Yep. Yep, I am absolutely sure you're right. Gibbering idiots will need something to do once they realise there is no bigfoot, and that UFOs don't make crop circles.
Reincarnation as a trivial scientific fact
- Thread starter wogoga
- Start date
Yep. Yep, I am absolutely sure you're right. Gibbering idiots will need something to do once they realise there is no bigfoot, and that UFOs don't make crop circles.
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
It sounds like a lucrative field. Hey, this guy died, and amazingly enough, nine months later, a guy got born. PhD dissertation stuff.
Almost 400,000 people are born each day; do you think it is hard to find someone out of that number to claim as a reincarnation of someone who died (out of about 150,000 people per day) about 9 months earlier? Not to mention that most pregnancies are not exactly 9 months.
tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
1) It's a known fact that 85% of facts made up on the spot are true.
If you doubt that refer to statement 1.
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2011
- Messages
- 6,474
Never going to happen.
Wolfgang, or whatever your name is, your entire idea is entirely devoid of any merit and doesn't deserve any serious consideration. At no point in this thread did you come close to putting forward a testable hypothesis and putting forth your long words that you made up didn't help your arguments, such as they were. Posters on this thread have been made stupider for having seen your posts and I award you no points, may Cthulu have mercy on you.
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
FTFY; the only way those "this guy was born after that guy" links could be treated as evidence for reincarnation is by superficial reasoning. And why would you make a point of your "improbable coincidence" that there was exactly nine months between the death of Tiberius and the birth of Nero (presumably as evidence for one being the reincarnation of the other), and then post a list in which the other gaps between deaths and births are 2, 8, and 23 years? Is any gap supposed to be evidence as long as one link comes after the other? What childish reasoning...a theory that sets no limits to what can pass for evidence for it can't be falsified- it's no theory at all, it's a faith.
And if these mundane requirements are met, then there's no need for your "environment continuity" or "evolutionary relatedness," as principles of reincarnation, to explain how these examples successfully became and remained for some time Emperor, is there?
This takes "circular reasoning" to a whole new level- we know Constantine was the reincarnation of Aurelian because he was born after Aurelian died, which we know because he must have been in order to have been Aurelian's reincarnation.
And President Obama continued policies established by President Bush in many areas, including religion- this is obvious evidence that Obama is the reincarnation of Bush.
Is it possible that you really do not realize how silly all this sounds? You can dress the dreck up in all the fancy, pseudo-intellectual posturing you want- it's still dreck.
ETA- "psychons"? Really? There's a name for "making stuff up to support other stuff you've made up"- it's called "fanfic" (or, alternatively, "theology").
ETA 2- as for your objection to evolution, that "the odds are against it"- I want you to think about this, and see if you can understand how it applies- evolution is not the normative process it would need to be in order for a predictive concept like "odds" to be useful in assessing its outcomes.
Last edited:
This is another example of making up your facts. You have no way of knowing what the cost of anything is in "psychic energy". In fact, you cannot even show that "psychic energy" exists. You just made this up on the spot.
We can distinguish three phases of a fundamentally new theory:
- At first, the theory seems absurd, because it defies current "brain architecture".
- During the second phase one must search for evidence making the theory something between reasonable, probable and factual.
- After having established the (probable) validity of the theory, we can apply it in a third phase also to situations which, taken alone, would not even suggest the theory as a hypothesis.
It is rather the opposite: I assume that Constantine is the reincarnation Aurelian despite the fact that according to most historians he was born more than three years before Aurelian died.
George W. Bush and Obama (for both of whom I have sympathy) unfortunately were/are not much more than puppets in political system having degenerated into institutionalized corruption (party and election donation system) and institutionalized blackmailing (terrorists are only useful idiots for those running the secret services).
Nevertheless, I consider it probable that both Obama and Bush have reached highest political positions also in previous lives. Both could be/have been excellent presidents in the case of a positive environment (consisting of advisors and other political players).
Returning to Aurelian and Constantine, the continuity in politically implementing monotheism is evidence for Constantine being Aurelian's reincarnation:
"Aurelian strengthened the position of the Sun god Sol Invictus as the main divinity of the Roman pantheon. His intention was to give to all the peoples of the Empire, civilian or soldiers, easterners or westerners, a single god they could believe in without betraying their own gods. … During his short rule, Aurelian seemed to follow the principle of "one god, one empire", that was later adopted to a full extent by Constantine." (WP)
Obviously, this alone is still far away from conclusive evidence.
Enjoy this feeling and try to memorize it. It is the same feeling you had when for the first time you heard that things fall upwards on an opposite side of where you stand; the same feeling you had when you heard that the Earth is not in the center of the universe but "hovering in the air"; the same feeling you had when for the first time you came across the claim that monkeys instead of Adam and Eve are your ancestors.
Cheers, Wolfgang
We ourselves were the monkeys we descend from
The earth isn't hovering in the air.
A monkey ancestor may well be in our ancestry too, but we aren't descended from monkeys.
