Does the INTERNET spread the evidence like never before?
- Thread starter alienstyle
- Start date
Owl
Super-alt Mitglied
Err... this doesn' t really have anything to do with reincarnation, it' s just a person who looks similar to another one, if that was the case then this site http://roflrazzi.cheezburger.com/totallylookslike would be undeniable reincarnation proof.
If the guy would have had any memories, would have been attracted to the period since he was a kid and maybe some other elements, sure, I would consider the case, but in this situation, nothing suggests reincarnation.
Sorry!
If the guy would have had any memories, would have been attracted to the period since he was a kid and maybe some other elements, sure, I would consider the case, but in this situation, nothing suggests reincarnation.
Sorry!
alienstyle
New Member
But just consider the following 2 & 1/2 points: (APART FROM THE portrait)
## "...he loved the helmets. He was completely oblivious to it, and I walked past it and was like, 'Do you see this painting right now?..." [para 5]
## Max said: "To be honest, I didn't see it. I didn't see the resemblance. Then I saw the picture..." [para 6]
# Max and his girlfriend were strolling through the Philadelphia Museum on November 11 when they stumbled across the portrait. [para 4]
To this less concrete last point, a question still arising is—Why did they go there, to stumble?
In the light of these three & half evidences (including the 'remarkable' similarity) it seems that a 'tempting defence' for the critics might be:
To start claiming that after first watching the Portrait & the incredible similarity, Max & his girlfriend swiftly agreed—within 3 days (from Nov 11 to Nov 14)—to create the 'story' of seeing the Helmet first & his loving it & then looking at the picture.
And the stumbling upon is just yet another coincidence anyway.
But is it 'practical' to create such a Fictional Story vis-à-vis the Internet Era?
So a better move (although passive)—on the part of the critics of reincarnation doctrine—would be to simply limit everything in the realm of the coincidence.
## "...he loved the helmets. He was completely oblivious to it, and I walked past it and was like, 'Do you see this painting right now?..." [para 5]
## Max said: "To be honest, I didn't see it. I didn't see the resemblance. Then I saw the picture..." [para 6]
# Max and his girlfriend were strolling through the Philadelphia Museum on November 11 when they stumbled across the portrait. [para 4]
To this less concrete last point, a question still arising is—Why did they go there, to stumble?
In the light of these three & half evidences (including the 'remarkable' similarity) it seems that a 'tempting defence' for the critics might be:
To start claiming that after first watching the Portrait & the incredible similarity, Max & his girlfriend swiftly agreed—within 3 days (from Nov 11 to Nov 14)—to create the 'story' of seeing the Helmet first & his loving it & then looking at the picture.
And the stumbling upon is just yet another coincidence anyway.
But is it 'practical' to create such a Fictional Story vis-à-vis the Internet Era?
So a better move (although passive)—on the part of the critics of reincarnation doctrine—would be to simply limit everything in the realm of the coincidence.
Last edited by a moderator:
Err, from your perspective perhaps "it's just a person who looks similar to another one", and that is all it may be. But, what IF it is a case of reincarnation? Of course one cannot and should not assume it is given the lack of any other evidence other than a physical resemblance. But to state so unequivocally that "nothing suggests reincarnation" ... I mean, how is it that you are so sure? Have you looked deeply into this case to know with such certainty? And, as I've said before, it's not necessary to have memories to uncover a past life case.Owl said:
The other interesting thing about this story - apart from what alienstyle has made a point of correctly highlighting - is that his grandparents are from the region in Italy from which this painting is said to have come from. Again, this may be little more than just an interesting side note, but what if it isn't ... what if it is meaningful?
As it is often said, it is all in the details ... if one can be bothered looking/investigating.
Who in the general public are you saying need to take this subject more seriously?
Me? ... the man in the story? (who by the way hasn't claimed a case of reincarnation as far as I know) .... someone else?
You can't assume anything if you haven't examined the case in any depth. That's all I've gotta say.
Me? ... the man in the story? (who by the way hasn't claimed a case of reincarnation as far as I know) .... someone else?
You can't assume anything if you haven't examined the case in any depth. That's all I've gotta say.
