The Museum of Hoaxes
Could a Little Boy Be Proof of Reincarnation?
Posted By:
X
in McKinney, TX
Jul 01, 2005
 I watched this on Prime Time Live last night and it was pretty facinating.
This little boy has his parents, and the realatives and friends of a dead WWII pilot convinced the boy is a reincarnated version of that fighter pilot.


http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Technology/story?id=894217&page=1

Category: Birth-Babies, Death; Replies: 91

Comments
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
Cranky Media Guy
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 01:55 AM
Citizen Premier said:

"Analogy theif!"

Bad speller! Nyah nyah.
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 02:45 AM
DFStuckey, are you saying that "reverse memory" is any less of ridiculous gobbldygook than "remote viewing" is?
X
in McKinney, TX
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 08:23 AM
UPDATE!!!!: JamieBlonde, I will continue to delete all replies that seem to insult members and admin of the forum and replies that seem to be ramble, in ANY topic in the MOH that I come across. As most know in here, I have no problem doing this.
entropy
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 10:19 AM
This post has been deleted.
UPDATE by Sir Stephen;
Jamie Blond feels that she can change screen name and post as another user. This can not be hidden from admin
and is frowned upon.
Charybdis
in Hell
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 10:45 AM
jamieblonde, while normally I have no problem with people who diss Stephen, I feel that this is a special case.

Hiding behind a different username doesn't hide your IP. Citizen and Cranky have been mostly on-topic. You have been the one avoiding posting on topic, or even posting a point. Even when you're posting as entropy you can't stop rambling.

I also removed your identical posting in the other thread as it was a) redundant, and b) off-topic.
X
in McKinney, TX
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 10:57 AM
Thanks Chary......Im deleting the above comment from her. And Jamie, Im not here to play your little head games, so don't expect me too.
Accipiter
Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 04:06 PM
I neither believe nor disbelieve in reincarnation, since I don't see any way of unquestionably proving it one way or another. The only real way to prove it to myself is to die and see if anything happens, but I think I'll put off that experiment for a while longer.

However, even being open to the possibility of reincarnation doesn't mean that I have to accept as being true every claim of it having happened. I believe that most (if not all) such claims are false, being people looking for publicity or just being insane. In the case this topic is about, there are several things that I find to be rather suspicious:

1. It was after the parents began suggesting that their kid was remembering a past life that details of this life began coming out.

2. Carol Bowman has made a career out of supporting reincarnation, and so she can hardly be considered an unbiased party.

3. The "recollections" of the boy were only made public after the parents had done research into the life of that pilot who was killed.
Mark-N-Isa
in Midwest USA
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 09:33 PM
Geesh... how many others are axiously awaiting the return of Alex???
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
 Member
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 | 10:59 PM
The only real way to prove it to myself is to die and see if anything happens, but I think I'll put off that experiment for a while longer

The sad part of that is, if we really die in the absolute way that I think we do, we can never really varify it ourselves. Which also means jerkwad religious zealots will never know that they're wrong. The dead don't know they're dead!
Razela
in Chicago, IL
 Member
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 | 12:40 PM
Oh Stephen, what would we do without you?
DFStuckey
Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 | 01:53 AM
Citizen Premier, while you may dismiss Reverse memory as gobbledegook, you must surely recognise two points.

One, it fulfils all the requirements for a testable hypothesis and such an experiment would give a conclusive result as to what mechanism is in operation.

Two, it satisfies Occam's Razor in that it assumes no mystical new power, but simple applications of known and observed physics; Namely, the fact that the brain would be communicating internally with itself, and that this communication would be unbound by positive entropy or time flow - Possible because many subatomic partilcles regularly reverse themselves in time as Quantum physics observes.

As has been said, common sense is a very poor guide to physics on the quantum level. But I applaud you for not raising the tired religious argument that it is "wrong" to end anoother humans life. 😊
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
 Member
Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 | 06:10 AM
Acci, I also see your point, and the biggest thing that shouted "<b>this is so fake</b>," was when the parents said this is something they never would have expected. So, if it wasn't something they expected...why the hell would she have believed her mom when she suggested it??

My mom says weird stuff all the time. If I listened to all of it, I'd be a nut.
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
 Member
Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 | 11:44 AM
DFTStuckey, you are right that we could produce a testable experiment for 'Reverse Memory.' However, everything I know about thought, memory and emotion suggests that 'Reverse Memory' does not exist; but if you can provide evidence via experiment I would consider it.

