Good questions to ask a past-life claimant? [Archive]

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 05:42 AM

Brainache

12th September 2006, 05:48 AM

So what was the beer like in ancient Egypt?
Which Dynasty was ruling at the time?
Upper or Lower Egypt?
Were there Pyramids?
How many?

TV's Frank

12th September 2006, 06:13 AM

Cuddles

12th September 2006, 06:24 AM

Wavyline, constipated eagle, wavyline, unrinating dog.

If they lived in ancient Egypt they should be able to translate this. :D

On a slightly more serious note, which channel and when?

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 06:24 AM

Ask them about daily life...what was their favorite food, what kind of work did they do, etc. Look up what we know about it and catch them when they screw up. Of course, there are two cavaets: they could be more well-read about ancient Egypt than you, or they will just claim they don't remember things like that.

I have a feeling that, no matter what you say, they'll be able to wiggle out of it. If you keep yourself calm and reasonable, the best you can hope for is that a few folks in the audience will say, "wow, that guy is really nice and reasonable and asking simple questions, and these kids are idiots."

Yeah, that's the problem - if I ask them generic questions, they can just make up answers and I won't have the resources to hand to verify them. Unfortunately, I don't know what period they are claiming to be from, so it's hard for me to research an obscure detail to try to catch them out with. And of course I'd need a closed question - anything like "what was X like" could easily result in a vague subjective answer which defeats the object.

Plus it won't make very interesting TV.

What I was thinking of were more general past-life questions, like "how did the soul enter your body, when, where had it been before then, do you find the past life more interesting that your own, what does this mean for Christianity and the concept of heaven, why do some souls disappear and others linger for thousands of years before inhabiting another body, what is your relationship with your family like, do your teachers describe you as creative, have you ever written any stories, have you ever read any books/seen a show, website, film about ancient Egypt"

Etc.

PS Tkingdoll is the female of the species ;)

Brainache

12th September 2006, 06:32 AM

How about: Which god controls reincarnation? Or is it just a natural process like osmosis?

steenkh

12th September 2006, 06:37 AM

This will be difficult, because what you would really like to do is to catch any anachronisms they might present.

Most reincarnated people claim to have been famous people in the past. Although Egyptian history is vast, you would probably find that for some reason these people will happen to have lived in some of the few more well-known epochs in Egyptian history. The pyramids were built relatively early in history (dynasty 3 to 5, if I remember correctly) so if the earlier reincarnations lived in the most famous dynasty 18 with the Amarna period, Akhenaten, Nefertiti, and the completely insignificant Tut-ankh-amun, they should definitely not remember having seen the pyramids being built. If they were present at the crowning of Tut-ankh-amun, they should know that his name was still Tut-ankh-aten at the time, because Aten was still the main god at that time. In any case, the kings were not called by the names we use now (prenomen), such as Ramses, or Amenophis, but rather one of their other names, the nomen: Tut-ankh-amun was known as Neb-kheperu-ra. And nobody knows how those names were really pronounced in those days anyway, because the common royal names are handed down to us by the Greeks, and the Egyptian equivalent was definitely different (well, perhaps not for "Ramses"). They also did not number their kings. Names like Ramses II or Amenophis IV have been invented later. See if they remember any other royal names than the common names. Unfortunately, Wikipedia's king list is botched, but you can use a simple list like this one (http://www.crystalinks.com/egyptdynasties.html) to acquaint yourself with the type of names that you might encounter. I could not find a king list that also listed the nomens.

You could also ask if they learnt to read and write. The educated class (a very small group, not even all of the artists who painted the beautiful hieroglyphs knew what they meant) would have been able to read hieroglyphs, but they hardly wrote them. Normal hand-writing was done in the cursive style hieratic, which had hardly any similarity to the hieroglyphs you see on temples and in graves. We have exercises done by pupils when they learned to spell - mainly a list of foreign names, because they were the most difficult ones.

If they were involved in diplomacy, they should know that during the middle Kingdom, the diplomatic language was Assyrian, and the diplomatic mail consisted of cuneifom tablets.

Iron only appeared in Egypt at about Tut-ankh-amun, who was equipped with an iron dagger in his grave, precisely because it was very precious.

Well, in short, you must know your subject, if you want to catch the reincarnations! And if they do their homework, they have every chance of knowing what you know, too!

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 06:38 AM

How about: Which god controls reincarnation? Or is it just a natural process like osmosis?

Ooh I like that!

brodski

12th September 2006, 06:44 AM

Ask them who really built the pyramids. ;)
Seriously, have you considered emailing or phoning someone at the Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity based at the University of Birmingham? This guy may be a good start. http://www.iaa.bham.ac.uk/staff/leahy.htm
How long do you have to prepare?

Garrette

12th September 2006, 06:47 AM

Along the lines of "process questions" you might ask how many souls reincarnate, if every person today is a reincarnation, and where new souls come from.

In the latest issues of "Discover" magazine (a layman's scientific mag in the US) there was a sidebar tidbit that estimated 10,000,000,000 people have in earth's history (they didn't source it). It would seem that either new souls have to generate frequently or they were all in place 14 billion years ago with most of them waiting for enough people to be born. What do they do in the meantime?

StewartP

12th September 2006, 06:47 AM

What about setting woo to trap a woo?

eg: could you ask them about Moses, and the plagues, Red Sea and all. They might say "didn't happen" which would freak out all the Christians watching.
If on the other hand they say "yeah, our grandad told us about that happening", or "my boyfriend was an Israelite slave before they all left", you could point out that there is no heiroglyph record of any of that stuff and perhaps it's myth.

or, could you set them to use their unique and accurate knowledge of Egypt to debunk any modern egypt woo (like http://healing.about.com/library/uc_memory_egypt05.htm)

Divide and conquer is what I'm getting at. You could present "here are some examples of past life lunacy. In what way are you two NOT like these examples?"

0oTITANo0

12th September 2006, 06:48 AM

Well, for starters you can ask them why they bothered to come back from the dead at all. A good portion of Egyptian life was focused around preparing for the post-mortem trials the dead must go through to enter the field of reeds. Reincarnation was not a part of Egyptian theology and I would imagine that any Egyptian would prefer to stay in paradise vs. returning to earth. The trials were pass/fail tests against nasty demons with failure meaning oblivion as you are devoured by the demon, so there was no backtracking.
In general you could do some research on Egyptian theology and ask relevant questions especially concerning the afterlife and preparation for death. These religious beliefs were relatively static across all Dynasties.

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 06:52 AM

brodski

12th September 2006, 06:57 AM

It's being filmed on Friday!

Eep!

Holy Sarcophagus, Teek-Girl, you need to find an Egyptologist, and now!
Quick, to the Egyptology-mobile!

ObscureReferenceMan

12th September 2006, 07:19 AM

Do you have to ask the questions and debunk in the same show? Or will you be allowed to appear back at a later date for debunking?

Flo

12th September 2006, 07:36 AM

Orcutt's Catchpenny Mysteries of Ancien Egypt (http://www.catchpenny.org/index.html) has all kinds of ressources to debunk a lot of junk about egyptology.

The Pyramidiocy Index (http://www.catchpenny.org/crackpot.html)could come in useful at some point ... ;)

steenkh

12th September 2006, 07:36 AM

Anacoluthon64

12th September 2006, 07:44 AM

There's a wealth of factual information on ancient Egypt here (http://guardians.net/egypt/egol1.htm). It shouldn't be too difficult to dig out a few obscure factoids, e.g. the what, the where and the significance of fairly recent discoveries, or ancient practices and customs that are not well known.

You could also ask them where the Pharaoh's cigars really are. ;)

Good luck -- by which I mean that I hope you are given sufficient time to ask pertinent and probing questions.

'Luthon64

Flo

12th September 2006, 07:46 AM

Please be aware that of course debunking is not on the agenda! Unless this is an entirely different style of program than what is usually produced, Teek will only be their token skeptic so that they can claim to have covered all angles, and in any case, they will cut down Teek's appearance to a few seconds where she seems not to have a ready answer ...

Of course, but I've often found this site really useful in an "emergency", although their version of the crackpot index should only be used at the very last resort ...

exarch

12th September 2006, 08:04 AM

I suspect there's a chance these two chose ancient Egypt because they thought it would be easy to pull things out of their ;)ss without the general public even being aware they did. Perhaps they chose it because ancient Egyptian history is so long and elaborate you could make all kinds of claims and probably find a time period that complies with the claims.

And of course, there's always the chance they're just deluded and really DO think they were reincarnated Egyptians, in which case a few simple questions about everyday life will probably result in them giving the wrong answer. If the Egypt they describe looks a lot like that from movies like "The mummy", you know where they get their inspiration.

Anyway, I like the idea of pointing out that the ancient Egyptians didn't believe in reincarnation, and asking a few more detailed questions about how reincaration works.

grayman

12th September 2006, 08:08 AM

Ask them what Moses was really like.

:p

Mojo

12th September 2006, 08:10 AM

I have the general ones like skepdic etc, but some nice juicy facts like "there are currently seven people claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots" would be great. Apparently that last stat is true but I can't find a source for it.It would make a great reality TV show. Lock 'em all in a house...

Jekyll

12th September 2006, 08:24 AM

Specifically, if you could question two teenagers who were claiming to have memories of past lives in ancient Egypt, what would you ask them?

I'd ask "Why does everyone always claim to have such interesting passed lives?" not just "Flood session day 68: Got up before dawn, cold, ate flat bread with sand, pushed rocks uphill. It got hot. More rocks uphill. Got cold, went back to the tent. More flat bread with sand. Slept."

If reincarnation was real you'd expect most past lives to be really dull.

Almo

12th September 2006, 08:27 AM

I'm with the fight woo with woo thing. And it's very important to always sound calm and confident, so they can't edit you to look like a moron.

casebro

12th September 2006, 10:14 AM

Forget the reincarnation questions- how are you going to disprove them?

Try asking for specificsabout everyday life- that have answers in artifacts or hieroglyphs- what clothing fabrics? Favorite recipes? How were olives crushed into oil? How did they mix mortar? How did they sharpen their knives? How long to dry mud bricks? Oxen or mules to till the fields? Describe the weaving process, describe a loom. What did they use for toilet paper? Leather tanning process? step by step process for squaring a log into a beam. What fuel for cooking? ingredients for making dyes? What type of container for grain? oil? water transport? how to twist rope. how long to fire pottery...

SkepticScott

12th September 2006, 10:19 AM

How about "What objective evidence for your claim? How can we determine if you're telling the truth, have mental problems, or are lying? I'm not going to take your word for it. If you can't prove your claim, how are you any different from the drunk down at the train station who claims he's Napoleon?"

gdtbiker

12th September 2006, 10:36 AM

Do these kids Speak ancient Egyptian? Can they say a line or two and translate it to English?

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 12:06 PM

I'm with the fight woo with woo thing. And it's very important to always sound calm and confident, so they can't edit you to look like a moron.

No editing needed :D

BillC

12th September 2006, 02:15 PM

"Is it true, as Killik says, that Atlanteans built your pyramids?"

Arkan_Wolfshade

12th September 2006, 02:19 PM

Q: What pharoh was in power during your life?
Q: What three pharohs preceded them?

grayman

12th September 2006, 02:27 PM

Q: What pharoh was in power during your life?
Q: What three pharohs preceded them?

Shouldn't that be Which pharoh? (Not often I get to use my English degree)
:p

Tanja

12th September 2006, 02:32 PM

As the guy in the Da Vinci code said: I've got to get to a library, fast.

Will you let us know when it will be on TV, and which station?

Piscivore

12th September 2006, 02:37 PM

Shouldn't that be Which pharoh?

The pharohs were witches?

Arkan_Wolfshade

12th September 2006, 03:10 PM

Shouldn't that be Which pharoh? (Not often I get to use my English degree)
:p

They let 'em get away with it on Jeopardy!. :p

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 03:22 PM

As the guy in the Da Vinci code said: I've got to get to a library, fast.

Will you let us know when it will be on TV, and which station?

I might, it depends how well it goes :D

bjb

12th September 2006, 03:49 PM

I would take a completely different approach. Read up on past lives hypnosis and how people are fooled into believing in this and other nonsense (UFO abduction, satanic ritual abuse, childhood abuse). Show how false memory works and give evidence of hypnosis causing false memories and therapists being sued successfully by their patients. You are going to have to do a lot of research, but a copy of "Why People Beleive Weird Things" will be helpful.

Once you have established how false memory works, ask your past lives claimants how they came to their beliefs. If they admit to having been hypnotized, you can say that they are victims of false memory syndrome. You might want to reverse the process. Ask about their hypnosis, then give your story about false memory. Then ask the TV audience, which is more likely, these people have been reincarnated or they are willing vicitms of false memory syndrome?

The advantage of this approach is it bypasses any valid claims these people may make. You can say they read up on Egypt and know all the answers but they'll say no, we were there and that's how we know. Showing they are examples of false memory breaks through their side of the story and if they've been hypnotized by an 'expert', they will have no defense.

HeyLeroy

12th September 2006, 05:01 PM

Jeesh, Teek, not a lot of time to prepare, eh?

IMO, stay away from reincarnation questions and stick to facts. If you point out that ancient Egyptians didn't believe in reincarnation, all they'd have to do is roll their eyes and say, "you're right, and boy, were we wrong back then!" Don't give them the opportunity to look sympathetic. Any type of subjective questions should be avoided. A lot of people claim to be reincarnations of various christians, and christianity doesn't believe in reincarnation, either.

