jeeprs wrote:That's right. He was a cautious researcher, and never claimed to have proven the case. And, of course his methodology would be criticized, because in a culture where such ideas are regarded as outlandish or taboo, how else would you go about discrediting such suggestions? It is the age-old method of 'discrediting the witness'.
His methodology was criticized because it wasn't totally scientific and it had holes. At the very,very best his conclusions could also support idea of ESP, or "the devil made them speak the truth to Doubt Christianity".
How can we objectively test rebirth?
Did you read article about "James 3" ?
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005 ... ion_a.html
What if some more or all cases can be explained in the above way?
jeeprs wrote:This, however, is a Buddhist forum, and I would rather hope that contributors here would be both better informed, and have a more open mind, about such matters. Alas, such expectations are often dashed.
When I tried to be open minded Budddhist, I became very skeptical of rebirth.