You know, I just realized that "experience" and "experiment" share the same root. In this case, my experiment is my experience. And, after thinking about these words for a while, they now look very weird to me.
Snowy
in aeternum
 Member
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 | 03:51 PM
[off topic]

Myst said:

What the heck is a pinko?? LOL

it comes from the fact that, long ago, commies were associated with the color red.

so, liberals, who were suspected of being commies, were called pinkos.

get it now?

[/off topic]
DFStuckey
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 | 02:08 AM
Further to Snowy's comments. people of left-wing viewpoints but only on a superficial level were also reffered to as "Parlour Pinks", as they were only slightly Red in their own social circle.

Strangely enough, the colour red is now associated with having a right wing viewpoint, linked as it is to being caucasian and/or being so mentally dull as to work outside.
Cranky Media Guy
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 | 01:36 AM
DFStuckey said:

"Strangely enough, the colour red is now associated with having a right wing viewpoint, linked as it is to being caucasian and/or being so mentally dull as to work outside."

I may be wrong, but I don't think that's the reason for Red being associated with Republicanism. I think it's because the TV news people started to use Red to mark states that voted for Republicans and Blue to mark those which went Democratic. Yes, I realize that you may have been sarcastic. I also realize we're WAY off-topic here.
DFStuckey
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 | 12:48 AM
Cranky Media Guy, have you never heard the term ( And I apologise for the use of the phrase, being as it is a racial epithet ) "Redneck"?

That was the phrase I was thinking of. And I was not being that sarcastic.
Cranky Media Guy
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 | 06:05 AM
DFStuckey said:

"Cranky Media Guy, have you never heard the term ( And I apologise for the use of the phrase, being as it is a racial epithet ) "Redneck"?

"That was the phrase I was thinking of. And I was not being that sarcastic."

Sure, I've heard of "redneck." Is it really a racial ephithet, though?

I'm not convinced that that is where "red" as a reference to Republican states comes from.
Just me
Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 | 07:28 PM
I just thought I would join this conversation. I believe in reincarnation. To me it makes sense to have multiple chances to get it right. My belief is that your past lifes will affect your future lives. The mistakes you made before will cause the problems that you need to overcome today. That being said, to really test for reincarnation would be very difficult. For the people who have tried to search for reincarnation have stated that most information comes from children before they turn five years old. Thus, how do you approach the subject with a less than five year old child? If you are sceptical of the ideal (even subconciously), then the child may read your expressions and hide the information. If you believe in the ideal, then you must still be able to separate the actual facts from the child's fantasy. When it comes to the story on ABC, I would like to ask this question of all: When do you think the parents should have contacted someone to investigate the situation? Also, if you bring someone in to investigate and this person makes the child feel like they are doing something wrong because of the things they remember, then don't you think they would hide the experiences to please the investigator? Thus, from what we know today, it is very hard to get good testimonals that would stand up to strong scrutiny. One suggest for a test is that maybe we should monitor a group of children, less than five years old, twenty four hours a day with a hidden camera and ask them. That maybe the only way to get good information.
Cranky Media Guy
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 | 12:57 AM
Just me said:

"I just thought I would join this conversation. I believe in reincarnation. To me it makes sense to have multiple chances to get it right. My belief is that your past lifes will affect your future lives. The mistakes you made before will cause the problems that you need to overcome today."

No offense (honestly), J.M. but what you believe is not relevant. Things either are or they aren't regardless of our beliefs. To me, it makes sense that leprechauns would guard pots of gold at the end of rainbows but I've never been able to find one. Yes, that's a wee bit sarcastic but I think you get the point. There are a great many things I'd like to believe in, but unless I see actual evidence for them, I just regard them as nice fantasies.

Actually, this whole "I believe it so it must be so" frame of mind is my biggest disagreement with believers. I just don't think the universe works that way. Things either are or they aren't. Period.
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
 Member
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 | 06:22 AM
This sounds like an X-file. Where is Spooky when we need 'im.
Razela
in Chicago, IL
 Member
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 | 11:21 AM
"If you are sceptical of the ideal (even subconciously), then the child may read your expressions and hide the information."

Very convenient huh?
george
Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 | 03:10 AM
Yeah, it's BS - when one dies one ROTS IN THE GROUND, period.
HINDU
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 | 03:36 PM
HI,
I BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION,NOT BECAUSE I WAS BORN A HINDU, BUT I QUESTIONED MYSELF MANY TIMES.I EVEN BELIEVE IN GOD AS BEING A SUPREME BEING IN WHATEVER FORM,FOR ALL RELIGIONS.I AM OPEN MINDED.FIRST LET US TAKE A LOOK AT THE WORLD.WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND.YOU HAVE MORNING,NOON,NIGHT.YOU SLEEP THEN AWAKE.THE SAME CONTINOUS LIFE EVERYDAY.THINK OF EVERYTHING YOU DO ,E.G.IT IS A CYCLE ROUND AND ROUND.EVEN THE PIPE MAN CREATED TO CLOSE AND OPEN OR A DOOR OR A CAR ECT.WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT THE SOUL OF A PERSON CANNOT CARRY ON INTO A NEW BODY.
ON EARTH IF YOU COMMIT CRIMES YOU ARE PUNISHED BY THE LAW.THAT IS WHY WHAT YOU DO YOU WILL PAY FOR IN YOUR NEXT LIFE.NEVER SAY NEVER BECAUSE THE WORLD NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE US .REACHING THE MOON,NEW TECHNOLOGY WHAT NEXT.YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DESTINY.IF YOU SMOKE YOU WILL DAMAGE YOUR LUNGS.
IF YOU DO GOOD IT WILL FOLLOW YOU ,THAT IS WHY YOUR DESTINY IN THIS WORLD CAME FROM SOMETHING IN YOUR PAST.REINCARNATION IS THE REPRODUCING OF A SOUL IN A DIFFENT BODY.IF SCIENCE CAN REPRODUCE CELLS WHAT MAKES YOU THINK AFTER DEATH YOU CANNOT REBORN.ONLY THE SUPERIOR CAN HAVE THAT POWER JUST LIKE A SCIENTIST HAS THE KNOWLEDGE.TRACE ALL THE PEOPLE YOU KNOW PERSONALLY GOOD AND BAD AND SEE THEIR LIVES.I HAVE .
Cranky Media Guy
Member
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 | 01:24 AM
Hindu, while I don't question your sincerity, that in no way proves the truth of reincarnation.

PROOF requires actual FACTS, not merely opinions.

"IF SCIENCE CAN REPRODUCE CELLS WHAT MAKES YOU THINK AFTER DEATH YOU CANNOT REBORN."

Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. It's like when people say things like, "We can put a man on the moon. Why can't we make a pencil that never wears out?" One has nothing to do with the other.

There is no evidence whatsoever for the existance of reincarnation. You will probably respond with more theories and opinions, but they, too, will not prove the existance of reincarnation.
Cynthia Wilson
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 | 04:06 PM
Spirit doesn't rot. http://www.infinitesouls.com
Charybdis
in Hell
 Member
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 | 04:18 PM
Yay, existentialist spam!
Cris
Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 | 11:07 AM
I don't believe this absolute proof that reincarnation exists but I do believe in reincarnation. There have been several others who remember their past life, especially in children.
I have nothing bad to say about this article, I do believe he could have been this pilot in a past life, we will never know for sure..
corson
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 | 05:24 PM
OH my God! Yes, God. Remember him? Anyone got proof of God? Dont think so, Yet for some reason trillions of people believe. hummmmmmmm
Steve from NJ
Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 | 11:07 PM
This kids parents are just trying to sell their book, which is pathetic!!!
jaimieblondelover
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 | 04:20 PM
I always find it funny to find online arguments, and just so happens that this one maybe be my favorite. I stumbled upon this simply because i was curious about other peoples opinions concerning the video of the boy, who may possibly be a reincarnated version of a WWII fighter pilot. The reason i say "may possibly be" is because its the truth. i myself am not a firm believer of religion or any other made up form of teaching but this video really does get you thinking.

The facts are in the video and if they are really such a hoax why would a primetime television show waste millions of dollars to air it?

Also there would need to be a shit ton of people in on this plan for it to even have a chance of working, which makes it really hard to believe that one of the people involved wouldnt have $old the truth about the boy to a different primetime television show. because that would certainly be something people would want to see.

i can picture it now... a boy, his parents, and a future full of embarrassment and harassment. what more could our society ask for.


ps jb<3
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

 Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.