Message from @Mallic
Discord ID: 473923953325506570
THE CIRCLE OF LIFE
ayyyy FMA
ourobouros at work
@Mallic Also, there's a fine line between presenting evidence and an appeal to authority fallacy.
let me just explain my opinion
Psychologists and Genetics still can't prove anybody homosexual unless an individual him/herself claiming to be homosexual. So proof of homosexuality is based on someone's claim rather than genetical and psychological hard facts and evidence, and this is why these subject does not pass Scientific framework to be considered as Scientific knowledge. Genetics and Neurologist also cannot prove anybody homosexual at the time of birth, unless they themselves claim to be so, after growing up. So these doesn't properly fit into the scientific framework.
Same with Reincarnation and anything related with human or any living being. When human or any living being comes into the context of studying them scientifically, it fails to fit into the scientific framework.
Here it's a lot to read though
I've actually read ian stevenson's work
pfff shiv
Reincarnation is a loose term
Technically we replace the atoms in our very body several times over the course of life,
So we're not even ourselves by next year
So if thats the case,
a part of us, will be the food someone else eats at some point
On the other hand,
If you die, your atoms become part of the surroundings, which are then consumed and absorbed by other beings, and then become part of a new creature
So Reincarnation doesn't work scientifically
I WAS INTERESTED
i know a gay guy, with an identical twin, who is not gay
grew up in the same environment, non split etc etc
I mean do humans work scientifically?
naturally their environs where not exactly the same, but i suspect its gona be in a very little thing
I read through that link prior to it being posted here. It's not proof of reincarnation
TL:DR
A piss i took last year, is part of some fish animals body in Australia by now
regardless, just cause there is no explenation, does not mean that there is non to be found
assuming its impossible to find a cause is a fallacy whos name i cant come up with atm
That's so stupid
The best evidence for reincarnation according to ian stevenson, are the number of "cases of subjects who have birthmarks or birth defects that seem to derive from previous lives. These marks and defects correspond closely in size and location to wounds (occasionally other marks) on the deceased person whose life the child later claims to remember."*
oof
wait
At the very least there is something going on that we don't know about
CAPITAL OOF is more appropriate
That's always the case
XD my birthark covers my dick XD
So why brush it aside?
uh oh
But it doesn't mean two things are related
Extraordinary claims without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
And something to keep in my mind, is that none of his work is peer reviewed by actual peers
(serious)
Do you believe in every supernatural claim?
it has only been published in pseudoscience journals
if we stick to the scientific method this is clearly not science, as the theory is non falsefiable
its also non-provable
Honestly it's either that or submit myself to moral nihilism
Except that's not true