BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:58 PM

Oh, by the way... how DID they manage to get such a clever deus into that machina?

They consulted his ex.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 04:12 PM

"...creativity, affinity, mental connectedness, and all the other anomalies of mental life ..."

Anomalies?! I wouldn't call creativity or affinity anomalies ... I'm not sure what "mental connectedness is". And why is "neurobiology" less marvellous than something supernatural (and quite possibly fictitious)?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 03:09 PM

It is my characterization of the sobersides fixation on bounding perception by the edges of matter, energy and spacetime. Your insistence that imagination, creativity, affinity, mental connectedness, and all the other anomalies of mental life, are somehow explicable by neurobiology as their origin point, their source. This is the most near-sighted approaches tot he question of thought itself I have seen.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 02:44 PM

Nobody has ever been able to produce evidence for the need of a Deity, let alone the existence of one, and while I am happy to admit that ""there are more things in Heaven and Earth......etc."", I cannot somehow view Gfs' ridiculous maunderings as evidence for anything other than an over gullible nature and a complete mis apprehension of what constitutes evidence.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 11:02 AM

"This obsessive-compulsive self-satisfied materialism is too silly to even argue with."

Oh indeed so! However, that form is not one I am familiar with. As described, it sounds very much like a 'straw man' construction designed to label us curious skeptics as hidebound, close-minded poltroons. ;>)

(Oh, by the way... how DID they manage to get such a clever deus into that machina?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 10:02 AM

Good question! I agree that it is very clear that loading up a body with alcohol leads to attenuation of rational abilities. So does, for example, starving, chronic pain, lack of certain vitamins, dehydration, and extreme loss of salts.

My opinion is that there is a gradient of ability to remain rational independently of body mechanics or loss thereof, and some are better at it than others. I think the appropriate answer to your question is "SOme of each and both, depending on the degree of interdependency and habituation involved."

If you inject one dose of of about 60% H2O plus 40% C2H5OH (plus traces of phenolic compounds) into your cellphone while listening to an interesting person tell a long story, the interesting story will get badly chopped up, unintelligible or even stop being heard altogether.   The question of where the dysfunction is located will certainly arise at once, no? ;>) But I appreciate this is a very over-simplified metaphor.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Jack Sprocket
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 06:00 AM

It completely ignores the important questions of who it is that is doing the knowing

Amos: when I drink a lot of a fairly simple mixture of about 60% H2O plus 40% C2H5OH (plus traces of phenolic compounds), is it my material body or my non- material spirit that starts malfunctioning? Why doesn't my spirit make correct decisions like whether it is sensible to apply a repeat 25cl dose of the mixture, or indeed should the dose increase to, say, 50cl?

Repeated observations over a long-term period of study suggest that it is the carbon- containing compound which affects the spirit. In concentrations down to 2% or so the tendency towards spiritual malfunction is observed, though the rate of deterioration decreases. Lower than this, the decision to apply a repeat dose is rarely observed.

The spirit is also discriminatory as to the precise nature of the carbon- containing compound. If the mixture contains C2H4OH the spirit declines a repeat dose at any concentration, while using C6H12O6 (with a small addition of C6H8O7) a small number of repeat doses of about 200ml may be requested, but no spiritual deterioration is observed.

My tentative conclusion is that, if we refer to whoever it is that is doing the knowing as "the spirit", the spirit is alcohol- soluble.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 04:16 AM

Amos, I have little doubt that there are things out there that I can't perceive as the result of the limitations of my senses. What we are arguing about is whether or not some of those things are sentient or directed, or whether or not it is possible for a person to influence the material world via the 'unseen' world. Apart from quoting from the 'works' of various pseudo-scientists (cranks, charlatans and madmen) you have written nothing which would persuade me to move away from a materialist position (funnily enough I find that I can live with your scorn!).

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 12:34 AM

A perfect metaphor for arguing with materialism explains why I get exasperated sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Dec 12 - 12:31 AM

It depends, as I said earlier, on who is doing the seeing and how much bandwidth they are willing to see on. None is so blind, etc. If you think that something has to be between 390 to 750 nm in order to be real you are dancing with fools for breakfast.

Perception, furthermore, goes into much wider pastures than the visible. This obsessive-compulsive self-satisfied materialism is too silly to even argue with.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 12 - 07:32 PM

perhaps "^META Shimrod Profundity "

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Dec 12 - 06:41 PM

Thanks, Bill. Profundity is my middle name! Shimrod Profundity ... and you can't see the third name - although, no doubt, GfS believes in it!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 12 - 11:13 AM

Shimrod... I gotta say, that has to go into my book of "Profound Truths That Get Little Notice"

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Dec 12 - 04:01 AM

" ... I was speaking of those 'on here'..in Mudcat, who were the chronic bitchers when it comes to ANYTHING unseen or even 'quasi-spiritual'."

You know, GfS, the trouble with the "unseen" is that you can't see it!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 06:40 PM

Amos, the title of this thread is ""Afterlife new exciting proof?"", and after a month and a half and 340 posts, we have yet to see anything which comes even close to a logical support of that, let alone any proof.

GfS has signally failed to produce anything other than a mishmash of anecdote and psychedelic dreams.

Hence the thread has failed in its purpose and so has GfS.

We didn't force him to claim an impossible proof, he did that himself, so why would we be expected to dig him out when the crap he's posted is up to his bottom lip.

Let him drown himself!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 04:33 PM

Well now you can recognise a stupid post perhaps you might proof read your own prior to posting?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 04:26 PM

...and basically, just give up living and experiencing life to the fullest, and not appreciating the gifts, and using them disrespectfully!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 02:09 PM

There's a charming core of deep resignation and apathetic indifference fueling the hard materialist viewpoint. It completely ignores the important questions of who it is that is doing the knowing, looking at the hopelessly drab mental pictures, and operating the body. It opts instead to shrug sadly and assign it all to a complexity of complexities, multiplied to a paradoxical exponent of more complexity, thus guaranteeing hopelessness to understanding and a surrender to the Awful Power of Mechanism. Pfui, sez I.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 11:21 AM

Well THAT was a stupid post.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 28 Dec 12 - 06:23 AM

Prof. Muttely just did a shit on the carpet and invited me to spirit that bugger. (Didn't use spirits, it might bleach things, stuck to Dettol and carpet cleaner.)

The good professor does have a point though. You can shit all day and use spirits to make things tidy again. In the meantime, those of us rolling up our sleeves, holding our noses and dealing with the reality dismiss spirits and indeed spirituality as both have a habit of making thing worse, whether to your carpet or your mind.

Prof. Muttely in his reply to Goofus the other day put it quite succinctly;

Woof Woof Woof!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 12 - 10:14 PM

RIGHT!!!!

....but the spiritual one lasts longer....
..better deal with it....
...Snap now, and avoid the rush!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 27 Dec 12 - 09:20 PM

Personally I think those who are hell-bent on insisting there is NO spirituality are about as far in left field as those who claim just as fervently that it is ALL spirituality.

Both sets of phenomena exist, and they have different characteristics. Either set can be clearly understood on its own terms once those terms are identified and defined.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Dec 12 - 08:25 PM

""Don, I was speaking of those 'on here'..in Mudcat, who were the chronic bitchers when it comes to ANYTHING unseen or even 'quasi-spiritual'.""

Then perhaps it wasn't very clever to align it with another unrelated argument, which is what you chose to do.

Nobody forced you to drop yourself in the shite.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 12 - 03:15 PM

Don, I was speaking of those 'on here'..in Mudcat, who were the chronic bitchers when it comes to ANYTHING unseen or even 'quasi-spiritual'.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:31 PM

""Ever noticed that the same cast of characters who 'bad mouth' ANYTHING 'spiritual' or an 'afterlife'..are the same ones who argue in favor of the recognition of homosexual marriage ....AND then want some church to recognize it!!!!........and call OTHERS looney!""

Which of us have demanded that any church recognise it you Klutz?

Certainly not me, since I don't subscribe to the idiocy of organised God Bothering.

Have you ever heard of an institution called a Register Office?

They actually perform marriage ceremonies. And there are some churches which do not share your homophobic attitudes, and actually welcome Gay couples.

There might possibly be some merit in your views about the nature of homosexuality, if you were able to tell us when, precisely you rejected it and chose to be heterosexual.

Can't do that can you, because you simply were heterosexual by nature, in exactly the same way that Gays are homosexual by nature?

Until you can explain that scientifically, without your usual airy fairy nonsense, your opinion of the mechanism is unadulterated shite.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 26 Dec 12 - 04:15 PM

You are the one making his point.

Merry Christmas

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Dec 12 - 03:44 AM

Musket: "What do you think of that Prof. Muttely?
Woof Woof Woof!
Yeah, I agree, but that would be a bit drastic don't you think?
Woof Woof!
Ok, you may have a point."


Make up your mind. ..or make your point...or....make a point...OK?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 24 Dec 12 - 07:17 AM

Hang on Goofus, my clinical phycologist wishes to have a chat with you, professional to professional, as it were..

Woof Woof Woof Woof!




As you don't appear capable of serious debate, I thought I'd move it to your level.

"People who bad mouth ANYTHING spiritual or an afterlife are the same ones who argue in favour of the recognition of homosexual marriage."

Ha Ha Ha Ha!

What do you think of that Prof. Muttely?

Woof Woof Woof!

Yeah, I agree, but that would be a bit drastic don't you think?

Woof Woof!

Ok, you may have a point.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Dec 12 - 04:23 PM

Don(Wyziwyg)T: "Goofie, buzz off! Your lunacy is showing.

..and I can ALMOST suppose why....because you CANNOT prove your point..like the tooth fairy being any more real than genetic PROOF of homosexuality......so it's just time for you to post, "Buzz off."

Why don't you post a factual post once in a while....and probably a few others would also 'buzz off', as well, but as long as you are posting hogwash...well, somebody will call you on it!

Ever noticed that the same cast of characters who 'bad mouth' ANYTHING 'spiritual' or an 'afterlife'..are the same ones who argue in favor of the recognition of homosexual marriage ....AND then want some church to recognize it!!!!........and call OTHERS looney!

Just an observation.....you know, like scientists observing something, to catalog it......hmmm..how would you catalog this one???
(...Just a rhetorical question..you don't need to answer it...it will only make no more sense, than you already have!).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Dec 12 - 03:46 PM

Don,

Sure--influencing remote devices such as done by Ingo Swann in lab experiments in 1972. Consistently acheiving above chance results on remote viewing experiments as was done repeatedly in Hal Puthoff's experimental series for Stanford Research Institute in the late 70's. The case of the red tennie that was detected during one patient's OOB experience which nobody in the hospital knew about, which was parked out of sight on a ledge above her hospital room window, not visible from the window, or the street. These are just a few--I have provided a lot of links in other threads..

But the insistence on "scientific" corroboration as being material evidence is problematic since it like asking the fox to count the hens. I am sure this seems hard to understand but it is inherent in the business. Domination ny force is the earmartk of the material universe. It tends to nullify anything not willing to buy the package, such as live thought, awareness, live communication, creativity, and so on.

Given the very large number of people who have reported such experiences, and the very large number of people who have reported none, I don't see a strong argument for merit of the latter rather than the former. Furthermore you are facing a white-crow logic problem while hoping that all crows are always black.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Dec 12 - 03:10 PM

Goofie, buzz off! Your lunacy is showing.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Dec 12 - 03:08 PM

""Well, no, Don, unless you reject self-description as data.""

Well Amos, it may qualify as data (by a big stretch of the imagination), but it fails scientific standards for "evidence" on every level.

Somebody may report that he has seen a UFO and be absolutely convinced of it.

That would qualify as data for an archive of reported sightings, but there is no way it would be accepted as evidence of the existence of UFOs without further corroboration.

Can you suggest any way in which a reported out of body experience might be corroborated?

Don T.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 11:23 PM

Don(Wyziwyg)T: "...I have no problem with anybody believing in the Afterlife, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or little Green Men from Mars."

(or thinking homosexuality is genetic..but that's for the other thread...)

Don T: "I only object to them trying to tell me that their belief represents a scientific breakthrough."

No shit...tell that to the clowns who keep insisting that homosexuality is genetic..but that's for the other thread..

Did I say that, before..or does it just bear repeating, because morons won't believe it....No matter how factual it is??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 07:44 PM

Well, Amos, it's data all right. There's no denying it. But what it isn't is evidence. It's witness. A bit like visions. Other forms of non-evidence, apart from witness and visions, often presented as evidence, are tradition, edicts emanating from holy men, "theology", ancient texts penned by desert savages, mass hysteria and mysterious objects. They can all be recorded as data, but none of them represents evidence. Evidence must be observable by your peers, it must be repeatable and it must be able to be corroborated. I can tell you that I think Stonehenge is a temple to the gods, but I'd better be able to back up that assertion with evidence. I'm fine with people believing what they think they believe in. No skin off my nose. As long as they don't present their unsupportable mythology as fact to other people. That's just lying. And that applies to every person who's ever lived who tells someone else that their God is true. They are liars and they do a good deal of damage. Data can be false, and often is. Evidence can be checked.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 07:14 PM

Well, no, Don, unless you reject self-description as data. Which is an extreme position to take, especially given the nature of the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:54 PM

""Since everyone operating hereabouts agrees with material forms, by necessity, identifying yourself as one is terrific camouflage and a safe solution to all kinds of problematic issues.""

I have no problem with anybody believing in the Afterlife, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or little Green Men from Mars.

I only object to them trying to tell me that their belief represents a scientific breakthrough.

You know as well as I do that scientific proof of any such is simply impossible.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:23 PM

Oooops, hit 'enter' instead of 'shift'....

So, Amos, just out of curiosity...and not to drift from the thread, (too much), do you still feel that way?..or was it more like 'the lesser of two evils'...or...has he (in your sweet smelling opinion), improved?..or what?
I'm just curios, and I'm not asking to enter a 'debate' with you on this one....just curios...I'd be interested in your feedback.

GfS

P.S. Boy, that must be a novelty for Mudcat....asking for another's opinion...without trying to start the basis for a bout of 'Mud-wrestling'!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 01:17 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 09:47 AM

Merci beaucoup, GfS.

I think Obama was a better man, with better intent, than you gave him credit for.

But you know what opinions are like.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 04:07 AM

Musket: "Anything more than that is just borrowing someone else's wet dream."


Depends what their 'God' is..I suppose....if your God makes you get wet...well, who am I to tell you different?

I WAS thinking a 'little higher' than that...though...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 03:13 AM

Thanks Goofus.   I think..

If it helps I am saying there is a God if you believe in it. It's your own God and firmly in your head.   Ditto afterlife.   

Anything more than that is just borrowing someone else's wet dream.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 12 - 03:00 AM

Amos, I read your post, aloud, to a friend, and have to say, you're on target, and articulating it well!...I think the only thing we've disagreed about was Obama, during the first campaign....and it got me wondering....how can such brilliance not see what he was about?

I'm not up for debating it...just wanted to pose the question as 'food for thought'.

Regards To Ya'!!!!

GfS

P.S. ....'After'--????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:07 PM

Musket: "Of course, God can be very real in your awareness. It just goes to show that our awareness is our own reality and not anybody else's. If your awareness is that there is an afterlife, then there is. For you. ...."

So, from your own words, you are not saying there is or isn't a 'God', as much as you are assailing 'awareness'...

Go back and re-read what you posted.
Actually, I tend to agree with you...'awareness' is a state of being...has nothing to do with the validity or reality of what a person is 'aware' or 'unaware' of.....and it is perfectly true..people have the ability to be 'aware' or 'unaware', stay 'unaware' and promote that view to anyone along the way.........UNTIL they experience something 'different' as to what being 'unaware' has left them.

Can't argue with that!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 12:59 PM

I made the point somewhere up thread that we seem to have a curious divide between those who have ever been out of their skulls, and those who never have. The lumps and ridges of old energy which lock a being into his head or not impermeable or immoveable, but they are as long as one does nothing about them.

Personal solidity of this type has some advantages and disadvantages. It makes it very "safe" in a short-term view, because no-one can argue with you for mimicking the debilitating entropy and massiness of material forms. Since everyone operating hereabouts agrees with material forms, by necessity, identifying yourself as one is terrific camouflage and a safe solution to all kinds of problematic issues.

On the downside, it attenuates one's own connection with one's own source-hood, sovereignty and creativity. It also sets you up for a painful and confusing transition if your beloved Token, the meat body which you insist is the totality of you, suddenly drops out from under you one day. And this puts you at risk of ending up wherever you end up purely by knee-jerk reaction or blind groping rather than by the pursuit of your own elective affinities.

This, in turn, can lead to long and un-inspiring terms of service in some grungy environment, working as a collier, a dustman, a waitress, or even a politician, Gawd forbid!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:54 AM

Goofus, I sincerely hope that you will have a split second in which to realise that you only had one life, which you wasted being a complete clown.

If, of course, you turn out to be right, I'll have plenty of time to make suitable apologies.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:13 AM

so long as mine includes a football team up there anything like as worshipable as Sheffield Wednesday, I'll be happy too.

Don't just say God, say Shankly.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:15 AM

Not trying to pick the bones out of your last post Goofus, but at the risk of side tracking, linking this to peoples' awareness of God is a good one.

Of course, God can be very real in your awareness. It just goes to show that our awareness is our own reality and not anybody else's. If your awareness is that there is an afterlife, then there is. For you. Not for me, not for Fred next door, but for you. Fred has his own personal heaven or hell to look forward to, and so long as mine includes a football team up there anything like as worshipable as Sheffield Wednesday, I'll be happy too.

Mind you, the bit about God being loving and intelligent was originally written before we knew that certain wasps inject eggs into other insects and have their larvae eat their way to their own "glorious birth." Intelligent, I can go with. Loving of course falls at the first hurdle.

