The Christian Haupt Story

Discussion in 'Children's Past Lives -Age 7 & under' started by autumnleavesnnovember, Dec 12, 2016.

  1. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Then there's this slight inconsistency:

    From Cathy Byrd's The Boy Who Knew Too Much (Hay House, 2017)

    p.199 "In February 2015, nearly one full year after connecting with Reverend Ken, Christian and I took a trip to Milford, Connecticut, to visit Mom Gehrig's old stomping grounds where she had lived with the Steigler family. As Christian and I were preparing for our trip to the East Coast, Reverend Ken and his wife, Marilyn, were preparing to attend the 50-year reunion of his historic march alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in 1965."

    But it was just a few pages back where we were informed that Cathy had had her third regression with Jeroen in November, 2014, the one where Cathy seemingly out of the blue comes up with several obscure and specific details about the Steigler family and Mom Gehrig's life with them 1951-1954 (Mom Gehrig's death):

    p. 176 "I thought I was also done exploring my personal connection to Christina Gehrig that had surfaced through my past-life regressions until I went to see Jeroen for a third time and inadvertently slipped back down the rabbit hole. Jeroen had offered me a complimentary past-life regression in return for a workshop I had treated him to and I decided to take him up on his generous offer in November 2014."

    This kind of makes a sham out of what Cathy states to have happened on pp. 185-186, where she says she found a photocopy of a letter to Mr. George Steigler which she had obtained from the National Baseball Hall of Fame archives in July 2014. It was this letter, or so we were led to believe, that led her to the Steigler's in Milford, Connecticut, and specifically to Jill Steigler, the daughter of the late George and Laurel Steigler.

    Laurel Steigler passed away June 30, 2014, her husband George having predeceased her by several years. However, it couldn't have been too difficult to come up with the name of the Steigler family from Christina "Mom" Gehrig's March 14, 1954 obituary, available online with two clicks of a mouse, or through newspapers . com. Once she had George Steigler's name it wouldn't have taken too much more research, most likely through ancestry . com, to come up with George Steigler's son's name, Rev. Kenneth Steigler and his sister Jill, even though she would have had to have made special requests to Steigler family tree members to access that kind of private info. Or she may have been able to get Ken and Jill's contact info directly from 95 year old Laurel Steigler herself, since Mrs. Steigler was still alive and living in Milford, Connecticut. Regardless of how she came up with Rev. Ken's and Jill's contact information, the fact that she did contact them months before her third regression, puts a heavy taint on anything "new" that may have come out of it.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
  2. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Just to continue. The following is a one of the minor errors Cathy makes when being regressed by Jeroen during her first visit April 2014. The context suggests that Cathy (as Mom Gehrig) is going to see her son Lou play in one of his first games as a regular in the New York Yankees line-up, Yankee Stadium, The Bronx, NYC, sometime in June or early summer of 1925, Lou's rookie year:

    CBRT.1. pp.9-10 (Cathy Byrd's Regression Transcripts, pp.9-10, Apr 2014 (available at www.
    cathy-byrd . com, under Regressions) :

    Jeroen: So, it sounds like you guys are going to see a game. Is that where you are doing? Cathy: Yeah. It's a stadium made of iron- levels, big structures. Jeroen: And is it right in the city or outside of the city? Cathy: It's near the city. It's far from us. Jeroen: So, you had to travel a little way to get there? Cathy: Yeah. Jeroen: So, where is your boy? He didn't want to come with you guys? Cathy: He's playing in the game so we're gonna watch him. Jeroen: Oh my god, that's so exciting! Cathy: I know. Jeroen: Are you guys excited? Cathy: Yeah. Jeroen: Is he doing well? Cathy: Yeah. Jeroen: Wow. Cathy: He's new though. Jeroen: Is it one of the first games he's playing in? Cathy: Yeah. Jeroen: That sounds very exciting . . . .

    Except that in 1925 the Gehrigs didn't live far from Yankee Stadium, less than 3 miles. The Gehrigs lived in an apartment building at 2079 8th Ave, in the Morningside Heights section of Manhattan just southeast of Columbia University. (cross W. 113th street) from at least 1920 (1920 US Census data. 1925 New York State census data) until they moved into a nice, middle-class neighborhood in New Rochelle, NY just before Christmas 1927.

    From her book, The Boy Who Knew Too Much (Hay House, 2017) Cathy Byrd even cites her own research proving her mistake for anyone but herself (and Hay House editors) to see:

    p.134 "Ironically the old Yankee Stadium that I had seen so clearly during my past-life regression was torn down in 2008, the same year of Christian's birth, to make way for the ultramodern new Yankee Stadium. My fact-finding mission also led me to discover a home at 9 Meadow Lane in New Rochelle, New York, that Lou Gehrig bought for his parents in 1927."

    She compounds the error by claiming that (p.135) "The modern-day photograph I found of 9 Meadow Lane looked very much like the home on top of a hill I had described [on p. 128] living in at the time of Lou's retirement [July 4, 1939]."

    Wrong again, Cathy. Mom and Pop Gehrig were forced to move out of their New Rochelle home sometime after September 1937 when they were unable or unwilling to come up with $ 8000 (roughly $180,000 in today's money) to pay off their mortgage after they missed a semi-annual mortgage payment earlier that year. Sometime in late 1937 Mom and Pop Gehrig had moved into a rented home in the neighboring community of Mt. Vernon, New York. So at the time of Lou Gehrig's retirement from being an active baseball player (July 4, 1939), the Gehrigs were living in Mt. Vernon not New Rochelle. Come to think of it, if the regressions had been on the up and up, Cathy never should have seen the Gehrig's home in New Rochelle, New York, since she was taken back to a time 2 years before and about 2 years after living in that house.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2018
  3. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Just a couple of little things that someone should have caught before Cathy's book went to press.

    First, Cathy, as part of her research into the life of Lou Gehrig, makes a startling claim about Babe Ruth's living accommodations in 1929-1930.

    From The Boy Who Knew Too Much (Hay House, 2017):

    p.173 "As we stood on the enclosed porch of the big, white house at 9 Meadow Lane where Lou Gehrig lived with his parents from 1927-1933, Christian looked lost in thought for a moment.
    "This is where Babe Ruth used to smoke," he said.
    I [Cathy Byrd] knew from my research that Babe Ruth was a frequent visitor to the home on Meadow Lane and even lived with the Gehrig family for a year after the death of his first wife. . . ."

