Discussion Afterlife (and related) general discussion

[Deleted member 847]

See here's the difference. Scientists use probabilities to understand that some things are more or less likely. We DO use evidence in our understandings. God, spiritualism and afterlife is no less or more likely than the existence of fairies or the easter bunny if you want to believe that way. Personally I'm passionate about understanding the truth about reality (and not just our perception and psychology behind it) as much as possible.

Denying things is unscientific, a real respectable scientists has an impartial view on the paranormal, especially when you consider that this phenomenon is at least backed by some kind of evidence, the same evidence we use in courts, and there were also some real lab experiments on ESP but because of stigma they're never taken seriously by the scientific community. Whenever someone tries to prove ESP in a lab he's accused of being a fraud, not using proper control etc. You just can't compare things like reincarnation, remote viewing, nde with fucking fairies. The probability of a fairy being true compared to ESP is not the same. There are many scientists who take into consideration ESP, because the chance of it being real is higher than just a random idea that you can think about. Take fairies and religions out of this, please.

 

[weedoge]

Denying things is unscientific, a real respectable scientists has an impartial view on the paranormal, especially when you consider that this phenomenon is at least is backed by some kind of evidence, the same evidence we use in courts, and there were also some real lab experiments on ESP but because of stigma they're never taken seriously by the scientific community. Whenever someone tries to prove ESP in a lab he's accused of being a fraud, not using proper control etc. You just can't compare things like reincarnation, remote viewing, nde with fucking fairies. The probability of a fairy being true compared to ESP is not the same. There are many scientists who take into consideration ESP, because the chance of it being real is higher than just a random idea that you can think about. Take fairies and religions out of this, please.

But denying fairies is unscientific... You can't just cherry pick. The fact we use evidence that isn't true evidence in court is more a statement on the courts rather than scientific method. Believe me no self respecting real scientists is going to take you seriously. I can compare anything imaginary with anything else imaginary...

But regardless my point isn't to just disregard anything its that no, there isn't any real scientific evidence to support ESP or anything like it. I'd be interested if you could provide me a scientific paper that proves these things.

 

[Deleted member 847]

But denying fairies is unscientific... You can't just cherry pick. The fact we use evidence that isn't true evidence in court is more a statement on the courts rather than scientific method. Believe me no self respecting real scientists is going to take you seriously. I can compare anything imaginary with anything else imaginary...

But regardless my point isn't to just disregard anything its that no, there isn't any real scientific evidence to support ESP or anything like it. I'd be interested if you could provide me a scientific paper that proves these things.

I could start giving you links, then you'll just search for the materialists counter-argument and copy paste it here thinking that you'll impress me because you guys have the status-quo. Nah maybe another time, I don't even keep track of the articles I read on the internet and I'm too lazy to try to find them now. I'm not denying fairies, who the fuck knows maybe in a parallel universe they exist. What I'm saying is that fairies are less probable than ESP. Now you're going to reply to this by saying there's no evidence for parallel universes.

 

[Deleted member 847]

If fairies were real, and some people would claim to have seen them, a biased scientist will never find evidence for them because in his close minded view of reality there can't be fairies. He has all figured out. In science anything should be open for investigation. Nobody claims to see fairies at the same rate some people claim to have an out of body experience, so it's just make sense to investigate them instead of just labelling them as hallucinations, which doesn't mean to accept them as being real, it just means being impartial until there's proof for any of the possibilities of them being fake or a real phenomenon (oh by the way we don't even know what the hell hallucinations are, we just know the process that triggers them).

 

[weedoge]

I could start giving you links, then you'll just search for the materialists counter-argument and copy paste it here thinking that you'll impress me because you guys have the status-quo. Nah maybe another time, I don't even keep track of the articles I read on the internet and I'm too lazy to try to find them now. I'm not denying fairies, who the fuck knows maybe in a parallel universe they exist. What I'm saying is that fairies are less probable than ESP. Now you're going to reply to this by saying there's no evidence for parallel universes.

I apologise for stating my point of view hehe. Its hard to take statements like "everything science ever discovered didn't make sense".

How are fairies less likely than esp? Neither of them have any real evidence. There are eye witness testimonies of fairies lol. Didn't mean to offend you but I don't hide the fact that I trust in science. Scientists aren't interested in hiding any truth and as soon as we're provided with absolute evidence we'll consider it you know?

Everything that happens has a mechanism and we attempt to understand those mechanisms. I'm definitely tainted by the way in which " spiritual" people have spoken to me in the past and attempted to manipulate when they didn't get their own way so Im sorry too for that.

Provide me with links if you like but yes there is generally a good explanation for non scientific things. I find it very hard to believe we are able to describe the fields that permeate our universe, something that seems almost magical and metaphysical, but can still be proven in a lab setting. Even considering the fact of collapsing the wave function by observing it, we can still test these things in controlled lab settings without them falling apart.

