Author

Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 274. (Read 845578 times)

legendary
Activity: 2240
Merit: 1254
Thread-puller extraordinaire
April 25, 2015, 08:47:12 AM
If any one reads the Phoenix Journals, then invariably s/he will choose to conclude that the Journals are the WORD. Then, one will understand that GOD IS. MAN PLACES LIMITATIONS--GOD HAS NONE! Here are some highly relevant quotes:


Oh wow, I hadn't even realised quite how unhinged you truly are Jag! So some delusional lunatic posts about how he is an inter-dimensional being and you, what, just believe him?

Is that how it works or are you claiming there's actual evidence that he is an inter-dimensional galactic commander?

So you will simply conclude that Hatonn is wrong without even reading his writings?

Because the writings at that link are as unhinged as you are. Someone claiming to be an inter-dimensional galactic commander is already clearly suffering from a delusional mind state. One look at the collection of fanciful and entirely arbitrary claims being made attempting to paint some weird history involving numerous inter-dimensional beings, reads like the kind of crap L. Ron Hubbard wrote.

And why do you not respond to John Lennox and Thomas Nagel, both of whom emphasize the absurdity of atheism? Your response just doesn't add up!

They can emphasize it as much as they want, it doesn't make for a cogent argument. Your sources of reference are not credible and you are simply attempting to rebut the challenges to your absurd assertions by way of providing links which you assume are sufficient to objectively support your position.

They are not and they do not.

Try actually offering up a reasonable argument to support your bizarre assertions instead of using those links like BADecker continually does with his, equally useless, links to unsupported and unsound assertions.

Both of you utterly fail to make your case and so you resort to posting dishonest responses as though they were accepted facts even though they contain nothing of the sort.




full member
Activity: 438
Merit: 100
April 25, 2015, 08:14:40 AM
So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

There is no afterlife.  It was made up by people who don't understand or are scared of death.

so what you believe if there is no afterlife? on me afterlife is there.

Where is your evidence for an afterlife? I don't think NDEs would count as the person is not even dead yet - therefore they are still a product of life and not afterlife. Just like people wou take drugs and hallucinate are still alive but still seeing weird things.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
April 25, 2015, 06:14:35 AM
So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

There is no afterlife.  It was made up by people who don't understand or are scared of death.

so what you believe if there is no afterlife? on me afterlife is there.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 123
"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"
April 25, 2015, 03:45:55 AM
In god - we trust! Other pay cash  Grin

and the smarter barter, it's tax free Cheesy.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Knowledge could but approximate existence.
April 25, 2015, 03:43:34 AM
1) If our brains are only a high-tech computer-like lump of tissue which produces our mind and personality, why does it bother to create illusions at the time of death?

Even color is a hallucination: it is begotten, in part, of the collapse of the probability waves of light quanta.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 03:19:42 AM
So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

There is no afterlife.  It was made up by people who don't understand or are scared of death.

Hi Vod; remember how this conversation started?

Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39

Did I give you what you wanted?
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 03:18:37 AM
If you are using the premise that no one understands quantum mechanics to assert a conclusion bearing on human knowledge, then I am afraid that your argument is lost on me.


Quote from: Axel Cleeremans. “The Radical Plasticity Thesis: How the Brain Learns to Be Conscious.” _Frontiers in Psychology_ 2 (2011). 10-11. Web. 30 Mar. 2015.
In other words, such a network is unable to distinguish between a veridical perception and an hallucination. Doing so would require the existence of another, independent network, whose task it is to learn to associate specific input patterns with specific patterns of activity of the first network’s hidden units. That system would then be able to identify cases where the latter exists in the absence of the former, and hence, to learn to distinguish between cases of veridical perception and cases of hallucination. Such internal monitoring is viewed here as constitutive of conscious experience: A mental state is a conscious mental state when the system that possesses this mental state is (at least non-conceptually) sensitive to its existence. Thus, and unlike what is assumed to be case in HOT Theory, meta-representations can be both subpersonal and non-conceptual.