Steenkh has brought up some excellent points, and others have provided links for you to bone up on what is known about ancient Egypt. Stump 'em with a few factual questions.

Then you could ask them if their claim boils down to whether their 'souls' existed in the bodies of people long dead. Lead them around to saying that the soul is the seat of personality. Once they state that, ask them why, if that is true, brain damage causes personality changes?

Finish them off with bjb's approach.

tomgv15

12th September 2006, 05:20 PM

Be prepared for a wild goose chase in a thick fog. There will be no end to vague answers barely responding to your questions. KEEP ON TRACK. Don't let yourself be played for a fool.

CLD

12th September 2006, 06:41 PM

I concur with GDTBiker,

Every moment of every day of their past Egyptian life they would have been hearing and speaking Coptic or Arabic. The language would be the strongest memory of any memory. Ask them to speak a few words of it. Be prepared for elaborate excuses.

One possible excuse might be "we don't remember language, our memories consist of visual imagery".

http://www.watson.org/~leigh/egypt.html#hiero

So go to the url above and print out the glyph symbols. Make a Xerox enlargement and bring it with you to the taping. Fold it to hide the right side translations from their view. Point to the symbols and ask the teenagers to tell you what they represent. They should be familiar with such things as the reed leaves and bread loaf symbols and their meaning.

Their ignorance of the language and their ridiculous guesses at what the symbols mean should give the audience all the proof it needs to know they are not sincere.

Gord_in_Toronto

12th September 2006, 06:43 PM

Why not just ask them if any recognized scholar has vetted them?

If they answer "no", then ask as a general question to all why anyone should believe them?

If they give a name, it's less easy to follow up live. But you could ask what her/his qualifications are and where the response is recorded. It might be amusing to follow up later.

tkingdoll

12th September 2006, 06:48 PM

I have to be relatively careful, these girls are 16 so if I go too much on the attack I will look like the villain.

Kochanski

12th September 2006, 07:03 PM

Do you have any info about these teens? Have there been articles about them that you can review?

Barring that, I would ask them when they first started having these memories of past lives. What were the circumstances. How did they "recover" the memories.

These are legitimate questions that won't be seen to be confrontational and can give you an in to bjb's approach. His approach will carry far more weight if their stories are in the lines of the false memories schticks and you establish what their stories are before you start talking about false memories, otherwise they are likely to dodge your questions.

CLD

12th September 2006, 07:25 PM

You could also ask some simple questions about the food they ate. What type of bread? What type of meat? What drink? What fruit? What food was eaten on feast days? etc.

Again, eating is something they would be doing every day of their "past life", no matter if they were royalty or beggars. To not have some detailed memory of the details would be very suspicious.

bjb

12th September 2006, 07:28 PM

I didn't know the girls were 16! They are easy targets for the false memory syndrome approach. You might even get the audience to feel sorry for the poor things. FMS is relatively new and many people don't know about it. Read up on the McMartin preschool case. Also look into how researchers were able to prove they could implant a false memory into children. The audience must understand that there is absolutey no doubt that FMS exists and the mechanisms to create them are well-known and well-documented. Remember, you're trying to convince the TV audience, not the two girls or their supporters.

Also, they might also be frauds pulling a hoax like the Cottingly Fairy girls or the Fox sisters. It might not be nice to accuse them of being frauds right away but if the subject comes up, you can discuss these two cases of innocent girls who willingly fooled a lot of people who should know better. Their defenders even said things like, "How can they be lying when they're just innocent teenage girls?"

Outhere

12th September 2006, 07:32 PM

If they tell you they were born in 2401 B.C., your work is done!

CLD

12th September 2006, 08:22 PM

false memory syndrome approach

After reading this I have to change my recommendation. The TV show is set up as entertainment, not as a scientific forum, so the "disprove 'em with interrogation" approach will go over like a lead balloon.

The TV hosts will be credulous to the girls, No matter what *you* say, they will steer the discussion to an "open end", and wrap-up the segment with a tantalizing "it's a mystery" conclusion for the audience. So your best approach is to avoid challenging them altogether. You're there to provide information on an alternative (rational) POV. Formulate what they call an "elevator statement" (a highly condensed overview that includes key facts) on FMS and practice giving it.

When in doubt, ask yourself "What would Carl Sagan Do?" (WWCSD) :-)

Of course, he would be a gentleman and state the facts.

Good luck!

Cleon

12th September 2006, 08:31 PM

Well, one thing I can tell you is not to bother with asking them to translate hieroglyphics. Only specially trained scribes could read/write; the majority of the population was illiterate.

Blue Mountain

12th September 2006, 08:58 PM

If they claim to be from the era when the Great Pyramids were build, ask them a question about the slaves who built them.

If they're good, they'll correct you. The current thinking is the pyramids were not buily by slaves; they were basically a big public works project. There is good evidence the workers lived in a town close by the pyramids with their families.

If you don't want to be confrontational against the girls themselves, try to come up with a quick soundbite about false memory syndrome.

I recall seeing on TV (I think it was CBC's "the fifth estate") about an experiment where an unusually tall man visited a daycare one day. All he did was show up, say "hello", stand or sit quietly for a few minutes, then say "good-bye" and leave.

Later the researchers intereviewed kids at the daycare about the visit. They had some very interesting stories to tell. I recall one boy, after being prompted by an interviewer about an incident with a book, excitedly explain how the man had picked up the book and torn it to shreds in front of them all.

You may want to come up the a 10 second, 20 second, and 30 second version of a False Memory Syndrome soundbite. Get the most important facts into the fisrt 10 seconds, flesh it out a bit more in the next 10, and give a bit more detail in the next 10. Hopefully, if nothing else, you can raise a doubt.

Whether or not anything you say gets to air is another question. Isn't TV wonderful? :)

That's why I like forums like this. If someone say something that's BS, he/she doesn't get away with it.

steenkh

12th September 2006, 11:44 PM

Every moment of every day of their past Egyptian life they would have been hearing and speaking Coptic or Arabic.
Arabic not at all, and Coptic only if they were living in Roman times. Egyptian would be the meain language spoken, and it is commonly divided into Old, Middle, and New Egyptian. By the time of Tut, the were speaking Middle Egyptian, and they would have some slight difficulty in reading texts in Old Egyptian.

http://www.watson.org/~leigh/egypt.html#hiero

So go to the url above and print out the glyph symbols. Make a Xerox enlargement and bring it with you to the taping. Fold it to hide the right side translations from their view. Point to the symbols and ask the teenagers to tell you what they represent. They should be familiar with such things as the reed leaves and bread loaf symbols and their meaning.

Correct, if you stick to the actual pictograms and what they depict. But be careful not to reference to the linguistic meaning, or the sound, because the modern transliteration is an approximation, and you would need too much specialist knowledge, and probably some Semitic, in order not make factual errors. The Egyptian writing did not only consist of single-sound letters like our alphabet, but loads of double- or triple-sound letters, too. And they preferred the double- or triple letters, rather than the letters printed in the popularized texts, like the quoted link, and there are other specialties about the wrting that would be too complicated to discuss here.
Their ignorance of the language and their ridiculous guesses at what the symbols mean should give the audience all the proof it needs to know they are not sincere.[/QUOTE]

Diabolos

13th September 2006, 01:48 AM

Are you familiar with the process of cryptomesia? This seems the most likely explanation for most (maybe all) so-called PLRs. That and a bit of made-up story-telling, of course. :)

richardm

13th September 2006, 03:25 AM

I'm not going to take your word for it. If you can't prove your claim, how are you any different from the drunk down at the train station who claims he's Napoleon?"

Hehehe! :D

The trouble with asking them questions like "What did you eat" or "What did you wear" is that it's possible they are well-read on matters Egyptian and will be able to give you a decent answer, which would put you in a rather awkward position.

I don't know what I would suggest. Maybe a quick recap of Bridey Murphy, and asking why we should assume the girls aren't doing the same thing? Point out that the simplest explanations tend to be the best, and the simplest is that the girls are mistaken/lying through their teeth/deluded/mad (delete as politeness requires)

richardm

13th September 2006, 03:29 AM

I have to be relatively careful, these girls are 16 so if I go too much on the attack I will look like the villain.

For a good chunk of the audience you're probably going to be the villain anyway :( How dare you suggest these girls aren't the reincarnations of tootunhotep? THEY ARE CHILDREN AND CHILDREN DO NOT LIE :mad:

Actually that's an interesting question - I assume these girls are friends. What an amazing coincidence that they should both be reincarnated from the same period thousands of years ago and live just down the street from each other!

Nucular

13th September 2006, 03:40 AM

Although it's tempting to go down the 'catch them out on historical inaccuracies' route, this could require a degree of judgment: it's highly possible that they're quite well-read on egyptology, and that an obsessive interest might have led to the 'past life' idea.

Of course, it's always possible they have a level of knowledge at the Ladybird Book of Ancient Egypt level, in which case, let the slaughter commence. But if not, I think perhaps BJB's approach would be more fitting, to acknowledge that they're interesting claims, but not unprecedented, and this is how it might work instead... false memory syndrome, etc.

Might be worth pointing to Wiseman's stuff (don't have a ref, sorry) about comparing stories made up by children about someone who died some time ago, to reincarnation memories as regards historical accuracy.

And if they've ever been hypnotically regressed - which I'd think would be almost inevitable for such children - there's a wealth of stuff about recall accuracy/confabulation under hypnosis.

Have they ever said anything which has been independently verified, but wasn't previously known? Are there any unanswered questions in current egyptology which perhaps they could supply an answer to, to attempt to verify later? Not so useful in terms of the immediate interview, but as a long term strategy, it could 'get them in the end'. And perhaps help people to see the difference between verifiable information and the vague wishy-washiness that usually gets discussed when reincarnation is brought up as a subject.

If it was me, I'd acknowledge their being 'convincing', but end all such sentences with a "... but..." And of course you may not be suggesting that they're lying, but that they may be mistaken. Perhaps some statements about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence, burden of proof, etc. Those old soundbites are statements of the bleedin' obvious around these parts, but most people who lap this stuff up genuinely haven't even an inkling that this is what skepgits actually propose.

I wonder if they'll google 'reincarnation, sceptic, egypt, television, uk, friday' and find this thread?

Good stuff though Teek, very brave - how did you get this gig, if you don't mind my asking? Have you been on TV before? I have the feeling that, however opinionated or obnoxious I can be in private, I'd clam up as soon as the cameras rolled :)

Nucular

13th September 2006, 03:45 AM

Actually that's an interesting question - I assume these girls are friends. What an amazing coincidence that they should both be reincarnated from the same period thousands of years ago and live just down the street from each other!

"Well, of course the people we're close to in this life are the same people we've been close to in all of our past lives..." or some other such glibness would put that one to bed, I think. :(

In fact, there are glib answers - unsatisfactory, but nevertheless the sort of thing people cling to - for probably most of the metaphysical arguments about how reincarnation might work. They can also give rise rise to counterattacks such as "you can't say something doesn't work just because you don't know how it works, here's the proof right in front of you!" Important not to seem as though one is dismissing claims a priori, I think.

exarch

13th September 2006, 05:26 AM

Q: What pharoh was in power during your life?
Q: What three pharohs preceded them?

And if you're really sly, you could also ask "Which pharaoh's succeeded him?", then when they answer that, say "How did you know that, when you were supposed to already have died by the time that happened?"

Beady

13th September 2006, 05:30 AM

Lead them around to saying that the soul is the seat of personality. Once they state that, ask them why, if that is true, brain damage causes personality changes?

"I don't know."

Beady

13th September 2006, 05:31 AM

And if you're really sly, you could also ask "Which pharaoh's succeeded him?", then when they answer that, say "How did you know that, when you were supposed to already have died by the time that happened?"

"We learned it in this life."

Beady

13th September 2006, 05:35 AM

If they tell you they were born in 2401 B.C., your work is done!

"We were expressing the date as we learned it in this life."

exarch

13th September 2006, 05:40 AM

I don't know what I would suggest. Maybe a quick recap of Bridey Murphy, and asking why we should assume the girls aren't doing the same thing? Point out that the simplest explanations tend to be the best, and the simplest is that the girls are mistaken/lying through their teeth/deluded/mad (delete as politeness requires)

I think the problem is that for many people, the simplest explanation is not that two girls were hypnotized by some psychologist who then proceeded to nefariously plant false memories, or that the girls are fraudsters who did lots of research about ancient Egypt in an attempt to fool thousands of TV viewers. To them, the simplest explanation is just that they really ARE remembering bits of a life they lived approximately 3000 years ago. I suppose the goal would then be to point out WHY that is, in fact, not the simplest explanation.

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 05:42 AM

I think one of the best questions I can ask is "why should we believe you?"

The Egypt-specific stuff isn't going to work, as I can't verify any of the answers there and then, so I think I need to stick to the more generic questions about their background and what led them to the belief, although I suspect the show host will do that anyway. I need to inform the show of pretty much everything i plan to say in advance, they don't like suprises, so there's not much room to spring something on them.

There's also a faith healer on, that should be much easier to deal with! At least there is proof of placebo.

exarch

13th September 2006, 05:45 AM

I assume these girls are friends. What an amazing coincidence that they should both be reincarnated from the same period thousands of years ago and live just down the street from each other!