    Babe Ruth's estranged first wife died in a house fire in January 1929 in the Boston, Massachusetts area under somewhat mysterious circumstances, although it was ruled an accident. Three months later, in April 1929, Babe married his mistress of several years, Claire Merritt Hodgson, a beautiful but strict stage actress (Ziegfeld Follies on Broadway) whom he had been living with since 1927 (1925?) in her Upper Westside apartment on Riverside Drive in Manhattan, NYC. Newspaper articles at the time recorded how Claire took care of the glutinous, hard-drinking, party-hardy baseball superstar and national celebrity in July 1929 during a health scare that forced the Babe to take 6 weeks off from the 1929 baseball season. Later that year Claire and the Babe, along with Claire's daughter from a previous marriage, and Dorothy, Babe's daughter from a previous relationship, moved several blocks further north into a 14-room apartment on W. 88th Street also overlooking the Hudson River. These are exclusive neighborhoods by the way. So I find Cathy Byrd's comment that Babe moved into the close-knit Gehrig's middle-class home in New Rochelle, NY for a year, a little strange.

    Second, Cathy and her now 6-year-old son, Christian, on Little League Opening Day, spring 2015, somewhere in the northern LA metro suburbs:

    p.212 "Before it [opening day speeches] was over, another voice bellowed out from the loudspeakers-- a voice that had become as familiar to our family as that of a close friend.
    " 'I have been walking on ball fields for sixteen years . . . .' said the voice of Lou Gehrig in a crackling recording from his retirement speech at Yankee Stadium that memorable day in 1939.
    " Christian looked at me with eyes as big as saucers as soon as we heard Lou's voice."

    Actually, these were the words of Gary Cooper playing Lou Gehrig, in the 1942 movie "The Pride of the Yankees".

    Lou said "I have been in ballparks for seventeen years . . . ." , which is a little less eloquent, but poignant nevertheless given what he says next in his famous (you'd think anyway) "Luckiest Man" speech, July 4, 1939, Yankee Stadium, The Bronx, New York City.

    To be fair, Cathy does correctly record the rest of Lou's short speech , the parts that survived in the newsreel clips of the day, anyway, in the paragraph immediately following this minor mistake. Maybe Cathy switched the opening line with the movie line for the same reason Sam Goldwyn's writers modified it -- "walking on ball fields for sixteen years" just comes across a whole lot better than just being "in ballparks for seventeen years." But still . . . .
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2018
  4. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Knowing that Cathy Byrd published a March 23, 2014 article in her local Ventura County on-line newspaper about her son Christian's claims of a past life as Lou Gehrig

    http://citizensjournal.us/our-local...-league-and-loving-americas-favorite-pastime/

    I find the following paragraph to be out of place if not completely disingenuous:

    From Cathy Byrd's book, The Boy Who Knew Too Much (Hay House, 2017), p. 110:

    "Reading about other American children with parents like us [in Dr. Jim Tucker's, Dec 2013 book, Return To Life, and probably the unmentioned 2009 Leininger book, Soul Survivor], who did not believe in reincarnation before their own personal experiences, is what inspired me to send Dr. Tucker an e-mail outlining Christian's odd statements and behaviors. The fact that the families featured in Dr. Tucker's book had the option of changing their names to protect their identity eased our apprehensions about having Dr. Tucker come to our house to interview Christian [on April 2, 2014]. The last thing we wanted was to destroy our son's life by having kids on the playground or baseball fields find out about our family secret."

    If Cathy was so worried about protecting her 5-year old son from name-calling and other forms of bullying, if she was so worried about exposing the "family secret" why did she have Christian's story published in a local newspaper, even on-line for the whole world to read, days before Dr. Tucker's April 2, 2104 visit?

    Something doesn't add up.
     
  5. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    Interesting thread, and excellent detective work, especially by GuySittingintheStands. You've put a lot of work into this (enough that I confess I haven't read it all as I write). I'm grateful and impressed.

    With respect to published cases of famous past lives remembered by children, there is the case of Hunter, the golf prodigy, that was published by Jim Tucker, that has been mentioned above. He also published the case of a boy who recalled being the scriptwriter of Gone With the Wind. Both these cases are included in Tucker's book Return to Life: Extraordinary Cases of Children Who Remember Past Lives.

    Someone above mentioned Ian Stevenson in the context of famous past life memories. He actually did write about them, in one paper, but all the cases he mentioned were fraudulent or delusional. The paper is here: https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/wp-content/uploads/sites/267/2015/11/STE23.pdf .

    Re the Christian Haupt case: in late spring 2017 I wrote a commentary about it. Here is an edited and updated version. It might well reiterate points made by GuySittingintheStands or others.

    Background

    When I first learned of this case (on a closed reincarnation group on Facebook) I was delighted. A child FPL [famous past life] case, of a baseball prodigy who had been a legendary baseball star who came to a tragic end—how could I not be touched? But I agreed with Jim Tucker and James G. Matlock at the time, as discussed on the FB group, that the identifying memory-evidence was weak, though the semantic knowledge was interesting in its accuracy, and the subject had inarguable baseball talent, as shown in the videos, as well as dedication. I became (and remain) convinced that Christian was indeed a major-league baseball player of the era; but I didn’t feel the identification was strong.

    I was also somewhat uncomfortable with Cathy’s clear desire for publicity, and wondered if she was considering her son’s future and reputation carefully enough. I’d had thoughts along the same lines about James Leininger when I first heard of his case, but the risks were not the same as with an FPL case, and I became convinced that James’s parents had been in sufficient accord with his own wishes when I saw James himself advocate publicly for reincarnation, saying he wanted to get the truth about it out there, on one of the TV segments.

    So, I withheld further judgment of the Christian Haupt pending a read of Cathy Byrd’s book. I have acquired it and read it complete now. However, before I did, another event transpired that has a strong bearing on my opinion of the case. I will discuss it as the first issue below.

    I feel that the case is very vulnerable to criticism as it has several issues, based on its presentations in the book and elsewhere, viz:

    1) Cathy Byrd’s credibility

    Jim Tucker was made aware of the case, I think by Carol Bowman, but he declined to investigate and publish about it, and thus made no public statement evaluating its genuineness.

    In early March (2017) I read the YouTube book trailer description by Cathy, posted Mar 2. It included the sentence “Christian’s case has been studied and verified by Dr. Jim Tucker from the University of Virginia Medical School department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences…” (emphasis added). I have a screen capture of this version that I can show on request.

    I informed Jim Tucker of this via email and he emailed back saying someone else had spotted the same “case was verified” claim on Cathy’s amazon.com page, and she’d corrected it at his request. He did the same here, so it has been corrected. ()

    There is no such thing in reincarnation research as a case being verified. Rather, individual facts stated as memories are verified. A case may be solved (the identity of the previous person determined), but it is not said to be "verified." So Jim can never had communicated such a judgment even privately to Cathy.

    Thus it is clear that Cathy purposely attempted to falsely make use of the reputations both of Jim Tucker and the Division of Perceptual Studies to lend the case credibility, in two public places that are marketing gateways to her book and to the case. In fact, the revised sentence can still be read to mean that Jim concurs with the identification, about which he actually makes no judgment. If he had not requested corrections of both these descriptions, the deceptions would remain posted, to be read by millions.

    I was astonished and sickened to see the one and learn about the other. I have said elsewhere that with adult cases, FPLs in particular, if I catch the subject in one falsehood, I dismiss the case entirely. This is for two reasons:

    a) When there are no time-stamped written or recorded records, or when witnesses are few, we simply have to trust those who give accounts. In fact we always have to, to some degree. Thus we must make our assessments of their trustworthiness. Stevenson touches on it in some of his cases, stating his impressions of a family’s honesty or evaluating whether they have anything to gain by fraud. If someone presenting a case knowingly makes a false statement, we know they are not entirely disinclined to do so generally. Thus, we cannot safely credit anything else they say. This is even more true when they issue a falsehood publicly. If the falsehood is made to give their case greater apparent credibility, we have an even bigger problem, because it means they may be deceiving in other ways so as to give the appearance of a strong case. It is time then to look for a motive behind wanting the case to appear credible.

    b) When subjects, or parents of subjects, feel compelled to make the case seem more credible through a falsehood, the case as a whole is likely to be weak.​

    2) Inconsistency of account on an essential point (the identification)

    Stevenson was careful to check and double-check his information through repeated interviews, sometimes years apart, as he counted consistency of account as a good measure of a case’s strength. Certainly an inconsistency on a major point would have aroused his suspicion. Cathy Byrd has publicly given two versions of how she made the Lou Gehrig identification.

    a) In the book, she says she showed Christian a 1927 team picture of the New York Yankees, based on the premise that Christian’s previous incarnation had been a member of the team. According to the text, Christian, who had already apparently demonstrated an animosity to Babe Ruth, picked out Ruth and, on being asked who else on the team wouldn’t like him, picked out Lou Gehrig and said “That’s me.” The only witnesses to this apparently were Cathy and her daughter Charlotte, of whose age at the time I am not certain, except I get the impression she was perhaps 6-8.

    b) In 2014, Cathy wrote in a newspaper article: (http://citizensjournal.us/our-local...-league-and-loving-americas-favorite-pastime/).

    He told us that he played for the Yankees and that his favorite position was first base.​

    This detail is not in the book, that I can find.

    I took to the internet to soak up as much information as I could on baseball in the 1920’s and 30’s. I purchased books on Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig and showed Christian photos. The first photo I showed him was a photo of Lou Gehrig and a person I thought was Babe Ruth in Yankee uniforms and he was quick to point out that it was the coach, “not dumb Babe Ruth” (emphasis added).​

    In fact in this article it is not clear precisely what clue had Cathy decide for sure that her son had been Lou Gehrig. She was being quite detailed, however. So why is the team picture and his declaration “That’s me,” said in the book to be crucial to the solving of the case, missing?​

    ...part 2....
     
  6. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    KarenF's commentary on the Christian Haupt case, Part 2:

    3) Lack of episodic memories and identifying statements

    Being accustomed to cases such as those published by Stevenson and Tucker, I was expecting to see more personal episodic memories from Christian in the book, and was disappointed. Though Cathy repeatedly refers to Christian frequently telling her stories of his PL baseball career, we don’t see a lot of sentences, and while, as previously mentioned, there are semantic memories whose accuracy is impressive, episodic memories and identifying statements are very much lacking.

    There is a distinction that must be made between accurate semantic memories and identifying statements, and it may be that she doesn’t understand this well enough (as I think many people do not). Basically, an accurate semantic memory supports a previous incarnation’s presence in the time remembered, but does not identify that person if others shared, or can have shared, the stated experience or knowledge.

    So, for example, any pro ballplayer of the time would remember that the players traveled by train, stayed in hotels and played by daylight; any of them born into humble circumstances would recall having no electric light and no automobile in childhood. These facts don’t identify the previous person as Lou Gehrig. Even “Babe Ruth was mean to me” does not narrow the identity down to one person, since Ruth apparently had a reputation for being mean generally, as Cathy reveals in the book.

    If, on the other hand, Christian had been heard to say, before he could have acquired this information any other way, “I said to everyone in the stadium that I was the luckiest man alive,” or “we spoke German at home,” or accurately described the symptoms of ALS as Gehrig suffered them—or, best of all, said “my name was Lou,” as James Leininger said “my name was James”—we would have some identifying statements. As it is, there are none, if I recall rightly, other than the claimed declaration of “That’s me,” while picking out Gehrig in a photo (and there’s a problem with that as per item 2 above).

    4) Lack of witnesses to statements or time-stamped records

    As Cathy’s husband Michael Haupt was apparently disinterested in the whole thing, Christian’s statements seem to have been witnessed by Cathy alone, with Charlotte sometimes present. However Charlotte, being a young child herself, would naturally follow Cathy’s interpretation of the case, rightly or wrongly. As far as I can tell, Cathy doesn’t have time-stamped records of Christian’s expressions of memory prior to an identity being determined. (Compare with James Leininger, whose memories prior to identification were preserved on videotape shot for a failed ABC TV pilot, of which Jim Tucker had a copy.)

    5) Behavioural discrepancy

    Here I am indebted to a friend of mine whom I shall call Mike, and who 1) has extensive PL memories and verifications of his own, such that he can be called an expert in PL self-investigation and 2) is a baseball buff (and was in at least one PL). Mike is aware from his own experience, as I am from the reincarnation literature, that past-life behavioural signs tend to be very specific. To him, Christian’s skill in pitching suggests that pitcher was the previous incarnation's position as a pro. Note Cathy’s observation in the book, “Christian was completely enamored with left-handed pitcher Clayton Kershaw,” carefully studying and imitating his style. Now Lou Gehrig was a pitcher for at least part of his college career, but once he entered the major leagues, he did not excel at it enough to be tapped, but played first base instead. He was most famous for batting. Pitching is a very specific and extremely important skill in the game, and the pitcher arguably plays the most important role on a team. That Christian was apparently born so good at it suggests professional experience in a past life. I remind readers of the mention of “shaking off the sign” in a comment above, an action performed only by pitchers.

    It also struck Mike as anomalous that a former New York Yankee would happily wear a Dodgers uniform, as the Dodgers and Yankees were both based in New York City and therefore locked in bitter rivalry in Gehrig’s time. In sports, loyalties are intense, especially among players, whose lives are about their sport. Mike does have an alternate theory: that Christian was a pitcher for the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1938, the year that Babe Ruth was coaching for the Dodgers, and they had their run-in there. I would say it is worth looking up, but it would be hard to verify based on the information in the book since it is so scanty, and I don’t think Cathy would be willing to entertain it, now that she is declaring publicly that she was Lou Gehrig’s mother, so anyone investigating this will get no help from her.

    Related: In the book, Cathy states that Christian’s batting form is similar to Gehrig’s, but she is not an objective judge. This assertion needs to be tested with one or more unbiased judges with baseball expertise who are blinded through being unaware of the hypothesis and given videos of several 20s batters so as to choose whose form Christian’s most resembles. Double-blind would be even better.

    6) Possible dis-identifying statement

    In looking in the book for statements by Christian witnessed by people other than Cathy or Charlotte, I found the incident in which Christian said to Tommy Lasorda, “You used to play for the Yankees, didn’t you?” and Lasorda replied, “I was with the organization for one year.”

    A research check shows that Lasorda was indeed with the organization in that the Yankees owned his rights. However, he was playing for their farm team:

    He pitched for the Dodgers for two seasons, then for the Kansas City Athletics for one season after the Athletics bought him from the Dodgers. Kansas City traded Lasorda to the New York Yankees in 1956. He appeared in 22 games for the Triple-A Denver Bears in 1956–1957, and then was sold back to the Dodgers in 1957. [https://www.revolvy.com/topic/Tommy Lasorda&item_type=topic ]​

    Now Lasorda might have interpreted Christian’s question as meaning that he played for the Yankees indirectly, which he had. However, notice should be taken of the era in which he played: some 20 years after Lou Gehrig’s death. Thus this bit of knowledge of Christian’s cannot possibly be from the life of Lou Gehrig. It suggests either that Christian was a player who lived longer (such as a pitcher for the 1938 Dodgers), another past life in between, or cryptomnesia, perhaps from that TV documentary he watched. At any rate, it is not evidence for the identification and is possibly even evidence against it. The fact that Lasorda was a pitcher at the time could have been the cause of Christian’s interest in his career.

    ...part 3...
     
  7. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    KarenF's commentary on the Christian Haupt case, Part 3:

    7) Possible cryptomnesia in Cathy’s regressions

    To reiterate what Cathy wrote in the 2014 article: “I took to the internet to soak up as much information as I could on baseball in the 1920’s and 30’s. I purchased books on Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig.” As she tells it, this was around the time of Christian’s first statements and thus well in advance of her regressions.

    Mike and I had a lengthy Skype conversation on the case, and when we came to the regressions, I shared some of Cathy’s statements with him. Unbeknownst to me at first, as I was doing so, he was busy Googling, as is his wont. He was able to find, within seconds, references on sites posted or works written prior to 2013 (the year of Cathy’s first regression) to three out of four items I shared, including two that Cathy writes in the book that she verified through obscure sources:

    a) The name of Lou’s sister who died very young, i.e. Sophie:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=7...#v=onepage&q=lou Gehrig sister sophie&f=false (Eig, J. (2005). Luckiest Man: The Life and Death of Lou Gehrig. NYC: Simon & Schuster.) Also: https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=90856644

    b) The existence of another son who did not live long enough to be named, born after Sophie’s death:

    Eig (2005), p. 10. (Mike found it on Google Books; I found it on amazon.)

    c) Facts about Christina’s later life, verified by Reverend Kenneth Steigler: she owned a parrot and a dachshund named Monkey, left jewellery and a watch to an unrelated family who had the things hidden in a trunk in their basement: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/sports/baseball/a-treasure-trove-of-lou-gehrig-memorabilia.html

    d) Gehrig’s fatal prognosis being withheld from him, with his wife’s collusion but not his parents’, verified by a letter found in the National Baseball Hall of Fame Library: At first this struck both Mike and me as implausible, accustomed as we are to current medical ethics. A source on the Internet set us straight. The diagnosis was not concealed, as Gehrig was sent a letter. In fact, the fact he had ALS was announced publicly by the Yankee organization. The prognosis, however, was indeed concealed from him (emphasis added):

    Gehrig himself was even misled by his physicians about the mortal nature of his disease, despite the fact that he eagerly sought the truth. “I feel you can appreciate how I despise the dark,” he wrote to Dr. O’Leary, “but also despise equally as much false illusions.” Yet O’Leary, with Eleanor Gehrig’s assent, never told his patient he was dying. Physicians in his father’s era, Dr. Habein reminded me, routinely shaded the truth, figuring it would preserve their patients’ hope. This type of paternalism is much less common today. http://dartmed.dartmouth.edu/spring08/html/point_of_view.php

    The one regression statement I mentioned to Mike that he didn’t find on Google was that there was a picture of Gehrig as a child with his sister Sophie, but Mike didn’t do a thorough search. It's worth noting that, since another picture of Gehrig as a child is easily found, Cathy would have known that the family had access to a camera, and the two children who lived longest together would be a natural and likely subject for a photo.

    For a proper investigation of the possible role of cryptomnesia in Cathy's regressions, an internet search and a perusal of the Gehrig biographies extant prior to 2013 needs to be done for every single one of Cathy’s verifiable statements in regression. Again, Mike and I did not go through it carefully, and we used the book, not the regression recordings, but were still easily able to find information online that Cathy writes that she verified using obscure sources. The information that was supposedly only available from these, she actually could easily have found online prior to the regressions.