I'd ask you to prove ESP or NDEs to me with science but you'd be wasting your energy so I wont.

 

[weedoge]

If fairies were real, and some people would claim to have seen them, a biased scientist will never find evidence for them because in his close minded view of reality there can't be fairies. He has all figured out. In science anything should be open for investigation. Nobody claims to see fairies at the same rate some people claim to have an out of body experience, so it's just make sense to investigate them instead of just labelling them as hallucinations, which doesn't mean to accept them as being real, it just means being impartial until there's proof for any of the possibilities of them being fake or a real phenomenon (oh by the way we don't even know what the hell hallucinations are, we just know the process that triggers them).

Seeing something is the worst proof of it existing.

 

[weedoge]

If fairies were real, and some people would claim to have seen them, a biased scientist will never find evidence for them because in his close minded view of reality there can't be fairies. He has all figured out. In science anything should be open for investigation. Nobody claims to see fairies at the same rate some people claim to have an out of body experience, so it's just make sense to investigate them instead of just labelling them as hallucinations, which doesn't mean to accept them as being real, it just means being impartial until there's proof for any of the possibilities of them being fake or a real phenomenon (oh by the way we don't even know what the hell hallucinations are, we just know the process that triggers them).

Being impartial is not important due to the nature of scientific experiment. What you expect or want to find will not affect the outcome.

 

[Deleted member 847]

Seeing something is the worst proof of it existing.

The argument for NDE usually it's the fact that some patients report verifiable data after being out of body and it seems that their body could have not received that data when they were operated. If NDE were just people seeing themselves out of body and that's it, I'd agree with you there would be nothing else to it and I would not take them seriously either.

 

[weedoge]

The argument for NDE usually it's the fact that some patients report verifiable data while out of body and it seems their body could have not received that data when they were operated. If NDE were just people seeing themselves out of body and that's it, I'd agree with you there would be nothing else to it and I would not take them seriously either.

I'd be interested to see evidence considering I've heard exactly the opposite. A test was done with dome writing facing upwards above a persons body. After an OBE they weren't able to read back what was on the paper. I'm massively paraphrasing from memory but I'll see if I can find.

Its not about my beliefs that I already hold. I'm simply interested in truth.

 

[weedoge]

And if we discussed this long enough im sure it would devolve into the method of studies, double blind whatever etc etc and unfortunately that's one thing I don't know enough about to put my point across.

Wish I did have the knowledge and method but I don't and never will since I dropped out at 17 but its been a fun conversation

 

[Deleted member 847]

I'd be interested to see evidence considering I've heard exactly the opposite. A test was done with dome writing facing upwards above a persons body. After an OBE they weren't able to read back what was on the paper. I'm massively paraphrasing from memory but I'll see if I can find.

Its not about my beliefs that I already hold. I'm simply interested in truth.

The reality in which patients find themselves while out of body is believed to be very thought-responsive and reality fluctuations are very frequent. That's exactly why not ALL nde patients have reported verified data, but only a few like Pem Reynolds. There are also cases in which born blind patients can see in their NDE, but they can't see during their dreams as they say. Patients that have NDE when there is no brain activity, therefore no possible way in which their brain could have produced hallucinations and some heal from incurable diseases after them after having a experience in which an entity offers them to stay in that world or return to their body like Dr Eben Alexander.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-have-ndes-while-brain-dead.html (you can't compare these stories to some crackpot seeing a fairy and telling his doctor about it because of the larger amount of other possible explanations for that experience compared to NDE)

 

[Miss clefable]

Any scientific proof for the meaning of life

 

[Deleted member 847]

Any scientific proof for the meaning of life

the meaning of life is to find a way to catch the bus

 

[Miss clefable]

the meaning of life is to find a way to catch the bus

The point is we are all debating afterlife but what about now here in present this diabolical place

 

[weedoge]

Any scientific proof for the meaning of life

The meaning of life isn't a scientific question its a philosophical one. What is the meaning of mountains? Things just develop naturally and gradually, the "meaning" of it just isn't a scientific thing to ask.

The reality in which patients find themselves while out of body is believed to be very thought-responsive and reality fluctuations are very frequent. That's exactly why not ALL nde patients have reported verified data, but only a few like Pem Reynolds. There are also cases in which born blind patients can see in their NDE, but they can't see during their dreams as they say. Patients that have NDE when there is no brain activity, therefore no possible way in which their brain could have produced hallucinations and some heal from incurable diseases after them after having a experience in which an entity offers them to stay in that world or return to their body like Dr Eben Alexander.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-have-ndes-while-brain-dead.html

I'm going to concede and say that I don't have the knowledge required to refute you. I'll certainly read it though.

Born blind being able to see during and NDE is a big red flag for me personally but at this point I'm only working from half scientific knowledge and half what I've learned from scientists who actually know their shit. Ill read this and then look for the opinions of other scientists, namely physicists, on the subject.

 

[Deleted member 847]

The point is we are all debating afterlife but what about now here in present this diabolical place

Now we suffer brother

 

[weedoge]

Ndes and out of body experiences are one thing. I 99% don't believe in these things and 99.999% don't believe in an afterlife. And if there were an afterlife it would not be a conscious experience and it would not be an afterlife. Our slot for living and experiencing will expire.

 

[Miss clefable]

Now we suffer brother

Neither brother or sister I'm nothing

 

[Miss clefable]

Weedoge did you just realise what you said about the meaning of life statement

 

[weedoge]

Weedoge did you just realise what you said about the meaning of life statement

No, please tell me

 

[Miss clefable]

No, please tell me

The meaning of life is a philosophical question your right but it proves my point science can't prove everything funny though because a scientist would at least think about the question of life and it's meaning there's just no tool or measurement or lab test to prove a conclusive answer

 

[weedoge]

The meaning of life is a philosophical question your right but it proves my point science can't prove everything funny though because a scientist would at least think about the question of life and it's meaning there's just no tool or measurement or lab test to prove a conclusive answer

I'm not really going to try to explain this to you but yes, you can't conclusively measure a made up question. I could made up bizarre odd unanswerable questions and use them to laugh in the science but I'd look like an idiot doing it. I'll let you take your perceived win though.

Scientists think about the origin of life and we can prove that the meaning of life is almost definitely NOT that we were divinely designed. Science can't give us morals either because its not a matter of facts. The meaning of life isn't something factual, its an opinion. Science can't measure opinions.

 

[Miss clefable]

I'm not really going to try to explain this to you but yes, you can't conclusively measure a made up question. I could made up bizarre odd unanswerable questions and use them to laugh in the science but I'd look like an idiot doing it. I'll let you take your perceived win though.

Scientists think about the origin of life and we can prove that the meaning of life is almost definitely NOT that we were divinely designed. Science can't give us morals either because its not a matter of facts. The meaning of life isn't something factual, its an opinion. Science can't measure opinions.

The point is not about winning it was science does not prove everything nor does philosophy

 

[DarkTear]

Have you ever thought about the possibility of reincarnation as an animal (basically we're animals too)? You may laugh at this thought of mine, but it's as possible as no afterlife/reincarnation as a human etc., isn't it? We just don't know.
Imagine being reborn as a mice used in experiments, as a pig in industrial livestock farming etc.
I don't want to end this life just to end up being abused by our cruel species.

It's an disturbing thought, but I'm interested in what you think...
It may sound stupid, but these thoughts do really scare me at the moment.

 

[weedoge]

Have you ever thought about the possibility of reincarnation as an animal (basically we're animals too)? You may laugh at this thought of mine, but it's just as possible as no afterlife/reincarnation as a human etc., isn't it? We just don't know.
Imagine being reborn as a mice used in cruel experiments, as a pig in industrial livestock farming etc.
I don't want to end this life just to end up being abused by our cruel species.

It's an disturbing thought, but I'm interested in what you think...
It may sound stupid, but these thoughts do really scare me at the moment.

When I used to consider things like reincarnation, yeah definitely, doesn't make sense to me why you'd be more likely to be born as a human. I've even considered why am I a human even now? but we'll never know, there's no good reason. so if I were to be reborn as an animal I think it'd be just as random as where all my original atoms came from.

 

[throwaway123]

There is this uncertainty that bothers me. I simply don't know what happens after death. I can speculate, I can believe, I can conclude but I can not know. This is one of the reasons why I am hesitating.

 

[DarkTear]

Yes, and the more you think about it, the more anxious you become...
As an atheist/agnostic I never believed in anything my whole life. But now all these thoughts do come up. Maybe it's our survival instinct that wants to stop us.

 

[blurr21]

Theres a belief in moksha after living our lives on earth in hinduism,a heaven like in christianity,there are instances of grace given to earthlings as well in hindu scriptures,islam talks of nearness to allah and paradise with hadiths on how beautiful houses are in heaven..guess id like to be there asap

 

[lifeofregret]

Some people commit suicide because they lost someone or something. I feel like there is another parallel universe that those exist.

 

[lost illusions]

We are bodies of electricity and elements with an awareness. So I believe in physics 101. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only converted. The elements will return to the earth and something new can develop. The state of awareness is the question.
I might be alone in my thoughts but I'd be a fool to think we are alone in the universe, or here for that matter. Also I see 3 dimensions but science proves there is 6 so far. I can't confirm nor deny in an afterlife but the possibility is there