Ah, but past-life proponents have a perfectly reasonable explanation for that. Destiny. Ever feel like you were always meant to be with the person you fell in love with? Well, you were! Related spirits will keep meeting each other in every incarnation throughout history. Unless you've been absent during every episode of some TV show where, having run out of ideas for a while, the script writers resort to doing some kind of time-travel bit and have all the same characters appearing in similar roles and personalities.

Beady

13th September 2006, 05:59 AM

Read up on past lives hypnosis and how people are fooled into believing in this and other nonsense (UFO abduction, satanic ritual abuse, childhood abuse). Show how false memory works and give evidence of hypnosis causing false memories and therapists being sued successfully by their patients.

The very moment you enter Lecture Mode, you've lost. Rather than explain, challenge or ask:

"Explain why your reincarnation is more credible than someone else's abduction by aliens."

The onus is now on them to separate themselves from other loonies - if they can't, turn to the moderator and ask what the point of the interview is.

"What do you know about False Memory Syndrome? What have you done to rule it out in this case?"

The name "FMS" says it all; don't explain unless asked - The name alone will plant doubt in both the minds of the audience and the claimants - especially if they have never before heard of it, in which case you can suggest that the remainder of the interview be delayed until the possibility has been investigated.

"Is it possible that you are wrong? Why not?"

Do you really think it's possible they will admit they could be wrong? = No story, no TV show, etc. The real intention is to get them to explain "Why not?" If, however they admit to possibly being wrong, you can again ask the moderator what the point is.

I also like the idea of asking for specifics and publication info of verifiable test results.

Oh. One other question: "Many, perhaps millions of people, have claimed to be reincarnated. Why do you think your claims rate a TV interview and theirs don't?"

Beady

13th September 2006, 06:04 AM

I need to inform the show of pretty much everything i plan to say in advance...

So, why not just mail in your questions?

I take back my entire previous post; there's no point at all to your side of the show.

exarch

13th September 2006, 06:26 AM

So, why not just mail in your questions?

I take back my entire previous post; there's no point at all to your side of the show.

Actually, I still think the question asking them to identify how their experience is different from alien abduction is a good question. And so is the "false memory syndrome" statement. No need to explain that. Unless the TV show's host asks you to, in which case you can go for the 20 or 30 second version.

Of course, if they realize before the interview that the questions and statements tkingdoll is going to ask/make are going to be too damaging to the show's intention of doing a "Oh golly, what a mystery!" thing, it's likely they'll just not ask her any questions at all, or they DO allow her to speak, just to put her mind at ease, and then cut it all out of the final version anyway.

I think most big skeptics have already experienced that happening in interviews/debates. Their entire appearance is cut down to a 3 second soundbite (usually the one bit that doesn't do anything to incite skepticism), but hey, at least the show had "a skeptic" on.

steenkh

13th September 2006, 06:36 AM

It is an amazing fact about ancient history that at least in the popular history, there is hardly anything about how they lived and what preoccupied their lives. We know a lot about their religions and in particular their ideas about death, because of the wealth of information to be found in their tombs, but ordinary Egyptians did not, as far as I know, spend so much time reflecting on the life beyond the death.

Please be aware that if these girls are reincarnations of real persons from ancient Egypt, they really should not know much about what we know today. Chances are that they would hardly know anything about much of what we know about them today, because most would happen afterwards, and we stress other things than what they were presumably think of as the most important things that happened.

Perhaps it is best to question the girls how they themselves think that their claim can be substantiated. After all, they would probably admit that it is a rather fantastic claim, and if it is true, historians could get an enormous help in their job by having actual eye-witnesses to interview. Do they themselves feel that they have something more to offer than what is commonly known? And could some of this stuff be actually verified, like if they remember the typical colours of the buildings, and how many stories were the palace, and so on?

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 06:41 AM

So, why not just mail in your questions?

I take back my entire previous post; there's no point at all to your side of the show.

Well, the other guests don't know my questions in advances, just the production company. They have to plan the show, that's how TV works. No surprises. Ever.

Broadcasting guidelines say a balanced view must be presented, so they wheel in token skeptics.

However, the way to make it less like that is to be an interesting, witty and engaging skeptic!

Damn. :(

0oTITANo0

13th September 2006, 06:47 AM

but ordinary Egyptians did not, as far as I know, spend so much time reflecting on the life beyond the death.

Actually, egyptian peasants buried their dead outside the tombs of the wealthy in the hopes that they would be able to tag along as the wealthy person made their way to the field of reeds. The peasants also practiced a cheap form of mummification involving burying the corpse in the sand so it would dry out. Egyptian theology was pervasive at all levels of their society. The lower classes were not atheistic or ambivalent to the afterlife. As for understanding the daily lives of the lower classes there have been extensive excavations of the work camps surrounding the pyramids and other areas. Quite a bit is known about how the average egyptian lived. There is an extensive amount of administrative documents and hieroglyphic inscriptions available outside of the tombs that are not related to theology and the afterlife in any way. The Rosetta stone was a proclamation made by Ptolemy 5 concerning the repeal of certain taxes and construction projects.

0oTITANo0

13th September 2006, 07:04 AM

Teek, you are probably not going to be able to catch these girls in a historical contradiction. Even if you did it would probably not be anything that the audiend could relate to anyway. It would be much easier if you could catch them lying against what the audience knows to be true but since the general population knows nothing much more about egypt than King Tut its your word against theirs. Even if what you trapped them with is true its not something the audience can relate to. Probably better to be skeptical and work the false memory angle.

Nucular

13th September 2006, 07:21 AM

Probably true that you won't get them historically - but I'll just reiterate my point that you should be prepared, if you don't know anything about them at this stage, to strike if they do come out with a clearly poor or inaccurate knoweldge of 'Ancient Egypt'.

I wonder if taking a leaf out of the woo book and making bald statements of fact like "this is no different to any number of cases which have been utterly disproven" might be the ticket? The point of them being, if unchallenged the statement stands, like so many nonsensical woo assertions; but if challenged, you get a platform to actually say what you mean. Just a thought, not sure if I would.

Tez

13th September 2006, 07:22 AM

Don't ask them to read hieroglyphics - just copy 5 real ones and 5 ones you completely make up onto pieces of card, and ask them to pick out the real ones!

exarch

13th September 2006, 07:24 AM

However, the way to make it less like that is to be an interesting, witty and engaging skeptic!

Perhaps the thing to do is to play along with the sympathy these girls are going to be getting from the audience anyway. Show concern for their ordeal, and the whole false memory thing. Show them how you feel sorry for them, being the victims of such a scam. Perhaps even suggesting (and referencing) some sources they (or others like them) could check out, or urge them to contact the police to get the fraudulent psychologist who's scamming them arrested (hmm, okay, perhaps going a tad too far).

anyway, turn it into something that's exactly what the TV producers want: on screen drama. Only, you should make it drama that promotes the skeptical side of the story rather than the wishy-washy woo-nonsense that everyone is expecting to see and hear.

Tez

13th September 2006, 07:24 AM

In fact I would do the "multiple choice questions" thing as much as possible - you'll need to prepare a bunch of different questions for different eras of course. Nice thing is that they are then very clearly either right or wrong...

Darat

13th September 2006, 07:27 AM

....snip...

anyway, turn it into something that's exactly what the TV producers want: on screen drama. Only, you should make it drama that promotes the skeptical side of the story rather than the wishy-washy woo-nonsense that everyone is expecting to see and hear.

Well for drama tk could stand up and reveal she is a fundamental Christian and throw some holy water on the girls at the same time screaming "in the name of Jesus I demand you leave"?

Spektator

13th September 2006, 07:32 AM

How about "What has it got in its pocketses?"

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 07:35 AM

Well for drama tk could stand up and reveal she is a fundamental Christian and throw some holy water on the girls at the same time screaming "in the name of Jesus I demand you leave"?

Well the researchers are making a big deal out of the fact I used to be a Christian, I'm not sure if they like it because it demonstrates that you can reason yourself out of an irrational belief, or because they can paint me as a cynic who's lost her faith. We shall see.

Arkan_Wolfshade

13th September 2006, 07:44 AM

Well for drama tk could stand up and reveal she is a fundamental Christian and throw some holy water on the girls at the same time screaming "in the name of Jesus I demand you leave"?

I have to quite speed reading posts. The first time through I only caught "Well for drama tk could stand up and reveal" :boxedin:

Beady

13th September 2006, 07:45 AM

Well, the other guests don't know my questions in advances, just the production company.

Yeah. OK.

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 07:49 AM

Yeah. OK.

I must admit I'm a little cynical of that claim myself, but as it's two kids, I really don't see what use the information is to them anyway. If they can come up with a sparkling clever retort to my reasons why the burden of proof is on them, then good luck to them, frankly.

John Jackson

13th September 2006, 07:54 AM

I think one of the best questions I can ask is "why should we believe you?"

Absolutely.

In fact you would do well to make that your entire approach.

In this type of programme the burden of proof is often placed on the skeptic to prove the claims wrong. Skeptics can fall for it and try to argue back.

If, for example, they have been hypnotised/regressed then they should explain why the reincarnation hypothesis is more likely than the false/implanted memory one.

If they are claiming reincarnation, the burden of proof should be kept on them.

exarch

13th September 2006, 07:58 AM

Absolutely.

In fact you would do well to make that your entire approach.

In this type of programme the burden of proof is often placed on the skeptic to prove the claims wrong. Skeptics can fall for it and try to argue back.

If, for example, they have been hypnotised/regressed then they should explain why the reincarnation hypothesis is more likely than the false/implanted memory one.

If they are claiming reincarnation, the burden of proof should be kept on them.

In other words, the question should be something like: "Why should we believe that the memories you have are of a past life in ancient Egypt, and not simply a false memory, planted inadvertently or not, when you were hypnotised?"

steenkh

13th September 2006, 07:59 AM

Actually, egyptian peasants buried their dead outside the tombs of the wealthy in the hopes that they would be able to tag along as the wealthy person made their way to the field of reeds. The peasants also practiced a cheap form of mummification involving burying the corpse in the sand so it would dry out. Egyptian theology was pervasive at all levels of their society. The lower classes were not atheistic or ambivalent to the afterlife.
Quite. But the existing literature does not suggest that they were so preoccupied with death as might be thought if you only look at the tombs and burials.

As for understanding the daily lives of the lower classes there have been extensive excavations of the work camps surrounding the pyramids and other areas. Quite a bit is known about how the average egyptian lived. There is an extensive amount of administrative documents and hieroglyphic inscriptions available outside of the tombs that are not related to theology and the afterlife in any way. The Rosetta stone was a proclamation made by Ptolemy 5 concerning the repeal of certain taxes and construction projects.
But this is the bit not found in popular books on Egypt. Which is why I asked for unusual stuff that could be verified.

In any case, I agree completely that trying to catch historical inaccuracies will be both difficult and unspectacular (in the sense that the editors will cut it out because they think it is boring). But if they mix Hellenistic and Pyramidal epochs together, it should be fairly easy to spot, and could be interesting enough for the audience not to switch channel!

Beady

13th September 2006, 08:07 AM

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 08:13 AM

vbloke

13th September 2006, 08:15 AM

What happened to the Sphinxs' nose?

Or take a lump of rock into the studio and ask them to carve some heiroglyphics.

Almo

13th September 2006, 08:16 AM

John Jackson

13th September 2006, 08:16 AM

In other words, the question should be something like: "Why should we believe that the memories you have are of a past life in ancient Egypt, and not simply a false memory, planted inadvertently or not, when you were hypnotised?"

Something like that - yes.

There'll be many neutrals in the TV audience and, IMO, the best we can do is to show why the reasoning is flawed (so they can make their own minds up) rather than try to debunk the claims completely.

Instead of treating the claim as true or false, treat it as a choice between competing explanations. Why should we accept a highly implausible explanation when much more mundane ones are at hand?

Occam's razor, really! :D

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 08:22 AM

What happened to the Sphinxs' nose?

Obelix kicked it off in Asterix and Cleopatra.

Beady

13th September 2006, 08:25 AM

If I say I want evidence but then can't think of anything that might be evidence, they don't have much reason to listen to me (I don't know what I want but I know I want it).

They are in the court of public opinion, and the audience (and you) are the jury. It is not the jury's responsibility to supply or define the evidence. You could say as much on the show.

I was adding this to my last while you were replying:

Your punch line, which just might be the program's final line, but in any case can be used to sum up your own position: "I'm sorry, but I believe you simply have given me and the audience insufficient reason to base our hopes of eternal existence on your version of the universe." This also gives the audience a reason to side with you.

Almo

13th September 2006, 08:27 AM

So, why not just mail in your questions?

I take back my entire previous post; there's no point at all to your side of the show.

Oh no. :( Damn TV guys.

Do your best. We're all rooting for you. :)

vbloke

13th September 2006, 08:28 AM

Why wait until now to come back?
Have you come back as someone else before?
Can you remember anything from THAT life?
What lead you to believe you've been reincarnated?
Have you met and been questioned by any eminent egyptologists?
What happens during the reincarnation process?
How often can it be done?
Why you?
If it happens to everyone, why do people from all time periods pop up all over the place, is there no order to it?

Beady

13th September 2006, 08:33 AM

Can you remember anything from THAT life?

If they can't, what's the point of the show?

How often can it be done?
Why you?
If it happens to everyone, why do people from all time periods pop up all over the place, is there no order to it?

Why should they know the answers to these questions? Could you answer similar questions about being born? All they have to say is, "I don't know; I wasn't in the back room when the process was designed."

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 08:35 AM

They are in the court of public opinion, and the audience (and you) are the jury. It is not the jury's responsibility to supply or define the evidence. You could say as much on the show.

I was adding this to my last while you were replying:

Your punch line, which just might be the program's final line, but in any case can be used to sum up your own position: "I'm sorry, but I believe you simply have given me and the audience insufficient reason to base our hopes of eternal existence on your version of the universe." This also gives the audience a reason to side with you.

I love that! I'll try to memorise it! Thanks :)

Almo

13th September 2006, 08:42 AM

I love that! I'll try and memorise it! Thanks :)

Try to memorize it.

:duck:

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 08:53 AM

Try to memorize it.

:duck:

I don't know what you're talking about :whistling

sophia8

13th September 2006, 08:55 AM

If I was testing anyone who claimed to remember a past life earlier than the Middle Ages, I'd bring along a live pig and a carving knife to the test and invite the reincarnatee to demonstrate how they used to make bacon.
Obviously, that might not be practical here. So how about asking these kids for some recipes for genuine ancient Eygptian beer? Or maybe telling you what type of musical instruments they played and how they wrote down music? Or telling how they made dyes or incense? Maybe get a modern copy of some Eygptian instrument and get them to play it?
Just get them to talk about or (preferably) demonstrate some skill or specialised knowledge that they couldn't easly have got out of a book.

Soapy Sam

13th September 2006, 09:01 AM

Give one of them a simple, written message in English , about irrigation, corn tithes, land measurement or a similar technicality well known to ancient Egypt.
Ask him to translate it into Egyptian and read it to his pal. Ask the other to write it out.
Compare the two messages.

Cleon

13th September 2006, 09:06 AM

Their ignorance of the language and their ridiculous guesses at what the symbols mean should give the audience all the proof it needs to know they are not sincere.

No, their inability to read hieroglyphics is not proof that they are not sincere. As I said, only a specialized group of trained individuals could read or write; the majority of the population could not.

So even if these girls are for real, chances are that they wouldn't be able to read them anyway. As an analogy, consider two random people on present-day Earth reincarnated 2,000 years from now. As "proof," someone demands that they explain the meaning of some Java code. What are the chances that those two people would have the knowledge to actually do so?

IMO, historicity is the way to go. Ask them about daily life, where they lived, and compare that to what we know, historically and archaeologically, about the period.

My money says that they will speak in very vague terms, saying that their memories are "fuzzy" or some such. (For some reason, leftover memories from reincarnation are never very specific.) If they insist on this approach and refuse to answer your questions, don't be overly aggressive lest you be perceived as beating up on some poor 16-year-old girls.

Instead, simply point out that there's no way to verify what they're saying. They're not saying anything that you can corroborate, and by the same token you can claim to be a reincarnated Inca princess. Just keep reiterating that there's no way to know, that what they've provided just doesn't provide enough to be able to tell whether they're the real deal or just suffering from overactive imaginations.

The important thing is to be friendly, smile a lot, don't get frustrated, don't get upset, and above all don't accuse the girls of anything. Don't call them frauds, don't suggest that they're doing this just for attention, just point out anything they've said that's not in line with historical evidence and/or point out that they're not saying anything that can be corroborated.

exarch

13th September 2006, 09:26 AM

Try to memorize it.

:duck:

Do! Or do not. There is no try :p

Nucular

13th September 2006, 09:33 AM

IMO, historicity is the way to go. Ask them about daily life, where they lived, and compare that to what we know, historically and archaeologically, about the period.

If you did go down the historical route, I wonder if there might be a handy 'expert' on hand to verify or otherwise? If I was making a programme like this, I'd make sure there was one.

Another historicity-based approach which might not require you or someone else to have reams of obscure knowledge might be for you to pick a topic to read up on just a little, and see if you can lead them up the garden path a little, then tell them what you've done (simple and crap example being, perhaps "When you got paid for your work, what were the coins made out of? What did they look like? What marks were on them? Aha! There was no Ancient Egyptian coinage system!", I'm sure you can do better).

Instead of using modern words for things, see if you could look up a few actual Ancient Egyptian terms like "When the tjaty - are you with me here?".

Basically, if the conversation is on their terms, they'll stick to topics they know about. Make it on your terms.

I got my examples from Wikipedia, but I somehow suspect they'll have been there. Try a dusty old library book.

Tanstaafl

13th September 2006, 09:41 AM

So go to the url above and print out the glyph symbols. Make a Xerox enlargement and bring it with you to the taping. Fold it to hide the right side translations from their view. Point to the symbols and ask the teenagers to tell you what they represent. They should be familiar with such things as the reed leaves and bread loaf symbols and their meaning.

Their ignorance of the language and their ridiculous guesses at what the symbols mean should give the audience all the proof it needs to know they are not sincere.

I think we have a winner here!

Not being able to read the simplest words in "their" language would pretty well nail them I should think.

exarch

13th September 2006, 09:43 AM

If you did go down the historical route, I wonder if there might be a handy 'expert' on hand to verify or otherwise? If I was making a programme like this, I'd make sure there was one.

Another historicity-based approach which might not require you or someone else to have reams of obscure knowledge might be for you to pick a topic to read up on just a little, and see if you can lead them up the garden path a little, then tell them what you've done (simple and crap example being, perhaps "When you got paid for your work, what were the coins made out of? What did they look like? What marks were on them? Aha! There was no Ancient Egyptian coinage system!", I'm sure you can do better).

That might not be a bad thing to add if you've got time. You know, if you're asked what you would consider evidence, say that describing what their coins looked like or were made of would convince you, then if they try being vague "Well, they were made of some bronze-like metal and some had an image of a bird on them", you can say, "That's odd, because the Egyptians didn't even use coins?"

Deus Ex Machina

13th September 2006, 09:49 AM

Hi folks,

On Friday I am taking part in a TV debate and have the opportunity to question people who claim to have had past lives. It's quite a trendy story at the moment in the UK, so every woo is coming out of the WOOdwork.

I'd like to be prepared as possible, so I thought I'd open the floor here to see if anyone has ideas that I might have overlooked.

Specifically, if you could question two teenagers who were claiming to have memories of past lives in ancient Egypt, what would you ask them?

I need to keep it polite, "why are you so deluded?", while tempting, would make me look like the villain :D

And if you know of any good sources on this topic you can link to, that would also be helpful. I have the general ones like skepdic etc, but some nice juicy facts like "there are currently seven people claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots" would be great. Apparently that last stat is true but I can't find a source for it.

I would start off by asking them to explain what they mean by having "memories". Sort of like getting people to state, in advance, what they are trying to demonstrate for the Randi test. Don't try asking any questions until they have stated what it is that they "know".

Ask them to speak in Ancient Egyptian. Give one of them an english phrase, in writing and ask them to translate it verbally to the other in Ancient Egyptian and then ask the second one to translate it back.

Should be pretty simple.

The trick would be to separate the two of them and ask them some very simple questions about daily life.

1) How did you wipe your ass after taking a dump and where did you go to the "bathroom"?

2) What was your favorite meal and at what time did you eat it?

3) Where have you been for the last 4000 years/

richardm

13th September 2006, 10:24 AM

Ask 'em if they've read this (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bride-Nile/dp/0863276229/sr=8-3/qid=1158167906/ref=sr_1_3/026-3248090-7738057?ie=UTF8&s=gateway) ;)

Do you actually know anything about what they claim? Do they even claim to be able to speak whatever languages Egyptians spoke? 'cos if they did do the speaking in tongues bit Deus' test could be quite fun. "Ixnay on the Glyphsay"

steenkh

13th September 2006, 10:25 AM

No, their inability to read hieroglyphics is not proof that they are not sincere. As I said, only a specialized group of trained individuals could read or write; the majority of the population could not.
I did not write the quote you attributed to me, but nevertheless, I would argue that the girls might not know that very few in Egyptian society could read or write, and they might try to wiggle out of the question in a less obvious way than to say that they never learnt it!

Anacoluthon64

13th September 2006, 10:34 AM

Are the two "reincarnatees" presently friends and do they claim to also have been acquainted in their Egyptian manifestations? If the answer is yes to both questions, it may be possible to draw some advantage from asking by what means they recognised one another in this life (e.g., by appearances, mannerisms, modes of speech or behaviour, language - but without giving them such a list of options, of course). If they respond with anything that is tangible, you can then admit your bafflement at their reply because the transmitted "soul," itself being intangible, allegedly carries no physical attributes. But be wary of getting embroiled in an unproductive and murky "metaphysical" squabble on their terms.

ETA: If they are not, and/or were not, thus acquainted, you can pose a similar question as a hypothetical.

'Luthon64

Winterfrost

13th September 2006, 10:43 AM

I completely agree with what Deus Ex posted above.

While something like the translation/reading tests might be good "evidence," they might simply respond that their memories aren't that detailed. You can only ask them about those things which they remember.

Questions which focus on aspects of their "regular lives" would probably be better received. I think the money/coinage question is good. I would suggest specific questions about diet, work, clothing, marriage/relationships, children... and I was going to propose the bathroom question as well, but Deus Ex beat me to it again! :)

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 10:45 AM

Beady

13th September 2006, 11:08 AM

CLD

13th September 2006, 11:23 AM

Try this on for size:

(To Moderator) Fred, I can't say it didn't happen, because I wasn't there. Neither am I going to say that the girls are lying, because I have no evidence that they are. In fact, I am tentatively willing to stipulate that the girls, themselves, believe everything they are telling us is absolutely true. If they want me to also believe, if they want me and members of the audience to base our own hopes of an afterlife on their story and to abandon whatever religious beliefs we currently hold, however, they are going to have to give us something reasonably solid upon which to base our conversion."

(At this point the moderator may well ask, "What kind of evidence would you accept?")

Shrug. "To my knowledge I have never experienced reincarnation, or any other sort of return from the dead, so I have no idea what evidence might be available. These girls say they have experienced it, so they would presumably know."

(Then look expectantly at the girls, and show every sign of waiting patiently for their answer).

Your punch line, which just might be the program's final line, but in any case can be used to sum up your own position: "I'm sorry, but you simply have given me insufficient reason to base my eternal existence on your version of the universe." This also gives the audience a reason to side with you.

Agh. I think it's gonna be more like THIS:

FRED: Do we live again? Do our souls continue on and on in a cycle of reincarnation? Scholars and thinkers have searched for the answer to those questions for centuries. Today we'll be talking to two teenaged girls from Saskatchewan who recall vivid details of past lives in ancient Egypt. Please welcome Buffy Perky and Lola Giggles.

AUDIENCE: APPLAUSE

FRED: Buffy and Lola, when did you first realize you'd been reincarnated?

BUFFY: Ever since I was little I thought about pyramids and stuff but it was only this summer that I really started talking about it.

LOLA: Me too.

FRED: Fascinating, fascinating. Tell us something about those startling, true memories and how they have affected your young lives.

LOLA: This guy I know. He's hot. He told a friend I looked Egyptian.

BUFFY: Oh my God! Me too! They say I look Egyptian too!

LOLA: Oh my God! That's soooo strange!

FRED: For another point of view on this fascinating true case of reincarnation, we've brought in a professional skeptic. Tkingdoll, what's your opinion? Do you buy the girls story?

TKINGDOLL: Fred, I can't say it didn't happen, because I wasn't there. Neither am I going to say that the girls are lying, because I have no evidence that they are. In fact....

FRED: (interrupts) Lola, who were you in ancient Egypt?

LOLA: I was a princess. I lived right next to that big statue with the kitty paws, what do you call it?

FRED: The Sphinx?

LOLA: Yeah.

FRED: Tkingdoll? Is reincarnation possible?

TKINGDOLL: To my knowledge I have never experienced reincarnation, or any other sort of...

FRED: (to Lola) But you girls have experienced it, right? What's it like?

LOLA: It's like a weird spiral with a white light, Fred.

BUFFY: And you get to see all the pets you ever had who died.

TKINGDOLL: I'm sorry, but you simply have given me insufficient reason to base my eternal existence on...

FRED: We've got to break away right now, but it's safe to say that reincarnation will remain a tantalizing mystery that experts will debate for centuries to come. Thank you Lola and Buffy and thank you Tkingdoll. (pause)
Don't go away! Coming up next, a new diet that could shed those ugly extra pounds just by thinking them away. Stick around, we'll be right back!

AUDIENCE: APPLAUSE

Khyron

13th September 2006, 01:09 PM

I'm new here, but felt this was worth saying.

The subject line is an obvious reason to be careful selecting memory questions. The normal response I've gotten to detailed past-life information requests is that they only recall the memorable bits - like what most adults remember of early childhood. I may remember breaking my leg when I was 4, but I don't remember what my favorite food was at that age.

Ask them a question where they will -want- to give details, because doing so will gain them sympathy. Things such as "Do you remember your mother and father? how much older than you were they? what did they die of?" could lead interesting places, especially if they can't answer. They've probably pre-agreed on what 'they' died of, but this could work. Another similar question would be "what's your happiest memory from that life?" and follow-ups about it.

All of this is assuming they have some story beyond "we were sisters back then, that's all we know." I assume they do, otherwise why put them on the show?

Good luck!

grayman

13th September 2006, 01:20 PM

What are the chances of asking questions to these two seperately, questions they make not expect and rehearse?

Plasmadog

13th September 2006, 03:32 PM

I still say that asking them about the mechanics of reincarnation is a mistake, because all they have to do is say, "I don't know." Being born does not inherently imply a knowledge of the reproductive process, and I see no reason to argue that being reincarnated would inherently imply a knowledge of that process.

Also, asking them any kind of history question can be met with the same answer. Reincarnation does not inherently imply a knowledge of then-current events. Whether it involves memory or knowledge of any sort is sort of an open question, and the question itself won't be defined until Teek finds out what the girls think reincarnation entails.

I agree completely. In addition, if they were to answer any questions of this sort, there is unlikely to be anything you could say that would definitively catch them out in the eyes of the audience. Just like a cold reader, they can always state things in a way that is very difficult to falsify, and if you can't challenge what they say, it will just be seen as more evidence in their favor. In a pinch, faced with a specific challenge, they can always claim that modern scholars have simply got it wrong, or that you aren't up to date on recent findings, or whatever. Anyone in the audience who is already inclined to believe the reincarnation explanation will view it as your word against theirs, and they would probably favor the girls. They would start from the assumption that they really are reincarnated, which would imply that the girls have first hand knowledge, which would be considered more reliable than any information you could possibly provide.

Sadly, facts and contradictions just won't convince many people. I like the "divide and conquer" approach suggested earlier. Take advantage of the fact that woos cherish their existing beliefs, and tend to reject anything that challenges those beliefs. Try to turn these girls' claims into such a challenge.

exarch

13th September 2006, 04:21 PM

Agh. I think it's gonna be more like THIS:

Sadly? Yes, I fear you're right. Except of course "Buffy" and "Lola" will be from a place in Brittain
But that's a point that has been made earlier. Teek, make your answers or questions as short as possible, because they're going to cut away the moment you start stealing too much airtime away from the main event: the girls. If you're asked to elaborate, go ahead, but you shouldn't count on even getting that much.

And as others have suggested, maybe you could also resort to a cheap a woo tactic and make a bold, attention grabbing statement that is perhaps not entirely 100% correct, but will be heard by every person watching the show. Perhaps people will contest what you said later on, but by then it's already been said on TV.

CLD

13th September 2006, 04:55 PM

Yeah, I retract all my earlier suggestions about asking the girls to recognize glyphs or speak their ancient language. And please forget about discussing the mechanics of reincarnation. TV sound bites are about all you'll have time to deliver.

Some possible bold, attention grabbing statements:

-We know False Memory Syndrome can often convince otherwise rational people that they have led a so-called past life. Daydreams and impressions aren't proof of reincarnation.

-There are at least a dozen people in the world who are convinced they are the reincarnation of Mary Queen Of Scots. They cannot all be the same person.

(Something else I picked up here on JREF, don't know who posted it, but it's a great tool:)

YOU: How many people here remember the first time they got in a fight? Perhaps in a schoolyard or playground or somewhere else? Raise your hands. [show of hands] OK, I'd like you to picture that scene right now. How many see themselves in the scene, perhaps from above, as in a movie? [show of hands] In actual fact, your only point of view during the fight was from your two eyes and was very limited. But our brains revise the memory to create an image much like a movie where we can watch ourselves as part of the action. Therefore you can't really rely on memory to be an accurate record of reality.

tkingdoll

13th September 2006, 04:57 PM

Plasmadog

13th September 2006, 05:05 PM

Agreed, that's the best way to go. I want to try and use the Randi school of 'can't edit my point' by using the important word at the start, middle and end of the sentence.

For the sake of simplicity, this can be achieved by making every sentence take the form of: "********!"

edit: that word was BS, by the way, but it just didn't seem right to spell it that way.

exarch

13th September 2006, 05:08 PM

Agreed, that's the best way to go. I want to try and use the Randi school of 'can't edit my point' by using the important word at the start, middle and end of the sentence.

Not to mention you're not actively challenging or contesting the girls, just making a statement. You'll not be seen as harassing. And there's always the risk that the show's producers aren't playing fair and will tell the girls if you're planning to trap them in a lie. You'll only give them more credibility if you fail to do so because they were forewarned.

Beth

13th September 2006, 05:54 PM

My advice, if you want it:

Don't try to beleaguer the girls at all. Accept whatever they say as being, at least sincere and not deliberate fraud. However they came to believe this, chances are good they are sincere in their belief. I would expect that they've developed this belief together and have inadvertantly reinforced each other, perhaps with help from one or more of their parents.

When given the opportunity, talk about how people come to believe things like past lives and alien abduction. Discuss what scientists tend to think about why and how such beliefs can develop.

I don't think you can come across as anything but villanous if you impugne the girls at all. If you stay away from any sort of attact, you can come across as a thoughtful expert who humors them politely.

Spindrift

13th September 2006, 06:16 PM

I think this is a no win situation unless they are really dumb. They should be able to weasel out of any situation, simply by saying "I don't have all the memories, just enough to know I'm reincarnated."

If you attack them, you will come off as a bully. If you try to say, "I'm sorry, but you simply have given me insufficient reason to base my eternal existence on your version of the universe." you will just come off as pretentious and someone unwilling to accept different beliefs.

They're sisters in the past life? If you could get them separate it would probably be easy to trap them by asking the same basic questions that sisters should know. (Number of siblings, their names, parents names, describe the house, etc.) But that doesn't seem likely.

I think your only hope is to find some common misconception about Egyptian life (if there is one) and lead them along the path of confirming the misconception before springing the trap.

Anything else can just be answered by "I don't remember that particular thing."

Beady

14th September 2006, 03:48 AM

If you try to say, "I'm sorry, but you simply have given me insufficient reason to base my eternal existence on your version of the universe." you will just come off as pretentious and someone unwilling to accept different beliefs.

Most members of the show's audience will have grown up believing there is only one way to eternal safety; these girls are telling them that what they have been taught all their lives to believe is wrong. I'm not sure about the Jews, but these girls, by asking Christians and Muslims to believe their story, are also, by definition, asking them to give up hope for Paradise on behalf of themselves and their loved ones. That's a pretty big sacrifice and the justification for the request should be more substantial than vague anecdotes unsupported by more than a common preference in hairstyles.

What could possibly be more important than the eternal fate of your immortal soul? Shouldn't a claim to know that fate ahead of time be backed up by reasonably convincing arguments? What an individual audience member finds to be "reasonably convincing" will depend on how they value their own soul. This should be Teek's essential argument.

Brainache

14th September 2006, 04:07 AM

I would ask them if they remember anything about their deaths in ancient Egypt.
Who died first?
Did they both die at the same time?
What rituals were performed at their funerals?
They might try a bit of on the spot confabulation and trip themselves up.

exarch

14th September 2006, 04:25 AM

Beady

14th September 2006, 05:40 AM

And again, past-lifers can easily claim that, upon dying, the soul is given the chance to stay with friends and family in "the after-life", or go back and reincarnate.

That scenario is straight out of Hollywood ("What Dreams May Come"). In order to make that claim, they are also going to have to claim that they remember the decision-making process. This leads the interview into areas where they can be tripped up.

BTW, Teek? It's entirely possible that the girls will draw themselves into making some fairly elaborate descriptions. Just remember that there are times when it's best to shut up and let them talk. Don't even think about trying to counter every point; choose your shots.

thatguywhojuggles

14th September 2006, 05:57 AM

Anacoluthon64

14th September 2006, 06:35 AM

I still say that asking them about the mechanics of reincarnation is a mistake, ...If this is in response to my earlier suggestion about how the "sisters" recognised one another in their present lives, it is hard to see how they could convincingly answer, "I don't know." After all, the question doesn't probe the "mechanics of reincarnation" in any deeply technical way; it merely exploits the background assumption underlying the transmigration of "souls" that "everyone knows anyway" - i.e., that nothing physical is involved in the process, otherwise there'd be evidence of it. If they claim to have been biological, as opposed to metaphorical, sisters, and are at present not similarly related, it would be very strange indeed if they are unable to provide a halfway decent answer. If they provide a goofy answer, remember that the audience will detect it too. It isn't composed entirely of fools.

'Luthon64

Spindrift

14th September 2006, 06:38 AM

Most members of the show's audience will have grown up believing there is only one way to eternal safety; these girls are telling them that what they have been taught all their lives to believe is wrong. I'm not sure about the Jews, but these girls, by asking Christians and Muslims to believe their story, are also, by definition, asking them to give up hope for Paradise on behalf of themselves and their loved ones. That's a pretty big sacrifice and the justification for the request should be more substantial than vague anecdotes unsupported by more than a common preference in hairstyles.

I think there are probably a lot of Christians who are quite ready to believe in reincarnation. I'll bet if you ask these girls what their religion is, odds are they are Christian.

That may be a line of questioning. If in fact they say they are Christian, how do they resolve that with reincarnation?

As I said, this is a no win situation. You can't disprove they are reincarnated unless you trap them in some kind of misstatement. There are a few ways to do that, attack them systematically until they trip up, separate them and find where their stories don't jibe or let them blather on of their own volition hoping they will trip themselves up.

You won't have time for a systematic attack, I doubt they will let you question them separately, so you have to hope they screw up and say something wrong.

Beady

14th September 2006, 06:45 AM

Well, I've said all of any importance that I've had to say. I'll stay subscribed to this thread, now, to hear Teek's report on how it went.

tkingdoll

14th September 2006, 06:52 AM

I think there are probably a lot of Christians who are quite ready to believe in reincarnation. I'll bet if you ask these girls what their religion is, odds are they are Christian.

Two 16 year olds in the UK? Odds on they aren't.

I agree that's it's basically a no-win situation, but that's not a reason not to try. My main personal objective is not to prove them wrong or even counter their claims, but to just represent skepticism as a nice, friendly person. The TV company said they are tired of the 'angry skeptic' type that they usually get, I guess if I can demonstrate there's a new generation not rabidly shouting "evidence" in their faces, then skepticism will become more acceptable on programmes like this.

If I can, I'd like to get in the following examples:

There are several people currently claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots
False memory syndrome
Bridey Murphy
What would happen to society if we just took everyone's word for things?

Anything more than that will be a bonus! CLD's 'movie fight scene' is a great device, although I think mostly the audience is housewives (this is daytime TV) so I might change it to something like first kiss.

rebecca

14th September 2006, 07:10 AM

Right, of course there's little chance that Teek will get 30 minutes to carefully explain to a willing audience why these girls are full of crap. But she and Darat and VBloke are all doing a very, very good thing of showing that skeptics are cool, down to earth people who just happen to think rationally about stuff.

Good job kids!

tkingdoll

14th September 2006, 07:13 AM

exarch

14th September 2006, 07:26 AM

If I can, I'd like to get in the following examples:

There are several people currently claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots

Not "several", "at least half a dozen". Perhaps it's not entirely true in that there are perhaps not 6 or more fully documented cases of people claiming such, but there's probably plenty more who may have claimed this off the record somewhere, who aren't part of that stack of files (yet). it also makes the number sound bigger than "several"

Are there any other big celebrities from the past whose lives are (officially) claimed by several people? Like Cleopatra? Julius Caesar? Napoleon? Joan of Arc?
It would sound very well researched if you could say something like:
"There are currently at least 6 people claiming to have been Mary QoS, 9 who claim to have been Cleopatra, 4 claiming to have been Napoleon, and the list goes on. They can't all be right? Can they?"

What would happen to society if we just took everyone's word for things?

Maybe add to that somethng like "Just because you think it could be right doesn't mean it necessarily is" to highlight the basic premise of the skeptic's point of view.

richardm

14th September 2006, 08:11 AM

"There are currently at least 6 people claiming to have been Mary QoS, 9 who claim to have been Cleopatra, 4 claiming to have been Napoleon, and the list goes on. They can't all be right? Can they?"

As far as we know though the girls aren't claiming to be anyone big, just ordinary Egyptians. So while the point is a good one, they could just respond "well, perhaps those people are soft in the head", or something unanswerable like "We don't know" or "souls can get spread between more than one person, there are a lot more people alive today than there were in the past don'tcha know". In the first case you have an obvious follow-up question, not much you can do to the glib answers other than roll your eyes.

Mind you, one thing I think Teek will have in her favour is that these are two 16 year old girls who are likely to be nervous, giggly and daft, whereas she can use her l33t media skilz to put across her points calmly and sensibly, which may make a very positive impression on the audience. Unless of course the girls really are reincarnated, in which case they've probably got a cumulative age and experience to perform wonders. Or would an ancient Egyptian keep squinting at the lights and making comments about how bright rush lamps are these days?

So, are you going to tell us when you're on, Teek? Be nice to see you moving and talking.

exarch

14th September 2006, 08:19 AM

So, are you going to tell us when you're on, Teek? Be nice to see you moving and talking.

If it's daytime, she better tell us tonight, because otherwise I won't be able to see it, or even have time to program the VCR watch it later on ...
and if it's not on BBC1 or 2, well then never mind, those are all I can get. At least I can watch Mythbusters tonight.

tkingdoll

14th September 2006, 08:24 AM

Nucular

14th September 2006, 08:29 AM

My main personal objective is not to prove them wrong or even counter their claims, but to just represent skepticism as a nice, friendly person. The TV company said they are tired of the 'angry skeptic' type that they usually get, I guess if I can demonstrate there's a new generation not rabidly shouting "evidence" in their faces, then skepticism will become more acceptable on programmes like this.

*applause* - yep I think that's sorely needed. Some people think Wiseman is a bit too 'fair', but he does get the airtime. Chris French seems a bit too happy to take a back seat and produce the obligatory 10 second soundbite at the end, but it's bit by bit isn't it. The more calm, reasonable sceptics get seen on TV, the more there are likely to be in the future. Go get 'em :)

If I can, I'd like to get in the following examples:

There are several people currently claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots
False memory syndrome
Bridey Murphy
What would happen to society if we just took everyone's word for things?

Anything more than that will be a bonus! CLD's 'movie fight scene' is a great device, although I think mostly the audience is housewives (this is daytime TV) so I might change it to something like first kiss.

Incidentally, something else that might be relevant is the literature - fairly extensive - on the suggestibility of children, and how easily-led they can be. I know most of this from a criminological perspective only, and so most of the stuff I've got relate to police interviewing techniques in e.g. cases of abuse, and the potential for inserting new information. Children are often eager to please, and also tend to assume there's a 'right' answer that they have to guess, rather than realising that they hold the information.

I remember thinking at the time I was studying this, how pertinent it is to the way 'reincarnated' children may be 'interviewed' by their parents and sundry 'experts'. I have a couple of papers etc. I could email if you think it's relevant, and more I could dig out and post (I imagine there's no time for that) but the major points are:

1) Mildly suggestive questions can tend to focus a child in on one area, which they wouldn't necessarily have gone towards. Forensic example: "How close was he sitting to you?" focuses in on proximity, personal space, touching etc.; reincarnation example: "Did this happen before you were born?" opens up the whole area of reincarnation, when in fact it might have happened on the TV, or in a made up story, or anything else.

2) Children who have begun to be interviewed repeatedly at 4 years old or younger are particularly 'suggestible'.

3) Children (like adults of course, but more so) are susceptible to social pressure, e.g. the idea that other people think a certain thing, or believe a certain thing. Forensic example: "Other people have told us he's touched them."; reincarnation example: "You see kids who remember things like this on the TV all the time!"

4) Children are especially prone to obedience to authority, e.g. an interviewer in a position of authority sharing a personal view. Forensic example: "We know he did it, and we want to make him sorry, just tell us what he did."; reincarnation example: "I've always known you were special!"

5) Ideas implanted in an interview can be easily, but accidentally, reinforced; though there are lots of ways that can happen in a police interview, the reincarnation sort would be obvious, e.g. "Tell your Dad what you've just told me!" (attention, attention, attention); giving tangible rewards like a later bedtime for talking more about it; negative reinforcement e.g. not letting a child go out to play until they've 'performed' for Aunty Mabel, etc.

6) As mentioned above, children tend to try to please, and therefore give answers they think the adult wishes to hear; and tend to assume there is a 'right' answer they have to guess, just as there usually is at school.

The point being, that this is all found from research done in a forensic setting, to see how trained interviewers can, inadvertently or otherwise, subtly mislead or direct children to produce inaccurate information, or to confabulate incidents; then compare to the likely 'interview' method of parents of children whom they believe may be reincarnated! Obviously, it goes way beyond the "improper interview" style which creates legal problems.

It's be very interesting to kow how old the girls were when they first started talking about this. If there's any suggestion that they were four or younger, that slots neatly into one of the specific research findings on suggestibility, but all of this stuff, I think, could be relevant.

Just depends if you could make it into a snappy point for audience consumption?

richardm

14th September 2006, 08:30 AM

It's just too good a mickey-take opportunity to miss, really.

That really isn't why I want to see it. I want to see how you get on is all, and what these girls are like. Plus, someone I kind-of-know on telly - who wouldn't want to see that?

tkingdoll

14th September 2006, 08:35 AM

That really isn't why I want to see it. I want to see how you get on is all, and what these girls are like. Plus, someone I kind-of-know on telly - who wouldn't want to see that?

I'm happy to have my leg pulled, I am pretty Brummie on telly.

The amusing thing about all this is that I don't watch TV myself :D

Spindrift

14th September 2006, 08:47 AM

Two 16 year olds in the UK? Odds on they aren't.

I agree that's it's basically a no-win situation, but that's not a reason not to try. My main personal objective is not to prove them wrong or even counter their claims, but to just represent skepticism as a nice, friendly person. The TV company said they are tired of the 'angry skeptic' type that they usually get, I guess if I can demonstrate there's a new generation not rabidly shouting "evidence" in their faces, then skepticism will become more acceptable on programmes like this.

If I can, I'd like to get in the following examples:

There are several people currently claiming to have been Mary Queen of Scots
False memory syndrome
Bridey Murphy
What would happen to society if we just took everyone's word for things?

Anything more than that will be a bonus! CLD's 'movie fight scene' is a great device, although I think mostly the audience is housewives (this is daytime TV) so I might change it to something like first kiss.

I'm not advocating not trying. I'm quite happy that you are. Unfortunately these venues are not the best for the skeptic.

How about this:

"There have been lots of people who claim to have been reincarnated, but under close scrutiny the stories always fall apart. Bridey Murphy is an example of that. I'm sure that these two little girls stories would crumble under any close scrutiny. It is usually someone who just wants attention for themselves. And obviously in this case it has worked."

Be prepared to explain the highlights of the Bridey Murphy story.

Darat

15th September 2006, 02:23 AM

I have no idea when it's going to be aired, I will find out tomorrow. It's daytime TV, but I daresay someone will upload it, particularly if I look foolish and sound Brummie. It's just too good a mickey-take opportunity to miss, really.

If it's the same format as what I did yesterday I hope you get to say more then I did.

Vanessa was not gentle with the gentleman who claimed to be abducted (note he doesn't use this term), I managed to get one response in but probably was too dry for them to ask me anything else. I was sat next to another person that claims that some beings have abducted him and even taken sperm to create some hybrid child. He got to say a lot more then I did. Vanessa did a quick walk along asking people did they believe them and the consensus was overwhelmingly no - although a few people did say that they believe in life elsewhere then the earth.

I had a little chat with the group of "pro-abductees" afterwards and they all came across to me as being very genuine in their beliefs. The gentleman who had had his sperm extracted had asked me during the show did I believe in God - but Vanessa ended the show at that point. I asked him what he was going on to say and his point was that "Would you be crass enough to ask the Pope for evidence for his belief in God" - to which I did reply with a "yes". One thing I did notice was that they were angry at the ridicule that normally follows their claims of abduction and I have to say I have some sympathy with them about that - as one of them said "If you say you are a Catholic you don't get this type of ridicule" which I d0 think is a valid point. There are obviously some non-evidence based beliefs that are acceptable and some that aren't. (Personally the Roman Catholic version of Christianity is as barmy as alien abductions to me i.e. angels, demons, Satan, saints, exorcisms, the trinity and so on do not seem in principle anymore ridiculous then aliens abducting people!)

Beady

15th September 2006, 02:53 AM

(Personally the Roman Catholic version of Christianity is as barmy as alien abductions to me i.e. angles, demons, Satan...

Anybody who says they believe in angles is just being obtuse.

Darat

15th September 2006, 03:15 AM

Spindrift

15th September 2006, 06:18 AM

I'm happy to have my leg pulled, I am pretty Brummie on telly.

Excuse my American ignorance. What is Brummie?

(I know what a telly is. He played Kojak :D).

rats

15th September 2006, 06:33 AM

Excuse my American ignorance. What is Brummie?

(I know what a telly is. He played Kojak :D).
http://www.birminghamitsnotshit.co.uk/brum.php

:D

Tez

15th September 2006, 06:38 AM

Brummie refers to someone from Brummingham, the second largest city in the UK (behind Manchester - according to the Brums). A visit to Brummyland is guaranteed to set you back 5 IQ points....

tkingdoll

15th September 2006, 06:46 AM

Brummie refers to someone from Brummingham, the second largest city in the UK (behind Manchester - according to the Brums). A visit to Brummyland is guaranteed to set you back 5 IQ points....

That'll take your IQ down to 45 then.

Birmingham is the second largest city by some distance - almost 3 times the population of Manchester, and is officially the country's 'second city' - that means if London is somehow destroyed, the seat of the country (parliament etc) would move to Birmingham.

exarch

15th September 2006, 06:58 AM

that means if London is somehow destroyed, the seat of the country (parliament etc) would move to Birmingham.

Proof right there that islamic terrorists did not orchestrate the attacks on the London subway! :eek:

Darat

15th September 2006, 06:59 AM

exarch

15th September 2006, 07:06 AM

What would be the capital if it was a matter of intelligebility of its inhabitants?
Or reachability by car?

tkingdoll

15th September 2006, 07:12 AM

There is no "official second city" :p Just like there is no official "first city" there is the capital of the UK (and also the capital of England) - London and then all the other cities. (And if it was just a matter of population then the City of London would not be the capital...) ;)

That's not what I've read - apparently the government have a contingency plan in the event of their geographic seat being destroyed, and Birmingham is it.

I will have to find a source for that, it might be hundreds of years old.

I think what Manchester want is to be known as the 'second best' city, which is of course a matter of opinion. Nonetheless, it's really not on to insult people's homes. People who disparage Birmingham usually haven't been there in a long time.

Jekyll

15th September 2006, 07:17 AM

Well, good luck with it.

brodski

15th September 2006, 07:19 AM

That's not what I've read - apparently the government have a contingency plan in the event of their geographic seat being destroyed, and Birmingham is it.

I will have to find a source for that, it might be hundreds of years old.

That info is out of date. You won't find a current source on this, "Civil Contingencies" is a hot topic ATM but very little is being published, but pu it this way if your largest population centre has just been wiped out would you choose to situate yourself in the 2nd largest?
The only official designation of Cities outside of the two cities which from London, are the "Core Cities", these are Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield.

tkingdoll

15th September 2006, 07:25 AM

That info is out of date. You won't find a current source on this, "Civil Contingencies" is a hot topic ATM but very little is being published, but pu it this way if your largest population centre has just been wiped out would you choose to situate yourself in the 2nd largest?
The only official designation of Cities outside of the two cities which from London, are the "Core Cities", these are Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield.

Ah thanks. I had a feeling it was something from Ye Olden Parliament, but I know I read it in a book rather than online, so it was gonna be a struggle to find the reference.

richardm

15th September 2006, 07:25 AM

if your largest population centre has just been wiped out would you choose to situate yourself in the 2nd largest?

Of course! Where else are you going to find another Selfridges?

tkingdoll

15th September 2006, 07:27 AM

Of course! Where else are you going to find another Selfridges?

Real Brummies shop at Harvey Nichols, dahling.

Anyway, there's a Selfridges in Manchester too, although theirs isn't housed in a giant blue and silver pair of breasts.

richardm

15th September 2006, 07:39 AM

Real Brummies shop at Harvey Nichols, dahling.

Anyway, there's a Selfridges in Manchester too, although theirs isn't housed in a giant blue and silver pair of breasts.

You have a Harvey Nics? Well, that seals it then, that must be where the sooper sekrit bunker is. Brodski's just trying to throw us off the scent.

brodski

15th September 2006, 07:45 AM

(And if it was just a matter of population then the City of London would not be the capital...) ;)

The City of London is not the Capital City, the City of Westmister is. Howeaver Greater London is the Capital (but is not a city). Like all UK constitutional matters, it is pointlessly complex and makes very little (read: absolutely no) difference in real life.

exarch

15th September 2006, 07:49 AM

The City of London is not the Capital City, the City of Westmister is. Howeaver Greater London is the Capital (but is not a city). Like all UK constitutional matters, it is pointlessly complex and makes very little (read: absolutely no) difference in real life.

Are you suggesting I've been giving the wrong answer on geography tests all these years?

brodski

15th September 2006, 07:50 AM

You have a Harvey Nics? Well, that seals it then, that must be where the sooper sekrit bunker is. Brodski's just trying to throw us off the scent.

But hasn't Leeds also got both Selfridges and a Harvey Nick's?
So has Manchester. And since when was the UK run by a secret cabal of department stores? And if it was, wouldn't this cabal be run by M&S? ;)

Beady

15th September 2006, 07:50 AM

Thread Drift Alert!!!!

exarch

15th September 2006, 07:58 AM

So Beady, do you think these are NOT good questions to ask a past-life claimant?

brodski

15th September 2006, 07:58 AM

Are you suggesting I've been giving the wrong answer on geography tests all these years?

Quite possibly.
The seat of Government in the UK-(the place of Westminster which holds the house of commons and the house of Lords, Portcullis house, Whitehall, Downing Street and the principle English Royal Palaces are ill in SW1 in The City of Westminster. The City of London (run by the Corporation of London) is the financial centre of the UK, but has no major national political intuitions there. London as a whole is made up of the 32 London boroughs and the City (or "corporation") of London, it is not a single city. Although few people who are not prone to excessive pedantry would ever need to know this. And there is virtually no chance of a 16 year old reincarnation of an ancient Egyptian knowing this either. ;)

Blue Bubble

15th September 2006, 07:58 AM

Seconded (the Thread Drift Alert, that is ...)

Wasn't Teek's TV show meant to have taken place today ?

Beady

15th September 2006, 08:00 AM

So Beady, do you think these are NOT good questions to ask a past-life claimant?

