• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hello from a non-skeptic

Garrette said:
Not sure if I'll go back over there, but the possibility remains.
Click to expand...

The Robert Snow case seemed to me to be the most interesting one, and the most perplexing. Good job on your long post on the Keene/Gordon case. Who knows, some lurker may read it.
 
Olowkow said:
The Robert Snow case seemed to me to be the most interesting one, and the most perplexing.
Click to expand...
I may have to complete my reading of it, then. I wasn't impressed by the "Proof Positive" SciFi episode, though.


Olowkow said:
Good job on your long post on the Keene/Gordon case. Who knows, some lurker may read it.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That is the hope.
 
I know I'm late to the party here, but isn't identifying yourself as a "non-skeptic" the same as nullifying whatever argument you're about to put forth? Are you really saying, "I accept claims without evidence to back them up?":confused:
 
Mick Houlahan said:
I know I'm late to the party here, but isn't identifying yourself as a "non-skeptic" the same as nullifying whatever argument you're about to put forth? Are you really saying, "I accept claims without evidence to back them up?":confused:
Click to expand...

Welcome Mick. I took this to mean he is not one of us (whatever that means) and proud of it. Beyond that, I don't think any of us has figured out what he meant about any of his claims. The thread is a pretty interesting look at what happens when you leave your brains on the doorstep because of what amounts to another religion.
 
Garrette said:
I may have to complete my reading of it, [The Robert Snow reincarnation claim]
Click to expand...
I have now read the thread in PLF regarding the Robert Snow case. The two primary participants were our own Paul C. Anagnostopoulos and marinjan (or somesuch; I didn't write it down), with some able help on the skeptical side from Ersby and a late appearance by another believer.

I see no reason to revisit this case. Paul and Ersby did a better job than I could have, though I would have emphasized other weaknesses of the case; that is more attributable to differing backgrounds and expertise. For instance, they barely touch on Snow getting wrong the one absolutely specific bit that shouldn't have been gotten wrong: the name of the wife of the person he was supposed to be the reincarnation of. He got right some vague things like, traveled to Paris, used a cane (actually, I disagree that he got this right), had money problems, etc., but didn't seem to know that his wife's name wasn't Amanda.

Paul also found out what kept being pooh-poohed by his opponent: That there was a definite connection (read chain-of-knowledge) between Robert Snow and James Beckwith before Snow had his past life regression.

As I have said after checking many of these cases, and could have said after all of them: If this is what they consider their best evidence, then they have no evidence at all.
 
Mick Houlahan said:
I know I'm late to the party here, but isn't identifying yourself as a "non-skeptic" the same as nullifying whatever argument you're about to put forth? Are you really saying, "I accept claims without evidence to back them up?":confused:
Click to expand...

No, I don't think that's what they're saying at all.

The definition of "skeptic" as "one who demands evidence to support claims" or something similar is not universally accepted. In fact, I don't think that's a common usage outside of the so-called skeptical community. The general population seems to use "skeptic" as meaning "someone who does not accept a particular claim or phenomenon," as in "global warming skeptic," "evolution skeptic," etc.

So when Charles announced himself here as a "non-skeptic," I think all he really meant to say was "I believe in paranormal phenomenon, unlike you lot." Which is fair enough. As the discussion showed, Charles really does believe that he has sufficient evidence to support his belief. Very very few people actually describe themselves as taking the position that it's good to believe things without evidence, with the frequent exception of religion. (Though even there, most believers assert that there is evidence for a/their god.)

This is one of the reasons why I don't think "skeptic" is all that useful a term, and why I don't bother identifying myself as one any more. It just doesn't communicate to the "outside world" what members of this community seem to think it does. It's also why this community ties itself in knots occasionally trying to answer questions like "can a skeptic believe in X"? But now I'm really digressing.
 
Mirrorglass said:
Charles just posted more of his thoughts on this thread on the Past Life forums. Apparently he genuinely felt afraid, feeling we were threatening him and his family because someone found the book he had written - you know, the one he directly copied parts of his early posts from. It seems he views the JREF forums as a violent mob of some kind, and according to him, pretty much every poster outside Garrette was simply howling mindless insults at him - it was so bad he fears for the safety of his family.

Considering all that, I guess it really was brave of him to post with his own name. :boggled:
Click to expand...


BTW, does anyone believe Charles was being honest about being afraid?

Wolrab posted the link to his book and I quoted something he'd written in a Yahoo group on the 12th. Three days and many posts later, he posts this in the other forum:

Don't tease, Truthseeker... :)They haven't gotten rid of me yet over there, mind you, though it does seem thay have been doing their very best to do so... Might give you all a little break, huh? :rolleyes:;)
Click to expand...


