They are labelled as a quack because the ‘evidence’ that they cite is dubious, but they present it as if it is not.
Its essentially con artistry.
There are actual new discoveries in science that lead to much actually legitimate consternation, see the currently ongoing Hubble Tension crisis in astronomy.
But when you have other people, other experts in the fields you are claiming to use as evidence, tell you that your ‘evidence’ is a nothing burger… that is what makes you a quack.
My ‘dogma’ is that we be honest and not lie about things, that we don’t make false claims, as you literally did, when you said ‘there are thousands of documented veriable past life claims’.
Yeah thats about the same level of evidence as using the vaccine injury complaint register to claim that all vaccines are actually far more likely to cause problems than they actually are.
Anybody can just say shit. A bunch of people saying shit is not evidence of anything, unless you properly evaluate those claims.
When you properly evaluate those claims, and the result is ‘oh these don’t really mean anything, or have many other more likely explanations’…
Unlike you I actually have looked at a few of these cases. You can attack that guy all you want, but some of the kids stories are too detailed to dismiss. 2 year olds should not know the details of an obscure murder case.
They are labelled as a quack because the ‘evidence’ that they cite is dubious, but they present it as if it is not.
Its essentially con artistry.
There are actual new discoveries in science that lead to much actually legitimate consternation, see the currently ongoing Hubble Tension crisis in astronomy.
But when you have other people, other experts in the fields you are claiming to use as evidence, tell you that your ‘evidence’ is a nothing burger… that is what makes you a quack.
My ‘dogma’ is that we be honest and not lie about things, that we don’t make false claims, as you literally did, when you said ‘there are thousands of documented veriable past life claims’.
Yeah thats about the same level of evidence as using the vaccine injury complaint register to claim that all vaccines are actually far more likely to cause problems than they actually are.
Anybody can just say shit. A bunch of people saying shit is not evidence of anything, unless you properly evaluate those claims.
When you properly evaluate those claims, and the result is ‘oh these don’t really mean anything, or have many other more likely explanations’…
You’re just bullshitting, you’re lying.
Unlike you I actually have looked at a few of these cases. You can attack that guy all you want, but some of the kids stories are too detailed to dismiss. 2 year olds should not know the details of an obscure murder case.