Sariel
New Member
I'm sure it is meaningful since many noblemen were known to be frisky with the peasants or perhaps it was rape either way they probably share DNA.firebird said:
I think Owl meant the subject of reincarnation as a whole was not taken seriously by the general public, because of ludicrous and unfounded claims. I have examined the case and believe they may be related. Reincarnation isn't always involved when people look alike.firebird said:
Sariel
New Member
The only details that have been mentioned in this thread is the resemblance and that the family came from that area in Italy after that there was only speculation. What are the other details we are to examine?firebird said:
Bloodline related since it would take more than physical resemblance to be a case for reincarnation.firebird said:
That was the point I was making - that without examining more closely all details here (which I do not have by the way, and presumably neither do many others discussing it here) how can anyone really say, either way, without a shadow of a doubt, that this isn't (or is) a case of reincarnation. Given that physical resemblance, which seems to be evident here, is definitely a factor in many cases of reincarnation ... and given some of the other 'coincidental', and one could say, odd details of this man's story, I would think believers of reincarnation would not be so easily dismissive as to say it is definitely 'nothing'; and esp. because so few details are available (either about the man himself and the nobleman in the portrait).Sariel said:
Do you "believe" or actually know with certainty that the 2 men are blood related? Both the nobleman and artist are unknown I believe. Only the area the painting came from is known.
firebird said:
The OP is suggesting that stories like this are spreading evidence of reincarnation 'like never before'. The word 'evidence' is used again in the OP's follow up post while quoting the article.firebird said:
Owl is saying there really isn't anything to work with in this news story. And, come to think of it, aren't you saying the same thing, Firebird?
Why do you think these points were correctly highlighted? Do you think they're supportive of a reincarnation case?firebird said:
And, not to derail, but how do you think coincidences play a part in reincarnation? Other than a physical resemblance, what other coincidences do you see?firebird said:
For me, I agree with Owl and Sariel that this isn't suggestive of anything. In all honesty, I think the man in the pic looks like the friendly dairy vendor who delivered milk at a coffee house I used to frequent. : angel
Inhaltslos, I think you should address the OP about their comment "that stories like this are spreading evidence of reincarnation like never before" as I did not respond to that. No point in raising that with me.
My initial response - as you can see - was directed towards Owl re his comment and implied certainty that "this doesn't have anything to do with reincarnation" and his reference to the man not having memories or being drawn to the period in question as a child, and that there is "nothing that suggests reincarnation". If you think I'm saying the same thing as Owl you need to read my posts again. If it still isn't clear what I have said or what position I am taking, then next time I will try and be clearer ... maybe I will post in another language other than English ... :thumbsup:
Oh, and if you should see that friendly dairy vendor of yours again, please take a photo so we can make a comparison ... and don't forget to ask him if he too has visited the Philadelphia Museum of Art with his wife and had his picture taken there as well .... and, perhaps he too has grandparents or relatives from the same region as the painting ....
My initial response - as you can see - was directed towards Owl re his comment and implied certainty that "this doesn't have anything to do with reincarnation" and his reference to the man not having memories or being drawn to the period in question as a child, and that there is "nothing that suggests reincarnation". If you think I'm saying the same thing as Owl you need to read my posts again. If it still isn't clear what I have said or what position I am taking, then next time I will try and be clearer ... maybe I will post in another language other than English ... :thumbsup:
Oh, and if you should see that friendly dairy vendor of yours again, please take a photo so we can make a comparison ... and don't forget to ask him if he too has visited the Philadelphia Museum of Art with his wife and had his picture taken there as well .... and, perhaps he too has grandparents or relatives from the same region as the painting ....
Owl
Super-alt Mitglied
It's a bit amusing how you're feeling so combative and sarcastic towards everyone, Firebird, I shouldn't even bother in explaining because looks like this thread is just for you "to freely argue" and not for a rational discussion, however, here I embrace myself again in a crusade for the sake of scientific and logic thinking, although I know it'll be in vain:
First, the news article was presented as EVIDENCE of reincarnation. Nothing IN THE ARTICLE suggest it's a case of reincarnation, it only remarks the similarities in physical appearance. Could the man be the reincarnation of the guy in the portrait? Sure, as much as Inhaltslos's dairy vendor could, we don't know their memories, we don't know their whole story, that is true, and in that WE ARE SAYING THE SAME , whether you like it or not. However, since we don't know ANYTHING about this man:
THE ARTICLE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF REINCARNATION
And with "general public" I meant what Sariel said, that people is making unfounded claims about cases or reincarnation, that they are not treating the subject with the seriousness that it deserves and since so much fantasy is involved all the time no wonder a lot of people don't take the subject seriously.
