Belief in reincarnation tied to memory errors

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17982545/

I didn't see this anywhere, sorry if someone posted it already.

[Victus]

Oddly, we're working on something related to this in our lab.

"... This is because they can’t distinguish between things that have really happened and things that have been suggested to them, Peters told LiveScience."

Doesn't that cover all Christians?

Victus wrote

Oddly, we're working on something related to this in our lab.

Like what? can you give us the short version?

[Victus]

DontBeStupid wrote

Like what? can you give us the short version?

Well a friend of mine (I actually just proof read her draft last night) is doing a paper on dissociable traits (linked with suggestibility and, more distantly, hypnotizability) and false memories. Briefly, people with high levels of these traits create more false memories for public, negative events than the average person.

False memories are one of those things about the brain I find really... disturbing. Almost creepy sometimes.

I like my false memories! I fantasize about something enough times, and soon it's just like a real memory. For instance, that time I had a threesome with Salma Hayek and Penelope Cruz...

:thumbsup:

ForsakenOne wrote

I like my false memories! I fantasize about something enough times, and soon it's just like a real memory. For instance, that time I had a threesome with Salma Hayek and Penelope Cruz...

:thumbsup:

hahahahaha


I'm talking about the real false memories though, you know, how science has shown just how bad human recal ability can be.

I had a history proffessor who did an experiment with the class once. Someone ran in the room unexpectedly, did something on the chalk board and ran out. We were then asked to write about what had just happened. Even though the person had just been in the room, we had people who couldn't even agree on what the person had worn, or what color hair they had. The idea of the exercise was to show that history is simply our best guess of what happened.

This is why I think it's funny when christ tards take the jesus myth litterally. I mean, we couldn't even agree on something that happened minutes before, so how the hell do they think that some guy thousands of years ago who was written about many years after he was dead was actually... magic?

[Gnosital]

:lol::lol::lol:

I did this to a class once, I had a friend of mine run into the room and yell "There can be only one!" while making stabbing motions at me, and then he ran out.

I think only one person gave an reasonably accurate description, and also got the quote right.

[Choobus]

Baphomet wrote

I mean, we couldn't even agree on something that happened minutes before, so how the hell do they think that some guy thousands of years ago who was written about many years after he was dead was actually... magic?

I think that is necessary for the godidiots. If we knew exactly what had happened in the past they wouldn't have jack shit to back up their christology.
Ignorance is bliss? Ignorance is the basis of all religion.

Baphomet wrote

I had a history proffessor who did an experiment with the class once. Someone ran in the room unexpectedly, did something on the chalk board and ran out. We were then asked to write about what had just happened. Even though the person had just been in the room, we had people who couldn't even agree on what the person had worn, or what color hair they had. The idea of the exercise was to show that history is simply our best guess of what happened.

This is why I think it's funny when christ tards take the jesus myth litterally. I mean, we couldn't even agree on something that happened minutes before, so how the hell do they think that some guy thousands of years ago who was written about many years after he was dead was actually... magic?

Sadly, I remember doing something like that in a Sunday School class. I doubt the message we were supposed to get was the same :lol:

I think the secret is not thinking about your religion too much. I was reading an interview with the awesome Derren Brown in the paper yesterday - he used to be a happy-clappy vange - and he said: "I read theology books so I could defend my beliefs, and the opposite happened. Once I read how the bible was put together, I unravelled."

Of course this is a former christologist who happens to have a brain. If you are one of the majority who don't you're probably fucked. I guess most punchers who get pissed off with their god become satanists or mooslims or sew-agers.

[Sternwallow]

We have to believe in the reality of what our mind tells us is real. It is hardwired and it is why witnesses are so adamant about what they "saw". A nice common example of the mind lying to us is deja vu when the brain tells us that the sensations we just had on entering a strange room "really" happened long ago.

In computer terms, the recorder resets the timestamp on some early frames of the video to a much earlier value and we have no more reliable time indicator so we testify that those first few frames were taken weeks or months ago.

Incidentally, and slightly off topic, this is why I am very skeptical about the self-validating electronic voting systems.

[Choobus]

Sternwallow wrote

Incidentally, and slightly off topic, this is why I am very skeptical about the self-validating electronic voting systems.

I'm skeptical about any computerised voting system (self validating or not) because

a) we already know certain texan cunts like to rig elections

b) the wankers who build the machins won't show the source code to anyone, not even the government

c) if teenage kids can hack into the pentagon then we can expect Brittney spears to become president some time soon.

[Sternwallow]

Choobus wrote

I'm skeptical about any computerised voting system (self validating or not) because

a) we already know certain texan cunts like to rig elections

b) the wankers who build the machins won't show the source code to anyone, not even the government

c) if teenage kids can hack into the pentagon then we can expect Brittney spears to become president some time soon.

Yes, but it is external validation that would solve all three of your items. If the results can be independently verified, who cares what the source looks like. They probably just have shy or shoddy programmers.

I'd like to see the contract for that equipment. Ordinarily, unless it is officially classified, all source code for a government funded project, like communications systems or accounting is public domain (since WE paid for it).