Sounds like someone genuinely afraid for his own and his family's safety?

And then he continues to post here for three more days until he (first) leaves in a huff on the 18th.

Even his post on that day in the other forum doesn't mention feeling afraid or threatened at all, just "drained."

IMO, his attempt at playing the "nasty skeptics scared the hell out of me" card was just one more dishonest tactic on his part.
 
Mr Boden's outburst on the Past Lives forum is the funniest meltdown I can remember since the Rev. Evan Cockshaw's silly poll got Pharyngulated by PZ's hordes a couple of year ago:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/bad_arguments_useless_poll.php

He turned up on a sceptical blog, got soundly thrashed, claimed Mrs Cockshaw was terrified by the prospect of getting letter bombs from "hate-filled atheists", then tried to have his original post and all the relevant comments deleted.

What thin skins the woos have...
 
I may have to revise my assessment of the reasons for closing the thread over on PLF. Another member began a thread asking why it was closed as it was getting interesting, and he looked forward to the participation of Jeffrey Keene.

Deborah's response consisted of two things, neither of which answered the question:

1. A discussion of the nature of the forum (without a discussion of how the thread in question departed from that nature)

2. A cryptic comment about Jeffrey Keene:

"Jeff Keane has read the thread in question and it will remained....closed."
 
The joker in her post was definitely this:

It is the only place we know of on the Internet that offers a safe and supportive environment for parents and grandparents to ask questions and get informed answers about children who appear to be remembering a past life.
Click to expand...

Informed answers? By cutting off discussions that contain some critical stuff and point out the discrepancies between what they want to believe, and what really happened?

Wow... just wow...

Greetings,

Chris
 
Lest anyone have any guilt about "outing" Boden's book on JREF in the month of October, I just discovered that he was first "betrayed" in this manner by Sunniva, an administrator at the PLF, on August 7, 2010.

Just a little "stupor relish" I guess.

http://www.childpastlives.org/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=18024
Sunniva said:
Descendant of Kings

Hi everyone,

It took me almost 20 years to write it, but my book has finally been published and is available on Amazon (see link below). I cannot tell you all how happy I am about it, and how much hard work went into it.

I do hope you will take the interest to read it. In the end, it turned out as a truly good story...

Charles Boden: Descendant of Kings
Click to expand...
 
This from Deborah in the other forum:

"Sometimes things happen behind the scenes. It is rare that we have to close threads; this just happens to be one of those situations."

My mostly groundless speculation is that Deborah has some relationship with Jeffrey Keene who saw the thread and didn't like it. Maybe it was a request based on friendship; maybe it was a legal threat which Deborah felt had merit. How it could possibly have merit, I don't know, but those are the two causes I consider most likely.
 
Garrette said:
I may have to revise my assessment of the reasons for closing the thread over on PLF. Another member began a thread asking why it was closed as it was getting interesting, and he looked forward to the participation of Jeffrey Keene.
Click to expand...

Er, that was me :o

I was following the thread and was confused that Deborah was participating in the discussion and talking of telling Jeffrey Keene about the thread, then in her next message, suddenly closed it without explanation. I still don't know why. The thread was civil and generally stuck with the OP on the Pool/Holohan case, and his adventures over here.

Deborah's explanation is:
Sometimes things happen behind the scenes. It is rare that we have to close threads; this just happens to be one of those situations.
Click to expand...

So make what you will of it.
 
Christian Klippel said:
The joker in her post was definitely this:



Informed answers? By cutting off discussions that contain some critical stuff and point out the discrepancies between what they want to believe, and what really happened?

Wow... just wow...

Greetings,

Chris
Click to expand...
I liked this (It's in the same subforum in a sticky thread called "Recommended guidelines for research"):

Deborah said:
Keep in mind -just because it is on the Internet - doesn't make it a fact. We hope this thread helps.

Do thorough research, investigate and question everything! Critical thinking is important and staying grounded and informed by the best researchers.... a must.
Click to expand...
:id:
 
And now a short thread has been deleted entirely without comment. Can't recall the name, but Charles started it to explain how open minded he is and how we aren't; a poster named Florence answered to say that if we would just look at the reincarnation testimony of children we would believe; Charles posted again, then I responded to both.

Less than an hour later, the thread is gone.


I have to add, though, that dlode is doing very well in politely shooting down the Quantum Nonsense being spouted in at least one thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom