>>Somebody
>>"'Maybe' she doesn't believe all that she says"
'Maybe' means you ain't sure, and can't use that charge on her till you can prove it. <<
Not quite. If Baxter's being mistaken or her being a liar are both consistent with what I know, then I must consider those to be equally valid hypotheses. Additional study of her statements and actions would support to one or the other.
But, while both of those options are plausible, her actually having visited heaven and hell in the matter she describes is not. Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable, especially without the ability to take notes, and the massive details she provides are not how people remember - nor are the people she claims to have met in Hell and Heaven acting as how real people would (who talks like that?). And that aside, there is no evidence for any sort of paranormal activity as she claims to have experienced.
>>"Maybe she is motivated by... a fear of admitting to having been wrong"
Are you beginning to believe her? <<
No, I am not.
>>Or is everything she wrote wrong? Then what is she afraid of? <<
It goes like this:
You say something. You or somebody else shows that what you said implies or suggests something else that you don't really agree with. You have two options: either admit that you were wrong, or add the new thing to your structure. Admitting that you were wrong is painful and shameful. It hurts. So you incorporate idea after idea, and end up with some intricate system that you would never have come up with in the first place.
This is how legends can grow in the telling, without any overt lie. Some initial idea spawns an impossible worldview.
>>But confused dreams, NO! She saw very vivid, heard very clear, she could feel, taste and smell. It continued for forty consecutive nights with different details every night. That's too much for a confusing dream. <<
None of those things are impossible for hallucinations or vivid dream. And, again, we only have her unsupported word on all of this happening. That is worthless on its own.
Also, her story is very similar to the concept of Hell that developed in medieval Europe and has shown up in different forms in so many different forms of fiction over the centuries. It is difficult to accept that something with so many common elements is not simply another variant of the same revenge-based fantasy.
>>someone said she ought to have bring along her camera one of those nights. That is not possible cos she went in spirit together with Jesus Christ.<<
Then let her prove that there is such a thing as having "went in spirit" - or any form of ESP, astral projection, remote viewing, spirit travel, or whatever you want to call it.
As always with claims like this, I refer you to James Randi: http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html. Let her satisfy Randi of the truth even part of her story, and we may be certain that it bears further consideration.
