Posted: Mar 25, 2010 12:35 pm
by The_Metatron
Autumn Clouds wrote:
I require something unambiguous. For example: lift stone number 12,234,222 in the Great Pyramid, you will find my name chiselled into the stone. Something that is not simply unlikely for the subject to have known, but something that was completely unknown by anyone.

Problem is, if it was completly unknown by anyone you'll discard him as a nutcase with good reason, since there's no way to verify it. If he made some claims about ancient history and justified it with some vague archeological evidence (as are most of all archeological evidence regarding meaningles individuals throughout history) you'll discard him as a nutcase.

What do you mean, no way to verify it? Go lift stone number 12,234,222 and see what's chiselled into the bottom of it. If that stone hasn't been moved in 6000 years, and what the subject said would be there is actually there, it would be a pretty good case of evidence to support something like reincarnation.

The people who would probably consider him a nutcase are those who actually own the pyramid now. They're not about to start dismantling it to look for shit that in all likelihood is not there.

Nonetheless, that would be some good evidence.
Autumn Clouds wrote:Verifiable by others in the immediate past would prove much valuable evidence in my opinion.
Why? All that would do is support the truth of the fact, not how the subject came to know it.
Autumn Clouds wrote:Then a guy claiming to be one of Ghenkis khan horseman. But I'll try to indulge your point by stating yet another case. This one isin't really verifiable, so it should be discarded as evidence.
Her name is Jetsunma a girl from a ghetto house in brooklyn. Her entire childhood was marked by abuse, from alcoholic parents. She never had exposure to buddhism whatsoever, but was able to teach tibetan buddhism at a very high level. Yet she never named it buddhism, just called it "Center for Discovery and the New Life".

How could she have known advanced buddhist teachings, never having access to them?.

If that knowledge existed (and it did), and it was even possible for that kid to learn of it, it is nothing more than a trick. There are no Buddhists in Brooklyn? This kid couldn't have read this material somewhere? No one at all could have taught it to her, the neighbor down the hall, perhaps?

Look to the most likely scenario, and you'll find the answer.

Cut away the bullshit with Occam's razor.

There are mentalists that can do shit like this out of hand. I don't know how they do it, but they do it, and very well.