Rayanne2010 wrote: » PLENTY!!! ******************************** Walk into any spiritualist or spiritist church and you will be given some evidence by mediums.. Go experience past life regression/hypnois and make up your own mind.. Or read books from the likes of Brian Weiss/Dolores Cannon to look at their past life/future life evidence.. Go to a physical seance where you will be given irrefutable proof....
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » What reasonable well thought out counterpoint would that be? There has not been any. I have not ignored anything incidentally. And incidentally a counterpoint to what exactly? You don't have to read the thread. Plenty going on elsewhere.
krudler wrote: » If by evidence you mean, y'know, bullshit, then yes there's plenty of that.
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: » Someone asking for my input on something constitutes an organised pursuit? If thats relatively organized in your world view I would hate to see how you run your life But nice out on replying to anything I actually said in most of my posts Exactly. You are expressing yours. I gave you mine. Only one of us appears bothered by the other person having done so though. You might want to dwell on that for a moment. Good life lesson then. Often when you express an opinion in life.... people sometimes go "Oh really? What makes you think that?". My point exactly. There is none. We simply have no evidence that there is anything after death. None. Nadda. Nichts. Nothing. Feck all. Diddly squat. We do however have much evidence linking human consciousness to the brain. So when ALL evidence we do have suggests the two things are inextricably linked and NO evidence we have suggests the possibility of a disconnect.... you can probably imagine if you try hard why I go one way and not the other. One does not need 100% conclusive proof to notice that if given choices X and Y that all the evidence points towards X so far and no evidence points towards Y so far.
Rayanne2010 wrote: » Take it you are well uneducated when it comes to these types of matters! :eek:
nc19 wrote: » Oh, I see now. You're one of them people. Pfft I am not in the slightest bothered by your opinion, just taken aback a bit by the tone and condesending nature of it. I would agree with your opinion in a large part. My 'opinion' was more of a hope hence why I typed /hope while it is most likely based on science and our understanding of it at present that there is nothing after death where is the harm in hoping? The whole point of a belief is that it is a belief and therefore not necessarily grounded in fact nor does it have to be. Ignored btw
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Correction - interpretations have been given not answers.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » I have not ignored anything incidentally.
nc19 wrote: » Oh, I see now. You're one of them people. Pfft
nc19 wrote: » I am not in the slightest bothered by your opinion, just taken aback a bit by the tone and condesending nature of it.
nc19 wrote: » while it is most likely based on science and our understanding of it at present that there is nothing after death where is the harm in hoping?
nc19 wrote: » The whole point of a belief is that it is a belief and therefore not necessarily grounded in fact nor does it have to be.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » The fact is, whether atheists like it or not, the vast majority across the world take their code from a religion and act accordingly. I don't believe many of them would be satisfied by nothingness. It's a point often ignored by those that preach atheism and such. I'm not religious, far from it, but I recognise this issue and the reality is that the theory of nothing after death does leave a void and something has to fill it. Simply living and no aspiration to something better afterward won't bind society together or make people act good in my opinion. Look at the crime rate in Ireland now compared to 40 years a go for example. Some would say life was worse in Ireland then but others would say life was safer and better for it under a more catholic and religious country. I do agree more often than not.
Terrlock wrote: » To be Born - to live and then to die and cease to exist - what's the point in that. It would make everything that happens utterly pointless.
krudler wrote: » Mediums? Educated enough to know they're nothing but scam artists. Nobody is psychic, if they were they'd willingly prove it under measured and clinical studies, but since nobody has and are more willing to prey on the vunerable and grieving to extort what money they can from them, I'll call bullsh1t until the cows come home.
Terrlock wrote: » Life after death, absolutely, it's the 2nd death people should be worried about. To be Born - to live and then to die and cease to exist - what's the point in that. It would make everything that happens utterly pointless.
Rayanne2010 wrote: » I would challenge you to read Arthur Conan Doyles the history of spiritualism ... he was a dedicated skeptic who set out to disprove life after death.. but found nothing but evidence so became an avid supporter of the spiritualist movement.
Rayanne2010 wrote: » Many not educated enough to know about scientific testing that does go on then? There are many many books written on the scientific facts based from psychic experiments.. I would challenge you to read Arthur Conan Doyles the history of spiritualism ... he was a dedicated skeptic who set out to disprove life after death.. but found nothing but evidence so became an avid supporter of the spiritualist movement. Also many do offer up their time to undergo testing.. some even made it their life long ambition. But for every supporter there is a skeptic so it will continue to be debated until people actually come out from behind their cloak of fear and have an open mind to see the other side of the argument.. I aint afraid of no ghosts! I was once though.. until I challenged my beliefs and actually went to the trouble of testing these theories out myself..
Maximus Alexander wrote: » Arthur Conan Doyle believed the Cottingley Fairies were real, yet the perpetrators later came out and revealed it had been a hoax. I wouldn't be putting too much faith in what he believed.
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: » So you are choosing to join the OP in dismissive ad hominem one liners used to cover your refusal to respond with substance to what others have said? One sad thing about textual forums such as this is that readers tend to assign tone to posts that is not actually there. Or use their imagined tone to avoid actually answering anything in those posts. There is no harm in ANY emotion in my opinion. Even hate and anger. It is what one DOES with their emotions that good and bad results come from. There is nothing wrong with hope. But many people use that hope to waste this life as their eye is on an after life. An after life there is NO reason to think anyone is going to get. And that is truely tragic. It becomes exponentially more tragic when people do this on behalf of others..... such as the aforementioned parents that watch their children die painfully of easily treated diseases..... because they "hope" their lack of medical intervention is pleasing to god and these children will live a much happier after life due to it. NO emotion is bad in and of itself. What we do with it however can be. Speak for yourself. I am not currently aware of holding any belief that is not grounded in substantiation. Nor am I capable of doing so. If there is no reason to believe X I can not simply flick a switch and CHOOSE to believe X. If YOU can then well done, but I certainly can not. The lability of your credulity is not something I share.
Rayanne2010 wrote: » everything you suggest is just for weak minded people imo. These people yoy mention, are they benefiting from your shortsightedness per chance? not one bit.. Funny how people have lots of opinions about something they have not experienced? (So unless you have driven a porche then your views on what a porche can do or what it can provide are somewhat invalid.. ) However, that is my opinion and I completely respect yours...
Rayanne2010 wrote: » everything you suggest is just for weak minded people imo. These people yoy mention, are they benefiting from your shortsightedness per chance?
krudler wrote: » He also thought Houdini was a genuine magician with real powers, even though Houdini showed him how he did his illusions.
Marcos Fit Rehearsal wrote: » why does there have to be some "point" to your life? There's no rational thought behind "life after death exists because I don't like the thought that it doesn't", that's just ego. You're carrying around three pounds of the most incredible living matter in the known universe in your pointless little skull. It's simultaneously creating and perceiving an entire consciousness and reality for you. You have empathy and love and literature and music, flippin sunrises and walks in the rain and puppies and all that shít. Isn't that enough? Just because it's temporary doesn't mean it's not amazing and wonderful, and just because it IS amazing and wonderful it doesn't at all follow that it has to go on forever. ETA: basically y'all need Buddha but that's a whole nother can of worms probably
Rayanne2010 wrote: » Yes & spiritualists would agree with this also... They hate the imposters too... However, the main point was that based on ALL the evidence given.. he came a believer...
bb1234567 wrote: » Life isnt amazing and wonderful for a lot of people
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/20f4606d019ca0b240328ff30d91e82b.svg)