I didn't say that, I just said

Thread Drift Alert!!!!

richardm

15th September 2006, 08:37 AM

But hasn't Leeds also got both Selfridges and a Harvey Nick's?
So has Manchester. And since when was the UK run by a secret cabal of department stores? And if it was, wouldn't this cabal be run by M&S? ;)

It's not so much that the UK is run by the stores, just that the people who do run it and their wives don't like to get too far away from the nice shops ;) M&S have shops everywhere, so they don't factor into the equation.

So; one bunker in Birmingham, and two others in Leeds and Manchester. Should you be telling us about this, Terrists could be reading.

richardm

15th September 2006, 08:38 AM

Seconded (the Thread Drift Alert, that is ...)

Wasn't Teek's TV show meant to have taken place today ?

Yes. Was it supposed to be live, or were they just recording? If the former I've missed it. If the latter I'm not much better off 'cos she still hasn't told us what the show is!

brodski

15th September 2006, 08:46 AM

Yes. Was it supposed to be live, or were they just recording? If the former I've missed it. If the latter I'm not much better off 'cos she still hasn't told us what the show is!

I'm pretty sure that it was being recorded today, for broadcast at a later (unspecified) date.
And don't worrry Richard, all the terrists and terrist sympathisers that read the JREF forum keep themselves to politics and conspiracy theory threads at all times. ;)

Nucular

15th September 2006, 08:57 AM

So these teenage girls who lived a past life in the Birmingham branch of Selfridges... no wait, I'm confused. Which one of us is on TV?

Oh yeah.

Yes, I suspect Teek's absence is because she's there now? She did indeed say filming today, broadcast date unspecified as yet.

Beady

15th September 2006, 10:35 AM

Yes, I suspect Teek's absence is because she's there now? She did indeed say filming today, broadcast date unspecified as yet.

What worries me is that this thread has drifted so far off course that Teek's report is now off-topic.

Nucular

15th September 2006, 06:08 PM

What worries me is that this thread has drifted so far off course that Teek's report is now off-topic.

I'll be sure to report her next post :D

Hm, was kinda hoping if I checked back now she'd be back with a breathless report to put us out of our misery... ah well, we'll just have to wait.

Perhaps Teek is busy being inducted into an ancient Egyptian reincarnation sect, and being regressed to find her inner mummy. Possibly in Selfridge's.

exarch

16th September 2006, 02:27 AM

I suppose a new thread would be a good idea for Teek's report ...

John Jackson

16th September 2006, 03:56 AM

Teek's away on holiday today.

I don't think there's much to report though - she didn't get to speak on the programme.

Beady

16th September 2006, 04:18 AM

So much for angst.

Darat

16th September 2006, 04:23 AM

Teek's away on holiday today.

I don't think there's much to report though - she didn't get to speak on the programme.

Oh well that's entertainment for you. :(

Mashuna

16th September 2006, 05:03 AM

I think what Manchester want is to be known as the 'second best' city, which is of course a matter of opinion. Nonetheless, it's really not on to insult people's homes. People who disparage Birmingham usually haven't been there in a long time.

So Manchester has downgraded to second best city now? Is that behind Birmingham?:)

Nucular

16th September 2006, 06:49 AM

I don't think there's much to report though - she didn't get to speak on the programme.

Gah! How annoying. Stupid television. I'd still like to find out about the reincarnated girls though.

Outhere

16th September 2006, 07:29 AM

Have the "Egyptian" girls been interviewed? What happened? Were they debunked as victims of False Mummy Syndrome?

lolurigeller

16th September 2006, 03:05 PM

Forget the reincarnation questions- how are you going to disprove them?

Easy ask for proof, they can't give it to you it's that simple. If they can find a the tomb of an ancient egyptian pharoah that can carbon dated back 2500years ago, buried beneath 300ft of sand, with absolutley no clue where or how it was to be found. THEN there might a good case for reincarnation, of course we know that's not going to happen.

Renfield

16th September 2006, 10:26 PM

Create a fictional Egyptian character, and talk about him/her as if they were well known by the common person of that time. Perhaps the character is a local hero or villan of some type. Ask them how they felt about this well known person, or if they every had an interaction with this character. If they fall for it, string them along and get as much detail as possible before exposing them. If they don't fall for it, just move along.

I really like this approach. Its very simple and can be used no matter what period of history they claim to have lived through. Most past lives enthusiasts always think they were someone famous and at the center of things, so I think it has a fairly high chance of success.

Of course, they'll have all kinds of excuses if you do catch them out, and the believers probably will accept those, but that's usually the case. It'll be fun anyway.

Beady

17th September 2006, 12:36 AM

Easy ask for proof, they can't give it to you it's that simple.

No, it's not that simple. There is no way I can prove to you that I used to live in Alaska and Michigan, even though it's perfectly true. Yes, I can produce various documents and witnesses, but not here and now, and there's no way you could be unwillingly convinced that the documents weren't forged and the witnesses weren't suborned.

JayT

18th September 2006, 01:13 PM

I don't think any questions will prove past life stories true. The only way to debunk such claims is to catch them in a serious factual error. But I doubt that even a factual error would qualify as true debunking. Ask any ordinary adult to describe his or her life and the surrounding world in general when he or she was in the 4th grade would also be full of errors, omissions and questionable memories in a similar manner. It wouldn't be sufficient to prove either way that he or she never lived during the time period in question.

Any historical facts they did mention would most likely be already documented, which actually proves nothing special with regard to their claim and well as anything else they claimed, but could not possibly be proven, would have no value in determining the truth either.

If such people could actually remember and fluently speak/write the language of the time period, that would be more impressive, but still not conclusive, just a step in the right direction.

They always seem to remember the country or place and sometimes even the year with great clarity, but when it comes to the types of things we might construe as 'proofs', they never seem to remember anything definitive. They either relate unprovable trivia or facts already in the public domain and available to anyone who does the requisite research.

Even hypnosis is useless as a past-life regression tool, since hypnotically suggested or delusional memories cannot be differentiated from true memories, as some children, and adults later found to have been falsely accused of molesting them on such 'evidence', can attest.

What I would love to see on such a show is several people who ALL claim to be the reincarnation of the same famous person, such as Napoleon Bonaparte. Then provoking a discussion between them would be especially interesting. Will the REAL former Napoleon Bonaparte please stand up? Their own group discussion would probably be the best debunker of them all.

exarch

19th September 2006, 12:48 AM

What I would love to see on such a show is several people who ALL claim to be the reincarnation of the same famous person, such as Napoleon Bonaparte. Then provoking a discussion between them would be especially interesting. Will the REAL former Napoleon Bonaparte please stand up? Their own group discussion would probably be the best debunker of them all.

I think getting all 6 Mary's Queen of Scotts on a show at the same time would already be far too skeptically tinted for the TV show to ever risk. It smells too much of debunking to their audience, who want to believe it's true. Then again, it would probably make great TV, so who knows. Maybe we should suggest it ... :D

I'm curious what the TV show Teek went to actually did show? Was it just more mindless drivel? Or did they at least try to get a few skeptical questions in?

FarSideOfTheMoon

19th September 2006, 04:47 AM

What I would love to see on such a show is several people who ALL claim to be the reincarnation of the same famous person, such as Napoleon Bonaparte. Then provoking a discussion between them would be especially interesting. Will the REAL former Napoleon Bonaparte please stand up? Their own group discussion would probably be the best debunker of them all.

That would be amazing, and absolutely superb entertainment.

I'd love to see a modern programme which used hidden camera techniques or set-ups to catch out people on this type of thing, but I guess it would need to focus on the more fraudulent activity such as psychics stealing money from idiots, rather than the seriously deluded. Otherwise it might not go down well with the mainstream audience.

I know we would still have the 'he was crooked, but other psychics are for real' type arguements, but we've got to start somewhere I guess:mad:

If only people could start to become just a little bit more skeptical, that would be a start. Even if it was to accept that some psychics are not genuine, that would be progress.

lolurigeller

19th September 2006, 05:05 PM

No, it's not that simple. There is no way I can prove to you that I used to live in Alaska and Michigan, even though it's perfectly true. Yes, I can produce various documents and witnesses, but not here and now, and there's no way you could be unwillingly convinced that the documents weren't forged and the witnesses weren't suborned.

You're missing the point, even if it were true, a belief in reincarnation in my opinion is unjustified until proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

edit: OTOH you cannot disprove reincarnation, as much as any other afterlife (or lack thereof) theory, but in the end it's just wasting time spinning wheels over something that may or may not exist.

sophia8

20th September 2006, 02:46 AM

Even hypnosis is useless as a past-life regression tool, since hypnotically suggested or delusional memories cannot be differentiated from true memories, as some children, and adults later found to have been falsely accused of molesting them on such 'evidence', can attest.

What I would love to see on such a show is several people who ALL claim to be the reincarnation of the same famous person, such as Napoleon Bonaparte. Then provoking a discussion between them would be especially interesting. Will the REAL former Napoleon Bonaparte please stand up? Their own group discussion would probably be the best debunker of them all.
In one of Colin Wilson's books, he relates the story of a hypnotic regression session the regressed person related an extremely detailed life of being one of Henry VIII's courtiers.
Every detail of his story checked out, except that there was no record of such a person ever existing. Eventually somebody had the bright idea of hypnotising him again and asking him where the story had come from. He then related the childhood experience of a long wet afternoon spent in a dusty library, where he had restlessly picked up a historical romance set in the court of Henry VIII and browsed through it.......
As for multiple reincarnatees meeting up, the British medium Arthur Ford related in his boiography how he had once deliberately brought together three "Cleopatras" in the same room; unfortunately, he gave no further details. I'd have paid to see that one!

tkingdoll

24th September 2006, 10:34 AM

I'm back from my soujourn in the sun!

Sorry to report that after all this wonderful advice and info, I couldn't do the show in the end. However, after hearing Darat's report from his appearance, I don't think it's a great loss to skepticism :)

Would have been a fun experience though.

However, all your input will not go to waste, as I plan to write an article (and maybe a UKS factsheet?) about past live claims soon.

Nucular

24th September 2006, 10:52 AM

simonmaal

2nd October 2006, 05:12 AM

It might be too late for the TV show, but we need to be careful on judging the holder of these memories. Memory is constructive in nature, it does not work like a video recorder. This is an unpleasant thought, because it can potentially call into question everything we recall or recognise.

A good authority on memories of this kind is Elizabeth Loftus. Her book 'The Myth of Repressed Memory' shows how suggestion, expectation and cultural beliefs all interact to construct memories of alien abduction and satanic rituals. A must-have for any skeptic!!!

Polaris

3rd October 2006, 10:10 PM

"When are you gonna pay me that $50 grand, 10 chariots and harem of Persians you cheap little ****?"

blutoski

3rd October 2006, 10:19 PM

I really like this approach. Its very simple and can be used no matter what period of history they claim to have lived through. Most past lives enthusiasts always think they were someone famous and at the center of things, so I think it has a fairly high chance of success.

Of course, they'll have all kinds of excuses if you do catch them out, and the believers probably will accept those, but that's usually the case. It'll be fun anyway.

TBers have a pretty ironclad defense mechanism for this type of trap:

"Well, no, Carlosus was a real person just as you describe. Where do you think you got knowledge about his life in such detail? You have obviously been channelling him! This is further proof of reincarnation and the afterlife. I win.

PBTree

3rd October 2006, 10:45 PM

Nucular

4th October 2006, 04:58 AM

What about a simple question like, "How do you know you had a past life?"

Just saying you had one and you remember lots of sand, pyramids and chariots, doesn't prove a thing, I (meaning you) could stand here and tell everyone I was a phoenician sailor from 3000 yrs ago but that wouldn't prove I was one. But, if I could tell this audience how I built my 3000 yr old boat, from stem to stern, plank by plank, it would go a long way towards proving it. What is the one thing that you two could say right now, that has convinced you and would prove to this audience that you had a past life and haven't just remembered things you have read (that we also can read) in a book, or made it all up?

Seems simple enough.

I guess one of the problems with the whole idea of requesting this sort of evidence from individual past-life claimants is that 'perfect memory' is never claimed - in fact, usually quite the oposite. Bits and pieces, smells and impressions, the odd name, the odd date (forget the names that don;t check out, hey, they existed, there's just no record, etc.

Obviously, to us this constitutes no evidence whatsoever; and we're all quite familiar with concepts such as burden of proof, inability to prove a negative, etc. But bleevers, and the majority of fence-sitting TV audiences, are less familiar with these.

They'll see two hypotheses with essentially identical outcomes (though they might not frame it in these terms):

1) The claimant has had a past life, and remembers bits of it

2) The claimant is mistaken or fraudulent, and has incorporated bits and pieces of knowledge with a few lucky guesses, forgetting the misses.

Most people, I think, are vaguely sceptical, but easily-impressed (I don't mean it cruelly, this describes the way I was for years). They'll be impressed with the fragments of information produced which seem to check out (particularly in a child claimant), and wary of a sceptic who tries to turn the exact same evidence into support for their hypothesis rather than the other.

But really, the two hypotheses do not produce identical outcomes, and so I think it should be the job of a TV sceptic in such situations to try to find evidence which can distinguish between them. For instance, although both hypotheses predict patchy, incomplete 'recollection', hypothesis 2 predicts that the claimant is quite likely at some point to make a mistake, whether an anachronism or other inaccuracy, whereas hypothesis 1 doesn't allow for that.

So whilst I think we might not be able to catch someone out (publicly) by showing they don't remember every technique and timber they laid into their 3000 year old Phoenician ship, if they accidentally mention using screws or drills or outboard motors (or something more subtle), then to everyone present that would swing the weight of the evidence towards hypothesis 2.

The simple question "how do you know you had a past life" should definitely be asked, but it's likely that people will be impressed with the answer, imo, even though of course we know it doesn't constitute 'extraordinary evidence', and it'd take more investigation to put that right.

I think :)

Victor Meldrew

6th October 2006, 10:22 AM

tkingdoll

6th October 2006, 12:02 PM

As a qualified hypnotherapist, I can hypnotise people and put them in a mindframe where anything I say to them is accepted. By accessing their unconscious minds through deep relaxation techniques, I can plant thoughts that are untrue but believed by the client - such as "you enjoy eating healthy food" or "you are a happy non-smoker...". If I can do that, then I can also plant thoughts like "in your past life you were an Egyptian....". So, so easy to do.......

Is that any use for phobias? I'm already dreading the flight to Vegas in January :covereyes

simonmaal

9th November 2006, 03:54 AM

As a qualified hypnotherapist, I can hypnotise people and put them in a mindframe where anything I say to them is accepted. By accessing their unconscious minds through deep relaxation techniques, I can plant thoughts that are untrue but believed by the client - such as "you enjoy eating healthy food" or "you are a happy non-smoker...". If I can do that, then I can also plant thoughts like "in your past life you were an Egyptian....". So, so easy to do.......

The interesting thing here is that people never seem to remember being anybody mediocre. They usually remember being Cleopatra, a French prince, a German general or a Greek Hero. Precisely the kind of archetypes that are popular in mythology and the media.

Larry Lovage

9th November 2006, 09:40 AM

Hypnotism is the only "woo" thing.... that actually works!

Reading over the early part of this thread, I can't help thinking that people here are not as up on proper skeptical thinking as I'm sure many of them think they are. Not many people seemed to be very good at thinking up questions that couldn't be answered by plain old bullcrap. "What's the process of reincarnation" indeed! :( (:Disappointed:)

Still, tkdoll, hope the show went ok.

Nucular

9th November 2006, 10:06 AM

Hypnotism is the only "woo" thing.... that actually works!

How do you mean?

Reading over the early part of this thread, I can't help thinking that people here are not as up on proper skeptical thinking as I'm sure many of them think they are. Not many people seemed to be very good at thinking up questions that couldn't be answered by plain old bullcrap. "What's the process of reincarnation" indeed! :( (:Disappointed:)

Inevitable question: what would you have suggested Larry?

IIRC, Teek didn't actually get to do the show in the end :(

luchog

9th November 2006, 12:47 PM

The interesting thing here is that people never seem to remember being anybody mediocre. They usually remember being Cleopatra, a French prince, a German general or a Greek Hero. Precisely the kind of archetypes that are popular in mythology and the media.

That's what always struck me as odd about the whole past-life thing (even back when I was into a bunch of woo stuff). They're invariably highly distinctive. Royalty, great spiritual leaders, powerful shaman/mages/magicians, renown warriors, significant contributors to the arts, etc. Or if they're not, if they're "commoners", then they're highly unusual or distinctive in some way. Talented artists, writers, or musicians; noble or romantically roguish thieves or highwaymen; witches who were burned at the stake or strong-willed women who dared rebel against their oppressive cultures (popular with wiccans and other neo-pagans); high-ranking revolutionaries fighting for a noble cause (popular with woo communists); companions of famous people*; even mass-murders are popular (there are more than a few claiming to be the reincarnation of Jack the Ripper). No one claims to be Baldric, third dung-shoveller to the Earl of Doncaster, or Abdul the camel-f**ker. Much of it sounds like they're simply characters in an RPG.

And then there is related stuff like the "Otherkin" nonsense.

It's all just a plea for attention, or a way for people who have difficulty coping with the real world to feel special or superior to everyone else.

* Like one woman who claims that in a past life she was Michaelangelo's favorite secret lover; never mind the fact that he was a flaming queen and borderline pederast.

simonmaal

9th November 2006, 04:09 PM

Hypnotism is the only "woo" thing.... that actually works!

Hypnosis is actually a useful intervention when used in the right way. "Woo" is not an inherent part of hypnosis; it is only when people start messing around with it and making paranormal claims that it ceases to be credible.

chillzero

10th November 2006, 12:55 AM

That's what always struck me as odd about the whole past-life thing (even back when I was into a bunch of woo stuff). They're invariably highly distinctive. Royalty, great spiritual leaders, powerful shaman/mages/magicians, renown warriors, significant contributors to the arts, etc. Or if they're not, if they're "commoners", then they're highly unusual or distinctive in some way. Talented artists, writers, or musicians; noble or romantically roguish thieves or highwaymen; witches who were burned at the stake or strong-willed women who dared rebel against their oppressive cultures (popular with wiccans and other neo-pagans); high-ranking revolutionaries fighting for a noble cause (popular with woo communists); companions of famous people*; even mass-murders are popular (there are more than a few claiming to be the reincarnation of Jack the Ripper). No one claims to be Baldric, third dung-shoveller to the Earl of Doncaster, or Abdul the camel-f**ker. Much of it sounds like they're simply characters in an RPG.

And then there is related stuff like the "Otherkin" nonsense.

It's all just a plea for attention, or a way for people who have difficulty coping with the real world to feel special or superior to everyone else.

* Like one woman who claims that in a past life she was Michaelangelo's favorite secret lover; never mind the fact that he was a flaming queen and borderline pederast.

When I went to a regression meditation years ago, all I got from it was a damn good rest and some visualisation about a countryside path. However, the others in the group had more 'real' encounters, but none of them were major characters. One woman said she was standing crying next to her burned out croft having lost her family, and she was really depressed and upset the rest of the day - we were in Scotland, where that horrific history took place, though ;). The others were less dramatic - a farmer, a peasant of some kind but we couldn't determine where or when by his descriptions and at least he didn't try to fit anything else in deliberately. I can't even remember the other person's story.

No real point to make - just adding to the conversation :D

Victor Meldrew

10th November 2006, 02:36 AM

That's what always struck me as odd about the whole past-life thing (even back when I was into a bunch of woo stuff). They're invariably highly distinctive. Royalty, great spiritual leaders, powerful shaman/mages/magicians, renown warriors, significant contributors to the arts, etc. Or if they're not, if they're "commoners", then they're highly unusual or distinctive in some way. Talented artists, writers, or musicians; noble or romantically roguish thieves or highwaymen; witches who were burned at the stake or strong-willed women who dared rebel against their oppressive cultures (popular with wiccans and other neo-pagans); high-ranking revolutionaries fighting for a noble cause (popular with woo communists); companions of famous people*; even mass-murders are popular (there are more than a few claiming to be the reincarnation of Jack the Ripper). No one claims to be Baldric, third dung-shoveller to the Earl of Doncaster, or Abdul the camel-f**ker. Much of it sounds like they're simply characters in an RPG.

And then there is related stuff like the "Otherkin" nonsense.

It's all just a plea for attention, or a way for people who have difficulty coping with the real world to feel special or superior to everyone else.

* Like one woman who claims that in a past life she was Michaelangelo's favorite secret lover; never mind the fact that he was a flaming queen and borderline pederast.

I don't think it's a plea for attention, I just believe they are digging into their memory banks and coming up with something, probably something that they have learned in history classes long ago. Once a hypnotist is working with the unconscious mind, all disbelief of the rational and reasoning part of the mind is suspended, so when they are bought out of the relaxed state, they truly believe that what they said is true, rather than just something learned at school. And we all have a habit of embellishing stories, a little imagination works wonders.......you can see where theses stories come from.

And no...hypnosis is not woo....just a deep state of relaxation, that's all.

simonmaal

10th November 2006, 03:31 AM

I don't think it's a plea for attention, I just believe they are digging into their memory banks and coming up with something, probably something that they have learned in history classes long ago. Once a hypnotist is working with the unconscious mind, all disbelief of the rational and reasoning part of the mind is suspended, so when they are bought out of the relaxed state, they truly believe that what they said is true, rather than just something learned at school. And we all have a habit of embellishing stories, a little imagination works wonders.......you can see where theses stories come from.

And no...hypnosis is not woo....just a deep state of relaxation, that's all.

The important thing to remember here is any type of therapy or counselling can be used to plant memories; this is what happened in a few group therapy settings in the late 1980s. Even more interestingly, the research on false memory syndrome is mixed: some studies find that hypnosis makes a difference to false memory construction, while others find no difference between hypnosis and simple persuasion. So hypnosis might not be the important component here: compliance and social comparison could be the main influences.

Windom

13th November 2006, 12:23 AM

I have to be relatively careful, these girls are 16 so if I go too much on the attack I will look like the villain.

Don't be afraid, those girls are several thousands years old :D

luchog

13th November 2006, 12:02 PM

However, the others in the group had more 'real' encounters, but none of them were major characters.

But they're not the ones going around telling others about their past lives as if they're somehow important to who they are now. I've never met anyone into the regression thing that didn't claim to have a past life that was more interesting and/or worthwhile than their current one. Even if they start with something mundane, by the time it gets told to someone else, it will have been embellished far beyond it's original manifestation.

The woman who "experienced" her family and farm being destroyed in Scotland will likely become a "survivor of a great tragedy" who went on to become a noble resistance fighter against the evil English invaders. Those who can't find something generally forget about it and go on to the next woo fad; in many cases denying the ever beleived that kind of crap (I know a few of these as well).

The point being, that people don't generally get into the "past lives" thing because they want to find out about being a medieval dogsbody whose weekly highlight was finding a turnip shaped like a thingie. They do it because they want something that makes them feel more worthwhile and interesting than they currently do.

Minarvia

13th November 2006, 01:14 PM

But they're not the ones going around telling others about their past lives as if they're somehow important to who they are now. I've never met anyone into the regression thing that didn't claim to have a past life that was more interesting and/or worthwhile than their current one. Even if they start with something mundane, by the time it gets told to someone else, it will have been embellished far beyond it's original manifestation.

The woman who "experienced" her family and farm being destroyed in Scotland will likely become a "survivor of a great tragedy" who went on to become a noble resistance fighter against the evil English invaders. Those who can't find something generally forget about it and go on to the next woo fad; in many cases denying the ever beleived that kind of crap (I know a few of these as well).

The point being, that people don't generally get into the "past lives" thing because they want to find out about being a medieval dogsbody whose weekly highlight was finding a turnip shaped like a thingie. They do it because they want something that makes them feel more worthwhile and interesting than they currently do.

I never read it, but how about that woman who claimed that she and John Lennon were great and tragic lovers in a past life, and that is why she was so devestated by his murder. Well, weren't a lot of us? Does that mean we were ALL lovers with a past incarnation of John's? :boggled:

Garrette

13th November 2006, 01:29 PM

I never read it, but how about that woman who claimed that she and John Lennon were great and tragic lovers in a past life, and that is why she was so devestated by his murder. Well, weren't a lot of us? Does that mean we were ALL lovers with a past incarnation of John's? :boggled:I prefer to think I was his lover in a future life, most likely when we are both aliens and our hybrid offspring proves the salvation of the galaxy.

If you think I'm making this up, then just look at my sincere face and soulful eyes...

Hmmmm.....appears we're missing the appropriate smiley....

Oh, well. It's true.

Minarvia

13th November 2006, 01:57 PM

I prefer to think I was his lover in a future life, most likely when we are both aliens and our hybrid offspring proves the salvation of the galaxy.

If you think I'm making this up, then just look at my sincere face and soulful eyes...

Hmmmm.....appears we're missing the appropriate smiley....

Oh, well. It's true.

Hee hee! I'll fight you for him! :catfight:

Ahem, on a more serious note, John must have had and will have more lovers than he can handle!

exarch

13th November 2006, 06:07 PM

Anacoluthon64

14th November 2006, 12:42 AM

...which prompts a sick joke: what's yellow and feeds off dead "beetles?"

'Luthon64

Minarvia

14th November 2006, 11:30 AM

...which prompts a sick joke: what's yellow and feeds off dead "beetles?"

'Luthon64

Ewwww! :D

luchog

15th November 2006, 10:06 AM

Zygar

15th November 2006, 01:39 PM

Eh, Lennon was great and all; but I'll take David Bowie over John any day, in this life or any other.

I'm too straight for this conversation, but I'd have to pick David Bowie as well.
Venture Brothers spoiler: Especially since David Bowie is the "Sovereign" (The head of a worldwide organization of supervillians)

JoeTheJuggler

15th November 2006, 03:32 PM

I would perhaps present them with some hard info about how memory works, and then ask them where exactly past life memories are stored?

This leads directly to lots of questions on dualism in general (if the soul has no physical component, no matter at all, how can it interact with the body--present or past life?)

What part of the "self" is it that transcends one life to the next (other than memories which we covered above)? Not gender, not your name, not language, not intelligence, certainly not uninterupted consciousness. . .

What characteristic of the "self" is capable of surviving the body, and exactly how does it do so? (Any characteristic they proffer can be proven to be connected to the body--most of them to the brain.)

When a person suffers a severe brain trauma, lots of cognitive impairments arise, but frequently they also experience profound personality changes. Such that loved ones often say "it's not the same person" as before the injury. (Similarly, when my grandmother experienced Alzheimer's Disease, the last two years of her life, she was just some nice lady and not my Grandma at all.) What makes you think you can be the same person in a completely different body?