NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Here's a nice documentary I just found on Youtube. I think it shows rather well that what Dr Jim Tucker (continuing Ian Stevenson's work) is investigating is a real phenomenon that should be studied but at the same time isn't the indesputable proof of survival of consciousness that some people would like it to be.

I had my difficulties understanding the Scottish English, but I think I got most of it. Come to think of Scotland, maybe goggs knows something about the case.

EDIT: the videos I linked here originally have been taken offline, but it was the same documentary which is discussed in this thread:

The Boy Who Lived Before - Documentary about a childs memories of another life | Page 15 | The Paracast Community Forums

I must say that I don't find Chris French's explanation of false memories induced by movies etc. very convincing. Still, when I was faced with a case that was quite similar to this one, that was my default explanation, too (back then I was quite convinced that I knew how the world worked, and that religious, spiritual or even paranormal stuff was all wishful thinking and nothing but). I thought that movies he had seen, stories he had been told, maybe one of the parents "imprinting" his or her esoteric beliefs on the child were responsible for the strange things he was saying (of course these couldn't explain the quite peculiar birthmark) and some of his behaviours. But knowing the child and their parents and talking mainly to the mother, I think, these explanations are not applicable. Both parents had never heard of Prof. Stevenson's research and never had given reincarnation a second thought. The boy grew up very protected and wouldn't be allowed to watch any potentially "harmful" TV (anything that was remotely seen as violent or frightening), no one would have told him stories about past lives etc.

<blockquote data-quote="Polterwurst" data-source="post: 149240" data-attributes="member: 5239">Here&#039;s a nice documentary I just found on Youtube. I think it shows rather well that what Dr Jim Tucker (continuing Ian Stevenson&#039;s work) is investigating is a real phenomenon that should be studied but at the same time isn&#039;t the indesputable proof of survival of consciousness that some people would like it to be.I had my difficulties understanding the Scottish English, but I think I got most of it. Come to think of Scotland, maybe goggs knows something about the case.EDIT: the videos I linked here originally have been taken offline, but it was the same documentary which is discussed in this thread:<a href="https://www.theparacast.com/forum/threads/the-boy-who-lived-before-documentary-about-a-childs-memories-of-another-life.13954/page-15#post-183198" target="_blank">The Boy Who Lived Before - Documentary about a childs memories of another life | Page 15 | The Paracast Community Forums</a>I must say that I don&#039;t find Chris French&#039;s explanation of false memories induced by movies etc. very convincing. Still, when I was faced with a case that was quite similar to this one, that was my default explanation, too (back then I was quite convinced that I knew how the world worked, and that religious, spiritual or even paranormal stuff was all wishful thinking and nothing but). I thought that movies he had seen, stories he had been told, maybe one of the parents &quot;imprinting&quot; his or her esoteric beliefs on the child were responsible for the strange things he was saying (of course these couldn&#039;t explain the quite peculiar birthmark) and some of his behaviours. But knowing the child and their parents and talking mainly to the mother, I think, these explanations are not applicable. Both parents had never heard of Prof. Stevenson&#039;s research and never had given reincarnation a second thought. The boy grew up very protected and wouldn&#039;t be allowed to watch any potentially &quot;harmful&quot; TV (anything that was remotely seen as violent or frightening), no one would have told him stories about past lives etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Polterwurst, post: 149240, member: 5239"] Here's a nice documentary I just found on Youtube. I think it shows rather well that what Dr Jim Tucker (continuing Ian Stevenson's work) is investigating is a real phenomenon that should be studied but at the same time isn't the indesputable proof of survival of consciousness that some people would like it to be. I had my difficulties understanding the Scottish English, but I think I got most of it. Come to think of Scotland, maybe goggs knows something about the case. EDIT: the videos I linked here originally have been taken offline, but it was the same documentary which is discussed in this thread: [url="https://www.theparacast.com/forum/threads/the-boy-who-lived-before-documentary-about-a-childs-memories-of-another-life.13954/page-15#post-183198"]The Boy Who Lived Before - Documentary about a childs memories of another life | Page 15 | The Paracast Community Forums[/url] I must say that I don't find Chris French's explanation of false memories induced by movies etc. very convincing. Still, when I was faced with a case that was quite similar to this one, that was my default explanation, too (back then I was quite convinced that I knew how the world worked, and that religious, spiritual or even paranormal stuff was all wishful thinking and nothing but). I thought that movies he had seen, stories he had been told, maybe one of the parents "imprinting" his or her esoteric beliefs on the child were responsible for the strange things he was saying (of course these couldn't explain the quite peculiar birthmark) and some of his behaviours. But knowing the child and their parents and talking mainly to the mother, I think, these explanations are not applicable. Both parents had never heard of Prof. Stevenson's research and never had given reincarnation a second thought. The boy grew up very protected and wouldn't be allowed to watch any potentially "harmful" TV (anything that was remotely seen as violent or frightening), no one would have told him stories about past lives etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification