User talk:Maryjanehatton

What Shroeder and Beyerstein both need to address in making statements like, "The most obvious objection to reincarnation is that there is no evidence of a physical process by which a personality could survive death and travel to another body,[17] and researchers such as Professor Stevenson recognize this limitation.[4]" is that most if not all of the major religions believe in the survival of the soul after death.

With that said, if the mechanics of how souls reincarnate, that is, being transported from one body to the next, is the crux of the skeptics' arguments then I would expect them also to be writing and publishing articles about "the most obvious objection to Catholicism, Islam, Christianity, etc., etc., etc. is that there is no evidence of a physical process by which the personality could survive death and travel to. . .heaven or hell.

I take the oppositive approach to Shroeder and Beyerstein. I say, present a plausible and I mean plausible explanation for how very young children know intimate details of another person's, a dead person's, life. In most of the literature the families of the small children do not know the deceased or the deceaseds' families. Is it really that plausible to anyone other than skeptics that all these families around the world (I know Stevenson wrote about 3,000 case studies before he retired)set up the EXACT SAME SCAM that they coached their toddlers into telling complete strangers intimate details of a dead person's life. That doesn't strike anyone as a tad absurd?

I challenege anyone who has been a parent if they even think it's possible to coach children as young as 2 in intimate details of anything, much less training them how to pretend they are a big person in some other family.

Interestingly in my line of work which at time was working with children on their reading skills I was working with a small,Indian boy. At the time he was four and although I don't think it's relevant, dying from a deadly childhood cancer. He would tell me about when he was big all the books he had read. I asked his parents if he had said that to them. The father dismissed it that his son had his verb tenses mixed up and meant when he grew big he would read books. Suspecting that in fact the parents weren't Hindu, which they weren't, and therefore not accepting of reincarnaton, I kept my mouth shut and focused on working with the child in this lifetime.

Of course any skeptic could wave his hands and claim that example is such trivial evidence and of course I would agree, but not combined with all the accounts from all the children from around the world that is in the literature. He was the right age for remembering a past life and he talked to me all the time about it within the context of reading.

My children didn't come into this world with any past life memories. I prodded them, and asked them a lot of questions and got a whole lot of two-year old language back. However, I as a small child remembered my immediate past-life and contrary to a lot of children who remember past-lives, I still remember bits and pieces today. I know where I was, when it was, and how old I was when I died.

One of my most startling memores regarding my previous life was in this life time. I was in second grade and it was many years since WWII had ended. For some reason my teacher mentioned Hitler's death. I was stunned to learn that he was dead. Stunned, elated and confused why my parents had hid this information from me. After school I ran home as fast as I could to give my family the wonderful, wonderful news, that Adolf Hitler was dead. They found my announcement childishly amusing. I remember being very confused by my family's response. What I knew was that I could relax now when I heard jets flying overhead instead of cowering in my closet. That combined with *knowing I had died in Belgium in 1944 at the hands of the Nazis*, began my interest in a lifetime of study of reincarnation. Conclusive? Of course not. Suggestive? Definitely.Maryjanehatton (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)