I hope we're wrong about reincarnation

Richard Conn Henry is an exception. How do the great majority of physicists (who supposedly are atheist materialists) deal with this problem of the experiments showing the apparent truth of non-realism? Do they insist that the experiments must somehow be wrong, or find some other way to rationalize it, or just entertain an uncomfortable cognitive dissonance? I think the most common response must be to just refuse to deal with the problem - stick to the experiments and math and ignore the metaphysical implications.

I suspect you'd have to have a near complete elimination of realist models before you get to a sea change.

However, it seems to me that if all realist models are falsified this would apply both to the micro- & macro- levels of reality. As Kaku pointed out in his latest book, this wouldn't mean observers select reality, rather observation merely fixes reality. He might be wrong about that, which I guess is where Radin's work would come in.
 
I hope it's wrong, because I've experienced things I never want to experience again. Sure there are some really good things in life, but there is drama that puts me in a fetal position. I hope when I die, we're wrong about reincarnation and there's something else so I don't have to come back here. :(

This has troubled me before. I take comfort in the fact that when I pass I won't be subject to the same understanding I am in this life.
 
I'm horrified about it, because I might come back as a person with numerous medical problems or some rare genetic disorder for example.
You may get some horrible disease, or be tortured and murdered in this life. Nevertheless, it wouldn't be wise to worry about such possibilities.

Based on all the books and articles which I have read about reincarnation, I think that an individual can usually use his/her free will and choose a convenient life or choose to not reincarnate. Evil people, and people with addictions or religious indoctrination have less options.
 
That guy caused me to turn red in the face. He's probably calling us "whiny/childish and scared believers" somewhere. Hmph!
 
That guy caused me to turn red in the face. He's probably calling us "whiny/childish and scared believers" somewhere. Hmph!

As someone who has been dealing with these blowhards for years, I can tell you that it's easier to just tune them out. They will try to bait you at every turn and if you do take the bait you end up angry because they are soooo condescending. The impulse is to fight back and defend yourself, but if you do you'll soon find that you're fighting a tar baby.
 
Contact Jim Tucker and ask him what he thinks, as he took over Stevenson's work.


The work of Dr. Stevenson and his colleagues stands by itself. For anybody interested in actual data here's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to his research, a paper on birthmark evidence including a number of photographs, at http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_07_4_stevenson.pdf . The summary paper is based on his book Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect.

As he mentions, this is evidence of at least some paranormal process having occurred, and this gives at least the strong appearance of reincarnation. Of course there is always the super-psi hypothesis. Versions of this type of explanation and the interesting notion that the birth defects are maternal impressions onto the fetus due to the mother knowing about the deceased person's death are discussed and rejected by Stevenson.

He discusses and rejects the usual skeptical pseudo-explanation of chance combined with parental desire to explain the marks and defects in the context of culturally approved reincarnation beliefs.
In my opinion the primary (but still preposterous) way to attack his work is by simply claiming Stevenson and his coworkers were guilty of fraud.


Birthmarks and Birth Defects Corresponding to Wounds on Deceased Persons

Almost nothing is known about why pigmented birthmarks (moles or nevi) occur in particular locations of the skin. The causes of most birth defects are also unknown. About 35% of children who claim to remember previous lives have birthmarks and/or birth defects that they (or adult informants) attribute to wounds on a person whose life the child remembers. The cases of 210 such children have been investigated. The birthmarks were usually areas of hairless, puckered skin; some were areas of little or no pigmentation (hypopigmented macules); others were areas of increased pigmentation (hyperpigmented nevi). The birth defects were nearly always of rare types.

In cases in which a deceased person was identified the details of whose life unmistakably matched the child's statements, a close correspondence was nearly always found between the birthmarks and/or birth defects on the child and the wounds on the deceased person. In 43 of 49 cases in which a medical document (usually a postmortem report) was obtained, it confirmed the correspondence between wounds: and birthmarks (or birth defects). There is little evidence that parents and other informants imposed a false identity on the child in order to explain the child's birthmark or birth defect. Some paranormal process seems required to account for at least some of the details of these cases, including the birthmarks and birth defects.
 
"I do not tolerate online attacks it is cowardly. This always happens amongst paranormal believers when they are shown evidence they do not like or called out on their claims. They start ignoring the evidence contrary to their beliefs and then throw around ad-hominems or nasty accusations. Regards."

I could say the same thing about atheist/materialists.
 
Back
Top