Perhaps best not to let God outside of your own head, because he can only ever exist where logic might not be questioned.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:28 AM

I guess it boils down to if you think you are only your body, which, of course, dies..or attached to a larger reality, which may not have YOUR particular identity...but is larger...and connected to the whole...let's say, 'Light'... and/or intelligence,..or even 'Life' itself. Those who have had no experience to confirm either way, are really just guessing....those who have had an experience, can't seem to convince the former, that the experiences are real, just like 'convincing people of the source of the experience................I think you just have to experience it...and like those who have had experiences, have you ever thought of just asking for one?..same applies to people's awareness of God...if God is in fact loving and intelligent, then I think it would be incumbent upon God to answer an honest request to reveal 'Him'-self, to whomever asks ............... Two things, don't make up your own answers, and don't write off and ignore the answer that would come, nor set a time limit...Ask sincerely....and if nothing happens, blow it off...if something does happen, pay attention!
Fair enough???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Dec 12 - 11:49 AM

"I prefer to adopt the position that there is no after-life, just a continuation of the Great Game, regardless of which identities one takes up and lets go, with or without bodies. It is clear to me ....,"

Would that it could be so clear to others....whatever it means...

I think perhaps the "Great Game" is constructing vague and ambiguous linguistic concepts. *grin*... and I bow to your creativity.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Dec 12 - 11:05 AM

I prefer to adopt the position that there is no after-life, just a continuation of the Great Game, regardless of which identities one takes up and lets go, with or without bodies. It is clear to me that the fullest knowing of who one is leads to a sense of equanimity about the coming and going of bodies, identities, and other forms of manifestation.

Obsessive attachment, reactionary beliefs about scarcity and fear of loss, and the like, are all grand entertainment, but are sort of unhealthy in the long run.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Dec 12 - 05:51 AM

I used to use a Resusci-Annie in my lessons occasionally. The urgency of learning the resuscitation techniques was lost on most of the lads, however, whose main concern was whether she had nipples.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 20 Dec 12 - 04:24 AM

Did my resuscitation training earlier this week. I was "singled out" to do the CPR for five minutes, and the trainer clapped the beat to "Stayin' Alive" whilst I sweated.

Hard work....

Although 30 odd years ago, when I first did such training, I was presented with the Rescuci-Annie (blond dummy in blue tracksuit used a lot in such training) and was told she wasn't breathing, no pulse etc, what should I do? The "I prefer to make my mates laugh than take training seriously" Musket quipped "Slip her a length whilst she is still warm."

As a result, I did not get my first aider papers which would have got me 25p a shift......

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:44 PM

Gosh, are you satisfied that you were 'dead' enough???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:36 PM

This seems an appropriate place to flag up the fact that today marks two years of my personal afterlife - two years since I dropped dead with cardiac arrest, and was brought back to life thanks to two strangers who knew about how to respond to the emergency with CPR, and the medical staff who took over.

Well done, mate. But I hope it wasn't Vinnie Jones himself, otherwise I'd be asking you how your full ribcage transplant went... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:24 PM

This seems an appropriate place to flag up the fact that today marks two years of my personal afterlife - two years since I dropped dead with cardiac arrest, and was brought back to life thanks to two strangers who knew about how to respond to the emergency with CPR, and the medical staff who took over.

No memories of any tunnels to the light or anything like that I'm afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 03:27 PM

Shimrod, ...and a 'Happy 300!' to you as well!

Glad you got it under control. A lot of people do NOT understand what it's like, and the stigma that it carried, from times before.
Glad to hear you're controlling it...now be nice!

Wink!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 11:40 AM

""Science is just science....it really gets fucked up when it's a 'funded research project', to find the politically motivated desired results.""

The only time you'll see that happening is when the front man has sold out his scientific knowledge for a fat paycheck, which shows how little interest he had in science to start with. It produces crap like "Guar Gum" as a slimming aid.

It bears no resemblance to genuine scientific research and the results are never offered for consideration by his peers, because he has none.

You should never lose sight of the difference (if, in fact, you know the difference) between a scientist and a snake oil salesman . They are not interchangeable.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 03:57 AM

Hi GfS,

Yes, mine is under control now - with medication.

It seems to be certain foodstuffs which trigger my condition: coffee, cheese, wine and ripe fruits (particularly bananas and pears). I mentioned all of this to a neurologist who was ... 'non-commital' in his response. Anyway, I know what the triggers are and what to avoid. Mercifully, beer doesn't appear to represent a problem - phew!

Thank you for your concern. Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to you and your family.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 11:11 PM

My Aunt also had epilepsy. She was a concert pianist, and graduated first in her class at USC......but the epilepsy back then was debilitating. It did keep her from participating in things she wanted in her life.

Is yours under control?
Do you find that certain circumstances trigger an episode?..or does it come on completely unexpectedly?

I'll listen...I'm familiar with it..and I also do understand.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:23 PM

Hi Dave,

My mother told me that I had fits as a small child (I have no personal recollection). I was hospitalised for nine weeks at the age of 4 (presumably for observation?) - I certainly remember that!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 09:10 AM

As per Shimrod: "I have mild epilepsy - which has given me some strange experiences. I think that I probably developed symptoms as a small child but they gradually faded as I got older and then came back in my 50s (don't know whether this is normal or not).

On what do you base the "I probably developed symptoms as a small child"?

That the symptoms "re"appeared in your fifties is a fact in your knowledge, of course.

I'm not criticizing or challenging you; I'm interested.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:55 PM

Musket: "No, GfS, there are scientists and there are cranks, charlatans and madmen."

Science is just science....it really gets fucked up when it's a 'funded research project', to find the politically motivated desired results.
It's as bad as what churches do to otherwise salient unseen truths!!

..and there you have it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:58 AM

""Yes, and like the Republicans and Democrats, science seems to get more attention...the more they distract from the truth!""

And speaking of those who are out of their heads.........!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 06:44 AM

Just worked out why this thread is still running.

Placebo accounts for 20% of any results, and good lucky guesswork can drag that up to 40%.

Room therefore for charlatans and snake oil purveyors to grab the attention of the weak, vulnerable and desperate.

All the proof of afterlife you ever needed eh? Oblivion is going to be such a disappointment, but no matter, because in the big zero, facts and fiction hold true equally..

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 04:08 AM

"Those who study the real and the unreal in spiritual dynamics say there may be two kinds ..."

No, GfS, there are scientists and there are cranks, charlatans and madmen. The C,Cs & M claim to "study the real and the unreal in spiritual dynamics" (whatever the f*ck that means!) but it is highly probable that they are just making it up in order to fool the credulous - like you and Amos, for example. Have any of them asked you for any money yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 01:05 AM

Amos: "Those who study the real and the unreal in spiritual dynamics say there may be two kinds--those who have been out of their heads and those who have not. They have very different world views. Kinda like Republicans and Democrats, it sometimes seems the twain shall never meet."

Yes, and like the Republicans and Democrats, science seems to get more attention...the more they distract from the truth!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:54 PM

Please excuse, I'm tired. I was born the year he was shot down...BR

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:50 PM

Considerations...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWwzFwUOxA

Odd that I was born in the same year as the little boy's "former self" in the story. Co-incidence...

Wrote a book about airplanes when I was 8. Made a cover for it out of cardboard & string...

Began to make model airplanes.

Dad worked for Pantex, the friendly folks that brought us the atom bomb.

He always brought home some "toys", bullets for machine guns. I had a big collection. Dad was an inspector.

There was a place near our home that made military medals, we used to pry them out of the sand in the dump where the rejects were thrown.

I really wanted to be a pilot in the Air Force when I grew up, I just loved planes...although I couldn't get in as my vision didn't meet the requirements...

My uncle was a test pilot for the F101 "Widowmaker", kinda like a rocket with stubby wings.
He was killed while testing...

I have tried to "go back" to that time before...The door is closed...BR

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 12:57 PM

UNfortunately, experience is all the evidence you're going to find. There have been had-core physics experiments (Puthoff's buried magnetometer being switched on and off by Ingo Swann's attention at will comes to mind). The guy had never seen or known about the buried device encased in concrete under the lab floor,but he was able to draw parts of it and change the output graph every time he focused on it. But these things are just dalliances, really; the individual who owns the mind has to learn how it operates for himself if he wants to be free ofits more lizard-like qualities. In order to do that you have to face up to what thought is and how you generate it. It isn't a deterministic output from a biochemical analog computer.

Computer techs like to say there are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

Those who study the real and the unreal in spiritual dynamics say there may be two kinds--those who have been out of their heads and those who have not. They have very different world views. Kinda like Republicans and Democrats, it sometimes seems the twain shall never meet.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:23 AM

What you don't do, is come out all guns blazing and say "This is what I believe, so you must plough through four hours of superexcited gibberish from the snake oil salesman who sold it to me, or else STFU because you don't know what you're talking about".

It's your brainchild. Give the brain some exercise and follow it through, and when you have something worth listening to, you won't haveany trouble with getting the scientists to listen.

They DO that!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 07:04 AM

""maybe it is something to 'explore' and upon finding its nature, submitting to its direction...instead of following or making up stuff that seems 'logical' to our limited understanding...!""

There you go Guffers.

Now, it's your hypothesis, and a pretty way out one by current scientific standards.

So, what you do now is spend half a lifetime developing that theory and finding supporting evidence (genuine evidence, not your usual airy fairy walk in the clouds stuff). When you have gathered all of that together over, say, the next twenty years, you produce a paper and publish your theory in the scientific press.

If your evidence stands up to the scrutiny of your peers, you may possibly have added to the sum total of human knowledge.

You must come back in twenty years and let us know how it went.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 04:24 AM

In response to Bob Ryszkiewicz, I'll just repeat what I wrote, back up the thread, on the 14th November:

"I have mild epilepsy - which has given me some strange experiences. I think that I probably developed symptoms as a small child but they gradually faded as I got older and then came back in my 50s (don't know whether this is normal or not).

Occasionally, I would have temporary episodes of 'absence' or 'fugue' or whatever it's called. Twice, in the last few years, I've had full-blown fits and the doctors have now put me on medication which has virtually eliminted any symptoms (I still have to watch my diet as certain foods/drinks seem to act as triggers).

Anyway, it's the fugue/absence states that are the most 'interesting' (or alarming). In these states, which are of unknown duration, I experience a whole different, but utterly familiar, world. Don't ask me for details because when I return to 'normality' I've no recall of such details - just that I've been 'somewhere else'.

Looking at this dispassionately, it probably means that in part of my brain - probably the part connected with memory - neurons occasionally misfire and I experience false memories, or dream memories, or 'lost' memories from an earlier phase of my life.

If I was religious, or mystically inclined ... or a credulous fool (!) I could build a whole raft of crackpot 'theories' based on these experiences. I could claim contact with God, or an afterlife, or a previous life, or a parallel universe or ... well, you get the picture. But the experiences that I have had, as a result of my disability, do not allow me to claim 'proof' of anything other than that I have some abnormalities in part of my brain."

So, Bob (and GfS) I know EXACTLY what you're talking about - I just don't think that these experiences entitle me to make such bold assertions as:

"Is there an afterlife? Yes, I believe there has to be. Because of the many experiences that I've had, the people that I've met, etc. And 50,000 Buddhist Fans can't be wrong ..."

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 02:36 AM

Again, well said, Amos.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 12 - 12:21 AM

Concur with Bob's tendentiously poetic remarks. Looking at a picture of a past situation--never mind which life time it may be from--one has to ask two things. Whereabouts the picture seems to be, because often individuals don't even orient themselves that way. And more important, who is looking at it. The "I" that is te answer to that latter question is the brain's owner, no question, but to think of it as identical to the brain is an absurdity. The still center that poses the questions and looks at the pictures is not local in ordinary space-time terms, but this is an assertion that in some circles gets a reception akin to someone who insists the Emperor is wearing no clothes, or accuses politicians of rank hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 11:22 PM

Bob Ryszkiewicz, I've posted this before, but..'Have you noticed, that when you hear something 'new', and KNOW it is TRUE..it takes the form of 'remembering'?

Question is, "Where do you remember it from?"

Atta' Baby, Bob!!

Regards!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 11:12 PM

Right on the mark, Bob. It's damn silly for people to ask for "proof" about the Afterlife. About as silly as asking for the mathematical result of love minus twelve apples, the sum of a thought and a dog's shadow or the physical dimensions of various emotions in square centimeters.

If it was in the realm of scientific proof, it wouldn't BE in the Afterlife. And vice versa.

There are some things ya can only experience yerself...not provide proof of to someone who ain't had the experience.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 04:53 PM

OMG why do I bother writing about these things?; I must be deranged...(Thanks Val Kilmer as Doc Holiday - Tombstone).

My earliest memory is that of my mother holding me in her arms while standing in the bathtub, where she had the window open a crack. I remember looking at my little hand(an amazing thing), and seeing a feeling something white and wet. "That's snow Bobby," my mother said as I watched in wonderment. I might have been (Guess) a year old.

Then later came the memory of standing in my crib playing with some coloured wooden balls that were part of it. Frustrated that I could not pronounce or enunciate the words that I had in my head. Big words, adult words, that I knew, but from WHERE? I was somewhere else...BEFORE

Why am I here! In THIS body? Though I could not go back as a child, as an adult I recall those two experiences quite clearly.

Is there an afterlife? Yes, I believe there has to be. Because of the many experiences that I've had, the people that I've met, etc. And 50,000 Buddhist Fans can't be wrong (Hey, wasn't that the title of an album by Elvis?

Will there ever be proof? Not on Mudcat. That's for sure. The greatest scientists in the world could come up with proof positive and some Mudcatters STILL won't believe it until it comes gift wrapped at THEIR door...LOL

Remember the old joke sign? THIMK!

And most important... FEEL...

Far too many instances for me not to believe. But as Mom used to say, "to each his own..."

Have any of you had similar memories?

So back to the subject at hand, Aferlife? ABSOLUTELY...Proof?, most likely not during your lifetime...SHE(God, must be a woman, think about it) probably knows we just aren't ready. We must continue in LIFEschool( Kids!, you didn't get it yet!, We are Spirits evolving, get back to class) for a bit longer...;0)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 03:26 PM

Nimblerod: "Yes, there almost certainly is more to reality than meets the eye. But I'm not at all convinced that the "unseen" is either sentient or directed."

'Sentient or directed'???..well, think about this for a second....if it is indeed 'higher' perhaps the 'direction' is not according to how our understanding thinks of 'sentient or directed'....maybe it is something to 'explore' and upon finding its nature, submitting to its direction...instead of following or making up stuff that seems 'logical' to our limited understanding...!

Just a thought..(but then, don't underestimate the power of a thought!).
Especially an original thought..or from where those come!!!


Bill D: "I dunno how safe I am, but walking on other people's clouds seems risky to me."

Is 'walking on clouds' sorta like walking on water?.....but not quite as solid??
Might give it a whirl!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 12:13 PM

"Shimrod and Bill are safe in a well-defined zone of solid reality,..."

Well defined? I thought there was lots of work still to do on that? *grin*

THEN we can see what's up with anecdotes about semi-solid reality and vague, amorphous reality. (Like the math professor I knew who said he wanted to drop some acid and make breakthroughs in topology).

I dunno how safe I am, but walking on other people's clouds seems risky to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 10:07 AM

Yes, there almost certainly is more to reality than meets the eye. But I'm not at all convinced that the "unseen" is either sentient or directed. I strongly suspect that it merely consists of those aspects of reality that our senses can't reach (although, nowadays, our instrumentation can reach much of it).

Constant idle speculation about the "unseen" does nothing to address the problems which face the human race here and now - especially as many people don't even seem to perceive the "see-able" all around them!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 05:10 AM

Delete the other one...typo.


Risk??..What risk??..That there may be more to reality, than meets the eye???
That there is more going on in the 'unseen' that we have access to? The only risk, is missing out, because of limiting dogma.
Think about it, for just a minute or two.......It ain't so bad..........Accurate, too.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 05:08 AM

Risk??..What risk??..That there may be to reality, than meets the eye???
That there is more going on in the 'unseen' that we have access to? The only risk, is missing out, because of limiting dogma.
Think about it, for just a minute or two.......It ain't so bad..........Accurate, too.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 04:30 AM

Oh, I've got plenty of imagination all right. It's just that, the older I get, the more interested I get in the real world around me -rather than just fanciful things that don't seem to exist outside of anecdote and mythology. I could be wrong, of course, but I'm prepared to take that risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Dec 12 - 02:45 AM

Thoroughly enjoyed that!
Tip of the hat!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 12 Dec 12 - 08:33 PM

Working hard in the unforgiving fields of energy, matter and time can wear a feller down no end. Here's the thing: a being tends to identify with forms he puts lots of effort into. The harder you work the physics front, the less lively your imagination tends to become.

Shimrod and Bill are safe in a well-defined zone of solid reality, which is a good thing. So, Shim, no apologies needed for your bold assertions about the ineluctable dominance of the space-time continuum.

If you ever do find yourself three feet behind your head, however, don't let it panic you. Just find a safe spot to hang out until you feel better oriented. It can be extremely discomfiting to let go of an identity you have been hard-over locked into for some time.

Besides, if it turned out you were a spiritual entity using a body instead of a body scoffing at the idea of spiritual existence, just think of the awful consequences that discovery would entail!! You might have to be responsible for long, long chains of suffering and tribulation given and received over gawd knows how many lifetimes, or something like that. That would be too much for any ordinary mind to handle.

Smooth sailing, that's the ticket!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 12 Dec 12 - 04:25 AM

"Well, I'm not sure of what video you're talking about ..."

Oh come on, GfS, YOU'VE never stopped talking about it!

As for "wonderment", when I was working I would have been fired if I'd been perpetually 'full of wonder'!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Dec 12 - 01:31 AM

Well, I'm not sure of what video you're talking about..but it has been said, that a scientist(or maybe a 'good' one), approaches his subject matter with 'wonderment'.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 04:24 PM

Yes, GfS, THIS scientist is a sceptic when confronted with (the first excrutiating part) of a silly video and a load of rubbish about "NDEs" or something.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 04:07 PM

Don T: "It has been true, and will probably continue to be true...what's really pathetic is when somebody who knows zip about science watches a hysterically overblown account of other peoples' hallucinatory experiences under anaesthetic, and comes up with the inaccurate, unjustified and utterly ridiculous title "Afterlife new exciting proof?"

Are you reading, Steve and Nimrod??????????????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 03:43 PM

It has been true, and will probably continue to be true...what's really pathetic is when somebody who knows zip about science watches a hysterically overblown account of other peoples' hallucinatory experiences under anaesthetic, and comes up with the inaccurate, unjustified and utterly ridiculous title "Afterlife new exciting proof?""

Even if there were any basis for an objective conclusion to be drawn (and there isn't), that would be light years away from anything which could, even in the loosest sense, be called proof.

And I was one of those who wasted a slice of his life wading through that sludge.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 01:13 PM

Guest(?): "Scientists actually fall for "silly notions" all the time, in the sense that they pursue them in order to find out what's there. Most of the "notions" that scientists pursue don't yield anything substantial, but a few do, and that's what it's all about."

It has been true, and will probably continue to be true...what's really pathetic is when bad science is passed to a political group or party to create a mindset, that then takes bad science to be a fact!

Happens all the time!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 10:17 AM

Scientists, at least good ones, are not exactly "skeptics". They neither "believe" nor "disbelieve", they simply have a methodology for examining the things that they observe, and they draw conclusions based on that examination(the "conclusion" often is that more specific examinations are needed;-))

Scientists actually fall for "silly notions" all the time, in the sense that they pursue them in order to find out what's there. Most of the "notions" that scientists pursue don't yield anything substantial, but a few do, and that's what it's all about.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 11 Dec 12 - 03:52 AM

A scientist needs to be a sceptic - and not just some gawp who falls for every silly notion and unsubstantiated guess!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 12 - 08:18 PM

No, but because you can't (or won't) get out of your preconceptions to look at subjects objectively.

Simple as that.


GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 10 Dec 12 - 05:49 PM

So I'm 'biased' now am I, GfS. Is that because I refuse to take wild speculation seriously?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 12 - 03:58 PM

Peevishness?...hmm.....I guess biased people 'detect' whatever is in the parameters of their bias.

Expand.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 10 Dec 12 - 07:13 AM

Do I detect a certain degree of peevishness, GfS?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Dec 12 - 01:05 PM

Nimble-nuts, "Mums the word, Don!"

Good! Keep it that way!!!

gfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Dec 12 - 12:02 PM

Mums the word, Don!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Dec 12 - 11:24 AM

Shhhh! Shim, Goofus thinks it's him.

Don't disillusion him.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 09 Dec 12 - 07:33 AM

"That gravity will eventually, over eons, "shink" the universe to it's centre, including all forms of matter and energy."

I'm not familiar with the verb 'to shink'; care to explain, Gnu?

And where, exactly, is the "centre of the universe"?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Dec 12 - 05:15 AM

""Careful, Gnu, or your world will be covered with methane gas....then all the people will be gone.

Do try to keep up GfS.

Why would a wildebeeste care if there were no people. This is part of his plan for world antelope domination.

LOL
Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 12 - 10:51 PM

Careful, Gnu, or your world will be covered with methane gas....then all the people will be gone.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 08 Dec 12 - 04:43 PM

I believe the opposite. That gravity will eventually, over eons, "shink" the universe to it's centre, including all forms of matter and energy. Which begs the question, will such lead to another big bang or a void?

Anyway, I had to expand my universe a short while ago. My boiled smoked ham dinner with spuds, cabbage, carrots and green beans required a looser pair of pants and a longer belt. I expect the veggies will lead to a number of gaseous nebulas forming over the short term.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 12 - 04:26 PM

Donuel, Would you describe what you just posted from Taggert, is a form of 'decay'?


GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Dec 12 - 10:17 AM

Enytopy on a Universe scale is real, it is enivitable and we have quantitative proof.

The form it takes can be observed today and is altering time relative to gravity and mass and energy at this time.

The ultimate black hole will give way to another existence on the "other side" like a mega example of virtual particles, but it will be the product of entropy and be a reduced fractal product of what the universe once was. The children universes of our universe will somtimes live on beyond the existence of its parents but they too will undergo entropy. This is an entropy of the entire system and not merely the breaking down of atomic and subatomic particles.

PS the latest Taggert book was a lesser example of the Field.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 Dec 12 - 04:03 AM

"Tecnically, you are correct but I don't think that disproves the hypothesis offered in A's post. By a country mile."

I wouldn't quarrel with that - but now Amos needs to produce some evidence in support of his 'hypothesis'.

"Unless you force me to slap one of you!"

You and whose army, Video Boy?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 08:04 PM

Well Halleluiah!..Amos got them to post about issues.....
I'll just read for a while.....


GfS




















P.S.......Unless you force me to slap one of you!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 06:20 PM

Shimrod... ""The difference between meat and spirit is exactly that the human spirit is not bound by the entropic, redundant, blind laws of mass and energy in time and space ... "

Uuuuummmm! It probably is, Amos ... sorry!"

Tecnically, you are correct but I don't think that disproves the hypothesis offered in A's post. By a country mile.

Disclaimer... I only read a few of the last posts. Don't even know why I posted this post. When I get to the other side, I'll log back in and might even read this whole... well, the last several posts at that time. >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Bill D-testing a different browser
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 05:31 PM

Shimrod makes MY point very well!....

But to expand...
"If, on the other hand you are actually no more than the meat-bag that wears your clothes, these things have no ready explanation, or one of really excessive complexity.

Oh they do have various explanations. The simple one is that they are just an variation of what happens in intense, lucid dreams. Brains which are under unusual stresses, like anesthesia or reduction of oxygen near death...etc... can easily have their usual neuron paths disrupted... firing in semi-random ways, but still using patterns already there.
It's not a theory one can directly test, anymore than the ones Amos espouses, but it certainly has no more implied complexity!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 04:19 PM

" ... all thought is biomechanical, intentionality is just a deterministic accident, and all spiritual awareness is illusory, a simple happenstance of brain oxygen levels ..."

Yes, it probably is.

"Jung made the observation that the psyche goes beyond space and time. This is either true or not."

Probably not true ... even though Jung said it.

"If the former is true, all of the documented cases of unusual phenomena--including telepathic moments, OOBs, NDEs, and more common things such as understanding itself, the appetite for justice, aesthetics, intuitive perception and so on, are fairly readily explained. These are byproducts of a spiritual sense."

This is what we call: 'over-extending the possible implications of dubious anecdotes' ... 'OPIDAs' ...?

"Making a big issue out of the fact that the literature is predominately anecdotal really misses the point by a country mile ..."

No it doesn't.

"The difference between meat and spirit is exactly that the human spirit is not bound by the entropic, redundant, blind laws of mass and energy in time and space ... "

Uuuuummmm! It probably is, Amos ... sorry!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 03:35 PM

If the vast literature on OOB and NDEs were to be perused, you would find that many of these experiences happen to perfectly sober-minded, plain-speaking citizens who do not consider them religious in any sense of the word.

Jung made the observation that the psyche goes beyond space and time. This is either true or not. To put it another way you (an individual) are either a non-material entity experiencing material existence, or you are a material entity whose circuitry occasionally creates spiritual delusions.

If the former is true, all of the documented cases of unusual phenomena--including telepathic moments, OOBs, NDEs, and more common things such as understanding itself, the appetite for justice, aesthetics, intuitive perception and so on, are fairly readily explained. These are byproducts of a spiritual sense.

If, on the other hand you are actually no more than the meat-bag that wears your clothes, these things have no ready explanation, or one of really excessive complexity.

Making a big issue out of the fact that the literature is predominately anecdotal really misses the point by a country mile; given the implications, what else COULD it be? The difference between meat and spirit is exactly that the human spirit is not bound by the entropic, redundant, blind laws of mass and energy in time and space. The complaint is like rejecting apples because they do not taste enough like hot dogs. These things come from a different part of the jungle altogether.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 02:56 PM

Actually Dave, I agree with you.

The same could be said about anything or theory that one subscribes to.
Now when the evidence comes in to support whatever experience the 'believer' embraces, then believing turns to 'knowing'...as long as it is received in wonderment, and not just supporting a preconceived bias... either way. The observer would then tend to color the information, and not look at it objectively.

There are people who have had experiences that when they 'relay' it to another, that they can not 'prove' to the listener...other than the claim that he/she experienced it.

Experiences are far more personally embraced, than even reading a good book..because one you learn 'about' something..the other, you become one with it.

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 01:58 PM

The nature of sudden religious enlightenment is that
IT MUST BE BELIEVED .. . .

. . . by the direct recipient.

But when the recipient relates his experience to others,
it has no evidentiary value whatever.

I heard this individual interviewed on NPR recently, and
it seems clear that HE is convinced. But his credulousness
is not binding on me. Or you. Or Max, or Joe, or anyone else. If
one of his hearers is convinced by what he says, that's their
choice. Their credulity.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 01:37 PM

..and DonT, if you "The difference, Goofus, is that most of us numb-nutted pundits will read Amos' links because he has earned our respect, and he doesn't attach pejorative epithets to the vast majority of his comments."....respected and understood my posts..I'd probably be insulted!

You are too 'opinionated' into small minded thinking!
Snap now, and avoid the rush!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 05:50 AM

""Amos, History has it that the numb-nutted pundits don't check on links, that they insist aren't true..because they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. I doubt if they checked yours out either""

The difference, Goofus, is that most of us numb-nutted pundits will read Amos' links because he has earned our respect, and he doesn't attach pejorative epithets to the vast majority of his comments.

That is an area in which you specialise, which doesn't motivate anybody to comply with your unpleasantly worded demands.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 04:04 AM

"He had no further intercourse with Spirits, but lived upon the Total Abstinence Principle, ever afterwards; and it was always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May that be truly said of us, and all of us! And so, as Tiny Tim observed, God Bless Us, Every One!"

A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 07 Dec 12 - 03:21 AM

And a Merry Christmas to you too, Amos.

And, GfS, stay off the whisky, brandy, rum etc. ('spirits' - geddit?!).

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 12 - 10:07 PM

Ya gotta love Amos, for that one!!!
BRAVO!!!!!!!!


GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Dec 12 - 07:59 PM

Oy vey, Shimrod. Have it your way--all thought is biomechanical, intentionality is just a deterministic accident, and all spiritual awareness is illusory, a simple happenstance of brain oxygen levels or some such.

Merry Christmas, and a long and happy life to you anyway.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 12 - 09:54 AM

...and you're talking from personal experience?

GfS

P.S. Your post cracked me up...good one!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Dec 12 - 09:05 AM

Viagra? That's for the already dead..... haven't needed it. Do you recommend it from personal experience?

He: "Honey... maybe I'd better call the doctor."
She: "Oh, wait a bit... it's only been 3 hours and 45 minutes!"

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 12 - 12:40 AM

Bill D: "Now, I have a list of resurrections I'd like to see.."

Have you tried Viagra??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Dec 12 - 05:32 PM

Is 'resurrect' a transitive verb?

Sure is nice to have proofs......

Now, I have a list of resurrections I'd like to see.... and a few transubstantiations, too!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Dec 12 - 05:06 PM

"Afterlife new exciting proof?"........

The thread sank and died..and voila, it resurrected...by golly, there's your proof!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Dec 12 - 11:40 PM

great link, Bobad!...laughed my ass off!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: bobad
Date: 01 Dec 12 - 09:33 AM

Father Guido Sarducci explains the afterlife: Vita est lavorum

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Dec 12 - 01:11 AM

Well, I hope he gets her back from Gitmo..

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Nov 12 - 01:21 PM

I very much doubt it!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Nov 12 - 01:11 PM

Numbrod: "And did you know that Dr Melvin Morse has recently been accused of subjecting his own 11 year old daughter to a NED by waterboarding her?"

Did he finally get the 'truth' from her?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Nov 12 - 06:06 AM

I meant NDEs of course - not NEDs! I must have been thinking of NODDYs!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 30 Nov 12 - 04:57 AM

Actually, Amos, I DID read your links. The stuff about Dr Melvin Morse seemed to consist of some stories of NEDs among children wildly elaborated into pseudo-scientific 'theories' about life, death, the universe, quantum mechanics, God etc., etc., etc. And did you know that Dr Melvin Morse has recently been accused of subjecting his own 11 year old daughter to a NED by waterboarding her?

Also cited in the article is the National Institute of Discovery Science ... which appears to be/have been mainly concerned with the 'study' of UFOs!

In short, the usual array of cranks, charlatans and madmen!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 06:06 PM

Amos, History has it that the numb-nutted pundits don't check on links, that they insist aren't true..because they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. I doubt if they checked yours out either...but then, history teaches us that man never learns from history!

(...but these are half witted mutant gnomes!)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 06:00 PM

IF you self-satisfied numbnutted pundits would bother following up on the references provided up thread you would not be out on a limb cutting it off with your old saws.

Tell ya what: get a copy of "The Field" by L. McTaggart and look up all the papers she footnotes for specifics on experimental setups. She did a pretty thorough job of describing both the good ones and the flawed ones.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 05:33 PM

.....besides, music activates more neurons than any other activity on the planet...ya' think they might have 'connected' to something with those minds more active??

Now go back to sleep...and quit trying to fool people to impress them into believing you think very deep..it ain't working!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 05:28 PM

Numbrod: "A very long list of opinions about music there, GfS. There's a lot of high flown rhetoric but it doesn't prove much except that a lot of famous musicians loved what they did for a living."

Well, I thought quotes from the very people who composed it, might be a clue as to from where they got it....but that's OK..the mutant gnomes know better, right?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 04:32 PM

I have my own reasons for harbouring an inner certainty that there is a continuation of consciousness after the death of the flesh, relevant evidence that fullfils my needs at least.

Part of my own belief pertaining to how such continuance of consciousness is subjectively experienced, follows from Buddhist notions of self-created 'realms' of heaven and hell, which when subjectively experienced, feel quite objectively real. Much like this place really..

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 04:13 PM

A very long list of opinions about music there, GfS. There's a lot of high flown rhetoric but it doesn't prove much except that a lot of famous musicians loved what they did for a living. And, of course, in most cases we love what they created - but then I don't suppose that there are many people would claim that they are not moved by great music.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 03:41 PM

"...all of which have occurred in documented instances.."

Documented **claims & anecdotes!**. Only ONE person sees/experiences each instance, and almost none seem to come close to being replicable.

There have been millions of anecdotes about ghosts & witches and elves in gardens.... but... ummm...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 02:35 PM

Eliza,..put these two together, and what do you get?


Bigger than most think...

Then tie it in with trhis one..

And the idiots can't see it!!!...but then look how they 'separate' themselves....and then think they know something!

At least the world's greatest composers, whose brains are more activated by music can see it...but then, their brains are more activated!!

"Music is ... A higher revelation than all Wisdom & Philosophy"
― Ludwig van Beethoven


"Music is the one incorporeal entrance into the higher world of knowledge which comprehends mankind but which mankind cannot comprehend."
― Ludwig van Beethoven

"To play without passion is inexcusable!"
― Ludwig van Beethoven

"Don't only practice your art, but force your way into its secrets, for it and knowledge can raise men to the divine."
― Ludwig van Beethoven

"Music is the mediator between the spiritual and the sensual life."
― Ludwig van Beethoven

"Then let us all do what is right, strive with all our might toward the unattainable, develop as fully as we can the gifts God has given us, and never stop learning"
― Ludwig van Beethoven.

"Straight-away the ideas flow in upon me, directly from God, and not only do I see distinct themes in my mind's eye, but they are clothed in the right forms, harmonies, and orchestration."
-Johannes Brahms

Rossini on Bach, Beethoven:
"If Beethoven is a prodigy of man, Bach is a miracle of God." - Gioachino Rossini


Tchaikovsky on Mozart:
"Mozart is the musical Christ." - Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky

Wagner on Beethoven, Mozart:
"I believe in God, Mozart, and Beethoven." - Richard Wagner

"Whether I was in my body or out of my body as I wrote it I know not. God knows." -George Frederic Handel

"Neither a lofty degree of intelligence nor imagination nor both together go to the making of genius. Love, love, love, that is the soul of genius." -Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

"Music is an agreeable harmony for the honor of God and the permissible delights of the soul."-Johann Sebastian Bach

"It's always been a gift with me, hearing music the way I do. I don't know where it comes from, it's just there and I don't question it."-Miles Davis

"God gave us music…"

Daily Quote"Bach gave us God's Word. Mozart gave us God's laughter. Beethoven gave us God's fire. God gave us Music that we might pray without words."-quote from outside a German Opera house.

"The only proof he needed for the existence of God was music." -Kurt Vonnegut

"Music can name the unnameable and communicate the unknowable."-Leonard Bernstein

"Music is love in search of a voice." -Leo Tolstoy

"Nothing exists without music, for the universe itself is said to have been framed by a kind of harmony of sounds, and the heaven itself revolves under the tone of that harmony." - Isidore of Seville

"If music be the food of love, play on." -William Shakespeare

"What Music expresses is eternal, infinite, and ideal; she expresses not the passion, love, desire, of this or that individual in this or that condition, but Passion, Love, Desire itself, and in such infinitely varied phases as lie in her unique possession and are foreign and unknown to any other tongue...So...Here's to Victory, gained by our higher sense over the worthlessness of the vulgar! To Love, which crowns our courage...To the day, to the night!...And three cheers for Music..."- Richard Wagner

"music is a world within itself, with a language we all understand" - Stevie Wonder

"My music is the spiritual expression of what I am----My faith, my knowledge, my being........When you begin to see the possibilities of music, you desire to do something really good for people, to help humanity free itself from its hangups....I want to speak to their souls."-John Coltrane

It is a funny thing, but when I am making music, all the answers I seek for in life seem to be there, in the music. Or rather, I should say, when I am making music, there are no questions and no need for answers. ~Gustav Mahler

"All music comes from God."-- Johnny Cash

"Music is the mediator between the spiritual and the sensual life."
-- Ludwig van Beethoven

"Music is well said to be the speech of angels" - Thomas Carlyle

"I . . . stared at the phone. It was hard for me to believe that Igor Stravinsky had a telephone number, just like the rest of us. God didn't have a phone number. Why should Stravinsky? Nevertheless, my trembling hand reached out and dialed his number, which, I noted with astonishment, had the same number of digits as those of ordinary mortals." -Arnold Steinhardt

"Music is harmony, harmony is perfection, perfection is our dream, and our dream is heaven." ~Amiel

"Without Music, we could completely destroy the structure of the space time continuum"-Dr. Emmett Brown
..................................................................
But then, we can always pay attention to idiots, instead!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 05:46 AM

"ANd that is, oddly enough, the biggest reason why some folks shy off from examining the real issues of OOB existence, NDEs, telepathic links, remote viewing, and telekinesis, all of which have occurred in documented instances, many of them under well-designed scientific experimental protocols."

Sniff, sniff! What's that I smell? Why, I think it might be good, old-fashioned BS! Who? What? Why? Where? Give us references to these "well-designed scientific experimental protocols"!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 29 Nov 12 - 05:24 AM

Little Hawk, you too have made me think! I agree that Love encompasses all humankind and even all the rest of life. I wonder if that is what is meant by the Greek word 'agape' meaning a selfless and sexless love on a pure level. I also agree that it's very hard to achieve, but for me it isn't necessarily fear that gets in the way, it's selfishness. To truly love and care for all, you have to suppress self-interest. I've known and stayed with many nuns in convents of both Protestant and RC persuasion. These women (Sisters to all) seemed to be working towards a state of selfless Love for God, humans and all living things. To do this, they were trying to remove all thoughts of self, and all physical dependence on possessions and property. Very hard! (Sorry about the thread drift, I do this too often, and a Mudelf will one day chase me off permanently!)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Nov 12 - 05:15 PM

Even in this topic, still keeping its distance from Sanity I see. There is a certain symmetry to that at least.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 28 Nov 12 - 05:07 PM

ANd that is, oddly enough, the biggest reason why some folks shy off from examining the real issues of OOB existence, NDEs, telepathic links, remote viewing, and telekinesis, all of which have occurred in documented instances, many of them under well-designed scientific experimental protocols. That old Black Magic called fear.

My you live in more courageous times!



A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Nov 12 - 02:31 PM

I very much agree with GfS on this, Eliza. What most people term "love" (meaning romantic/sexual love) is just a strong emotional attachment to one other person, and it may not last. In fact, it very commonly doesn't last, and when faced with loss it can turn to hatred in the blink of an eye.

But Love, with a capital "L" is something that encompasses all of life and reaches out to all other people, as well as all of the rest of life.

And that is very rare. Most people have given it little, if any thought. Most people don't even know about it. Most people do not experience it (consciously, that is). Even most of the people who sincerely yearn for it (and they are few) do not manage to accomplish it within the frame of this lifetime. It's the biggest and most challenging task in life to accomplish real Love.

Cynics regard it as a fairy tale. (if they happen to hear about it)

I've heard of it. I've seen evidence of it. I've seen glimpses of it. I've felt it. I haven't yet managed to accomplish it. Why? Well, because I'm still afraid, that's why. And that's the same reason that other people fail to accomplish it, they are prevented from doing so by their fear.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 28 Nov 12 - 03:51 AM

Goofus failing to distinguish between love and beer goggles, I see....

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 28 Nov 12 - 03:10 AM

Thank you for your regards, GfS. You did make me think deeply about this. (It's what makes Mudcat so interesting and stimulating) Last night I had a further think, and I reckon I just don't trust emotional motives for one's behaviour. I prefer a considered and 'sober' approach. I've always found emotional driving forces to be too powerful, and linked more to the deeper, primitive parts of the brain. I expect it's just because I'm a more 'intellectual' type.
I like your idea that we're all One, and that we can feed eachother with our gifts and talents. Nice concept, and so true!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Nov 12 - 07:14 PM

Eliza, it's all the same thing. Your existence here is the result of Love...others are all here,too..and in reality we are all One. To some comes gifts..such as music....take care of the gift, as if you appreciate it, learn about it and use it to point to where it came from....those who hear, are fed.
You can even do it without lyrics!

Highest Regards, Eliza!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 27 Nov 12 - 05:01 AM

I agree with the excellent consequences you list as a result of 'love', but I would call all that simple 'kindness'. As a Christian, I do myself beleive it comes from and is initiated by God. I suppose another word for it all is 'Goodness'. But 'love'? Not sure.
I deplore the 'Lurv' sung about by youngsters. To me, that is just sexual attraction, a very powerful force, but essentially a way to reproduce the species. Maternal 'love' is an instinct to protect ones genes. There are many words I like and would wish to practise:- loyalty, protectiveness, selflessness, kindness, empathy, holiness, purity, fidelity etc. In fact, all the usual graces. I just seem to have trouble with the word love. Semantics again I reckon.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Nov 12 - 01:33 AM

Eliza: "LH, not so sure about experiencing 'love'. When I was much younger, I 'fell in love' a few times, but afterwards I saw that it was infatuation and neediness. At the time, any experience seems and feels real, but is that in fact the reality?"

Eliza, respectfully....it has been said "You don't 'fall' in love, bullshit is what you fall into...but love lifts us up to do wonderfully incredible things for our fellow man, and as you would have done for you". It's the power that you either plug into or it gets plugged in for you...but it's dialed into the source! It is intelligent, deliberate, has a goal of 'inhabiting' its beneficiaries. It has access to the 'unseen'.
Refer to the last posts of mine in the 'Alternative to Science' thread.

Regards!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 01:50 PM

LH, not so sure about experiencing 'love'. When I was much younger, I 'fell in love' a few times, but afterwards I saw that it was infatuation and neediness. At the time, any experience seems and feels real, but is that in fact the reality? I suppose the problem lies with our system of labelling and pigeonholing events so as to make sense of them. We use 'love' or 'the afterlife' to categorise what we saw or felt. But there isn't and can't be any proof. On that basis, I happily potter about and blunder into this and that, and don't waste too much brainpower trying to make sense of anything. Must be because I'm old, and will find out soon enough, when All Will Be Revealed! (or not!)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 12:53 PM

Depends on which part of her you're talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 12:47 PM

Steve, how high above the operating table was she hovering? : )

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 12:22 PM

I was put under anaesthetic four weeks ago. My last thought before I sank was how gorgeous the young nurse was who was hovering over me so attentively. Nothing else seemed to matter. I'll swear she fancied me.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 12:22 PM

The issue of energy production and disappearance in the universe has modulated since the days of Newton, and entropy may not be the ock concept it was once thought to be, since it seems at a quantum level to appear and disappear regularly.

The impact of awareness on material systems has also been re-evaluated since the days of Schrodinger's thought experiment with superimposed pussies. A great deal has been done, scientifically, to examine these connections under rigorous conditions and the results are generally very interesting, and indicative that the "all particles all the time" model of existence toward which our revered skeptics gravitate is perhaps lacking as a map of existence. The key hole in their argument is that the awareness of particles does not equate to awareness BY particles. Awareness, by its nature, appears to be something more. Defining it is extraordinarily arguable in a world where the predominance of material energy, form, and force has been the law for so long.

One very good compendium of a lot of these experiments can be found in this book:

The Field, L. McTaggart, Harper Perennial; Updated edition (January 2, 2008).

It doesn't address the question of afterlife, but it does examine many of the other bits and pieces about which we have here been chattering on.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 10:35 AM

The only proof you're ever going to get is through direct experience.

It's that way with love too.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 26 Nov 12 - 10:28 AM

No, anybody can have an imagination....

My dog was restless and wouldn't lay down after he had (unsuccessfully) chased a rabbit. When he went to sleep, he was twitching a lot, as he does when he sleeps after excitement. (Being a greyhound, sleeping is never an issue....)

So he was dreaming about the rabbit in all probability, and his restlessness beforehand was thinking about the rabbit.

When you are about to be put under general anaesthetic for an operation, most people, me included, think about what if you don't come through? No wonder people say they thought about heaven or whatever your mind thinks comes next.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 25 Nov 12 - 04:00 PM

As a matter of interest if there is an after life what about those lives that have barely begun? They have no concept of religion or science. That being the case is OBE experienced by older people only?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 25 Nov 12 - 02:27 PM

Go on then.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Nov 12 - 12:03 PM

..and when you define everything that comprises 'life' itself...you can go on and explain everything about when it begins and ends..seen and unseen.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Nov 12 - 03:30 PM

Ya' think?????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Nov 12 - 02:56 PM

Just following your lead, VB, just following your lead!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Nov 12 - 11:58 AM

Run out of stupid things to say, Nimrod?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Nov 12 - 11:46 AM

Talking to yourself (about rodents) now, Video Boy?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Nov 12 - 10:42 AM

The rodents are scattering!

Good!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 02:43 PM

Oh, I was leaving it up to the rodents themselves.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 02:39 PM

"instead of playing 'follow the leaders'..who happen to be the three blind mice...or rats, as you may prefer...and stop acting like lemmings!!"

Make up your 'mind' about which rodent you mean, Video Boy!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 02:07 PM

Oh..excuse my typo....""Oh don't get youR panties in a twist!.."

Hey leveller, check out the link..it's right up your alley!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 02:01 PM

"Oh don't get you panties in a twist!.."

:)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 01:56 PM

Oh don't get you panties in a twist!..I cut an pasted because I didn't want to post the whole link..(being as the experts in here don't even look at them)..so here:
Knock yourselves out!!

I thought for a moment you might be remotely interested, because co-incidentally, the image on the shroud, as tested by the scientists, was not made by 'painting' or absorption of a liquid, but rather by 'radiation', either by heat or light or both..and being as you brought up 'thermodynamics' that you could check it out yourself, instead of playing 'follow the leaders'..who happen to be the three blind mice...or rats, as you may prefer...and stop acting like lemmings!!

...or is that too scientific for ya'?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 03:53 AM

Apologies for the dreadful punctuation above - I wrote it in a bit of a hurry.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 03:48 AM

Well done, GfS, you have proved conclusively that you know how to copy annd paste from the web. You don't, however, demonstrate the least understanding of what you post.

You see,I am well aware of the work of Rod Swenson, whose words you have copied, and whilst his Law of Maximum Entropy (which builds on the Second Law of Thermodynamics) is interesting, it's not entirely relevant to this debate. Now I'm no physicist and don't pretend to understand all the explanations that Swenson puts forward, but to comment on the Cartesian part - if you are a follower of Descartes, you are somewhat behind the times philosophically. In particular, you might like to delve into Husserl's ideas of phenomenology (e.g. whilst Descartes discards 'perception', Husserl asserts that it is 'intentional')and his thoughts on 'The Me Behind the Scenes' which finally put to bed Bishop Berkeley's notions (and, by implication, those of Kant). OK, that's a bit of a simplistic, sweeping statement, but you get my gist. Alfred North Whitehead, of course, was pursuing similar lines of thought at the time, outlined in his 'Symbolism, Its Meaning and Effect'. To put it in a nutshell (which even you might grasp, GfS): whilst Descartes asserted that 'I think, therefore I am', what Husserl is saying is that you first need to ask 'who is this "I" '. Once you grasp that it's pretty simple, really.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 03:38 AM

Did you cut and paste that from Wikipedia, Video Boy?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 02:56 AM

The use of language was very good and lucid by Goofus' s standard.

A bit too much in fact. ....

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Nov 12 - 01:33 AM

theleveller, Here, trip out on this....not the bit about Darwinism and the disagreement with entropy..just for shits and giggles..


It was Descartes' dualistic world view that provided the metaphysical foundation for the subsequent success of Newtonian mechanics and the rise of modern science in the seventeenth century, and it was here at their modern origins as part of this dualistic world view that psychology and physics were defined by their mutual exclusivity. According to Descartes, the world was divided into the active, striving, end-directed psychological part (the perceiving mind, thinking I, or Cartesian self) on the one hand, and the "dead" physical part on the other. The physical part of the world (matter, body), defined exhaustively by its extension in space and time, was seen to consist of reversible (without any inherent direction to time), qualityless particles governed by rigidly deterministic law from which the striving, immaterial mind, without spatial or temporal dimension, was immune.
xxArguing that the active, end-directed striving of living things in general (Descartes had limited the active part of the world to human minds) could not be adequately described or accounted for as part of a dead, reversible, mechanical world, Kant promoted a second major dualism, the dualism between physics and biology, or between the active striving of living things and their dead physical environments. The Cartesian-Kantian dualistic tradition was built into evolutionary theory with the ascendancy of Darwinism where physics was given no role to play and "organisms and environments were totally separated" (Lewontin, 1992, p. 108). The same Kantian argument for the "autonomy of biology" from physics based on the apparent incommensurability of physics with the active, end-directedness of living things has been used by leading proponents of Darwinism right up to recent times (e.g., Mayer, 1985).

we can go on from there...if ya' want...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 22 Nov 12 - 08:30 PM

Afterlife: Folks, I'm concerned with this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 22 Nov 12 - 07:08 PM

It occurs to me that, if there is an afterlife, then this discussion thread will never die.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Nov 12 - 02:19 PM

Thanks, Don. Wonder where GfS has gone - was it something I said?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Nov 12 - 02:00 PM

WOW!

My hat's off to you Sir.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 22 Nov 12 - 04:18 AM

"A bunch of biased sillies."

Well, Gfs, I really wasn't going to bother but, as I have a few minutes to waste before the real business of the day, here goes.

The first thing to consider in discussions of this sort is the extent of your knowledge or, more importantly, its limitations. Let me illustrate with your comments on energy and end of life. What you haven't taken into account is the concept of entropy, and in order to understand that you'll need to get to grips with the soft and hard anthropic principles. I can recommend 'The Cosmological Anthropic Principle' by Barrow and Tipler as a good starter. In discussions of the soul, we will, in my opinion, never be able to understand this until (if ever) we understand the nature and origins of consciousness. This is one of the most hotly debated subjects amongst neurologists, philosophers, psychologists, physicists, mathematicians, historians, poets………. You could do worse than read Roger Penrose's 'The Emperor's New Mind' on the subject of whether it's possible to create artificial intelligence, and David Chalmers' excellent (if controversial) ideas on 'the hard problem of consciousness' which he sets out admirably in his book, 'The Conscious Mind'. And just when you think you're getting somewhere, you'll come across ideas from left field like those of Lyall Watson that he sets out in 'Lifetide – a Biology of the Unconscious' and, of course, in 'Supernature'; the gaia theory of James Lovelock; and the, for me, entrancing idea of morphic resonance as conceived by Rupert Sheldrake ('The Rebirth of Nature'). Along the line you might like to dip into Jung (archetypes and synchronicity), Sir James Jeans' 'The Mysterious Universe' and 'Physics and Philosophy', Wordsworth and the Romantic Poets, Peter Russell's 'The Awakening Earth', Guy Murchie's 'The Seven Mysteries of Life', John Gribbin's 'Deep Simplicity, Paul Devereux's 'Earthmind', Hans Duerr's 'Dreamtime' and, certainly, Sir Alistair Hardy's 'The Divine Flame – Natural History and Religion', And that's just for starters…….

You will, however, discover that you need a very big bookcases and that once you've opened this Pandora's Box out will come all kinds of strange things that can be good or evil (now there's another fascinating subject), amusing, charming, frightening and certainly puzzling. Once opened, you can't put the lid back on and you'll embark on a journey that will end only when you do (or perhaps that will just be the beginning) so it's one on which, in my opinion, it's better to travel hopefully than arrive. It was Frank Zappa who said that the mind is like a parachute - it only works when it's open, and an open mind may be best accompanied by a closed mouth lest, as I have often discovered, it ends up with a foot in it.

So, you can don your suit of shining armour and embark on your quest for The Holy Grail or you can stay at home and wallow in the comfortable muddy puddle of ignorance. If you choose the latter, however, please keep your grunting to yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 02:10 PM

"Hmmmm! Now who does that remind me of? (Shimrod??)"


No. Try again ... how about someone who purports to be from an abstract noun. Hmmmm! Who could that be?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 12:55 PM

Miss, Miss, he called me a biased silly.

Oh boohoohoo ~ how shall I bear the shame & the disgrace!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 12:54 PM

"...energy that we can only detect with physical properties known to the physical..."

"As I was walking down the stair.
I saw a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today-
I wish to (heck) he'd go away."

Do I lose my credits as a thinking man?

Can't continue this, as we go in an hour to set up a craft show... then comes Thanksgiving and 3 days of craft show.
I'll see what has developed on Moday maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 12:39 PM

MtheGM: "No, that is MOST PROBABLY NOT 'the way is is', GfS. I suppose it might be ~~"

the leveller: "Oh, GfS, you do amuse me - seldom in my whole life have I come across anyone who is so totally ignorant about so much,..."

Shimrod: " ... any blathering fool ..."
Hmmmm! Now who does that remind me of? (Shimrod??)

A bunch of biased sillies.

......................................................................
BillD: "...ll that means is that the basic, elementary particles do not breakup into nothingness...it does NOT mean that they retain whatever relationship with each other that they had while they were YOU! If you tear up a note, then burn it, the teeny-tiny particles are still 'somewhere', but they do not go somewhere and reassemble so that that note can again be read!"

OK..so you all either think 'energy' can be destroyed and created OR as Bill says it(and BTW Bill is the only one with a THINKING reply) that 'energy'...wait a minute..is that ALL energy?..or energy that we can only detect with physical properties known to the physical?
Next you'll be picking on gravity, and telling me every thing about it...known and unknown..

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 09:44 AM

".Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.......so does that mean my life's energy was NOT first around before it entered into me??....so, then it might not be destroyed if and when I die?..Right???"