However, I'm sure you're going to argue with this and start a bit fight over nothing, be my guest, or you can send me a private message if you want.
First, the news article was presented as EVIDENCE of reincarnation. Nothing IN THE ARTICLE suggest it's a case of reincarnation, it only remarks the similarities in physical appearance. Could the man be the reincarnation of the guy in the portrait? Sure, as much as Inhaltslos's dairy vendor could, we don't know their memories, we don't know their whole story, that is true, and in that WE ARE SAYING THE SAME , whether you like it or not. However, since we don't know ANYTHING about this man:
THE ARTICLE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF REINCARNATION
And with "general public" I meant what Sariel said, that people is making unfounded claims about cases or reincarnation, that they are not treating the subject with the seriousness that it deserves and since so much fantasy is involved all the time no wonder a lot of people don't take the subject seriously.
However, I'm sure you're going to argue with this and start a bit fight over nothing, be my guest, or you can send me a private message if you want.
Ignotus
Senior Registered
As Owl and Inhaltslos has stated, this article isn't an evidence of reincarnation. So what if the man in said picture bears uncanny resemblance to the portrait, it doesn't prove anything except they look alike.
There are many people who is said to look alike with certain people in history but that doesn't prove anything related to reincarnation if one doesn't have the memories.
All we're saying is that, to prove whether its actually reincarnation or whether said man is immortal, we need more evidence other than the physical resemblance. Its not enough as proof.
Sure, he could be the reincarnation of the man, if you can regress it, validate it and prove it.
There are many people who is said to look alike with certain people in history but that doesn't prove anything related to reincarnation if one doesn't have the memories.
All we're saying is that, to prove whether its actually reincarnation or whether said man is immortal, we need more evidence other than the physical resemblance. Its not enough as proof.
Sure, he could be the reincarnation of the man, if you can regress it, validate it and prove it.
firebird said:
You know what? That was uncalled for, and frankly, rude and immature. Did you really have to say that? You can debate without the need for sarcasm and rudeness, you know?
No, there is no question in my mind that Alienstyle said that and was looking for feedback.firebird said:
Oh, you were saying that the article does suggest enough reincarnation evidence? Why do you think so?
Well, though I am fluent in English, Sarcasmo, and have the Glurg/English-English/Glurg dictionary here at my work desk, I guess I still just don't get what you're saying. Again, I thought you were saying that there weren't enough details to know for sure if the man was or was not the reincarnation of the bloke in the painting.
But since you think there is, I'd love to hear why. I do hope you also can address my other questions in my post above concerning the highlight bits and coincidences.
Oh and thanks for the thumbs up. I almost thought you were being rude until I saw that.
I think alienstyle posed a good question, but I don't think he/she really backed it up with an appropriate link in this case. There IS no 'evidence' in the article to 'suggest' reincarnation (the words 'evidence' and 'suggest' being the bone of contention here I think) but there is no evidence in the text, and no evidence in the picture - reincarnation wasn't even mentioned. Now if they had both shared, let's say, a birthmark in the same place, then it would have caught my attention, physical resemblance alone is not sufficient evidence of anything at all. However, I would have to say yes to alienstyle's question. Since the advent of the internet, we have access to personal accounts, videos, pictures right here at our fingertips. So yes, I would say that the public are very much more aware of reincarnation through the internet, with the evidence to back it up.
Without the internet, we wouldn't even be having this discussion - and on behalf of the forum staff, I have to remind everyone that if we can't drop the sarcastic comments and be civil towards each other, then the thread will be closed and removed. Thanks.
Without the internet, we wouldn't even be having this discussion - and on behalf of the forum staff, I have to remind everyone that if we can't drop the sarcastic comments and be civil towards each other, then the thread will be closed and removed. Thanks.
LightWalker
Seeker of Truth
According to a more recent story in the Huffington Post, the man who found his doppelganger in the painting is using Ancestry.com to find a possible family connection between himself and the man in the portrait.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/max-galuppo-dresses-up-li_n_2139453.html?utm_hp_ref=arts
There is also a link to a funny news interview on ABC in which he appears dressed in period costume. The interviewer quipped, "So, you are looking at the swords and all the cool stuff and your girlfriend says, hey, you look like the guy in the red tights."
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/max-galuppo-16th-century-painting-doppelganger-interview-man-17727089
He states that he's "totally interested" and going to do as much research as he can.