    Incidental: Cathy describes visiting houses that Christina Gehrig lived in and that she recalled in regression; but while she says she felt a sense of déjà vu, she didn’t seem to show any sign of knowing her way around them. Of course such knowledge is not always present in reincarnation cases, but often it is, and it would strengthen her case.

    ...part 4...
     
  8. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    KarenF's commentary on the Christian Haupt case, Part 4:

    8) Cathy’s desire for fame as possible motive

    So if Cathy is either self-deceiving, knowingly defrauding, or some combination—what could be her motive?

    Desire for fame springs instantly to mind. (Financial gain does, too, but seems to be less of a factor for her.) Cathy’s inclination to seek the spotlight for her son is evident in events that occurred even before past-life memory came into it, such as her posting on YouTube the videos of Christian demonstrating his precocious baseball skills, her happy acceptance on behalf of him of his cameo role in the Adam Sandler movie, her determined effort, ultimately successful, to have him perform the opening pitch at a major league game, and her successful attraction of media attention. Now any proud mother with determination and hopes for a pro baseball career for her prodigiously-talented son might do these things. However, there are other indications that she would like to be in the limelight herself at least as much as Christian is, even though his story—extraordinary even if he was a less iconic baseball player—is her pathway to it.

    As of this writing she has created no Christian Haupt website, for instance; www.christianhaupt.com reroutes to her own website. The book trailer features her at least as much as him. The book itself is billed as being his story, via both title and the cover image; but I was struck by how once the regression portion starts—56% of the way through the Kindle edition—Christian more or less disappears. (Again, compare to Soul Survivor, which is about James throughout.)

    In case it seems I speak from bias here, I am not the only one who has noticed this. I recommend looking at the critical comments on the book's amazon page and also general comments on mainstream media articles and videos about the book.

    As another measure of the degree of Cathy’s desire for fame, we perhaps should look at whether she is considering the effect of her fame-seeking activities on her child and his future. I have to say, I read this passage in he book with horror (emphasis added):

    When I heard Christian come through the front door sobbing, I rushed out of my home office to see if he was injured. I found him collapsed on the floor with his head in his hands and his back up against the closed door. When I asked him what had happened, he gasped for breath and said through his tears, “Nobody believes I was Lou Gehrig.”

    My heart sank when I realized that Christian had shared his very intimate secret with his playmates, some of whom were five or six years older than him. I never wanted him to be ashamed of talking about his past-life memories, however I probably would have warned him that other people might not understand—if I had ever imagined him making a public declaration that he was Lou Gehrig.​

    But why would he not when she already had? According to her, this happened in the fall of 2014. She had already written about his “very intimate secret” for a local paper in March of 2014, in the article referenced above (http://citizensjournal.us/our-local...-league-and-loving-americas-favorite-pastime/ ). But here she was, in a book that she’s aiming to make a bestseller (and already has on amazon), ascribing the responsibility to him!

    Further, to me as a mother, the child’s tearful anguish due to his FPL claim being disbelieved—rightly or wrongly—seems like a very clear signal to his mother that she should back off on publicizing said claim until her son is mature enough to anticipate the possible impact on him and his life, and thus able to give informed consent. To show due consideration as a parent, she should wait ten or fifteen years and then ask adult Christian whether he’d like to have a book written and a movie made about his memories—and completely respect his choice whatever she herself would choose. But that is not what she is doing.

    My feeling is that Christian will succeed in baseball, since he has both extreme talent and extreme dedication, and baseball teams won’t care about past lives, just how well he can play. But I fear his words, “No one believes I was Lou Gehrig” have a good chance of proving prophetic, and he might be faced with the choice of either disavowing the claim of which he himself—rightly or wrongly—has been convinced, or having his sanity and/or credibility impugned for the rest of his life, through no agency of his own.

    Nowhere in the book does Cathy show herself to be sensitive to these possible consequences of her actions. Immediately following the above quote she writes, “As heartbreaking as it was to see my son completely disillusioned, this incident served its purpose by propelling Christian out of the past and into the present. He was finally ready to be Christian Haupt.” She does not acknowledge that robust sales of the book and the release of the movie will ensure that the past he is supposedly leaving behind will follow him wherever he goes. This is the nature of fame; as long as a person has it, he will be seen by everyone he meets, other than those who are already close, as he has presented himself—or been presented—not necessarily as he would want to be seen. That tension between true self and public image has broken many people emotionally. And fame as an FPL claimant is a fate Christian didn’t even get to choose.

    Nowhere in the book does Cathy discuss how his future might be affected, or ponder the parental ethics of what she is doing. Her own desire for fame eclipses all that. It is very strong, and so to me seems a likely motive for deception or self-deception.


    By the time I first drafted this commentary (early March 2017) I knew the book was being published in multiple countries simultaneously, and a movie deal had been signed. If Cathy’s plans pan out, Christian will become the poster boy for reincarnation and FPLs. Accordingly, the reincarnation naysayers will be particularly eager to rip the case apart, and will look for every weakness. Unfortunately, the weaknesses are there, as I and other commenters on this thread have found. There might even be more that none of us have found.

    The most unfortunate thing is that the detractors will not say what I do, that it is a weak reincarnation case being fraudulently enhanced. (Again, the evidence is good that he was a pro baseball player in the 20s in a previous incarnation, and so I think he was.)

    They will say instead that it is entirely fraudulent, and therefore proves all reincarnation cases, and reincarnation generally, to be fraudulent.

    --
     
  9. KenJ

    KenJ Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2014
    Messages:
    373
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    SW Ohio, USA
    The two of you, Karen and Guy, have done some exceptional work in your examination of this book and its shortcomings. It points to the difficulties in presenting anything publicly where there is a chance of mis-remembered history can come back to discredit you later. I have no idea if Christian was Lou, I do not know Cathy's mindset, nor do I know how to present anything that can be proven about reincarnation. As noted, the Leininger's book was far more convincing because of Bruce's need to debunk it himself. The three things in Leininger book that lent credibility in my opinion was young James correctly correcting his mother about drop-tank rather than bomb, his knowing that corsair aircraft were hard on tires, and recognizing who an old shipmate of James II by his voice. Those same kinds of things were in Cathy's book where Christian commented about his dislike of Babe, knowing his coach, and a few other things.

    I guess I'm trying to say that it is hard to not make mistakes; in 1997 I wrote a letter to my sister about my impending divorce where I wrote of a lot of my history that I wanted to share with her, over the years I've added to it so that it is now some thirty pages long, a biography of sort for my children. I was reading through it about a month ago and read where I wrote about a 1953 Buick that I once had - the problem is I've never owned a 1953 Buick, it was a 1954 Buick. If I could write something so incorrect in my own notes, I could not imagine myself making such an error, it is obvious to me that others are apt to do it also.
     
  10. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    If it were only that sort of error, I'd have no trouble with the case. Reincarnation researchers, starting with Stevenson, have never expected either children's or adults' PL memories to be perfect. In fact a set of stated memories without errors raises suspicions. They are fully aware that memory is not perfect, as you say, even within the same life.

    What makes a strong case is too many verified statements and/or recognitions (of people, places, etc.) for coincidence to be statistically plausible, no plausible way for the person to have known this information any other way, and other signs, either behavioural or physical or both. Consistency over time in the story goes without saying. James Leininger is a good example of a strong child case, for the reasons you give plus many, many more, including that he named his PL self, his ship and some of his comrades. Here is another example of a strong case: https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/nazih-al-danaf .

    GuySittingintheStands, you wrote:

    I, like many visitors to this forum, have been trying to come to some understanding of reincarnation, can it be put on a firmer footing and if so, be taken a little more seriously than it currently is. You have to admit it is a very strange field to be working in and the few people who are taking the subject seriously enough to put their reputations on the line need to be reassured that there could be some truth to the whole thing, however strange. But what is lacking are enough verified and verifiable stories or case studies to think about or bring up in polite company.
    Oh, there are plenty... hundreds of them. The DOPS database has 1,700 solved cases. They are just not easily accessible. My favourite recommendation to people who have doubts about reincarnation is to read a 1997 work by Ian Stevenson entitled Reincarnation and Biology: A Contribution to the Etiology of Birthmarks and Birth Defects. By the time you get through all two volumes, 2,200 pages, 225 cases and umpteen photos showing incredible visible reincarnation evidence, you'll be convinced. But it's not an easy book to get hold of.

    I will recommend this: visit here -- https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/possession-past-lives -- and read both the case studies and articles about reincarnation. If a multiplicity of evidence helps convince you, read them all. They are all fully-sourced so you can chase down the original books and papers easily if you want to dig deeper.
     
  11. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Karen and Ken -- Thanks for the kind words. This is an interesting project so I don't mind spending the extra time trying to get to the bottom of it. I was doing separate research on a particular 1930s Hollywood B-movie actress, using all the tools of the internet and my subscriptions to ancestry . com and newspapers . com, anyway, so have become quite familiar with what type of information is available online nowadays. The quality and quantity of information available on the internet, not to mention the access to reference books, biographies, other obscure material, etc through amazon has truly transformed the research process for everyone, including, I imagine, for any would-be writer or parent with publishing aspirations.

    Karen -- Just a quick note on some of your comments. For the most part they are brilliant. I hadn't given Christian's purported statement to Tommy Lasorda ("You used to play for the Yankees." in 6) Possible dis-identifying statement) much thought, but you may have something. But it may also just as well turn out to be a Red Herring, as Christian could have heard this fact about Tommy Lasorda's life from someone who knew Christian's Lou Gehrig or Yankee fascination (or narrative) and/ or Christian's desire to become a major league pitcher. Let's start with the worst case scenario first:

    If we take Cathy's narrative at face value, Christian's "You [Tommy LaSorda] used to play for the Yankees." destroys either Cathy's credibility ["Even I didn't know this"] or young Christian's credibility and/or his by now extensive Lou Gehrig narrative, since Tommy LaSorda didn't play for the Yankee organization (in one of their farm clubs and not even the Yankees MLB team by the way] until 1956 -- 15 years after Lou Gehrig's death. The fact that this information was easily available on-line doesn't help Cathy's case at all. Since this incident appeared in her March 23, 2014 "Luckiest Boy" story about Christian's odd behavior and statements in her online local journal article, we have to give to it extra credibility weight. This was not just some throw-away comment made to enhance or help carry the narrative in her book. But what to make of it? Possibly Cathy found out this little tidbit about Tommy Lasorda's bio on the plane ride over to the Dodger training facility in Arizona, and just forgot about it. I can imagine her mindlessly reading the wikipedia write-up aloud to Christian (since 5 year old Christian really couldn't read articles on the internet) on the flight from LA to Phoenix. Of course, she wouldn't have remembered what with all the excitement of going to Dodger spring training and all. Of course, if some version of this scenario really did happen, you can question Cathy's version of any and every odd statement that Christian makes in her book. Faulty memory may get her out of this jam, but it really kills taking her other claims of Christian's statements at face value. Could Christian (as Christian) have just made a random comment, which turned out to be sort of true, when he looked up at Uncle Tommy, an authoritative figure in a baseball uniform? It's possible. It kind of makes you wonder then how many of Christian's other random comments that didn't happen to be true were left on the editing room floor, however.

    On the other other, and to be fair to Cathy and Christian, Christian may have heard that Tommy Lasorda played in the Yankee organization for one year from a third party outside Cathy's earshot. This someone could have been the "ex-major league baseball player" friend Cathy refers to in her March 23, 2014 on-line article (whom I now strongly suspect is Rich Rodriguez, former MLB left-hand pitcher and founder of Elite Nine, a private little league and youth baseball camp and clinic mentoring group) or it could have been someone from the Dodger organization itself.

    OK. There's that. But I wanted to take issue with we'll call him Mike's opinion that Christian couldn't possibly have a love for the Dodgers given the historical cross-town rivalry between the Brooklyn Dodgers and the New York Yankees. For starters that rivalry didn't start until the 1941 World Series, 4 months after Lou's death. Not to mention the fact that the Brooklyn Dodgers were in the National League and New York Yankees were in the American League, ie., they would have never met on the playing field except in a World Series and that first meeting was as mentioned in early October, 1941 (google search New York Yankees Brooklyn Dodgers rivalry). Maybe there was an intra-city rivalry between Dodger and Yankee fans, much like there is today between Met and Yankee fans, but only that far, it doesn't extend to players. If you listen to or read Lou's "Luckiest Man" speech (July 4, 1939), he mentions the rivalry with the New York Giants, as they had faced each other several times in World Series play during Lou's career (google search New York Giants New York Yankees rivalry). Secondly, Mike is of the opinion that Christian's talent and/or desire to become a major league pitcher casts doubt on Christian's Lou Gehrig narrative. As we all know, Lou Gehrig pitched for one season for Columbia University, but played professionally as a first baseman, by many accounts, the greatest first baseman who ever played the game. But Lou was not always such a hot-shot fielder. As a matter of fact when he first came up to the Yankees from Hartford, he was lousy, even by his own account. Game by game, through hard work and determination, he improved to the point where the Yankees could rely on him for the rest of Lou's rookie year (1925). By 1927 he was making fewer errors at first base for the entire season than he had been making in his first week at first base in 1925. But what about pitching? Because of his overpowering strength, Lou could throw heat. The problem was control. He had none. So it was decided early on to move him over to first, which turned out to be a very wise decision, because it meant that the Yankees could eventually use Lou's amazing power hitting ability every day in every game. Just as an aside, when Lou had X-rays done at the Mayo Clinic in 1939 because of his illness (ALS), they found 17 separate fractures in his large knarled hands and fingers, that had "healed" over time (Jonathan Eig, "Luckiest Man", 2005). This while setting batting records that stood for decades until the PED generation of ballplayers of the 1990s. But I digress. Maybe Christian / Lou always wanted to pitch. Maybe Lou Gehrig always thought he could pitch, given enough practice and hard work. We just don't know, so it would be a little speculative to suggest that since Christian wants to be a pitcher this somehow disqualifies his Lou Gehrig narrative. I don't buy it.

    Much more to add, but I'll let it rest for now. Anyway, thanks for adding your comments Karen. My comments were beginning to look like a monologue, instead of a discussion,and it was getting a little embarrassing.

    Ken -- I agree with Karen, even based on my limited reading. But more on this later.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018 at 12:29 PM
    KarenF likes this.
  12. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thank you for your kind words, GuySittingintheStands. You've dug into the baseball history more than I did, and in the 20s and 30s Mike lived in Germany, so you may well be right about Gehrig having no rivalrous sentiments about the Dodgers. Re Christian's wanting to be a pitcher, to me it's not so much that he wants to be one as that he seems to already be one, having acquired the skill in a previous life. Still, this is a fuzzy rather than a cut and dried point, so I could be wrong. I think my analysis of the case is strong even if I were to leave out either of these points, however.

    You are very good at researching and well-equipped for it; is it something you do in your professional life?
     
  13. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    For me the first uneasy feelings about the veracity of Cathy Byrd's story, in whole or in part, began when I started watching youtube interviews of her promoting her book. In the opening pages of her book Cathy has 2 year old Christian -- still in diapers -- being fascinated by watching his 5 year old sister Charlotte playing T-ball in some sort of organized play so common in today's modern American suburbia. Christian's fascination turned into an obsession with baseball, which, strange turn of event after another, gave us the Christian of today. Later on in the book we read that it was on these same ball fields that a much younger Cathy Byrd played (presumably organized) softball as a girl growing up in the Thousand Oaks, California area in the 1970s. But Cathy changes the beginning of Christian's baseball obsession oh so subtlely. On at least one post-release book interview video, available on youtube, she says that Christian became obsessed after watching some of the bigger neighborhood kids playing baseball in the street near their home. It's a small change, but it acquits her of the criticism of being somewhat familiar with children's baseball play before Christian become obsessed with the sport, her claims to the contrary.

    Then there's the change in the "shaking off the sign" story I referred to in an earlier post that left me much less credulous than I had been back in August 2017 when I posted my first comments to this thread. In Cathy Byrd's March 23, 2014 on-line article, she says that she learned what "shaking off the sign" meant only after an "ex-major league baseball player" friend told her that Christian's odd head shaking was the common way for baseball pitchers to ask for another type of pitch from their catchers in the constant communication between catcher and pitcher about what type of pitch to throw to any given batter in any given situation. Cathy changes this story, however, in her book, where she has this information given to her by a woman apparently on a private group tour of Dodger Stadium early on in the story. Again, I'm guessing that she changes the story in order to get away from the charge that she, Cathy, is helping drive or at least help nurture young Christian's budding baseball career (as any parent would given the child's clear obsession).

    I now strongly suspect, but can't prove, that Cathy's "ex-major league baseball player" friend is Rich Rodriguez, a retired MLB left-handed pitcher, who back in 2012 founded "Elite Nine" a group of ex-professional baseball players dedicated to mentoring young little league and pony league age players in specialty baseball camps and clinics typically hosted in the northern and eastern LA suburbs, including Thousand Oaks, but willing to put on camps anywhere in the USA (see wikipedia write-up on Rich Rodriguez Elite Nine). Bolstering my suspicions is the following article I found on-line where we learn that the Rodriguez's lived in Newbury Park (and may still live there) during roughly the same time period as Christian's initial baseball fascination. Newbury Park is the community immediately adjacent to and west of Thousand Oaks, California in Ventura County. Added to that we learn that Rich's lovely wife Malia earned her MBA at LA's Pepperdine University -- the same university that Cathy Byrd earned her MBA.

    http://archive.vcstar.com/business/...t-another-career-ep-374150581-352631931.html/

    If my speculations are correct, we can see where Christian's early love of pitching came from, Cathy Byrd's evasiveness notwithstanding.

    Also, Karen, to your point about Christian's hitting mechanics, none other than Tommy Lasorda was impressed enough with Christian's swing, to have invited him out to Dodger spring training so they could take some file videos for future reference, at least according to what is stated in Cathy's book.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018 at 7:29 AM
  14. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re Christian's comment about Tommy Lasorda playing for the Yankee, your alternative explanation as added to that previous comment, is reasonable, but still eliminates the incident as reincarnation evidence.

    Re this:

    In Cathy Byrd's March 23, 2014 on-line article, she says that she learned what "shaking off the sign" meant only after an "ex-major league baseball player" friend told her that Christian's odd head shaking was the common way for baseball pitchers to ask for another type of pitch from their catchers in the constant communication between catcher and pitcher about what type of pitch to throw to any given batter in any given situation. Cathy changes this story, however, in her book, where she has this information given to her by a woman apparently on a private group tour of Dodger Stadium early on in the story. Again, I'm guessing that she changes the story in order to get away from the charge that she, Cathy, is helping drive or at least help nurture young Christian's budding baseball career (as any parent would given the child's clear obsession).
    More likely the charge she is trying to get away from, I think, is that she had a pre-existing interest in baseball which could have encouraged Christian's interest, rather than it being entirely past-life based. No one would fault her for nurturing his future baseball career, but her pre-existing interest weakens the case.

    Do you just do research as a hobby?
     
  15. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Exactly right, Karen, about Cathy Byrd's possible prior interest in baseball, I just didn't want to be the one to say it. But hypothetically she could have been a major league baseball player herself without damaging the truth claim regarding Christian's odd statements about having been a "tall baseball player" etc., it just looks bad as far as her motivation is concerned. Regarding Christian's random comment about Tommy Lasorda's one year stint in the Yankee organization, I think we have to put it aside or dismiss it altogether as something he may have heard or overheard, since we can't rule out his acquiring that bit of information through normal channels.

    Yes, this is just a hobby for me.. I have an undergraduate degree in Chemistry and worked many years in the field before taking early retirement not too long ago. I started off with genealogical research on my own family via ancestry . com and just kept going from there.

    Also, as far as The Boy Who Knew Too Much and Christian's story is concerned, even now, even knowing that we have to dismiss her 3 past life regression sessions with Jeroen as cryptomnesia (forgotten memory parading as new memory) at best or at worst . . . deliberate deception . . . even now, I am inclined to believe the basic core of her story as a type of Hollywoodized "Based on a True Story" version of the truth, at least for now. I'm still researching this thing as I'm sure you and others are as well.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018 at 7:30 AM
  16. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Just came across this bit of background material that might help explain a lot of Cathy's actions viz a viz her son.

    Cathy Byrd graduated from UCLA in 1989 with a BA in Communication Studies. Her degree in Communication Studies entailed more than passing familiarity with Mass Media. Cathy received an MBA from nearby Pepperdine University in the early 1990s. Because she spent at least 10 years in sports marketing while learning Southern California real estate practices from her mother, Judy, making media and business contacts must have become second nature for her.

    In case you haven't been following the Southern California news blogs, and for what it's worth, Cathy, Charlotte, and Christian moved to Santa Barbara in August 2017 without Michael. In an article in the online Santa Barbara newspaper Cathy says she moved to Santa Barbara so that her daughter could attend a local private art school. Christian also goes to a private school in Santa Barbara. For those of you who have sent your kids to private schools you know what this means, just multiply whatever you think it means by 2. Cathy and kids live in the same community that Jack Canfield lives in (author of the inspirational Chicken Soup for the Soul series of books).

    Sad to report that Cathy has separated from her husband Michael as of summer 2017, Cathy citing, among other things, Michael's failure to grasp "the mystique of baseball".
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018 at 11:23 AM
  17. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    @Guy, the point about the Lasorda comment is that it cannot have come from memory of a life as Lou Gehrig, because he was long dead by the time Lasorda was in the Yankees organization. This is why I wrote that it is not identifying and perhaps is even dis-identifying, if Christian had no way of knowing it by normal means--because if it's PL memory, he had to have been someone else (or learned it in a subsequent life).

    I'm not sure what in the info above explains Cathy's actions vis-a-vis her son, other than skill and interest in marketing -- care to elaborate?

    Last I checked, "failure to grasp the mystique of baseball" is not grounds for divorce. It sounds like perhaps he wasn't onboard with her project as much as she wanted him to be. I got the impression from the book that he wasn't onboard at all, as I think I said earlier.
     
  18. GuySittingintheStands

    GuySittingintheStands New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    Karen -- Re Christian's Tommy Lasorda comment. You are correct. It could not have come from a memory of a life as Lou Gehrig. But because Christian could have gained this bit of information through normal channels (if the incident indeed happened at all, which, for now we have to assume it did), ie, a third party (not Cathy) may have told him, or Cathy may even have told him, and then forgotten that she did later on, you cannot use this incident to support a PL memory of somebody else, say a professional baseball player of the 1950s. Even though when I first read your suggestion I thought it could be used to debunk Christian's Lou Gehrig narrative, on further reflection, I think the best explanation is that he heard or overheard it through normal means (not via any PL or paranormal means).

    With the added background info on Cathy, I wanted to make the point, that to her, given her background, training, experience, it was perfectly natural for her to take her son's odd statements and make a media project out of it, just as I have been trying to make a science project out of it (albeit a science project of the non-material world, which is a little odd to begin with) given my background, training, experience, and just as Carol or any PL regresssion therapist would try to make a PLR project out of it given their backgrounds, experiences etc. Many people have tried to hold Cathy Byrd's background as a marketer against her, for approaching this story the way she has approached it, but I don't. I was saddened of course, just as I'm sure anybody on this forum would be, to hear that her project has affected her marriage, apparently in a very negative way, but there may have been other issues going on between the two in addition to Cathy's Quest turned Mission to get this version of reality out to the world, we can't know for sure. The weird thing is, because I also love researching things, especially when I know I'm right and the world is wrong, I probably would have been just as zealous as she was, short of letting it affect my marriage (please remind me of what I just said, however, should I go overboard with this thing!)

    Up next, Christina and Henry Gehrig's early relationship, Cathy's regressed version vs. what we know or are pretty sure we know about their premarital lives.
     
  19. KarenF

    KarenF Senior Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    You're going into this in deeper depth than I have or will, I have to say. I commend you for it. And of course I will keep reading.

    Re the marriage: fact is, you can never know exactly what's going on in someone else's relationship. Even couples you know really closely can have things happening that you don't know about. So I don't think I even want to speculate that her project damaged the relationship, though it is tempting. It is a big change in their lives and changes can weaken relationships.

    What we cannot doubt is the effect it will have on her son. Fact is, you cannot even justly call it her project, because it concerns his possible past life and affects his current life. To put it another way: Christian is a human being, not a project. It's all about who he is, and he should own who he is, not his mother. I wouldn't be surprised if, once he hits adolescence or adulthood, he bucks... decides he just wants to play ball and not be the poster boy for reincarnation. Kids have a way of throwing parents' plans to the wind to follow their own. But he will always be followed around by the claim that he was Lou Gehrig. And if he is interested in knowing exactly who he was in his baseball PL, it will be difficult, especially if he has lost his memories as kids tend to do around 5-8 years old. These might be causes of pain and/or resentment in him, at the conscious level or at the subconscious. If he feels he has been exploited, or as if his mother tried to overshadow him in his own story, he'll have a point. @Guy, I would hope that, if you were in her place, you'd have enough parenting instincts to let your child have his choice over whether he became a famous-past-life claimant or not.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018 at 9:56 PM

Share This Page