The difference between the science advances you are trying (and failing) to talk about, and the pile of pooh you are putting forward, is that the science was done by scientists, published, tested, peer reviewed, and with multiple predictions made which all were later found to be true........whereas your gibberish about reincarnation has no grounding in any science, no testability, no predictions, no maths, no properly published papers......nothing. But you know that, which is why we all assume that you are just here winding people up.
Lukraak_Sisser
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 6,009
OK. so you claim you have an actual theory about reincarnation.
Leaving away tiny inconsequential things like actual proof, of which you have presented nothing yet so far, what are the actual core concepts of the theory?
Specific questions you might wish to adress.
What is it that is reincarnated?
How was it originally formed?
How is it measurable?
Given that the human population is growing at the current rate, how are the extra reincarnatbale bits generated?
Can that be artificially replicated in some way?
Can the reincarnatable bit of humans be intercepted.
How complex a lifeform is needed to be able to reincarnate?
Given that the vast majority of humanity lives/lived in total obscurity, how is it possible that whenever someone talks about their past lives they always were famous/important?
Once you've got that all worked out theoretically, then you can start working on actually proving any of it in a way that does not need believe, but is convicing on a larger scale.
Leaving away tiny inconsequential things like actual proof, of which you have presented nothing yet so far, what are the actual core concepts of the theory?
Specific questions you might wish to adress.
What is it that is reincarnated?
How was it originally formed?
How is it measurable?
Given that the human population is growing at the current rate, how are the extra reincarnatbale bits generated?
Can that be artificially replicated in some way?
Can the reincarnatable bit of humans be intercepted.
How complex a lifeform is needed to be able to reincarnate?
Given that the vast majority of humanity lives/lived in total obscurity, how is it possible that whenever someone talks about their past lives they always were famous/important?
Once you've got that all worked out theoretically, then you can start working on actually proving any of it in a way that does not need believe, but is convicing on a larger scale.
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
Wow. I don't think I've ever seen anybody work so hard to avoid addressing the actual points and questions raised. This doesn't even come up to the level of sophistry, and I can't even honestly say "nice try"; there's certainly no point in doing the whole thing again, so I guess I'll just leave you to your pretentious, but otherwise pointless, delusions.
Wogoga,
These are incredibly important and relevant questions for you to answer if you wish your theory to be considered positively. I look forward to you answers.
Fellow Traveler
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2013
- Messages
- 3,566
Here is a link to a song from 1986 which sums up my opinion on Reincarnation as an unproved theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE9KWU-ntBk
Johnny Cash and Waylon Jennings are dead now so I would assume they have met up with the reality. I hope Johnny is more than a drop of rain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE9KWU-ntBk
Johnny Cash and Waylon Jennings are dead now so I would assume they have met up with the reality. I hope Johnny is more than a drop of rain.
Last edited:
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
Wow! I just hope I wasn't born nine months after the death of some guy who was convicted of murder and sentenced to serve consecutive life terms 
Last edited:
Why not the other way around?
Maybe Bigfoot makes the crop circles. Further, there are no UFOs because Bigfoot identifies them.
Quotes from Population and birth rates: Claims about decline of the West are 'exaggerated':
This is still in agreement with what I've written almost two decades ago:
Birth rates have remained close to death rates since the whole of Europe fully reached demographic saturation twenty years ago:
(in millions, figure from Eurostat for the present 28 EU member states)
That the death rate of EU-28 has never (temporarily) fallen below its birth rate is the result of the immigration surplus.
Cheers, Wolfgang
A new paper by Oxford researchers argues that some countries in Western Europe, and the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand now have birth rates that are now relatively close to replacement, that the underlying trend in Europe is upwards, and that population aging, although inevitable, is likely to be 'manageable'.
This is still in agreement with what I've written almost two decades ago:
The European countries show that the number of birth correlates much stronger with the number of deaths than with the number of women in reproductive age. (Source)
Birth rates have remained close to death rates since the whole of Europe fully reached demographic saturation twenty years ago:
(in millions, figure from Eurostat for the present 28 EU member states)
That the death rate of EU-28 has never (temporarily) fallen below its birth rate is the result of the immigration surplus.
Cheers, Wolfgang
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,010
Your source says: "It can hardly be denied that many animal populations remain rather constant in size without Malthusian struggles for survival."
Which animal populations did you have in mind which "remain rather constant" irrespective of food/predation/disease/weather etc?
Congressman Weiner received his soul from JFK in 1963, who got it from Roger Casement in 1916, from Sam Houston in 1863, from American Revolution naval hero John Paul Jones in 1793 (Had to leave Russia when he was charged with molesting a 10 year old girl.), from Philip V of Spain in 1746, from Tsar Feodor III of Russia in 1682, from Charles X Gustav of Sweden in 1660, from Sultan Osman II of the Ottoman Empire in 1622 and from Queen Elizabeth I of England in 1603.
Weiner has the soul of Elizabeth I. Amazing!!!!:
Congressmen have souls? Kennedy's have souls?
