So I came across Ian Stevenson and after that, Jim B. Tucker about a year ago.

Qrd:
>Ian Stevenson was a psychiatrist that researched on children who claimed to have had past-life experiences
>He also founded the University of Virginia's Division of Perceptual Studies
>Jim B. Tucker started working with Ian Stevenson and eventually succeeded him as the head of the Division of Perceptual Studies
>Ian Stevenson grew up reading books about theosophy and took an interest in the paranormal after that and gave speeches at the Theosophical Society
>Jim B. Tucker has in the past given speeches for the European School of Theosophy about reincarnation
>Some people claim that they are full of shit because reincarnation is a religious concept and religion is man-made and fake
>Sceptics also claim that all of the accounts if reincarnation are from Asia where reincarnation is a common belief
>Both Ian and Jim have both gathered detailed accounts and testimonies over several decades from people who claimed to have had past-life experiences in the West
>Several academics including sceptical ones have supposedly said that the work that these men have produced is so rigorous that you would at least have to acknowledge that it is so well-made that it is at the very least worthy of being entertained and discussed and that some of the evidence certainly seem compelling

So what's going on here and what is up with those two men's links to theosophy? Is it all bullshit, is it all true or is it possible that they are onto something but also wrong about other stuff?

>Ehrm, how is this political!?

Is this thing being pushed to usher in some kind of New World Order religion that is meant to replace all the traditional ones and serve as a vehicle for some kind of spiritual globohomo? We all know that the spiritual stuff precedes the political stuff.

>>513716004 (OP)
His eyebrows are too far apart

>>513716270
Kek. Does this make him more or less trustworthy in your opinion?

>>513716552
Idk, could be a PhD who tries to sell books about utopian deliverance that never comes to sad people. But I don't know enough about him. What are his arguments for reincarnation?

>>513716743
Idk, he has said in interviews that he's skeptical about reincarnation but claims that it cannot be ignored etc. He also claimed on some podcast that none of his study subjects reported having had hellish experiences and that there was no suggestion whatsoever that there could be something akin to hell where bad people go. Yet every major religion known to man seem to believe in some kind of punishment for bad people even if the surrounding theology and philosophy regarding the topic differ among the different religions. This to me is a red flag.

>>513716743
>What are his arguments for reincarnation?
His arguments are simply that there are many accounts from chuldren that he and Ian studied throughout the years where children claimed to have had past-life experiences. Whenever he finds a case that he thinks might be interesting he does thorough research and see for himself whether the person said kid remembers him/herself to have lived as in a previous life actually existed. If it checks out he then goes on to publish about it. The case he's most obsessed with is the case of James Leininger who was a kid who remembered being a WWII fighter pilot that died in a crash. The details the kid provided supposedly matched the death of an actual pilot that died that way and he supposedly remembered actual details he or his parents shouldn't have known iirc.

>>513718571
*If it checks out he then goes on to publish it

>>513716004 (OP)
Last bömp.

>>513716004 (OP)
>>513716004 (OP)
>>513716004 (OP)

Eyes above ears, run away in fear.

>>513722517
Hmmmm... I'm torn as to whether this guy's eyes are above his ears or not. I'll look for more pictures of this guy. Good on you for bringing that up though.