Perhaps if this was presented in the context of a reincarnation identification claim along with validated memories, it might be shown that the internet spreads evidence like never before. Although this is being more spread by the mainstream media (he appeared on Good Morning America) than the Internet.
As it is, it is only possible evidence of a family resemblance between a man and someone who may be a 16th century ancestor. Which is fascinating in and of itself and has clearly captured the interest of the mainstream media.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/max-galuppo-dresses-up-li_n_2139453.html?utm_hp_ref=arts
There is also a link to a funny news interview on ABC in which he appears dressed in period costume. The interviewer quipped, "So, you are looking at the swords and all the cool stuff and your girlfriend says, hey, you look like the guy in the red tights."
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/max-galuppo-16th-century-painting-doppelganger-interview-man-17727089
He states that he's "totally interested" and going to do as much research as he can.
Perhaps if this was presented in the context of a reincarnation identification claim along with validated memories, it might be shown that the internet spreads evidence like never before. Although this is being more spread by the mainstream media (he appeared on Good Morning America) than the Internet.
As it is, it is only possible evidence of a family resemblance between a man and someone who may be a 16th century ancestor. Which is fascinating in and of itself and has clearly captured the interest of the mainstream media.
alienstyle
New Member
2 REFERENCES of Reincarnation being 'considered' in the Internet, outside our Forum:-
Man finds his doppelganger in old painting - Unexplained Mysteries:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676www.unexplained-mysteries.com › News › Bizarre2 days ago – Max Galuppo got came across a painting of someone rather familiar ... They say if your Reincarnated that your supposed to look exactly like the ...
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676
This comment is @ 5:02 @ 16th Nov 2012. There is such another statement at:
A comment @ 17:09 @ 14th Nov 2012 [@ THIS HYPERLINK] says: "Probably was him, ..." which is voted (though not necessarily rated) at the moment of my watching, as 9 in green.
Man finds his doppelganger in old painting - Unexplained Mysteries:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676www.unexplained-mysteries.com › News › Bizarre2 days ago – Max Galuppo got came across a painting of someone rather familiar ... They say if your Reincarnated that your supposed to look exactly like the ...
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=237676
This comment is @ 5:02 @ 16th Nov 2012. There is such another statement at:
A comment @ 17:09 @ 14th Nov 2012 [@ THIS HYPERLINK] says: "Probably was him, ..." which is voted (though not necessarily rated) at the moment of my watching, as 9 in green.
Last edited by a moderator:
LightWalker
Seeker of Truth
The fact that a couple of commenters on the stories posted on one mainstream media site and Unsolved Mysteries mentioned reincarnation doesn't lead one to consider this evidence of evidence of reincarnation.
Perhaps a story about this man and the painting in which he was asked about reincarnation, memories, affinity for that time period, etc., might lead more towards accepting that as something other than a story about a startling resemblance.
Has he ever had a pyschic reading, or a regression? Would he be willing to? Has he ever had an interest in that particular time period? Inquiring minds...
Perhaps a story about this man and the painting in which he was asked about reincarnation, memories, affinity for that time period, etc., might lead more towards accepting that as something other than a story about a startling resemblance.
Has he ever had a pyschic reading, or a regression? Would he be willing to? Has he ever had an interest in that particular time period? Inquiring minds...
I think this is being more less exploited as a novelty. I think there's very little you can tell from a casual likness in a painting.
For one thing that's only one perspective. I think you would need other angles and data to go on.
in fact I look quite like Zach Braff. So much so, that as a joke I changed my picture on Facebook to his and I got many compliments on how good I looked without my beard.
Of course that was only one photo. In other ones you can see a resembalance but you can tell we're different people.
For one thing that's only one perspective. I think you would need other angles and data to go on.
in fact I look quite like Zach Braff. So much so, that as a joke I changed my picture on Facebook to his and I got many compliments on how good I looked without my beard.
Of course that was only one photo. In other ones you can see a resembalance but you can tell we're different people.
alienstyle
New Member
He had already loved the Helmet. And that too, even before watching the portrait. [sEE THE 1ST POST OF THIS THREAD.]LightWalker said:
So far as inquiring mind is considered, he has at least shown a 'general interest' reportedly in the Internet, as at least one website claims he's "totally interested" in knowing about the possible family connection through Ancestry.Com. The Internet also reports that he wants to 'research' it (e.g. about the Nobleman) as far as he can.
Of course, we have not reached any 'full stop' yet—so far as possible collection of evidence (or further evidence) is considered. On the other hand, any spiritual/metaphysical topic (let alone reincarnation) is not usually a topic of discussion around the water cooler in the Corporate Office or most Universities. So how can we expect it to surface (especially with a detail discussion) in the mainstream media like TV, at least in the recent era?
In the Internet however—for example in the Web 2.0—where there is democracy + privacy, more varied voices can be heard. So watch out the Internet too. Of course, even in winning in votes, the truth is not established.
Who knows that we are NOT heading for an era, where even memory-less cases may come into limelight, or even in the realm of strong evidence?
I'm NOT NECESSARILY meaning this 11.11.2012 case is such a new (i.e. No Memory) Case Of the Reincarnation Type, say NM-CORT; but who knows that this particular case just cannot be a good NM-CORT, in the long run?
MAYBE it is just the start of a new style of case—hitherto unprecedented—and not necessarily the finish.
MAYBE IT IS NOT.—Even if it's not, then yet another such case (with some variation) may come in the Internet. And thus there may be a progress.
Last edited by a moderator:
LightWalker
Seeker of Truth
That's awfully thin to base an insistence of this being evidence of reincarnation on.alienstyle said:
His girlfriend said "he loved the helmets", which I'd translate into him finding them cool to look at. When he spoke, he didn't mention the helmets as having attracted his attention unduly. There was no indication in any of the other stories, including the various interviews that he had any interest in the exhibit other than preferring the armor and weapons the helmets to the paintings, which is very typical of a man and a woman looking at the same exhibit.
Now that I see the picture of those two together more closely in the second link provided, I don't notice the resemblance that everyone is raving about. Had he not had that beard going, I don't know if this story would be as popular as it is. All I see is a man with the same beard standing in a very similar position to the man in the painting, which was made on purpose by the girlfriend. In the pic where he is at a lake, I don't see a thing. That's the thing with photography and past life resemblance: a similarity can be made or not with lighting, shadows, position of the body, even the way you're styling your hair. It's worth mentioning that the guy himself didn't see a similarity until his girlfriend took the picture and showed it to him.
But I think what you're saying, Alienstyle, isn't so much that he looks like the guy and is maybe his reincarnation, as that you're excited that stories like this will make reincarnation more mainstream in Western society, right?
Now, if we had more reincarnation stories like the children's ones here on CPL on TV or online besides on 'Unsolved Mysteries' and other supernatural-themed places, I'd be all up for that.
When I read the statement by his girlfriend that he loved the helmets, but was completely oblivious to the painting, I thought it was more like she was saying, 'My boyfriend, what a silly dweeb he is! Here he was, loving the helmets and there was this big ol' painting right there! Ha, ha! That lovable oaf of mine!'
It also seems like a filler comment repeating in this story constantly because there really isn't anything else to say.
But I think what you're saying, Alienstyle, isn't so much that he looks like the guy and is maybe his reincarnation, as that you're excited that stories like this will make reincarnation more mainstream in Western society, right?
Saying that stories like this bring the idea of reincarnation to the general population, I believe, is a pretty big reach. Yes, we WANT society to be more accepting, but you'd really have to be looking for a past life connection in this story to get there. If I read this story outside of CPL, I don't think I'd make the reincarnation connection at all, and I am very committed to reseaching my past life and exploring the concept.
Yes, this person 'Ping' from Memphis says it was probably him and that he's a firm believer in reincarnation...but who the heck is Ping? He hasn't examined the case any more than we have. If reincarnation being more mainstream brings out the Pings, who believe without a doubt it's 'probably' him without anything else to go on, or even memory-less cases that are presented on a very superficial level, then I'd prefer that we all still skulk around behind usernames.
Now, if we had more reincarnation stories like the children's ones here on CPL on TV or online besides on 'Unsolved Mysteries' and other supernatural-themed places, I'd be all up for that.
I thought the same.LightWalker said:
When I read the statement by his girlfriend that he loved the helmets, but was completely oblivious to the painting, I thought it was more like she was saying, 'My boyfriend, what a silly dweeb he is! Here he was, loving the helmets and there was this big ol' painting right there! Ha, ha! That lovable oaf of mine!'
It also seems like a filler comment repeating in this story constantly because there really isn't anything else to say.
I agree...unfortunately, Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez broke up, so we won't see more stories like this for a long awhile. Besides, like you say, it's hard to see too much from a painting. What if the subject had what my grandmother calls 'cauliflower ears' or a schnoz that wouldn't quit and the painter was being nice? We have no idea if the man from the 16-century himself even looks like the man in the painting.Totoro said:
alienstyle
New Member
THE LAST TWO SENTENCES JUST ABOVE :
"What if the subject had what my grandmother calls 'cauliflower ears' or a schnoz that wouldn't quit and the painter was being nice? We have no idea if the man from the 16-century himself even looks like the man in the painting."
Well noted, & well said.—But it's also said that not a single case of both the Past-life hypnosis & Spontaneous recall is fully waterproof either. Every case in the memory-based research has at least one hairline flaw inherent in them too. This Dr Ian Stevenson did admit even after getting about 3000 cases of the children's spontaneous recall.
Just like the painter distorting the real man, the historian might also have distorted a document (say several centuries ago) based on which Regressive Past-life Hypnosis may seek validation today. Such a question is common in all the popular models of the empirical research on reincarnation—and thus nothing new.
If the painter distorted the real man to a better look—maybe he was 'nice' or maybe he did with the subject's instruction—then it's a great coincidence that the resulting figure would look like a man who would oneday happen to visit it. Note that the same old question of COINCIDENCE comes up.
Such coincidence question plagues even the spontaneous cases with the birth marks/defects. Even if you show there are more than one such marks, the coincidence probability—although quite reduced—is still NOT zero.
"What if the subject had what my grandmother calls 'cauliflower ears' or a schnoz that wouldn't quit and the painter was being nice? We have no idea if the man from the 16-century himself even looks like the man in the painting."
Well noted, & well said.—But it's also said that not a single case of both the Past-life hypnosis & Spontaneous recall is fully waterproof either. Every case in the memory-based research has at least one hairline flaw inherent in them too. This Dr Ian Stevenson did admit even after getting about 3000 cases of the children's spontaneous recall.
Just like the painter distorting the real man, the historian might also have distorted a document (say several centuries ago) based on which Regressive Past-life Hypnosis may seek validation today. Such a question is common in all the popular models of the empirical research on reincarnation—and thus nothing new.
If the painter distorted the real man to a better look—maybe he was 'nice' or maybe he did with the subject's instruction—then it's a great coincidence that the resulting figure would look like a man who would oneday happen to visit it. Note that the same old question of COINCIDENCE comes up.
Such coincidence question plagues even the spontaneous cases with the birth marks/defects. Even if you show there are more than one such marks, the coincidence probability—although quite reduced—is still NOT zero.
That's the point LightWalker. It may just be a resemblance, or it could be more than this .... he won't know unless he decides/wants to investigate it further.LightWalker said:
***
Frankly, before opining you should actually read what someone has said first:Ignotus said:
***firebird said:
It seems more like the media that has run with this and turned it into a novelty, ‘possibly’ sidetracking him from the reality? Without any further investigation it's not possible to know with any certainty. And, if this ‘novelty situation’ were you, would you just DISMISS it without investigating it further?Totoro said:
***
Presumptuous? We are in fact NOT saying the same thing at all. You have made a bold statement here that "nothing suggests reincarnation". On the other hand I have made no such statement. I have pointed out (as has the OP) some of the interesting coincidences (or whatever else you and others want to label them) which you have dismissed as "nothing". I have not concluded this is a case of reincarnation, but neither have I dismissed the 'possibility', as I know FROM EXPERIENCE, that minor details/coincidences often end up being important details in a case of reincarnation. So, from my perspective, there is a big difference in the view that I hold and yours.Owl said:
The OP pointed out a few things in this story that probably should be questioned and I tend to agree ... that is all. You may label this “fantasy”, “irrational” and illogical .... I call it questioning.
Now, it may very well be that this isn’t a case of reincarnation: I said in my first post in this thread, it may be just a case of 2 people looking alike and nothing more. Perhaps there may be an ancestral link here and it has nothing to do with reincarnation. And, it may also be neither of these 2 things. Maybe the fact that his grandparents come for the same region as the painting is just a meaningless coincidence ... maybe the fact that he visited the museum totally oblivious to the presence of this painting is again another meaningless coincidence ... and maybe the man’s pose in the photograph, if not deliberate, was coincidental too? A few maybes ... but still, you are so very certain that “nothing suggests reincarnation” ... and yet it has been proven that physical resemblance (apparent in this case, but “nothing” to you) is one important factor in so many cases of reincarnation. Must I list case examples here?
I also disagree with you – again - that having memories is necessary for a case of reincarnation to be established .... sorry this is not my experience and neither of some others that I know, including some members in this forum.
Inhaltslo’s dairy vendor - this was an off the cuff statement of frivolity and no proof of the man’s existence has been offered. And the cheesy site you linked to (i.e. Cheezburger.com) offering silly lookalikes ... really, must anyone resort to this when trying to rationally discuss the subject? ... is this what you normally provide as ‘evidence’ to convince others that physical likeness is not important in cases of reincarnation?
I see no “unfounded claims” of reincarnation on this particular story. The OP posted the article with many question marks; even the title of the thread is headed as a question. A question is not a claim. Also, that the word reincarnation was not mentioned in the article shouldn’t prevent a person from discussing the story here if they feel it may ‘possibly’ be relevant under the subject heading of reincarnation.
“For the sake of scientific and logic thinking” .... please .... for the sake of truth, maybe standing back first and considering some of the small details in a story before dismissing something outright would be better.
Sorry if you see this post of mine as combatant. I’m not trying to start a "fight”, I’m clarifying my point of view, as I HAVE obviously failed miserably in my previous posts. I don't expect all others to agree with my view, but I would expect others to at least allow me my right to have an opinion, and without telling me what it is that I am saying.
I think at the least, it proves what a good sport he is. :laugh: From the tone of the article though, it seemed like he was just being gracious about all the attention he had been getting and it was more about the media hype than anything.
If it was me, you know I wouldn't dismiss it. :laugh: I wouldn't be able to resist the opportunity to learn something new.
But for him, I wish him the same; to have some fun and learn something new! I think a large part of being human is discovering joy in something that is usually overlooked.
After reading the thread, I think that you guys actually agree. Just somewhere in the twain, you both missed the mark.
Nothing a little forgiveness and patience wouldn't cure : angel
The only thing we agree on is that there are too many dubious past life claims (includes some people with so called memories) that affects how the subject of reincarnation is perceived. As for the case raised in this thread (and as with other cases I have dealt with), I am not dismissive until I am certain there is no case. That's it in a nutshell. I didn't miss the mark. Let's say hypothetically only that this turns out to be a case of reincarnation that can be proven ... I'm not saying this will turn out to be so here, but let's just say that hypothetically ... then the statement "nothing suggests reincarnation" will prove to be false won't it. On the other hand, I've made no such statements of certainty that I will need to retract later.Totoro said:
As for the novelty aspect, I can speak personally to that and say that novelty sometimes turns out to be anything but. You're right, the man has been a good sport about it. If I were him, in this instance, I would probably try regression, just because there seems to be so little information about the nobleman himself and the artist of the portrait is not currently known. If you want some information badly enough though you can often find a way to obtain it, provided you remain open to the 'possibilities'.
Gryph
Senior Registered
When I look at that picture of the two of them in that link, the first thing I thought was "Boy, that fella had a small codpiece", followed by "Cool Division Bell T-shirt!" followed by "Huh, looks like they keep their beard the same way.
To be completely honest, the facial structure is not all that similar, at least to my eye, as others have already stated and the case for reincarnation is tenuous at best.
There are those who say I look like pictures of Teddy Roosevelt, but I wasnt him. In the end, I dont think there is enough evidence either way, and I think that its the kind of story that folks will stop and either go "huh, yeah he does... weird" or "that dude doesnt look anything like the painting!" and then move on. I seriously doubt that a layman would make a reincarnation connection there...
Aside from saying- "Ill bet you someone is going to say hes reincarnated from that guy because they look alike... lolol! Arent those reincarnation people weird!"
To be completely honest, the facial structure is not all that similar, at least to my eye, as others have already stated and the case for reincarnation is tenuous at best.
There are those who say I look like pictures of Teddy Roosevelt, but I wasnt him. In the end, I dont think there is enough evidence either way, and I think that its the kind of story that folks will stop and either go "huh, yeah he does... weird" or "that dude doesnt look anything like the painting!" and then move on. I seriously doubt that a layman would make a reincarnation connection there...
Aside from saying- "Ill bet you someone is going to say hes reincarnated from that guy because they look alike... lolol! Arent those reincarnation people weird!"
