• 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.

Reincarnation as a trivial scientific fact

wogoga said:
...
This is still in agreement with what I've written almost two decades ago:
Click to expand...
Many times wrong, wogoga.
  1. Population and birth rates: Claims about decline of the West are 'exaggerated' is about today's birth rates.
    Your claim was almost 20 years ago. You do know that 2015 is not 1995 :jaw-dropp!
  2. Your almost 20 year old claim was that there was a stronger correlation between the number of births and number of deaths than the number of number of women in reproductive age.
    That citation is just about birth rates.
  3. For some strange reason you made that claim just for European countries. Do you have something against Asia, Africa, the America, etc. :D? My guess is that their statistics show that claim to be false worldwide.
    That citation is about "some countries in Western Europe, and the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand"
  4. There is no evidence to back up your claim at that almost 20 year old link :eye-poppi.
    A claim of a correlation needs actual numbers for the correlation, not cherry picked examples without any correlation.
  5. The ignorance of what Mitochondrial Eve is - that is not the Biblical Eve.
    It is not even a single she. It is one of the women who was alive at the time.
    Every analysis gives a different Mitochondrial Eve.
    Every time someone is born or dies the Mitochondrial Eve changes.
    Mitochondrial Eve is unlikely to have lived at the same time or locations as Y-chromosomal Adam
  6. etc. etc.
 
Reality Check in #521 said:
Many times wrong ...
  • The ignorance of what Mitochondrial Eve is - that is not the Biblical Eve.
    It is not even a single she. It is one of the women who was alive at the time.
    Every analysis gives a different Mitochondrial Eve.
    Every time someone is born or dies the Mitochondrial Eve changes.
    Mitochondrial Eve is unlikely to have lived at the same time or locations as Y-chromosomal Adam.
Click to expand...


This refers to what I had written in the Demographic Saturation Theory:

Until not too long ago (in western society) all human beings were thought to descend from one single couple, which lived several thousands of years ago (a modern variant: Mitochondrial Eve). The idea of an ever growing world population is deeply rooted.​

Following quotes are from the Wikipedia article, referenced by you:

"In human genetics, Mitochondrial Eve is the matrilineal most recent common ancestor, in a direct, unbroken, maternal line, of all currently living humans, who is estimated to have lived approximately 100,000–200,000 years ago. This is the most recent woman from whom all living humans today descend, in an unbroken line, on their mother’s side, and through the mothers of those mothers, and so on, back until all lines converge on one person."​

And yes, there is even a "modern" equivalent of the Biblical Adam:

"Analogous to the Mitochondrial Eve is the Y-chromosomal Adam, the member of Homo sapiens sapiens from whom all living humans are descended patrilineally."​

Scientists are at least as much influenced by the arbitrary and more or less irrational beliefs of their previous lives than by hard facts and strictly logical interpretation of such facts.

Thus, dear "Reality Check", it is quite probable that in previous lives you defended the religious orthodoxy with the same fervor you defend now even the most absurd ideas of modern science, if only they have become mainstream orthodoxy (by chance, power politics or by other means).

Further reincarnation hypotheses maybe worth of being checked:
For gender equality two female hypotheses:
If at least two of these five hypotheses turn out to be true, then I'll be happy (in my next life).

Cheers, Wolfgang
Empiric and theoretic arguments for reincarnation
 
wogoga said:
Scientists are at least as much influenced by the arbitrary and more or less irrational beliefs of their previous lives than by hard facts and strictly logical interpretation of such facts.
Click to expand...
And your evidence for this completely made-up fact would be what, pray tell?

Thus, dear "Reality Check", it is quite probable that in previous lives you defended the religious orthodoxy with the same fervor you defend now even the most absurd ideas of modern science, if only they have become mainstream orthodoxy (by chance, power politics or by other means).
Click to expand...
Putting aside the utter lack of evidence for previous lives, let alone the claim they might be "quite probable", how about you tell us more about these "most absurd ideas of modern science"? What do you have in mind?
 
wogoga said:
Following quotes are from the Wikipedia article, referenced by you:

"In human genetics, Mitochondrial Eve is the matrilineal most recent common ancestor, in a direct, unbroken, maternal line, of all currently living humans, who is estimated to have lived approximately 100,000–200,000 years ago. This is the most recent woman from whom all living humans today descend, in an unbroken line, on their mother’s side, and through the mothers of those mothers, and so on, back until all lines converge on one person."​
Click to expand...
That does not mean that there was a bottleneck of just a single female. When you construct a family tree for a person, it usually grows with every generation you go backwards. Mitochondrial Eve is just the ancient female that appears to be common to the family trees of all living people.

And yes, there is even a "modern" equivalent of the Biblical Adam:

"Analogous to the Mitochondrial Eve is the Y-chromosomal Adam, the member of Homo sapiens sapiens from whom all living humans are descended patrilineally."​
Click to expand...
And there is no sign whatsoever that Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam lived at the same time, or made a couple.

Thus, dear "Reality Check", it is quite probable that in previous lives you defended the religious orthodoxy with the same fervor you defend now even the most absurd ideas of modern science, if only they have become mainstream orthodoxy (by chance, power politics or by other means).
Click to expand...
Why "thus"? This section is a non-sequitur.

Further reincarnation hypotheses maybe worth of being checked:
Click to expand...
How on Earth would you check this fantasy? And what makes you think that a famous person would reincarnate as another famous person, and even in the same country?
 
Wogoga, do you not understand that Mitochondrial Eve was not:

A. The only living woman in her time
B. A single individual
C. The most recent common ancestor if all Homo Sapiens living today

None of those.
 
Sorry, I haven't read all of this thread, but given that Wogoga brought up (quite incorrectly) the concept of a mitochondrial Eve and Adam the obvious question is: where did all the extra human souls now on Earth come from if we are re-incarnated? If there was a bottle neck in human evolution such that we all descended from just a few individuals, then how are there now 7 billion human souls on the planet?

1. Are new souls created fresh for some people, whereas others get previously-owned souls?
2. Do some human souls start out as animal souls in a prior life? Did I get a recycled Dung Beetle soul?
3. Is there a huge pool of unused human souls that is used to fill the expanding population? Is there a maximum number in this pool such that at some point no one will be born until someone else dies?
 
wogoga said:
This refers to what I had written in the
...snipped Demographic Saturation delusion and irrelevant rant...
Click to expand...
Repeating the Adam and Eve myth ignores the real world where Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam have nothing to do with the Biblical myth, wogoga, except the names :jaw-dropp!

Repeating your ignorance is not good, wogoga.
Mitochondrial Eve is not the Biblical Eve.
  • This is not a single woman alive. It is one of the women who was alive at the time.
  • Every analysis gives a different Mitochondrial Eve.
  • Every time someone is born or dies the Mitochondrial Eve changes.
  • Mitochondrial Eve is unlikely to have lived at the same time or locations as Y-chromosomal Adam.
Ditto for Y-chromosomal Adam:
  • This is not even a single man alive. It is one of the men who was alive at the time.
  • Every analysis gives a different Y-chromosomal Adam.
  • Every time someone is born or dies the Y-chromosomal Adam changes.
  • Y-chromosomal Adam is unlikely to have lived at the same time or locations as Mitochondrial Eve.
    [/LIST

    You remain many times wrong.
 
Giordano said:
Sorry, I haven't read all of this thread, but given that Wogoga brought up (quite incorrectly) the concept of a mitochondrial Eve and Adam the obvious question is: where did all the extra human souls now on Earth come from if we are re-incarnated? If there was a bottle neck in human evolution such that we all descended from just a few individuals, then how are there now 7 billion human souls on the planet?

1. Are new souls created fresh for some people, whereas others get previously-owned souls?
2. Do some human souls start out as animal souls in a prior life? Did I get a recycled Dung Beetle soul?
3. Is there a huge pool of unused human souls that is used to fill the expanding population? Is there a maximum number in this pool such that at some point no one will be born until someone else dies?
Click to expand...
The extra "souls" are produced by the Wathan generators emplaced by the Ethicals.
 
steenkh said:
I was not aware of this. But it makes sense.
Click to expand...

It's straightforward, if you think about it. MtEve is defined as the most recent matrialineal female ancestor. That is descent, mother to daughter. If some woman now living has only male children, then that line of descent from those male cannot by definition have a direct matrilineal line to the designated MtEve anymore, even though they are alive now and will likely have descendants of their own also having no matrilineal connection. Thus, by definition, MtEve must hop from individual to individual as some mothers have no daughters at all. MtEve thus seems destined to ever hop forwards in time.

But wait. Everyone in the world has not been tested. It is possible to discover a different matrilineal line heretofore unnoticed which could push MtEve back further into the past should we all share it.

It's a moveable feast.
 
wogoga said:
Further reincarnation hypotheses maybe worth of being checked:
For gender equality two female hypotheses:
If at least two of these five hypotheses turn out to be true, then I'll be happy (in my next life).

Cheers, Wolfgang
Empiric and theoretic arguments for reincarnation
Click to expand...

Just why would people in past lives who were male necessarily be reincarnated has male and the same for female?
 
Pacal said:
Just why would people in past lives who were male necessarily be reincarnated has male and the same for female?
Click to expand...
Why would they be reincarnated in the same country? Do souls to be reincarnated follow the rotation of the Earth so that they stay in the same geographical area?
 
catsmate said:
The extra "souls" are produced by the Wathan generators emplaced by the Ethicals.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. And I read the entire Riverworld series!

The assumption is that a person can be born who doesn't have a soul. There would have to be 'androids' who were born without souls before the Watham generator was constructed on a planet.

A 'android' would talk and act like a real person, but not have true 'consciousness' or 'feeling'. Everything they did would be a mechanical response. The Watham generator could modulate that response by giving the organism 'free will'. However, the soul would not affect the responses of the body and brain that evolved by natural selection. The main thing the Watham generator would do is give the response 'meaning'.


The first Watham generator was build by an android scientist who accidentally infused new souls into the newborns of his or her or its planet. The scientist himself never had a soul and neither did his contemporaries.

Everyone on a planet only has a soul if the Watham generator can keep up with the birthrate. However, the Watham generator can not determine the birthrate. If the Watham generator is not sufficiently productive for some reason, there will be those born without souls.

This in fact occurred on Riverworld because the Riverworld does not have a Watham generator. It has a computer that stores souls but not a generator that makes souls. When a body was resurrected, a soul was provided by the master computer. However, these souls had already been manufactured by the Watham generators planted on Earth before it was destroyed.

Or was the earth destroyed? Farmer said so early in the series through Monet. However, Monet turned out to be an undercover Ethical. So his story may have been a fabrication for his cover. This is n't relevant to the thread, however.

People were given birth control medication in their rations. However, some people resurrected in the Tower figured it out. Read 'Gods of River World'. They refused the medication. The result was that infants were born without souls. However, there would have been even more if the people on the Riverbanks had avoided birth control.

The salient point for this thread is the following. A shortage of souls would not reduce the birth rate on earth. Infants would simply be born without souls. So the OP can't logically use a decrease in birth rate as evidence that the number of souls were running out.

It is just as possible that the young people don't have souls. The Millenials may be absolutely soul less. The Baby Boomers have absorbed all or most of the souls that were manufactured by the Watham generators. The Baby Boomers may be the only living generation with Soul!

The OP should be trying to determine methods of detecting souls. It could make a big difference in our entitlement programs. I would think that the Social Security program would gain a great deal from the OPs insights.

There could be problems when the Androids respond to the loss of entitlements. They could fight the older but souled generation. However, the older folk have drones now. We don't have to fight the Androids directly. We could just send explosive drones to eliminate the Android Young.

I forgot. Just where did Jose Farmer say that earth's Watham generator was located?
 
Farmer was unspecific just that the generators and catchers were "buried far down" where they were surrounded by molten iron/nickel. The Magic Labyrinth
 
See posting in thread "Did Harry Houdini believe in reincarnation?"


Two quotes from 'Demographic dividend' is under way with collapse in fertility in agreement with demographic saturation:

"Latest survey data suggest that Indian fertility has fallen sharply in recent years and is already at the 'replacement level' needed to keep the population stable. Urban fertility is now at levels seen in developed countries and in some places among the lowest in the world.

These readings suggest a big change in India's demographic trajectory. It also adds to the likelihood that world population will peak a lot sooner than is widely believed."

"The level [of total fertility rate] for rural Bengal is 1.8 but is a shockingly low 1.2 for the cities. This is one of the lowest levels in the world and is at par with Singapore and South Korea."​

Cheers, Wolfgang
pandualism.com
 
Last edited:
Reality Check in #537 said:
Demographic dividend’ is under way with collapse in fertility is an article in the Economic Times. Cherry picked quotes from it is not support for a fantasy of reincarnation.
Click to expand...


Reiterated quote:

"The level [of total fertility rate] for rural Bengal is 1.8 but is a shockingly low 1.2 for the cities. This is one of the lowest levels in the world and is at par with Singapore and South Korea."​

Whether cherry picked or not, facts are either true or false, and either relevant or irrelevant. I wrote almost twenty years ago:

"In many of the poorest countries the decline in fertility will follow the decrease in mortality with higher velocity and intensity than it was observed in Europe and some Asian and South American countries. And if life expectancy continues to rise, fertility after saturation will become extremely low." (The Demographic Saturation Theory)​

In the meanwhile we have become accustomed to fertility rates near one. Yet in 1998, a fertility rate of 1.2 would have been considered "extremely low". A fertility rate as low as 1.2 had not even been reached in West Germany, once the shining example of a country threatened with extinction.

It is true that Kerala of India does not belong to the "poorest countries", but we can be sure that as long as births exceed deaths, also Kerala's fertility rate will tend to further decline.


From Thailand Population 2013:

"The current population of the Kingdom of Thailand is about 69.52 million people, which is an approximate 6.2% increase from the population taken in the 2010 census. … The population of the Kingdom of Thailand is expected to reach about 70.77 million people by the year 2015."​

Population of Thailand, 2016 (Mahidol Population Gazette, Vol. 25, Jan. 2016):

65.323 million (estimated total population at midyear 2016)​

There is a huge difference from 70.77 million in 2015 to 65.323 million in 2016, actually minus 5.45 million resp. –7.7%.

"Official" world population is around 7.4 billion. If we subtract 7.7% from this guess then only 6.8 billion remain. And the quality of demographic data in Thailand is probably above worldwide average. The least reliable data comes from Africa, therefore the best agreement of Africa with rather questionable demographic projections.


A further mantra stemming from the belief in official projections is dramatic population decline in Japan. In post #1 of this thread I showed that from 2004 (when Japan had fully reached demographic saturation) to 2008, the population remained astonishingly constant at 127.8 million. According to the latest data of May 2016 , total population has actually declined to 127.103 billion (final estimate) by December 1, 2015.

The provisional estimate of May 2016 for May 2016 is 126.96 billion. Yet such provisional estimates notoriously underestimate the ongoing fertility increase of Japanese women (due to increasing mortality and decreasing numbers of fertile women). The provisional estimate of Dec. 2015 for Dec. 2015 was only 126.88 billion.

Cheers, Wolfgang
 
Reiterated fantasies is not science

wogoga said:
Reiterated quote:
Click to expand...
Reiterated fantasies is not science, wogoga. Nor is
  • Ignorance about your own thread (Harry Houdini is irrelevant!).
  • Lying by cherry picking.
  • An "almost twenty years" fantasy that ignores the real world, e.g. birth rates go down as people become more affluent :eye-poppi .
    It does make a fantasy look more like a delusion though since it means 20 years of no actual evidence for the fantasy.
  • Inane coloring of text.
  • A screed of text stating trivial facts about fertility rates.
  • Ignorance, e.g.
    "but we can be sure that as long as births exceed deaths, also Kerala's fertility rate will tend to further decline" is wrong. All we can be sure of is that the fertility rate will be > 1 :eek:!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom