ปานบนร่างกาย = เราตายอย่างไรชาติที่แล้ว? งานวิจัยสหรัฐตรวจสอบได้จริง
Summary
What makes this line of work interesting is not what the children say but the birthmarks and congenital defects that match a dead person’s wounds.
Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia collected a large body of cases systematically, checkable against medical records.
The talk covers the well-known cases, including a Thai child with two birthmarks, and sets out the statistical reasoning and the alternative explanations researchers tried to eliminate.
Key points
Physical evidence is easier to check than testimony
A birthmark is on the child and can be matched to an autopsy record, unlike a statement that may have been prompted.
The correspondence of position is the point
One mark is coincidence. Two matching the entry and exit of a bullet is much harder to dismiss.
The researchers do the refuting themselves
The quality of this work lies in eliminating alternatives first rather than collecting confirming stories.
It is still not proof
What exists is a body of data without a better explanation — a different status from being established.