Nothing, there, provides for the acquisition of an accurate “knowledge” of anything (e.g., quanta)—intrinsic (to the brain) or otherwise.
Hey username18333, I would like to reject your Thesis because:
1) If our brains are only a high-tech computer-like lump of tissue which produces our mind and personality, why does it bother to create illusions at the time of death?
2) Even if NDE elements can be reduced to only a series of brain reactions, this does not negate the idea that NDEs are more than a brain thing.
3) Your Thesis includes assumptions that survival is impossible even though survival has not been ruled out.
4) You can see that the materialism of Dennett, which you promote, is refuted by Nagel's common sense.
5) You are simply projecting your ignorance. To prove that all atheists (humanists) are mistaken, it is enough that I point to the observations which strongly support the survival hypothesis. This leaves only theism as a viable answer to the God-question.

Like I have mentioned...
Skepticism of psychic phenomena is based more on a religion of materialism than on hard science.

Many researchers use scientific reductionism to reduce everything to its most basic elements. There is no doubt that the near-death experience involves the mind/brain connection, but to say that the mind is nothing more than a brain and chemicals is to assume a lot.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 03:02:20 AM
It's a spritual/soul thing.
The burden of proof is on you to prove the connection between this and god.
NDE's do not prove god in anyway, shape or form.

As I have mentioned, to prove the survival (or soul) hypothesis would discredit humanism...

Since all atheists are humanists (and all humanists reject rebirth/survival/spirit), then accepting the survival hypothesis is the same as accepting that all atheists (humanists) are mistaken.

Since there are only two possible answers to the god-question: either atheism or theism, then
The mistaken answer/category is atheism/atheists, and therefore
theism is the correct answer and god exists.

I point you to Phoenix Journals to learn about the connection between god and soul...
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Knowledge could but approximate existence.
April 25, 2015, 02:56:31 AM
If you are using the premise that no one understands quantum mechanics to assert a conclusion bearing on human knowledge, then I am afraid that your argument is lost on me.


Quote from: Axel Cleeremans. “The Radical Plasticity Thesis: How the Brain Learns to Be Conscious.” _Frontiers in Psychology_ 2 (2011). 10-11. Web. 30 Mar. 2015.
In other words, such a network is unable to distinguish between a veridical perception and an hallucination. Doing so would require the existence of another, independent network, whose task it is to learn to associate specific input patterns with specific patterns of activity of the first network’s hidden units. That system would then be able to identify cases where the latter exists in the absence of the former, and hence, to learn to distinguish between cases of veridical perception and cases of hallucination. Such internal monitoring is viewed here as constitutive of conscious experience: A mental state is a conscious mental state when the system that possesses this mental state is (at least non-conceptually) sensitive to its existence. Thus, and unlike what is assumed to be case in HOT Theory, meta-representations can be both subpersonal and non-conceptual.

Nothing, there, provides for the acquisition of accurate “knowledge” (bl4kjaguar).
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
April 25, 2015, 02:54:25 AM
So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

There is no afterlife.  It was made up by people who don't understand or are scared of death.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
April 25, 2015, 02:52:43 AM
So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

I know a mother that had an NDE on the operating table giving birth. When she was conscious afterwards she said she saw an object (I forget what now) high on top of a cupboard, as she looked down on herself.
There's no way she would of known about this object otherwise.

I believe her, so I believe in NDE's.
It's a spritual/soul thing. The burden of proof is on you to prove the connection between this and god.
NDE's do not prove god in anyway, shape or form.
People are connecting random dots and coming to a conclusion THEY WANT TO BELIEVE.

Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
April 25, 2015, 02:42:34 AM
It's up to you to prove a god exists... not up to me to prove he doesn't exist.   Wink

Same thing with the NDE - Scientists know what it is already... if you want us to believe science is wrong and it's some magical gateway for a soul or something, you need to provide proof, not a link to a crackpot website that speaks of fairy tales.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 02:40:02 AM
Hi Vod; remember how this conversation started?

Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39

Did I give you what you wanted?

Every credible doctor in the world will tell you what causes an NDE.  You can have an NDE simply being sedated for surgery. 

Is that your proof?  Brain cells being robbed of fuel and misfiring?  There's no god needed for that.

How do you know there is nothing else needed for an NDE besides the "products of a brain and the universe of which it is a part"?

The skeptical "dying brain" theory of NDEs has major flaws. The proper approach would be to pursue the research as originally proposed and compare the hypotheses in light of the data.

Kindly review the reference if you want to cointinue on this topic:
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a34
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
April 25, 2015, 02:36:25 AM
In god - we trust! Other pay cash  Grin
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
April 25, 2015, 02:15:45 AM
You are simply projecting your ignorance.

Actually, you are.   Undecided

Show us any proof, proof that we can recreate ourselves.  I can prove gravity exists by dropping my pencil.

Sure,
Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39

How is an NDE any indication of a god?  It's just brain neurons firing randomly as they are dying.

That is false:
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a34

Of course it's not.  Every credible doctor in the world will tell you what causes an NDE.  You can have an NDE simply being sedated for surgery. 

Is that your proof?  Brain cells being robbed of fuel and misfiring?  There's no god needed for that.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 02:13:03 AM
You are simply projecting your ignorance.

Actually, you are.   Undecided

Show us any proof, proof that we can recreate ourselves.  I can prove gravity exists by dropping my pencil.

Sure,
Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39

How is an NDE any indication of a god?  It's just brain neurons firing randomly as they are dying.

That is false:
The skeptical "dying brain" theory of NDEs has major flaws.

Anyway, I have provided for you a reproducible study that supports the survival hypothesis. NDEs are off-topic with regards to our discussion of Dr. Stevenson's study.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 02:11:59 AM
Why have people got inside their head that the afterlife has a connection with god? Maybe the afterlife does exist, if it does, what makes people think we will suddenly know everything and see god?
Because...
Not even the diehard skeptics doubt the powerful personal effects of NDEs.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a31

Proving the afterlife, does not prove god in any way.

So where is YOUR non-god explanation for the afterlife?

To prove the survival hypothesis would discredit humanism; since all atheists are humanists, then accepting the survival hypothesis is the same as accepting that all atheists are mistaken.

Also...
Because NDEs have many common core elements, this suggests that they are spiritual voyages outside of the body. Also, if the dying brain creates NDE illusions, what is the purpose for doing it? If our brains are only a high-tech computer-like lump of tissue which produces our mind and personality, why does it bother to create illusions at the time of death? If everything, including the mind and personality, are about to disintegrate, why would the brain produce a last wonderful Grand Finale vision? Even if NDE elements can be reduced to only a series of brain reactions, this does not negate the idea that NDEs are more than a brain thing.
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
April 25, 2015, 02:09:51 AM
You are simply projecting your ignorance.

Actually, you are.   Undecided

Show us any proof, proof that we can recreate ourselves.  I can prove gravity exists by dropping my pencil.

Sure,
Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39

How is an NDE any indication of a god?  It's just brain neurons firing randomly as they are dying.
hero member
Activity: 546
Merit: 500
April 25, 2015, 02:05:43 AM
You are simply projecting your ignorance.

Actually, you are.   Undecided

Show us any proof, proof that we can recreate ourselves.  I can prove gravity exists by dropping my pencil.

Sure,
Stevenson's study is completely reproducible which means that anybody who doubts the validity of this study is perfectly welcome to repeat it for themselves.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a39
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
April 25, 2015, 01:59:48 AM
I don't need science, nor religion, but God.

Science moves mankind forwards.
Religion moves mankind backwards.
God doesn't make any difference.
Jump to: