Past Life Regression

[vanilla]

In a past life, you were
Contestant #3…

did i win anything?

[Krispy_Original]

You missed out on the grand prize of “me” orangecakes…

[vanilla]

oh…my loss.
So…whats the scoop? Are you engaged or something?
Or was that in a past life?

[stpauler]

Hmm, wasting time, well, I’ll try not to. But since there’re so many crack pot theories out there that are being presented as truths to afterlife. Well, this really could take some time and I’m only going to go over a couple. (and one other thing, how come the proof of no afterlife is in Aussie funds, c’mon, if you’re so confident, let’s match for ).

Respected scientists who investigated
The link listed Einstein, Jung, Freud. Yes, all great people. None of whom was a specialist in the investigation of the afterlife.

FROM WEBSITE:In Europe from the early 1900s through the 1920’s other scientists including Baron von Schrenck-Notzing, Professor Charles Richet, Professor Eugene Osty and Professor Gustav Geley were likewise photographing apparitions under controlled laboratory conditions. Their written reports showed that they had investigated and ruled out all possible sources of trickery and fraud

debunk: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_069.html

EVP:
http://skepdic.com/evp.html (includes links as to the reasons behind the interference)
As for the Ouija Board:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mouija.html

quote from Victor Zammit:Since about 1980 psychic researchers have claimed that contact with people who have died has also been made via radio, over telephones, on television, on answering and fax machines and computers.

Hmm, so it must take the spirit world a while to catch up to technology since radio, telephones and tvs had been around for quite a while before that. Or is it just that’s when the cash cow for CarolAnne started?

Einstein’s E=mc2 and materialization
oh, this is funny, not since L Ron Hubbard has a piece of fiction been brought out to represent reality. To sum it up, the spirits are swirling so fast we can’t see them. Of course, if that’s accepted as true, it debunks some of Zammit’s other evidence. http://www.victorzammit.com/book/chapter06.html
**Modern mediums who confound the skeptics **

From Zammit: Another contemporary medium who proved himself in the University of Arizona Study was John Edward. Appearing five days a week, the host of the Sci Fi Channel’s Crossing Over has increased Sci Fi Channel ratings 33% over the same time period for the previous year, to a daily average of 533,000 households. The program is also attracting more female viewers to the network’s traditionally male-dominated audience. While women generally make up 45% of the network’s audience, Crossing Over’s audience is comprised of 60% women (Brown 2001).

I think we’ve debunked Edwards enough…

Yadda yadda yadda

[Czarcasm]

*Originally posted by Krispy Original *
**There is no need to prove a negative. The site very clearly spells out the conditions for the challenge. In general you must succesfully rebut the existing evidence of “afterlife”.

Should be simple for a science-based skeptic to do…right?

Have at it boys…(and.or girls of course) **

I seen and studied the website you refer to. I also noticed how he started off lying about James Randi’s Challenge. Did you notice that you cannot pass the test unless every single member of an anonymous “Committee” hand-picked by him agrees that the applicant has refuted all of the nonsense documents listed to their satisfaction? I’d say more about his site, but this thread would have to moved to the BBQ Pit first.:rolleyes:

[Krispy_Original]

orangecakes - Yep…engaged and living with my finance

slythe - Man…it’s just like the good old days dude… Can’t stay right now…will get back with you later…

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by SentientMeat *
**NO, IT DOES NOT. Please stop misrepresenting the skeptic viewpoint, since I am extending every effort not to misrepresent or denigrate yours in any way.

I am very interested in the girl’s story, although of course you understand that I have no way of knowing whether it contitutes something naturally inexplicable. Again, if I may ask some further questions:
What was her name?

What was the nature of her handicap or condition (you implied it was terminal)? Could she speak and write English at a level roughly appropriate to her age?

Could you give contact details of the care facility, the university and the Japanese teacher?

Did the decorative sign give any indication of its meaning other than the text?
Please understand that I am not trying to “catch you out”. I am merely trying to show that I really don’t simply dismiss every case out of hand. And hey, if this leads to the $1M and the Nobel Prize, I’d be glad to share it with both you and the girl’s family.

I agree wholeheartedly. Our difference lies in whether anything supernatural exists or has ever happened. **

I am sorry I can’t give you more, you really sound like you are interested. The girl is deceased and the care facility moved to another location. That is all I know.

I would suggest you read into the following links, while they may not be exactly what you want you can use them to continue your search.

http://www.plim.org/2idiots.html

Temple Grandin: Inside ASD

Love
Leroy

[Czarcasm]

Those two links not only have nothing what so ever to do with her questions-they have absolutely nothing to do with this topic at all!

[stpauler]

*Originally posted by Czarcasm *
**Those two links not only have nothing what so ever to do with her questions-they have absolutely nothing to do with this topic at all! **

Please Czarcasm, this debate works best off topic. Why would we want to refute points brought up already or cite sources to validate our opinions?
You’ll understand what I mean here:
http://www.rainbowbrite.net/

[Polycarp]

Oh, wow! A C#3/slythe debate! Just like old times!

o/~ o/~ “Tonight we’re gonna party like it’s nineteen ninety-nine…” o/~ o/~

[SentientMeat]

This is getting silly. All we’ve had is unverifiable anecdotes which for all I know may be outright lies if not mere acts of suggestion and imagination. If inexplicable aspects of past life regressions appear all the time, why are we having so much trouble pinning one down?

Krispy Original - even if I were to provide a reasonable explanation for any single one of those Tooth Fairy equivalents, it would still not absolutely prove that they were not supernatural. Even if I were the one to take the tooth from under the child’s pillow and leave money, I cannot prove that the Tooth Fairy has not already been, left an identical “decoy” tooth, having turned the real tooth into money which was then placed magically in my wallet. Of course, the non-existence of the Tooth Fairy is thereby proved beyond reasonable doubt but I gather that will not get you the Australian million.

I now politely take my leave.

[vanilla]

*Originally posted by Krispy Original *
**orangecakes - Yep…engaged and living with my finance

**

Heh heh, so…your marrying money…

[Scarf-Ace]

Ok heres my two guineas.

First off: Diogenes the Cynic:

If you believe in reincarnation, you should understand something about those Eastern traditions from which the idea originated. Buddhists and Hindus do not believe that past-life memories are accessible to the vast majority of people. In fact, the ability to remember past lives is one of the defining characteristics of enlightenment. Buddhas can do it, and that’s about it. So, unless your hypnotist or your “psychic” or whatever quack that’s selling this therapy has the ability to actually produce a state of Nirvana in others, they do not have the ability to induce memories of past lives-- at least not according to the precepts of the philosophies that they are attempting to exploit.

You are forgetting the tendencies in thought of your own contemporaries, namely Pythagoras and chums. Pythagoras was a believer in reincarnation as was Plato. I am not appealing to authority here, merely highlighting the fact that the belief in transmigration of souls has been held by some very great, very rational minds.

Whatever metaphysic or theology you suscribe to, or whether you suscribe to none, you should not dismiss the possible truth of another theology or metaphysic without rigorous analysis.

Reincarnation is underpinned by the notion of a soul. If you don’t beleive in the soul, I can imagine you would have great trouble believing in its movements.

Back to the OP; I think there are two possible ways to arrive at an understanding of past lives: 1)Psychoanalysis 2)Having a good memory.

I beleive that traits in the personality can be analysed causally to the point where there are not sufficient causes in one life to explain the make-up of the individual.

I also think that hypnotism is extremely dangerous and would never ask anyone to hypnotise me. Let alone someone who has their fingers in my wallett.

[stpauler]

*Originally posted by Meta-Gumble *
Ok heres my two guineas.
You are forgetting the tendencies in thought of your own contemporaries, namely Pythagoras and chums. Pythagoras was a believer in reincarnation as was Plato. I am not appealing to authority here, merely highlighting the fact that the belief in transmigration of souls has been held by some very great, very rational minds.

Yes, and they also believed in the Flat Earth. Since that has been disproved (for most of us that is) it’s safe to say they didn’t know all about everything. Name dropping is a bit useless in a debate unless they’re experts in the same topic as the debate.

*Originally posted by Meta-Gumble *
Whatever metaphysic or theology you suscribe to, or whether you suscribe to none, you should not dismiss the possible truth of another theology or metaphysic without rigorous analysis.

These theories have been disproved numerous times that if they need to be further asserted as valid, they’ll need to prove their worth (at least to me) before I’d consider them again.