I do not like arguments just for the heck of it.I like it when people have a cogent thought process to back up their arguments .Backed up with data ,empirical ,illustrations and the like. These have to be the fundamentals of any discussion. For of course arguments build discussions .No discussion can be fruitful unless based on something that can be cross verified. I do not like it when people argue just because something does not suit their sensibilities .
Arguments based on your whims & fancies without any convincing data is just a sheer waste,as is your opinion! For if all the discussions in the world happened this way then nothing new would ever have happened. Things which would essentially have been bizarre yet new would never have happened.Things that might be discomforting to your essentially scientific sensibilities but things that are nevertheless true .For when Galileo said that the sun was at the centre of the solar system and that the planets went around the sun wasn’t he persecuted for questioning the church & dogma! What he said was unconventional , inconvenient for the church and definitely qualified to be treated as heresy. That it is accepted & verifiable now is a different story altogether!
The nay sayers are welcome, however they should come with persuasive , well grounded ,conclusive arguments. Dismissing something that makes you uncomfortable or something coz you don’t want to believe it ,is not reason good enough .Of course something like Past life Regression would always be treated with certain amount of skepticism .I am not a believer either .However after reading the works & case studies of experts in the given field I would not be able to dismiss it as an outright sham . My submission being that argue with reason , rational & evidence lest you be called frivolous