Right... absolutely... true... yep.....

However- (you knew there was gonna be a 'however', hmmm?)....all that means is that the basic, elementary particles do not breakup into nothingness...it does NOT mean that they retain whatever relationship with each other that they had while they were YOU! If you tear up a note, then burn it, the teeny-tiny particles are still 'somewhere', but they do not go somewhere and reassemble so that that note can again be read!

We... and everything we use & see... were 'born' in thermonuclear explosions in stars...billions of years ago. All those particles follow laws of physics & chemistry, and under the right conditions can form a musician who can claim 'Sanity' and in his amazing self-aware state can imagine himself continuing to exist forever.. ;>)

Those who want to accept the idea of multiple lives (reincarnation) are not (usually) claiming that the **same particles** get reassembled, but that some intangible, non-physical 'essence' (you know...souls and such) gets glommed onto (pardon the technical language) some OTHER set of physical particles...somehow. The mechanism for this magic is sorta sidestepped, as even believers are peripherally aware that attempts at explanation break down under scrutiny.


"..and any blathering fool who denies that possibility can exist, with any asinine rhetoric, is approaching the subject 'emotionally'!"

And it is not required to deny anything... we "blathering fools" didn't make any claim. Anyone who wants to MAKE such a claim... or even suggest a way (other than collecting anecdotes) to test such a claim, needs to show we skeptics (not denyers) how THEY are doing more than "approaching the subject 'emotionally'!"

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 06:51 AM

" ... any blathering fool ..."

Hmmmm! Now who does that remind me of?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 06:24 AM

Oh, GfS, you do amuse me - seldom in my whole life have I come across anyone who is so totally ignorant about so much, and who is so set on sharing that ignorance with the world. You couldn't make it up, you really couldn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 06:22 AM

..And that's the way it is!
Get over it,...

.,,.,..,

No, that is MOST PROBABLY NOT 'the way is is', GfS. I suppose it might be ~~ just thought I saw a pig fly past the window here but it had gone when I stopped typing & went over to the window to check. But a bigbigbigbig, or maybe a mean a teeny-weeny-itsy-bitsy,

"might" - "might".

So ~~

you get over it.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 05:58 AM

The fact that mass delusion is possible does not mean that a high number of independent observers reporting similar experiences are deluded--such an attitude carries cynicism beyond reason.

True, but let's be wary of what "independent" means here. Once you've heard that out-of-body experiences have been reported, can you ever really be independent any more? The terms mass delusion and mass hysteria are way too blunt for my taste, but suggestion, infectiousness, attention-seeking and bandwagon-jumping spring to mind. All alternative possible explanations must be rigorously explored for all reports, no matter how high the numbers. Just me science blood I suppose. I'd call it healthy scepticism rather than cynicism. If proven wrong, the healthy sceptic rejoices, but the cynic can only crawl into a hole.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 05:48 AM

I think you have to completely get out of the 'religious' mindset when approaching the subject and concept of anything remotely dealing with the 'Afterlife'.
Science and the 'spiritual' have been crossing paths more these days, and a lot of the terms, redefined and twisted by religions, are not being looked at through that same filter.
Call it Love, Light, Life..whatever you call it..'God' if you are including it all...including yourself..and the life energy within everyone....and think back...hmmm...what was that thing we know about energy??...hmm..oh yeah, I remember....Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.......so does that mean my life's energy was NOT first around before it entered into me??....so, then it might not be destroyed if and when I die?..Right???.....Now, being as, all what we know, about this life..right here..is what we learned through our senses....FOR THIS DIMENSION....so if the body dies..but the energy is not destroyed....then, when it's separated from this body(dimension) and rejoins its origins.....does it 'remember' that it's 'glad to be home'??

This is not totally an unsupported observation.
To put it bluntly....no matter how fucking great you might have it here, 'dying' is like waking up from a 'bad dream'!
.....and this IS supported by a large number people, who have experienced it on operating table, (and other places, I'm sure).

..and any blathering fool who denies that possibility can exist, with any asinine rhetoric, is approaching the subject 'emotionally'!! ...with his thumb stuck in his mouth...picking his nose....

...And that's the way it is!
Get over it,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 03:58 AM

"When there is no consciousness of the difference between subject and object, an unconscious identity prevails. The unconscious is then projected into the object, and the object is introjected into the subject, becoming part of the psychology. Then animals and plants behave like human beings, human being are at the same time animals, and everything is alive with gods and ghosts."

Carl Jung: commentary on 'The Secret of the Golden Flower'.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 03:38 AM

Eliza, I don't think we can blame our religious beliefs (or anything else) purely on our genetic make-up. We also have brains. I certainly have a predisposition to spirituality and have spent a large part of my life examining many of its aspects. The result, however, is that I have come to the conclusion that there is no single entity or 'first cause' that we call god who has any interest in our lives, and that everything necessary to satisfy our spiritual needs exists here on earth and within ourselves, perhaps not always within our immediate comprehension, but here nontheless - Wordsworth's "...sense sublime of something far more deeply interfused, whose dwelling is the light of setting suns....". I think Husserl was right when he said that perception is intentional - all we need is the intentionality.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 21 Nov 12 - 03:11 AM

It has been claimed by researchers that there is what is jingoistically called the God gene. Certain people have a genetic predisposition to belief in God and a tendency to subscribe to the cultural and religious rituals that go with it. If this is true (and I have no opinion one way or the other, not being a geneticist) then obviously I have this gene and some others on this thread do not. Presumably, if one is genetically endowed (or handicapped!) in this way, one will persist in believing despite a lack of scientific proof, and even despite a definite proof that God does not exist. If this hypothesis pertains, then it is futile to argue and debate, since the two sides are genetically different and always will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 10:20 PM

"...so your assertion, Bill, is that no experience of reality is to be trusted? "

Hmm? I don't think I even came close to such an idea. I don't suggest "mass delusion" in my caution about how one might attribute status to certain 'experiences'. People HAVE the experiences they have... even IF they turn out to be no more than 'misplaced dreams'.

I have read many anecdotes about OOBs...etc., some of which are very...umm.. interesting. But because it is VERY difficult to replicate such experiences and/or study them under controlled conditions, they remain anecdotes.

   "...uber-Newtonian perspective of space-time as a safe, stable external box is a bit outdated..."

I been called worse that by guys biggern' you! How 'bout we just agree I'm a skeptic?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 09:23 PM

Hmmm...so your assertion, Bill, is that no experience of reality is to be trusted? And further, that reality is an objective set of conditions separate from experience?

Surely not. What differentiates the reality perceived by an observant physicist and that observed by an observant musician, plumber or grade school teacher?

The fact that mass delusion is possible does not mean that a high number of independent observers reporting similar experiences are deluded--such an attitude carries cynicism beyond reason.

Here's an interesting book for you tor ead: The Field, L. McTaggert. In it she compiles a long narrative of scientific experiments touching on the very nature of observation and awareness. She also sketches some liberal conclusions from them, which you are of course at liberty to reject.

I think you uber-Newtonian perspective of space-time as a safe, stable external box is a bit outdated, my friend.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 03:41 PM

Oh and Mr Shaw. If Liverpool were the true light then my son, presently doing his PhD in Liverpool would walk the short journey to Anfield on a Saturday afternoon. He doesn't. He gets on a train to Sheffield.   That's love..

I bet you both wish you had Suarez, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 12:20 PM

Well BillD, most of the humans I see spend their days sitting and looking at one thing or another, making their "reality" less interesting than, say most hermit crabs. When you include how they "experience" things, though, their days are much more interesting...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 11:40 AM

Of course love is an abstraction too. Hence Goofus inadvertently reminding us when he said God is love.

Love can be subjective too. Most women want one man to do all things for them. Most men want all women to do one thing for them.

Funny thing love. ...

Oh and Mr Shaw. If Liverpool were the true light then my son, presently doing his PhD in Liverpool would walk the short journey to Anfield on a Saturday afternoon. He doesn't. He gets on a train to Sheffield.   That's love..

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 10:27 AM

Amos..."You have to look at actual experience of others as well."

Gets more complicated every minute! ☺ Does LSD help with that? Do I and the 'others' have to take it together?


Actual experiences are just that... experiences. My dreams are 'actual experiences'. OOBs are actual experiences. This doesn't clarify their causality or status in reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 10:12 AM

"Likewise, I can love. I love my responsible adult, I have loved, and thought I meant it, many more in the past."

There are a lot of people out there who think that there is no such thing as love, too.

In point of fact, for anything that you might think is important, there is someone out there who thinks it's a load of crap. Soccer? Irish Music? Treasure Island? Folk Music? Philosophy? It's the talk on a cereal box...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 07:48 AM

"My cat sez she can lick your dog any day you like, leveller ~~ "

Yes, well Shrodinger thought that as well, but my dog is a devout follower of Pavlov.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 06:54 AM

Yeah, coming from a family of Unitedophobes*, that went down rather well this end too. I was over the moon, Gary. Go, Delia!



*Goes with "loving Liverpool " territory, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 06:46 AM

And while we're on the subject, what about Norwich City beating Man U 1-0 ? Whoooopeeeee! (sorry, nothing to do with the afterlife)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 06:10 AM

I love Sheffield Wednesday

Which proves that even atheists can be deluded.

You have heard of Liverpool FC, have you??

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 06:01 AM

""Yeah..all we got is the 'testimony' of the witnesses....
What do you got?""

Legally speaking, eye witness testimony is the weakest form of evidence, even when the witnesses are conscious.

No two witnesses ever see exactly the same sequence of real physical events.

Ask any detective!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 05:56 AM

""You really need to study linguistics & semantics a bit.""

And, GfS, learn the singular of "criteria", which is "criterion".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 05:50 AM

Huh, my dog could lick his own if he had any...

Goofus really knows how to make people smile indulgently, he really does. God is love is God etc.

There is no God, in respect of no God other than your own mental construction of the term, yet we all can love and recognise the symptoms. My dog used to get lover's balls, (hence the vet removing the urge to bugger off and empty them, leaving me apologising.) But although my dog can love, he hasn't heard of God.

Likewise, I can love. I love my responsible adult, I have loved, and thought I meant it, many more in the past. I love Sheffield Wednesday, I love my dog, (officer...) and I love a DECENT pinot. Ok, I love beer as well.

This idea that the rest of us have to ascribe good things to other peoples' imaginary friend gets my goat, it really does. I'll tether the bugger to the back of the car of the next person who tries to thrust their abstract mate down my throat.

But... If God is love to you, then well done. My love is for more temporal things, but I accept the idea of your love being for your see through mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 05:15 AM

I was referring to your circular arguments, which you seem to have begun to specialise in, as theleveller points out.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 05:15 AM

My cat sez she can lick your dog any day you like, leveller ~~

but she can't even scratch that non-existent referent which is the backwards-d·o·g...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 20 Nov 12 - 03:30 AM

"Even the Bible, who a lot of you hate, says that "God is LOVE"...so according to that criteria if God doesn't exist, neither does Love."

Really GfS, your arguments get more and more fatuous. If one doesn't believe in god then one doesn't believe that the Bible is the word of god, so your logic falls flat on its arse. It's like my saying that a dog is a cat because I believe it to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 11:59 PM

The fact that you haven't encountered a referent for a term does reduce the term to mere semantic juggling, Bill. You have to look at actual experience of others as well.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 11:41 PM

You can say what you want about God, Steve, but don't disrespect Neil Young. That's just too much. Can we get the thread closed, or something?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 10:29 PM

I was only responding to Steve's, "Even the Bible, who a lot of you hate, says that "God is LOVE"...so according to that criteria if God doesn't exist, neither does Love.
And round and round we go! Will the circle...be unbroken..."

It seemed appropriate..being as Steve mentioned, "Will the circle...be unbroken..."...a song...and being as this is a musical forum..it's nice to associate music and lyrics(even hidden in the posts), to getting the musicians and writers to think along those lines...Shit I've given you a ton of stuff..as I said I was going to do, years ago!


..and you took it all personal....GREAT! The best stuff does that!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 08:00 PM

Nice tune, exceptionally trite and shallow words. And not true. I've had my heart broken by a prematurely-busted harmonica before now, not to speak of by a zit that grew right on the end of my nose hours before a date with a beautiful girl.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 07:52 PM

That is art & poetry... and is quite nice- but it doesn't deal with the issue anymore than quoting any poet.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 06:47 PM

Hearts only break....because they won't bend!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 04:53 PM

Even the Bible, who a lot of you hate, says that "God is LOVE"...so according to that criteria if God doesn't exist, neither does Love.

And round and round we go! Will the circle...be unbroken...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 04:52 PM

"...according to that criteria if God doesn't exist, neither does Love.

Hmmm.. in the sense that both are just linguistic constructs, maybe so... but one asserts more than the other ....and asserting that one equals the other is itself a debatable piece of hyperbole. no matter where you get it from.

You really need to study linguistics & semantics a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 04:36 PM

Yeah..all we got is the 'testimony' of the witnesses....
What do you got?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 02:13 PM

If I may drop back a little (well, I'm going to anyhow)

"....at least those who were REALLY floating above the operating table KNOW what they're talking about!"

Yes, they know what they're talking about; they are talking about an experience in which it honestly seemed to them that they were floating up there. Neither of us is a know-allogist about it. You don't know for a fact that they were floating up there, and I don't know for a fact that they weren't.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 01:50 PM

The problem as you are expressing it is, you cannot seem to distinguish 'God' from 'religion'.

Even the Bible, who a lot of you hate, says that "God is LOVE"...so according to that criteria if God doesn't exist, neither does Love.
Maybe you need to rethink and redefine what you mean..because you're not making sense.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 01:19 PM

"... we WILL stick to our chosen faith."

Well, my original faith was not chosen. I was 'handed' Methodism (and duly baptized) from my ancestors, a couple of whom were actually preachers. I did NOT stick to it after about the age of 15 or so... I 'joined' the Unitarians at about 20, but gradually drifted away from even that. Some would assert that I merely substituted philosophy for religion as my 'faith', but that is a total misunderstanding of how the terms are used.

"...'thinking' doesn't always apply to religious beliefs."

Exactly.. so when I took up thinking as a major concern, religion had less 'conceptual' significance and more of an aesthetic/cultural relevance.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 12:47 PM

Excellent points, Bill. (I wasn't in the least suggesting that YOU were bludgeoning anyone, it was a general observation!) Most interesting that you appreciate the cultural and social aspects of religion and belief. One of the criticisms of the Church of England is the culture of the Tory lady, right-wing, Tudor music, nice hats type of worshipper who is more interested in what the other ladies in the pews are wearing than in what is going forward in the service. Another point I liked was the 'fundamentalist problem'. Tolerance (which in principle I support) gives freedom to bizarre and questionable or downright toxic practices, such as female genital mutilation and cruel exorcism etc. Even my husband's observance of Ramadan (which I respect and support) seems to me strange and not healthy, when even drinking water is forbidden in very hot climates. Finally, you're quite right that 'thinking' doesn't always apply to religious beliefs. None of it is terribly logical, but we WILL stick to our chosen faith. I feel the secret of Peace is calm tolerance, if at all possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 11:00 AM

Eliza... I fully understand why people (including your husband) have such beliefs, and I try to never present MY side of the issue as 'bludgeoning' of THEIR mindsets. I assume your husband understands why you think 'differently' about evil spirits.... but it is just too deeply ingrained in his culture to totally abandon.
If education and culture proceeded sanely, we would retain the sense of wonder & awe ascribed to the worship of the 'dieties' of our ancestors, and cultivate new 'rituals' based on the stories and art and communal practices... but without the hard and fast beliefs in them as literal truth.
We already do this with Santa, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny...etc... to enchant our children....and often ourselves. We understand our history better if we keep certain aspects of it alive, and not just in books and university lectures. In the USA there are many reinactments of Civil War battles... not because we approve of the conflict (well... most of us) but because it is about us. In the UK, there are a number of Wiccan gatherings, but I doubt more than a small % take it totally seriously. Here I know people who regularly attend church, but who use it as a social, organized way to confront ideas and issues and share them with others. (The Unitarians ... I used to be one... do church-like things without a lot of worry over the more metaphysical elements.)

All that being said, I worry every day about the fact that tolerating religious views involves allowing even the fanatical extremists to preach their doctrines..... but there's just no clear place to draw a line that can be enforced. The US Constitution says "there will be no establishement of religions".. but also says religion may not be prohibited. The trouble is, many Christian divisions take literally the admonition of Jesus to recruit and convert NON-Christians... and thus take issue with the idea of NOT "establishing" religion: and the 1st Amendment is often totally ignored until someone makes a court case about it--- where conservative judges often find a way to let them get away with being pushy. (freedom of speech & all that)

Human being are not computers... they are fallible... and they WILL often act according to what "feels good" and is comfortable under the duress of peer pressure, rather than endure the hard work of **thinking** to much about their own beliefs. Education, as currently practiced, can do only so much to instill reasoning that will help humans gradually relegate our culture & history to a reasonable place in our lives, enriching rather than enslaving us.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 19 Nov 12 - 09:07 AM

Bill, your mention of Santa Claus made me think. As a child, I was taught to believe in Father Christmas, the Tooth Fairy and Jack Frost. I really thought they existed and they were part of my mindset of the world. I was also taken to church by my mother and taught to believe in God. Now, the Tooth Fairy always left sixpence under the pillow, Father Christmas filled my stocking and Jack Frost artistically decorated my (unheated) window with frost patterns. God wasn't in evidence. Now, of course, the first three have been consigned to the bin, yet I believe in God still. Please don't assume I'm offering this as 'Proof' because it's no such thing. I'm just exploring these phenomena. After all, one could as easily subscribe to Jack Frost as to a deity. My husband believes in 'spirits' (bad ones) as do most Africans, Muslim or not. I pooh-pooh this, but have I the right to do so? He has no more and no less 'Proof' than I. Perhaps what I'm saying in a woolly way is that no-one can prove or justify their beliefs, and one has to accept people's religions and tenets as part of their make-up. They can't convince you and you can't disillusion them. If we bludgeon everyone whose mindsets annoy us, we'll become horrible verbal bullies.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 06:40 PM

If someone believes in a God then to them it exists. If it guides them in their decisions, lifestyle and deeds then that is tangible proof that their God exists.

So, lessee. "I believe in God. I believe God guides my deeds, lifestyle and decisions, so, because I believe he does that, and because I believe in him, he must exist."

Will the circle...be unbroken...?

(I won't even bother to revisit the "tangible" thang...)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 03:13 PM

"If someone believes in a God then to them it exists."

That is more than simple "begging the question"... it is an example of how we (well...many of us) do not reflect on how we confuse linguistic conventions with reality. NAMING something does not confer actual existence on it. We all 'know' what a unicorn looks like, but most of us also know that 'unicorn' is simply a generally agreed on concept that 'looks like' a horse with a horn.
The same principle operates with Jesus, Santa Claus...etc.
And with the word 'god', it gets VERY awkward because the notion has been so deeply embedded in language for so many thousand years that many people use it all their lives without coming to terms with how differently it is used. People ask "Do you believe in **GOD**?", and never stop to think that that very way of phrasing the question practically asserts that there IS some such thing, and dares you to disagree.

Love? Same thing.... it requires a lot of context to distinguish eros from agape' from philos from storge>....(ask any woman who has gotten a guy to profess 'love' for her).

Little Hawk *uses* the word god to mean some all-encompassing beingness that I find so vague that it feels like eating cotton candy.... but *shrug*, he likes the 'feeling' that he connects with it. Pete would differ... as would most Christians and Hindus.

It is not surprising that language clouds the very basis of the issue, as it take a lot of work and reflection to monitor our own thoughts and try to be sure we mean the same thing when ....ummm... "sharing" our opinions....

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 12:51 PM

No. It lost it in the thread title before anybody posted anything.

Anyway I like his Lizard theory. More logical than many other religious bollocks we are expected to respect. More fun too.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 11:40 AM

The article lost credibility when it referred to David Icke as a researcher.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 10:50 AM

I am. As long as you don't look too closely at the label on the bottle of wine I bring.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 10:37 AM

You must be a hoot at parties mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 10:11 AM

He seems to think that you need physical proof for a mental abstraction and that mental abstractions can't exist without physical proof.

Er, I shouldn't have to remind you, having typed the words so many times, that I neither seek proof for myself nor ask for it from others.

If someone believes in a God then to them it exists. If it guides them in their decisions, lifestyle and deeds then that is tangible proof that their God exists.

This is completely at odds with your comment above. "Tangible" means physical, and you just told me I wasn't to seek physical proof for abstracts! OK for the believers you so valiantly defend, then, but not for poor ol' Steve! Thank goodness I wasn't saying what you said I was saying anyway! :-)

In any case, your second quote is a classic case of begging the question. Nice one!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 09:31 AM

Whilst vaguely agreeing with Steve Shaw in terms of superstition hampering research and acceptance of said research, he shows shallow understanding of human nature when he questions my stance that for me there is no God. He seems to think that you need physical proof for a mental abstraction and that mental abstractions can't exist without physical proof.

I am appalled to see someone putting themselves up as rational refusing to accept the fundamental razor of Descartes.   I think therefore I am. Mr Shaw isn't exhibiting intelligence here. He is playing up to the character that gives superstitious logic choppers an excuse to say he is a radical whatever rather than putting forward the case for science.

If someone believes in a God then to them it exists. If it guides them in their decisions, lifestyle and deeds then that is tangible proof that their God exists.

The problems start when we are all asked to believe in their mental comfort blanket too.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 04:21 AM

Ah...I obviously don't exist - or someone stole my cookie!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Nov 12 - 04:14 AM

"That's the way you see it. For me they are interchangeable."

Well, we could have a long discussion about Descarte's existentialist ideas and Husserl's thoughts on intentionality but, basically, if what you say is true, then I am not alive because I don't believe in god so, by your reasonig, I don't believe in life.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Steve here on an alien device
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 08:31 PM

You appear to have misinterpreted my remarks. I was juxtaposing Musket's comment, which see, with my own take. Do try to keep up and stop wasting our energies in having to explain the simplest things to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 07:47 PM

Steve, i just can't get over you first two contradictory sentences...here, read it again...:

"...For me there is no God." Sheesh. Now lookat here. There is either a God or there isn't. There is no "for me" about it."

Hmmm...OK...sort it out a little..maybe BEFORE you make such dogmatic claims!

Think about it!



Jeez!..Ever thought about being a Mormon Missionary?...or a door to door Jehovah Witness?..The nonsense level with the fervor to 'convert' people is about the same.....and about as scientific OR spiritual as a box of rocks!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 04:54 PM

Jeez, I'm glad that Shimrod has maintained the closed ranks possessed of rational people and refused to talk bollocks, which appears to be going a little viral in recent posts. "For me there is no God." Sheesh. Now lookat here. There is either a God or there isn't. There is no "for me" about it. The deluded and irrational among us will say "I believe in God. Look around: his existence is self-evident! I cannot be persuaded otherwise!" The sensible and rational will say "Some say that there is a God who is all-knowing, all-powerful, who trumps all the laws of nature that he himself is supposed to have designed, and who hasn't got a beginning or an end, and who created everything, yet I haven't seen one smidgeon of evidence for his existence. Interesting!" Let me do a Musket-pastiche: for me, there may be a God. I was brought up to believe that there is one. But in all my life I have yet to see any evidence for his existence. Not only that, he is posited as an explanation for all creation, yet those who position him thus never seem to be able to explain how someone far more complex than the complexities he's supposed to explain, who breaks every rule of nature there is, and for whom there is no evidence, can even remotely be the answer to anything, let alone everything. Now that doesn't mean that there isn't a God. But it does mean, after I've applied all my rationality to the issue, that the possibility of his existence seems very remote indeed. As a scientist, of course, I would be more than happy to take on board any evidence to the contrary that anyone puts forward. But I do reserve the right to remain a rational being by applying the usual standards to any "evidence" put to me. Which, unfortunately, rules out ancient stories, tradition, witness, visions, edicts and the sayings of religious leaders. Not to speak of over-bloated, tendentious videos.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 04:34 PM

Musket: "Still feeling touchy Goofus?"

No, not at all..had a great session....BTW. I responded to your last post on the adjacent thread.....pretty much in the vein of what Little Hawk so eloquently stated....(and of course I threw in come of my 'Sanity-isms', just to emphasize a point)......but it's pretty consistent...check it out.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 04:27 PM

War is God's way of teaching Americans geography.

Ambrose Bierce

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 04:05 PM

""Some of us (me included) have Faith, but not Proof.""

You,and they, are not the problem Eliza, since you have the sense not to claim to have proof.

It's the ones who claim that they have proof by virtue of a dream, hallucination, or what have you.

They are the problem because, starting with their "proof", they warp some weird occurrence into "evidence" to support that proof.

They simply cannot accept the fact that the unknowable is unknowable precisely because no genuine evidence can possibly be adduced to prove its existence.

If Pete were content, as you, to own his faith and stop trying to disprove the work of generations of those real scientists who actually understand the process............but hey! Evangelism is in his blood and the conditioning has left no inkling of doubt in his mind.

He can't help it, whatever our resident bullies may think. He's been to effectively brainwashed.

A great pity!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 03:24 PM

Thanks Little Hawk. Thougtful answer. For me there is no God. A pity but there you go. I have looked at the idea long and hard and found religion too convenient to those in power for it to have any place in my world. I accept it is part of life though just like war and pork scratchings.

In an adjacent thread someone quotes Hitchens razor. What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

Still feeling touchy Goofus?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 03:04 PM

" For me they are interchangeable. The fact that we think differently about that is fine, and presents no problem as far as I'm concerned. "


**sitting on my hands, lest I say something**

(why yes- I did type this with my nose)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 02:48 PM

That's the way you see it. For me they are interchangeable. The fact that we think differently about that is fine, and presents no problem as far as I'm concerned. Each one is free to think as they wish about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 02:01 PM

"Life" and "god" are in no way interchangeable. "Life" is a fact, as everyone on the planet proves. "God" is an abstract concept which no-one can either prove or disprove. Actuality and belief are not the same thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 12:17 PM

"This could be where science and the spiritual come together in a most profound way.."

This could be where I switch off my brain, lean back and talk bollocks ...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 09:19 AM

I don't really know how to define "God", Musket, because God is too large to define. The best way I can explain it is to simply put the word "life" in place of the word "God". Life is also too large to define, but we all experience it all the time, don't we? It's inescapable. We're part of it and can't deny it. As long as you are sentient, as long as you have consciousness of any kind, and as long as you have what we call "biological" life, you are experiencing life, you ARE life, and you're in the midst of life. Life is inside you, outside you, all around you. Whether you are still consciously in the midst of life after your body dies...well, that's something we can speculate about, argue about if we want to, but we won't know for sure until our biological death occurs.

And if we're not in the midst of life consciously anymore at that point, then we won't experience anything. But if we are conscious at that point, then we'll continue to experience.....life....just in a different form, that's all...or perhaps in a way that could be called "formless" (according to our present view of things).

Life is the alpha and the omega. Life is the holy of holies. Life is the beginning and the end. Life has given you everything. And you ARE life, in the midst of life. Life has even given you the free will to say, "There is no life."...but who would be fool enough to say that? ;-D   

You see, the word itself is the crucial factor in establishing the reaction...positive or negative. Some people just have a lot of trouble with the word "God", because they associate it with some church or religion or tradition that they don't like for some reason...but no one has trouble with the word "life". "Life" is universally accepted, because it's self-evident, it's undeniable, and we are all part of it. Many civilizations, some a good deal wiser than ours, saw God in exactly that way....not as an old man with a beard and a bunch of rules...but as the sacred, unbroken expanse of existence itself....as life.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 05:26 AM

I truly enjoy Chongo Chimp and his posts, very inventive of LH and not weird, just something a bit different to interest us. To me, Chongo is a part of the rich and varied selection of characters on Mudcat. As regards Religion, God, The Universe, The Afterlife etc etc,
let's all admit it, we can't know can we? Not for sure. Some of us (me included) have Faith, but not Proof. Some are ready to be convinced, others are totally incredulous. IF God exists, I'm sure He/She can cope with our attitudes. If not, then Death is the end. End of story.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 04:22 AM

GUEST,Musket sans cookie: "Thing is Little Hawk, the term God means different things to different people. Now it is a word meaning what hasn't been proven or disproven yet.

Two things spring to mind about this thread. Anaesthetic cocktails are obviously powerful and the shroud still seems able to pack em in,.."


Haven't you noticed that the knee-jerk reaction to the shroud, on the shear terror that it might, or might not be Jesus's....and the only people that brought it up were those bitching that I was promoting a religion....or saying it should be worshiped or something..that's their trip..and I've said nothing of the sort, nor have I said if I believed that it was/is the shroud of Jesus.....I only gave them a link...in the video one of the scientists makes the statement, "This could be where science and the spiritual come together in a most profound way.."
Now...to post that...and get the reaction from those who have some resentment to some church that pissed them off, and then have them project that onto me.......need I explain?
No...we're done.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 17 Nov 12 - 02:59 AM

Thing is Little Hawk, the term God means different things to different people. For instance when I was a child it meant an old wise man with a long beard who had the job of looking after me. Now it is a word meaning what hasn't been proven or disproven yet.

Two things spring to mind about this thread. Anaesthetic cocktails are obviously powerful and the shroud still seems able to pack em in, even the gullible who wish to be seen as intelligent.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 10:10 PM

It's good discussing this stuff on a reasonable basis, Steve. ;-) Thanks for the courtesy of your replies.

You ask, "But who's asking these "great questions in life"?" Well, all the great philosophers have. All the great mystics and prophets have (and many of their followers...or just interested parties who were intrigued by their work). Most serious artists, poets, writers, and songwriters have. I think that uncountable millions of ordinary people ask these great questions from time to time, when they're not distracted by the more basic problems of survival, earning a living, etc.

Regarding the Shroud of Turin: I went through a period when I was quite interested in that...about 20 years ago...and I read a bunch of stuff about it then, but I haven't though about it much lately. I'd have to go back and re-investigate. It's just a matter of available time and how much I want to devote to it at the moment, that's all.

I found it all quite interesting 20 years ago, but I never came to any really strong opinion about it one way or the other.

"All such roads lead to God-squaddery."

I'm not sure what that means. "God" is just a word that people use, a word they got from their culture, and they use it to mean a great many different things. Some people react badly just to hearing the word "God", but that has mostly to do with what they think it means. It might mean something quite different to someone else.

It's kind of like...most Americans seem to react badly to the word "socialism". I don't think they know what it means! Or...they ascribe a very different meaning (usually a vague and simplistic one) to that word than most Canadians or Europeans would.

You have to know exactly what someone else means BY the word God before you knew what you are reacting for or against. I've discovered that people mean so many different things when they say the word "God" that you have to discuss it with them for some time to find out what exactly they are talking about. If they just give you some fixed dogma that someone else has told them, then they're not doing much thinking about it at all. If, on the other hand, they themselves have many questions as to what the word "God" means...then you could probably have a very interesting talk with them which would lead to both people asking further questions about life, and they might end up talking about life...moral sense...purpose...identity...love...sense of "self"...ego...and all kinds of interesting stuff.

It isn't just a question of simple God-squaddery. Not if you're willing to look beyond just repeating set religious dogma and looking no further than the surface of that dogma. It's a question of the whole nature of conscious existence, life, love, and death, and that's worth talking about, I think. It's a universal subject...not limited solely to organized religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 09:14 PM

Yeah, Steve. I have no problem with that. There are some great questions in life, though, where I don't think we'll ever be able to come up with any empirical evidence to answer them, because they are not matters of outer (exoteric) measurable phenomena. They are matters of inner (esoteric) meaning and consciousness. That's not stuff you can measure or observe by means of instruments, but it is stuff that still happens powerfully in our lives and affects us deeply.

Well yes, in other words there are things still to be explained. But who's asking these "great questions in life"? Unfortunately, it's usually (possibly not always - I always like to leave room...) a bunch of religious-minded or (almost worse) spiritualistically-minded morons who "ask" these questions. They are often not questions at all, but side-swiping rebuttals of plain-as-nose-on-face evidence. Never say never, of course, but always beware of those who claim stuff that "cannot be measured", etc. All such roads lead to God-squaddery.

I can't comment on the Shroud of Turin, as I'd have to do a lot of reading first in order to know more about it. I have no set opinion about the Shroud of Turin.

Then do a five-minute wiki job. It's really easy. Get yourself an opinion. You do appear to have opinions on mucho stuff that has vexed philosophers for millennia, so what's yer problem? Pete-ism?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 08:24 PM

Frogprince, I use Chongo much the same way that the cartoonist Walt Kelly used the many characters in his famous comic strip (such as Albert Alligator, Pogo, Churchy La Femme, Howland Owl, etc...). The fictional character is larger than life, a humanized animal, exaggerated in some respects, intentionally humorous, and serves to satirize various things that are going on in our lives and all around us.

If I had the artistic ability, I'd love to draw Chongo's satirical adventures too...and I'd do it in the style of Walt Kelly or Frank Cho (the writer of Liberty Meadows)....IF I had that skill. As it is, I'm restricted to prose.

Chongo does reflect some of my own opinions, yes. He also often diverges sharply from my own opinions on a number of things, because he's an extreme character. He's got a bizarre personality and a zeitgeist all his own.

I don't believe anything about the afterlife in an absolute sense, although I do feel that there is probably some type of afterlife in the form of "soul" and "consciousness". I don't subscribe to any specific set of religious dogma regarding that....I just think it's fairly probable that there is a continuance of consciousness and identity beyond the life of the body.

Not saying I KNOW...because I don't know.

I find the many different ideas people have about it quite interesting. I really do think that the primary motive behind the OP was something along this line: "Oh, boy! I've found another religious nutcase who believes all kinds of idiotic mumbo-jumbo about life after death. I'm going to have much fun ridiculing him on Mudcat...and by implication, ridiculing everyone else who believes in tripe like that. We'll all get together and pat ourselves on the back for being such bright, rational, modern people who don't believe in any malarkey like that."

Hence the thread. And all the usual gang shows up to enjoy sharing together in their amusement at the utter stupidity of people who could have beliefs about anything otherworldly that isn't yet "proven" in an empirical fashion. Same shit...same crowd....same target...different day.

I'd say that was Chongo's main point, and mine also.

Just realize, though, that Chongo is like a character in a political comic strip. He is there for social satire, he's not there to be my personal doppelganger, because he's a lot different from me.

****

Steve Shaw - "Asking for evidence is not asking for proof, nor is it saying that the other guy's notion is wrong. It's just asking for evidence, that's all."

Yeah, Steve. I have no problem with that. There are some great questions in life, though, where I don't think we'll ever be able to come up with any empirical evidence to answer them, because they are not matters of outer (exoteric) measurable phenomena. They are matters of inner (esoteric) meaning and consciousness. That's not stuff you can measure or observe by means of instruments, but it is stuff that still happens powerfully in our lives and affects us deeply.

I can't comment on the Shroud of Turin, as I'd have to do a lot of reading first in order to know more about it. I have no set opinion about the Shroud of Turin.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 08:19 PM

About seventeen years ago I had a fairly extensive sinus operation. Polyps, brought on by smoking for about thirty years before my brain kicked in and I quite. But my sinuses were so plugged up with polyps that I could hardly breathe through my nose and it would give me occasional panic attacks.

Anyway, my ENT operated endoscopically (went in through my nostrils with a minuscule camera and itty-bitty Roto-Rooter and cleaned everything out), prior to which, he had the anesthesiologist put me completely under.

No "out of body experiences" and I don't remember roaming the Cosmos or encountering Flights of Angels, but when I came out of the anesthetic in the recovery room, I was One Happy Dude!!

I don't know what the anesthesiologist used on me, but I want some more!!

Don Firth

P. S. And I never got into drugs back when it was in vogue—already drank unhealthy amounts of coffee and smoked like a chimney, which is what got my honker into trouble in the first place. And the occasional beer. Too many bad habits already. Why add something illegal with mind-altering drugs when I like my mind the way it is?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 07:52 PM

"But if you (and folks like you) was willin' to just admit that you don't KNOW fer sure whether there is an afterlife or not...then we'd have a basis for mutual respect. And this thread woulda never been launched...cos it was launched for one purpose: to ridicule other people for givin' consideration to a possibility that the OP didn't think deserved any respect."

1. L.H., you come off kind of...odd?...in putting what are obviously your own sincere strongly felt beliefs here through the "mouth" of a fictional half-crazy anthropomorphic chimpanzee.

2. If you read through the article which the original poster linked, you might see that he wasn't picking on some kid with thick glasses or red hair; he was shaking his head at a writer who was making exceptionally grandious claims about proving unprovable things, but who happens to be
      BAT SHIT CRAZY!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 07:34 PM

100

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 07:33 PM

Steve Shaw: "As one of your culprits I can tell you that we don't take anyone's opinion as fact...."

OK.. You've given your opinion...now shut up!..not interested..you have nothing to say...except telling people they're experiences don't exist,because you didn't experience them....Maybe you should spend less time in the bathroom and get out more...maybe you'll experience life..or intelligence..or
love...or something else you can't prove, because you don't see it!!

Steve again: " I won't say that your shroud videos were made by liars. But I want a very simple thing. Evidence. Proper evidence,...."

Maybe you ought to watch it.....
What a friggin' low input blowhard!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 06:57 PM

Eliza... rest assured, those accounts of feeling the operation are hokum, at least in this day and age. The guy in charge of the drugs monitors your breathing, blood pressure, heart rate, body temp... if you are in distress, he knows and gives you enough meds to la-la-land you so you don't feel squat.

AND, IF, in the ODD case you do, which I do not believe, it's better that you feel all the pain while being incapacitated enough to NOT flinch when yer cut on accounta that ain't such a good thing, is it? Whaddya wanna do? Be in pain for a while or in pain for a long time? Maybe even die?

I am all for short term pain for long term gain. When the doc says, "This is really gonna hurt but don't move.", I don't move. Simple stuff to me. Been there. Done that. Got the Johnny Shirt.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 06:00 PM

Evidence is great, Steve, if ya can find it. I always look first for the evidence. Sometimes it is very hard to find, though. Sometimes I don't know how to find it...or where? Sometimes there is no evidence available. This does not prove that a given proposition which is lacking evidence is wrong...and it don't prove that it's right either. It just remains as a hyothetical proposition in that case. It remains a matter of opinion or conjecture. Not proven right. Not proven wrong either.

Which was the whole point of my post if you'd care to review it. And scientists neither claim proof nor ask for it. If you see one doing either, they are not scientists. Asking for evidence is not asking for proof, nor is it saying that the other guy's notion is wrong. It's just asking for evidence, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 05:04 PM

Evidence is great, Steve, if ya can find it. I always look first for the evidence. Sometimes it is very hard to find, though. Sometimes I don't know how to find it...or where? Sometimes there is no evidence available. This does not prove that a given proposition which is lacking evidence is wrong...and it don't prove that it's right either. It just remains as a hyothetical proposition in that case. It remains a matter of opinion or conjecture. Not proven right. Not proven wrong either.

I can't even prove that Cleopatra got bit by an asp...all I got to go on for that is hearsay in old books. I can't prove a whole lotta stuff that happened in the past, all I can do is hazard a guess about it, rely to some extent on what others have said about it, and keep thinkin' about it with an open mind....cos I got no way of knowin' for sure.

Then too, there are things one experiences personally, directly...therefore havin' direct experience and some knowledge about it...but not havin' any evidence afterward with which to convince others. That don't mean the experience didn't happen. It just means it didn't happen in such a way as to yield....observable physical evidence after the fact.

We've all had such experiences. If you haven't had some experience I did, that don't make my experience "unreal" or untrue...it just means you ain't acquainted with it, that's all. You weren't there. You can't disprove it. I can't prove it. So what? If I had it, I still know for myself that it really happened. If you don't believe it did...or even could...then yer callin' me a liar...or a fool. And on what basis? Far as I can see, the only basis in that case would be that you figger you already KNOW what can and cannot be...givin' you what would appear to be a God-like power called "omniscience". You see, yer blind faith in your own omniscience don't impress me any more than I would expect you to be impressed if I acted that way.

But if you (and folks like you) was willin' to just admit that you don't KNOW fer sure whether there is an afterlife or not...then we'd have a basis for mutual respect. And this thread woulda never been launched...cos it was launched for one purpose: to ridicule other people for givin' consideration to a possibility that the OP didn't think deserved any respect. So he launched the thread to make fun of all the people in the world who don't think as he does and attract othes to join him in makin' fun of them...kinda like a bunch of kids in a school gettin' together in a little gang to bully "the weird kid" who wears thick glasses or has red hair or is a foreigner or somethin' else like that.

You wouldn't like it if you were the ones on the receivin' end. It ain't evidence yer after at all...yer after a chance to put down some other people for not thinkin' as you do.

I'm not talkin' about the Shroud of Turin here. I'm talkin' about the games people play to enlarge themselves by belittlin' others.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 04:35 PM

Now I guess the 'know-allogists' on the forum, who don't know anything but their opinions, which of course, were gleaned from other people's opinions, would care to take exception...fuck 'em!..they don't know what they're talking about!
..but we run in to this all the time on here.

As one of your culprits I can tell you that we don't take anyone's opinion as fact. We request evidence. Your clinically-dead patients who "came back" cannot supply evidence. They are uncorroborated, subjective witnesses. Possibly very genuine in their convictions. Now I know what you're thinking (heheh - nothing useful ;-) ): that we science-Spock-automatons won't accept anything that can't jump above a bar that's impossibly high. Not so. I won't say that those patients are liars. I won't say that St Bernadette was a liar. I won't say Moses was a liar. I won't say that your shroud videos were made by liars. But I want a very simple thing. Evidence. Proper evidence, not claims, witness, visions, and...well, you know the rest. In the case of your beloved shroud videos the bar is set very high, for the simple reason that that there is already overwhelming evidence that the damn thing and Jesus had nothing to do with each other. And it's proper evidence, obtained using the best honest science available, and it's repeatable too, all very down-to-earth and not in the least bit mystical.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 04:30 PM

That work will never be done. It'd be like tryin' to empty the ocean with a bucket. I suggest havin' a drink instead. The results will be confirmed and indisputable, and no one will slag ya off for bein' "different" from them in respect to yer ideas and yer interests.

Well, not unless yer wife objects, that is...

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 04:12 PM

"Now I guess the 'know-allogists' on the forum, who don't know anything but their opinions, which of course, were gleaned from other people's opinions, would care to take exception...fuck 'em!..they don't know what they're talking about!"

Well they should be better behaved by now, shouldn't they, GfS - especially as we've now got someone with your level of wisdom and sagacity 'in charge'. You've obviously still got some work to do!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 03:49 PM

He's like most people. He thinks he knows it all, and just ask him. He'll tell ya. If it IS what he thinks, it must be right, right? If in ain't, it must be wrong. Otherwise HE'd be wrong. And that's....inconceivable!!!!!!!!!!

He's got a LOT of company here. And in every bar. And, matter of fact, almost anywhere ya go. In government too. They don't necessarily agree with each other about a lotta stuff...but they're still ALL right ALL the time. Just ask 'em. ;-D They even KNOW stuff they got no possible way of knowin'. How? Well, that's how sheer brilliance works!

Or is it just blind faith? (somethin' these types complain about a lot whenever they see it...or think they see it...in other people)

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 01:11 PM

Frogprince is taking the part of a know-allogist...but then, what does he know?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 12:53 PM

Far more disturbing are the accounts (rare, thank goodness) of patients who weren't totally anaesthetised yet couldn't signal in any way that they were in excruciating agony. They could recount verbatim the jokes, music played (yes, my sis says they play music, tell jokes and natter away while in theatre, to pass the time) and afterwards were completely traumatised by their ordeal. I'd rather be floating about inspecting a nudie pic than feeling every cut and slit!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 12:36 PM

"....at least those who were REALLY floating above the operating table KNOW what they're talking about!"

There, thank goodness, that settles it; we now have genuine incontrovertable proof that OBEs are real !

In a little side-light to this: One of the patients GFS referred to was gay before the episode. But, while floating around up there in his heavenly and enlightened state, he realized that his decision to become gay had been a bad one, and he became straight.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 12:03 PM

On one occasion to my cardiologist, we had a discussion about this and similar things. she told me that she had 'lost' several patients..as in clinically dead..who were revived, and they seem to say the same thing, and described, individually pretty much the same experience. Most did not want to come back.
Now I guess the 'know-allogists' on the forum, who don't know anything but their opinions, which of course, were gleaned from other people's opinions, would care to take exception...fuck 'em!..they don't know what they're talking about!
..but we run in to this all the time on here. They are stuck in mid-air, sorta like those 'floating' above the operating table....at least those who were REALLY floating above the operating table KNOW what they're talking about!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 11:35 AM

"Anybody can say anything, can't they!" Not only can anybody say anything, anybody can do anything. What with 7 billion people in the world, any damned fool thing you can think of, there is someone out there has tried it.

As for your point, Eliza, if someone was operation on me and I was floating above it in the air, my attention would be totally focussed on what they were doing to me, and not looking for rude pictures in odd corners.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 05:22 AM

We're heading perilously towards the "I think, therefore I am" theory. If one thinks one is 'out of body' is one really so? If one thinks one is 'in Paradise' is one really so? If I feel I'm posting this, is it true or all in my mind? Are we really here or is it all a figment of our imagination? The reply is of course that we cannot prove any of it. On that basis, we just have to act 'as if' and go from there.
By the way, my sis told me of several patients who watched their own operations from a position high above their own selves on the table. They said they'd floated up and watched the surgeon chopping and stitching. So, to test the next one that claimed this, they put a large rather rude nude picture flat on the top of one of the tall pieces of equipment in the operating room. Not one of the OBE's said anything about it, or could describe it. So it was all a hum!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Jim McLean
Date: 16 Nov 12 - 04:08 AM

If you can't take it with you I'm not going.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 11:28 PM

Steve Shaw: " I have this recurring dream in which I'm a rock...Help I'm a rock....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 08:54 PM

it is perilous to object to someone who says they feel as if they are out of body.

I don't object to that in the slightest! Saying you feel like you've been out of body is not the same thing as asserting that you have been out of body. I have this recurring dream in which I have to obsessively buy cheap brandy in a branch of Sainsburys with a very strange layout. Very detailed it is and it's the same every time. Jeez, it's so real! I hate brandy, too! I might tell you that I felt like I was doing that in Sainsburys and you'd hardly object, but if I tell you I really was transported out of bed into that Sainsburys, you'd know I really was away with the bloody fairies this time. You say you've been out of body? Well where's yer evidence then! Anybody can say anything, can't they!

Oi, Mr Alien...put me DOWN!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 08:34 PM

""The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive""

Movie Quote, Full Metal Jacket

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:51 PM

At any rate, I posted because Mrrzy had posted to this thread, and though as a UK Mudcatter, you might not know this, she is a denizen of the Charlottesville area, and I thought she'd be amused.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:33 PM

Given that it says "OBEs can be induced by brain traumas, sensory deprivation, near-death experiences, dissociative and psychedelic drugs, dehydration, sleep, and electrical stimulation of certain parts the brain, among others", it is clear that an OBE simply means that the experiencer feels as if they are out of body.

From my point of view, it is perilous to object to someone who says they feel as if they are out of body. As both a scientist and a harmonica player, you might fare better.

As it is, I have enough trouble with IBE's-particularly those involving the court system.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:31 PM

I was gonna cite ONE post as a HAHAHAHAA! but there have been multiple such. Bravo and thanks for the laffs!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:30 PM

Steve, you are a pedantic old sod. LOL.

I hope someday to meet you in person because I think you'd be a hoot. (That means a very humourous fellow.)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:25 PM

Thought so. This assertion was made by a "researcher" in the journal of the Society For Psychical Research, one Susan Blackmore, in 1983, following a postal survey (yeah, right!).

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/PDFs/JSPR%201984.pdf

But she changed her mind about all this rubbish, stating in 2000:

It was just over thirty years ago that I had the dramatic out-of-body experience that convinced me of the reality of psychic phenomena and launched me on a crusade to show those closed-minded scientists that consciousness could reach beyond the body and that death was not the end. Just a few years of careful experiments changed all that. I found no psychic phenomena - only wishful thinking, self-deception, experimental error and, occasionally, fraud. I became a sceptic.

There ya go. The only out-of-body experience you'll ever have is going for a dump. You show that turd who's boss!

Susan is married to the estimable Adam Hart-Davis, by the way. That don't mean a thing, I know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:11 PM

One in ten people has an out-of-body experience once, or more commonly, several times in his or her life.

What an utterly ludicrous assertion. Does wiki really say that? (I'm off to check in a minute). Had it said that one in ten people claim that they have had an out-of-body experience once, or more commonly, several times in their lives, it would be slightly more credible.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 03:00 PM

There a John Prine song that deals with that, Frogprince.

I hear you, Stim.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 02:33 PM

At least I haven't had to resort to IHEs recently.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 02:30 PM

I'm not fussy, 999, any experience at all would be good.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: frogprince
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 02:08 PM

I've gotta stop messing around on this computer late at night so much; I've missed out on a couple of good in-body experiences.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 02:04 PM

I'm still hoping for an IBE (in body experience). The OBE is old hat for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 12:54 PM

OBE's really do happen, but the "what", "why", and "how" are up for grabs.Charlottesville, in some rcent poll or other, was decided to be the best small town to live in the United States. Maybe this was a contributing factor:-)

From Wikipedia:

An out-of-body experience (OBE...) is an experience that typically involves a sensation of floating outside one's body and, in some cases, perceiving one's physical body from a place outside one's body.
OBEs can be induced by brain traumas, sensory deprivation, near-death experiences, dissociative and psychedelic drugs, dehydration, sleep, and electrical stimulation of certain parts the brain, among others
One in ten people has an out-of-body experience once, or more commonly, several times in his or her life.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 07:46 AM

It stands for Other Buggers' Experiences. To join, you have to promise never to ask for evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 07:43 AM

How on earth did so many people from Charlottesville get The Order Of The British Empire ?

puzzled, Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 05:53 AM

Hallucinatory experiences, either spontaneous or created through substances, dance, music etc. appear to have been part of 'religious' ritual since pre-religious times. Mike William's excellent book, 'Prehistoric Belief - Shamans, Trance and the Afterlife' is enlightening on the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 15 Nov 12 - 05:28 AM

Here in Civilisationville, getting an OBE is somewhat of a privilege don't you know....

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 10:48 PM

Donuel... going to read more on autism. I had thought that neurological mis-wiring which caused 'similar' situations to random dreams was involved.

I do hate to be hasty in my remarks.....

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 10:21 PM

Steve Shaw: "Fer chrissake, I have weird dreams every night."

Wake up!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 09:31 PM

Is wanking frowned upon in the afterlife ?

Eternity is a bloody long time to have to keep your hands out your pockets

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 09:20 PM

From Wankers onward should not have been in italics.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 09:13 PM

• a survey in 1975 in the USA showed that 25 % of students and 14% of residents from Charlottesville, Virginia, claimed to have had OBEs.
Wankers. And to think that these deluded, lying pricks are probably running your country today.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 09:05 PM

"part of my brain - probably the part connected with memory - neurons occasionally misfire and I experience false memories, or dream memories, or 'lost' memories from an earlier phase of my life."


those who have autism see similar things every day! Bill D.


Dear Bill, Just in case you like to be accurate and truthful in your remarks, I have taken this time to remind you that you far off the mark of being correct. Your statement is neither medically, neurologicly or psychologicly true.

Temporal lobe hallucinations are not an aspect of autism.
Autism has savant aspects in its unique ability to see all the seperate parts of an thing or scenario while non autustics see an averaged out surface of the whole as one thing. The stimuli can sometimes be overwhelming for an autistic be it touch sound smell taste or visual overload. Perceptions being hightened lends itself for others to shy away from autistic people more thatn autistics shy away in a social awkwardness. Severe autism does have social deficits but very rarly antisocial. There seems to a infection that creates so much formic acid in the gut that it causes autistic like symptons of a debilitating magnitude at ages 2 to 5 and causes ongoing damage.

Shimrod when we magnetically stimulate the R T lobe into hallucination test subjects are able to recall their experience. Extremely high stimulus has not presented with amnesia of the event either. Your event may be triggered Temporally but deeper toward the hippocampus, or involves the angular cortex so you are unable to verbalize the event later but can process that the event has occured.

Neurologist and Psychiatrist Dr. Sax has his new book out pertaining to hallucinations of all sorts. One out of 10 or 12 people have the ability to hallucinate as part of normal thinking, the same as some people talk to themselves to concentrate many people are able to "see" outside the box. This is normal for many dyslexics, so normal in fact they don't realize others do not think or see this way. Picturing a triangle inside a circle floating in midair to study its characteristics is as normal for many as drawing it to see it for a more 2 dimensional mind. Hallucinations of all sorts from the normal to the bizarre are discussed. Anyway Sax has just finished his npr book tour so it is readily available.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 08:57 PM

Mrrzy: this discussion prompted me to Google "Out of Body Experiences", and I found this:

• a survey in 1975 in the USA showed that 25 % of students and 14% of residents from Charlottesville, Virginia, claimed to have had OBEs.


Thought you ought to know:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 07:30 PM

Fer chrissake, I have weird dreams every night. I always tell the missus about them and they keep her highly amused. She's almost come to expect the relaying of some zany recollection or other just about every day. Sometimes I even eat extra cheese last thing in the hope of instigating entertaining dreams. It pisses me off when people get all mysterious about stuff like this which is all a completely normal part of life, no spirituality, no mysticism. Wankers.

And not you, Shimmers. You correctly describe what most religious suckers would characterise as something incredibly "spiritual" (aka "I'm superior to you cos I get these vision thingies innit") as normal experiences that you make no major claims for. Bit like my bloody ball lightning when I come to think of it. You know it's right, I know it's right, but what we have is witness only and we just don't expect anyone to believe us. Ironically, though, the people who throw their hands in the air, and say that I know what I know but I can't prove a damn thing, are far more likely to be believed than the religious tossers who preach myth as truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 06:47 PM

Shimrod, were your seizures in your right temporal lobe? Those are the ones that come with the mystical weirdnesses, but then again, damage to the right lobe tends to go with weirdnesses anyway like neglect, where you not only don't feel your left arm, you don't believe you have.

Proof of heaven is a movie, not proof of heaven.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 03:55 PM

Exactly, Shimrod... and those who have autism see similar things every day!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 11:04 AM

OK, here's some anecdotal stuff which is certainly not "proof" of anything.

I have mild epilepsy - which has given me some strange experiences. I think that I probably developed symptoms as a small child but they gradually faded as I got older and then came back in my 50s (don't know whether this is normal or not).

Occasionally, I would have temporary episodes of 'absence' or 'fugue' or whatever it's called. Twice, in the last few years, I've had full-blown fits and the doctors have now put me on medication which has virtually eliminted any symptoms (I still have to watch my diet as certain foods/drinks seem to act as triggers).

Anyway, it's the fugue/absence states that are the most 'interesting' (or alarming). In these states, which are of unknown duration, I experience a whole different, but utterly familiar, world. Don't ask me for details because when I return to 'normality' I've no recall of such details - just that I've been 'somewhere else'.

Looking at this dispassionately, it probably means that in part of my brain - probably the part connected with memory - neurons occasionally misfire and I experience false memories, or dream memories, or 'lost' memories from an earlier phase of my life.

If I was religious, or mystically inclined ... or a credulous fool (!) I could build a whole raft of crackpot 'theories' based on these experiences. I could claim contact with God, or an afterlife, or a previous life, or a parallel universe or ... well, you get the picture. But the experiences that I have had, as a result of my disability, do not allow me to claim 'proof' of anything other than that I have some abnormalities in part of my brain.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 10:30 AM

How IT all happened in a one minute video from NASA

(they...ummm.. don't pretend to show the afterlife)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Musket
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 09:11 AM

I had near death experience once.

1.0 down and into the 89th minute. By 91 mins, we we were drawing and when the ref blew in the 94th minute, we were 2.1 up.

Near death? Yeah. Weird feeling? Yeah.

Mind you, the afterlife for many clubs is the fizzy pop league.

Am I missing something here? Oh. Right. Bible, truth and afterlife. All bollocks.

Next!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 06:12 AM

The author, Nikos Kazantzakis, (whose best-known work is Zorba the Greek) spent his life in a spiritual search, which he portrayed in much of his work. (His books were condemned by both the Greek and Roman Catholic churches, to which his response was: "You gave me a curse, Holy fathers, I give you a blessing: may your conscience be as clear as mine and may you be as moral and religious as I")

His epitaph is: "I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free."

That sums it up for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Will Fly
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 03:49 AM

Steve - it's a horror story for sure.

Billions of years ago, a particular combination of atoms fused into cells, with genes which fought with genes. These genes got carried by slime creatures -passed through several species with genetic twists and turns. Their carriers lived through ice ages, devastations, fires, floods, pestilences, wars, turmoil, tribulations, revolutions - to produce...:

Me.

(I'll get me double helix and leave now...)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 03:38 AM

"The wee small hours" ... is that when I have to get up at 3am to go to the toilet?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,VaTam on her Tab at stpid oclock in the morn
Date: 14 Nov 12 - 12:34 AM

Let The Mystery Be 

It is the way we were built.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:57 PM

Wouldn't be too surprised if the qualifying contest for entering the afterlife
has been taken over by Simon Cowell !!!???

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:39 PM

I once, 2 or 3 years ago, started a thread called What Went Big Bang? It ran & ran [must still be there somewhere], but never got an answer SFAIR. Another question that I've never found an answer to is, how can we have immortal souls and all that when we still have to piss and shit? Just doesn't seem right to me... Anyone see what I mean? In Heaven there is neither giving or taking in marriage, it sez. So no sex. Is there pissing and shitting, tho?

~M~

When they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven. Mark XII 25. There is a French wine called Pipi d'anges, but I bet they don't really.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:06 PM

11. mistakes are possible so study hard.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:03 PM

Since I thought of it here are

the new 10 strong recommendations.

1. We are all an expression of the continuity of DNA and RNA life forms made of the universe and by the universe while surviving on a knife edge of conditions that we have evolved to be able to endure from all of our adaptations our DNA can "remember".

2. We are alive today because of our relationships with other symbiotic and predatory life forms as well as the cosmos we are made of.

3. We are not alive solely because we have fought our way to the niche we enhabit, we survive because of our cooperation with the universe and all the forces that exist in the bubble of our existence.

4. I care not if you need to call this cosmic cooperation the love of God. I care deeply if you want to take an anti intellectual or anti science stand to condemn knowledge outside of the currently edited bible. Even the ancient Persians said as knowledge goes up, God goes down. As God goes up, knowledge goes down.

5. If you condemn the knowledge of man as anti God you are condemning the cosmos of which we are made, which is the epitome of ignorance and insults the faith you claim to defend. Anti science is denial of our part of universe and the universe, its elements and forces which are within us all.

6. So stop and cooperate. Be as you are meant to become. The stuff you wish to understand or merely sooperate with is already within you.

7. Stop with the this only never that. The universe is always a combination of this and that in all its permutations and evolutions.

8. Therefor be kind to one another for someday you shall be them and they you.

9. Shut thee up when you speak of having the only truth.

10. Go forth and be curious for the rewarding answers are magnificent beyond your current ability to see.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:43 PM

That did occur to me too on me read-through, but I thought I'd let it stand! ;-)

We all gonna die one day so cheer up!

Well, actually, being a human being in this vale of tears of ours, and having suffered the guilt-brainwashing of Catholicism for the whole of what passed for my childhood, I do find it bloody hard to think that I'm definitely going to snuff it one day and that there's no way out. That's natural. But it is also natural that pegging out is a part of living. I'm not going to be fretting about being dead once I'm dead any more than I was fretting about not being here yet before I done got born. I like to comfort meself with that thought, though I still want to live to at least 120!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:28 PM

Steve, we may all be a bit late on the compos mentis thing, but not too late for the mental compost thing.

(OK. Well, I thought that was clever!)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:08 PM

Heheh...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:05 PM

Steve... when you put it THAT way...

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:37 PM

Claims to an afterlife, or to near-death experiences, are always amusing but they are witness only, and witness only is not evidence. I always regard claims of an afterlife as the ultimate human conceit. We're so bloody good that this can't possibly be all there is - we simply have to go on....and on...and on! Here's a thought. If you are alive today you are the ultimate survivor. You are a rare victor in the struggle for existence. Unimaginably rare! Your dad (who was an unimaginably rare survivor himself) produced hundreds of billions of sperms and your mum (another unimaginably rare survivor) produced thousands of eggs. Try to get your head round all the possible combinations! The odds against you being you were hundreds of billions to one to start with, and even worse when you consider all that death, disease and destruction that goes on. Your chance of being here was the most minuscule of minuscule things, but you're here, in all your glory! And you were not a slug, a snail, a worm or a bloody amoeba! You were the right up there at the top of the evolutionary tree! Unimaginably rare top dog in a world of billions of unimaginably rare lesser dogs! You lucky, lucky bastard! So how come you want even more? To go on forever? Don't you think you've had a bloody good innings? When the day comes when I finally pop my clogs and start the journey back to stardust, I want to be compos mentis enough to do it with a smile on me mush! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:47 PM

Anna Taylor: Why do we die?
Eliot Deacon: To make life important.

After.Life (2009) quote

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:43 PM

Yup, gnu...it's that 'big bang' thing that's staring them right in the face...but they simply refuse to acknowledge that they do not know, scientifically..

I think it's kinda cool, myself...
The Great Mystery, as Russell Means loved to say....

Always, the Best Bits are saved until Last..

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:43 PM

I like After Eight mints.

As far as the underwear, kinda depends on where ya go eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:40 PM

Yes, Bruce...here we are...

And one day....we will be there.

Free at last...

You know, Gloria's son called it 'going back home'. Peter, as you may well remember, knew that he would die young, wrote about it in his poems, found after his death...and he had no fear at all, just a longing to be back there again, where he had always felt so at peace. He saw his own funeral, his parents, the face of the young lad who ploughed into him that night, but there was never any fear on his part, just a deep knowledge that his time here would be short and that it didn't matter, for 'home' was another place, even though he loved his parents so very much. He's never left them since, brought so many of people to them....Those whom we truly love *never* leave us, no matter that at times we may feel they have. They don't. Gloria found that out for herself many times after her son died, through different things that happened...

'Home' is a GOOD place to be...


Liz :0) x

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:37 PM

Anyone wanty to buy some afterlife mints?

When you go, don't forget a change of underwear. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 05:59 PM

Lizzie... sure there is proof. We came to be by chance. See, there was this big bang and then we were here. Wellll, to make a long story short, it took a long time, apparently, because things had to meld after the big bang. Makes sense, eh?

Does that want one to throw off religion? By religion, I mean meeting up once a week and deciding who needs help and how to help them. The ornate shit bugs me.

Scientists agree. The probability that we are alone in the universe* is very high given the numbers of stars they see at night. So, it IS possible that we are not "alone". I am quite sure that in the next billions of years, they have a slight probability of being correct.

*which seems to me to be demanding at an increasing asymtotic rate.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 05:59 PM

There is no proof scientific or otherwise as to how we got here, Liz. But here we are.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 05:22 PM

You need proof? You mean, you don't know? Weren't you born, knowing?
Hasn't it been in your Soul your whole life long? What don't you understand about death being merely another part of the journey?

I'm not talking 'religion' here, that man-made, control-crazy institution....I'm merely talking an Inner Knowledge that comes with Arriving on the Planet...

This 'there HAS to be scientific proof!' thing REALLY pisses me off...for there is NO scientific proof as to how we all got here, how the universe got here, how The Black Hole got here, but nope, on and on and on The Scientific Ones go.."If there's no proof then it isn't real!'

Oh, purleeeeeeeze!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 04:44 PM

There is a story about a great philosopher who noticed that, often in his dreams, he had the distinct feeling that he had discovered The ANSWER. The principle which would explain everything, the purpose and order of the Cosmos. Yet, when he awoke, he could never remember what that ANSWER was! Most frustrating!

So he put a notebook and pencil beside his bed, and tried a bit of self-hypnosis, telling himself that when this feeling came on him in his sleep, he should immediately wake up and write down what had been revealed to him, so that he might bring it to the world.

So that night, toward the wee, small hours of the morning, in his dream state, he had the feeling again—the principle which fully explains the Order of the Cosmos. His attempt at self-hypnosis kicked in. He roused from his sleep, grabbed the notebook and pencil, and wrote down The Principle of Cosmic Order. Then fell back and went into a deep slumber.

In the morning when he woke up, he reached eagerly for the notebook. He had written

My little fingers perfectly fit my nostrils.

Well . . . back to the old drawing board. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 04:15 PM

I believe in heaven and hell. Heaven was before I got married.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:04 PM

" "You never know what you'll find if you start looking without prejudice."

Except that 'prejudice' may not be exactly the right word. Many who 'look' in certain directions already have a 'predisposition' to interpret genuine experiences as metaphysical or religious...etc.
   The extreme of this is crowds wanting to believe they see an image of Jesus on a rusty water tank. If a person who already has an opinion... or predisposition... to the OOB or such like has an intense experience, well.... the word 'proof' in the thread title is almost always overused & inappropriate.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:03 PM

Oh, Eliza ~~ they wouldn't make the damned who were being burnt pay the gasbill, would they? Mind you, be a good hellish trick, that.   Reminds me oddly of the fact I read once in some old pupil's memoirs, that when, in old days when ejukayshun was ejukayshun, a boy was birched at Eton, the College would send his parents a bill for the cost of the birch! Good thinking, eh?

LoL.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:57 PM

Oh, come off it, GfS ~~ what did you post those things FOR, if not to demonstrate exemplars of, or evidence for, something you 'believed'? Don't be so disingenuous!

Regards

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:55 PM

Michael, if there is indeed a heaven (which I believe but cannot prove) there will no doubt be many surprises as to who is/isn't allowed in! Likewise 'Hell' (which I'm not sure of at all) will have some residents who erroneously thought they qualified for the Realms.
Just imagine the gas bill down there!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:51 PM

Amos: "You never know what you'll find if you start looking without prejudice."

No wiser words have you ever typed!..(well, at least that I've read of yours on here!)

The shit I went/am going through on the science thread is evident of that...and I never said I believed anything...I just posted a video link, that the biggest most nasty critics of it never watched, and a quote by Beethoven, in which I agreed with...and for that the imbeciles have been in full court press mode!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:50 PM

"...everything this guy describes has been turned up time and time again in researches relating to near-death experiences. "

Well...of course they have! Whether the sources are 'otherworldly' or not. *IF* there are glimpses of Heaven & parallel worlds...or *IF* they are just neural firing of brain cells which have had their normal activities disrupted.

To 'believe' in A is an extra step, while B is like Eliza notes, and already known to happen from drugs, dream states..etc.

'A' is just a more interesting answer.... to many. I think 'B' is the more interesting... and more likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:45 PM

"everything this guy describes has been turned up time and time again in researches relating to near-death experiences."

I agree.

I had an experience of that nature when I died(?) on an operating table when I was about ten. I recall a long journey into a whiteness, waiting in another white area and next thing I knew I was waking up in post op. I don't recall much more.

However, as soon as I see 'bible' anything connected with this kind of book, I begin to think someone somewhere is protecting a vested interest.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:40 PM

... 'n'see ~~ one of the torments of the damned is to lose your cookie!

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:39 PM

Eliza:

Peruse the sites I linked and you'll find quite a variety of different kinds of experience.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:38 PM

BUT Actually, Eliza, we won't find out either way, if my lot are right, because there won't be anything TO find out; but we will if you lot have it right, and we will all be suffering these gnarled treeroots & flames & horrible faces & all while you lot are flitterin'n'flyin'...

~Poo ~~ it's S-O-O-O-OH unfair

☺〠☺~M~☺〠☺

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:34 PM

Quit knocking the religion racket.
I tried to convince one of my sons to enter that 'profession' and get rich like Falwell et al., but he decided to be a lawyer instead.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:30 PM

As a Christian I do believe in the afterlife and the resurrection of the dead. But I also know that many medications cause vivid hallucinations, especially the opiates. What always makes me smile a little is that people who have had near-death experiences and glimpses of the next world always see very Earthly things, butterflies, angels whizzing about on their wings, singing, familiar faces etc. No-one can 'prove' anything, so I believe it's best to reserve judgment. We'll find out one way or the other soon enough. I often wonder what would happen if ALL my many Siamese cats were waiting for me Over There. There'd be a heck of a din, and wee everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Amos
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 12:13 PM

You guys should be aware--since your qualified opinions are so unambiguous--that everything this guy describes has been turned up time and time again in researches relating to near-death experiences. See Moody, Kubler-Ross, et al.

There's a lot of other research, as well, very rigorously done, into the nature of the mind, documented in a well-written popular book called "The Field" by Lynne McTaggart, which I highly recommend.

A collection of anecdotal narratives can be found here.

Several hundred more can be found here.

Here's a summary report of one doctor's researches/.

You never know what you'll find if you start looking without prejudice.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 11:05 AM

Why, I wouldn't give you two-bits for your two dimes!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:57 AM

20 cents

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:55 AM

Paradigms

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:29 AM

I'm not "putting down" anything... just remarking on the non-universality of the conceptual paradigms.....iffn ya' know what I mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:27 AM

I'm sure the neuro scientist is a fine person, just like Judge Napolitano from Fox News or Jerry Falwell from the grave.

Bill, don't put down the dream state, creative imagery and the unconscious mind, sometimes the greatest discoveries are incubated there.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:22 AM

"Remember, Dr. Alexander is a neurosurgeon. This guy knows the physical brain like no one else. The nine medical explanations he considers and dismisses as possible causes for his experience are:" blah, blah blah...etc....

Considers & dismisses, hmmm? It don't say at all why he dismisses them. I suspect that those 'memories' were just SO nice that he doesn't want to dismiss them.


So... *I* had this intense, clear dream the other night..... sit down while I tell you what IT proves about Life, the Universe and Everything.......

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:19 AM

The source for this article is www.BibleResearch.info. Does that give you an idea of its validity?

There is no valid discussion here.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:12 AM

As long as someone with relatively little education can make a buck in the religion business they will try to equate themselves with emerging concepts and discoveries as valid proof of their religion business.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:05 AM

don't you dare. that one finally got sorted.

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:03 AM

Can someone please combine this thread with the "Alternative To Science" thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:24 AM

Not only that, Henry, but along with the fire ya gotta listen to repeated versions of "What's it All About, Alfie?"

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:14 AM

You're going to burn in hell for this.
=(:-( D)

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:04 AM

So there is a positive side to it all then?

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:50 AM

It baffles me how anyone can be arsed reading such stuff.

You get born, life is shit, then you die, end of.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:47 AM

Uh huh.

Subject: BS: Afterlife new exciting proof?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:39 AM

Gleaned from a typically ludicrous stimulating item on fb:

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/11/12/proof-of-heaven-documents-existence-of-afterlife-multiverse-intelligent-life-beyond-

Discuss