• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Nuclear war and going back of Hitler

wise47 said:
Well, no, if a person has already passed from animal to human incarnation, they incarnate as a human. The law of karma is a fiction; we usually repeat previous incarnations to a certain extent, even if we were evil. A gradual process of evolution takes place as we become slightly more perfect from incarnation to incarnation.
Click to expand...
Buddha
 
wise47 said:
Please check this site, I switched to a paid server: Return of Hitler and nuclear warfare
Click to expand...
Your site presents no arguments. It simply makes a broad set of predictions without explanation.

You say you eschew the traditional view of reincarnation such as preached "superstitiously" in, say, the Dharmic tradition. Fine, you grew your own. But you don't explain much about it. Our experience in this forum shows that if you just make it up as you go, it's easy to tie yourself in knots. Perhaps this is why you do not answer direction questions asking about the specifics of your research and methods. That is a red flag.

You claim there's a supreme being ("Father") who can simply make all this go away if it wishes. If every possible outcome can occur according to your prediction, then it is not a meaningful prediction. Further it's not clear what role the people play in this. You precisely define some attributes of a spirit (size, gender permanence, etc.) and you call upon people to "launch a spiritual attack" in their own defense. This another red flag; it amounts to leveling a threat at humanity that can only be alleviated by following your religion and embracing you as a prophet.

You say that the U.S. "gifted" the atomic bomb to the U.S.S.R. by failing to escalate research and production until the Soviets had the bomb. This seems at odds with the historical record. While there was a surge of activity after the first Soviet test, the Truman administration was already in the process of industrializing the the production of atomic weapons and research into thermonuclear weapons. I was privileged to work for a time in the premier labs conducting that work.

Your subordinate predictions identifying the buildup to Adolf Hitler's return amounts to imprecise, obvious observations such as a worsening of political and economic outcomes tied to time spans as large as decades. These are explained better by ordinary cycles in such patterns. We do not need to reach to the supernatural to explain them.

You claim yourself to be the reincarnation of several notable scholars throughout history. Similarly, you claim Hitler was the reincarnation of various famous emperors and warlords. This seems to be a bit on the nose. You aspire to being recognized for your scholarship, so you claim an ancestry of sorts composed of scholars. As previously noted, this doesn't work as well for Hitler. If your claim is that he was not punished karmically enough for his past atrocities, where is the logic in allowing him to come back to Earth as a warlord and commit the ultimate atrocity of global thermonuclear war? One doesn't pay down the cosmic debt by incurring more of it. Your entire set of claims rests on the premise that you are able to determine who reincarnated as some other individual. Yet you don't explain how you're able to know that.

You offer this: "To avoid suspicions of formulating arguments of which cannot be subjected to the empirical verification, I can add 'probably' before in years 2030-2060 or 2050 etc." How does softening and broadening the claim make it more amenable to empirical verification? Precise, narrow hypotheses are more confidently supported by empirical methods than vague ones.

Finally, you say this about your reincarnations: "Thanks to deep and penetrating researchings I was able to establish indisputably some number of my past incarnations reaching of ancient period, these data are certain." Many of us here are quite familiar with what is ordinarily required of "deep and penetrating researching," and the importance of being able to demonstrate to skeptics that it has occurred. I dispute your data.

In conclusion, you seem to be indifferent to the notion that you are posting in a skeptics forum. You should expect your claims to be tested according to skeptic ideals. And you should be prepared to defend your assertions and explain where they came from.
 
Last edited:
Ryan O'Dine said:
In my humble (but eternally correct) opinion it's irrefutable that Charlie Chaplin was the reincarnation of Charles Dickens. Even their first name was the same -- couldn't be more obvious if you wrapped it in a wet fish and slapped yourself with it.
Click to expand...
And he had the same moustache as Hitler!
 
theprestige said:
Dude, you're late. Vladimir Putin already exists.

I am, however, interested in your assumption that the US Army is equipped for spiritual warfare.
Click to expand...
Well based on Hegseth's pronouncement's its sounds like he is trying address that issue.
 
JayUtah said:
You say that the U.S. "gifted" the atomic bomb to the U.S.S.R. by failing to escalate research and production until the Soviets had the bomb. This seems at odds with the historical record.
Click to expand...
The first Soviet nuclear test took place in August 1949. H. Truman was president from 1945 to 1953, so he had at least four years to attack the Soviet Union.
 
wise47 said:
The first Soviet nuclear test took place in August 1949. H. Truman was president from 1945 to 1953, so he had at least four years to attack the Soviet Union.
Click to expand...
Why would he want to attack the Soviet Union?
 
theprestige said:
Contrary to popular belief, nuclear bombs are not magic.
Click to expand...
They are certainly not a magical answer to the problem of Stalinism. Polling in the summer of 1945 showed that Americans overwhelmingly approved of using atomic weapons to end the war against Japan. By winter of that same year, polling showed that Americans overwhelmingly believed that atomic weapons should never again be used in war. An attack on the Soviet Union using conventional forces was a non-starter in the late 1940s. Everyone was tired of war and eager to rebuild. Using atomic weapons offensively against the Soviet Union in the late 1940s would have been political suicide, not just for Pres. Truman but for the United States as a whole.

Even if the use of atomic weapons had been limited to destroying the Soviet atomic weapons program, you still have the effect of people like Klaus Fuchs who believed that no one nation should have or control that technology. This faction would have made proliferation inevitable. And since atomic bombs are far from surgical weapons, the collateral damage and casualties arising from even a limited use would have cost the U.S. its newfound moral superiority on the world stage. You don't beat Hitler and Stalin by being Hitler and Stalin yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom