Why do you guys even waste time on him.

No idea. I have a lot of time.

(July 17, 2016 at 7:22 am)Stimbo Wrote: One that agrees with him, obviously.

I'm assuming real scientists are out of the question. I mean, we have some right here on this forum. And obviously no atheists. So non-scientific theists it is then.

Rik, I see you are still slamming your head against the wall and exchanging insults with the atheists. Is it possible you are getting way too wound up about differences of opinion about what words mean? Have you ever considered taking the world and everything in it on its own terms? Instead of head slamming, perhaps a little meditation would help. All I can do is point to the higher path, Rikster. In the end there is only hanging out with atheists because you enjoy their company or bickering with people on the internet because you have an inferiority complex. Which way will you choose, grasshopper?

(July 17, 2016 at 6:24 am)Little Rik Wrote: Yog, I could go on and on with all the garbage-guessing that you guys spout day after day which could be
thrown in the garbage bin by an independent jury.
Get real yog.  

Back to this conspiracy theory crap. I've explained that what matters is not the fault with the other guy's beliefs, but rather the evidence you bring for your own. I've asked you for evidence before and you never provide it. You just ramble on with a bunch of analogies or bare assertions. If you cannot provide evidence for what you believe, then you aren't worth listening to. So far the only evidence for anything you believe has been a handful of NDEs. That's not evidence for karma or microvita or reincarnation, yet you continue to babble on anyway. You're just full of crap because all you do is spew about the other guy. I've given evidence for the things you claim are atheist dogma. So what did you do? You belittled my evidence and changed the meaning of dogma that you'd accept. That's simply moving the goalposts. What was your new definition, "things accepted as true yet not proven as true?" That applies to practically all beliefs, including your own. You see an independent judge would notice you changing definitions of words and be unconvinced. See your analogies and be unmoved. See your bare assertions and not care. All you've got is your belief that the handful of veridical NDEs support your worldview. That's not enough to convince an independent audience. So you're full of shit with this independent audience crap. It's just a bunch of whining. "Ooh, it's not fair! Ooh, I'm losing, things are stacked against me!"

(July 17, 2016 at 9:12 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: Rik, I see you are still slamming your head against the wall and exchanging insults with the atheists.  Is it possible you are getting way too wound up about differences of opinion about what words mean?  Have you ever considered taking the world and everything in it on its own terms?  Instead of head slamming, perhaps a little meditation would help.  All I can do is point to the higher path, Rikster.  In the end there is only hanging out with atheists because you enjoy their company or bickering with people on the internet because you have an inferiority complex.  Which way will you choose, grasshopper?

I only see emoticons.  That's not proof he is actually banging his head against walls or keyboards.

I say he needs to prove he actually banged his head against walls and keyboards whenever he read an atheist reply.  He needs to post videos, or at least Mao coordinates to blooding head prints on brick walls matching the shape of his prodigiously thick skull.  That would actually make it worth atheists' time to reply.

(July 17, 2016 at 9:12 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: Rik, I see you are still slamming your head against the wall and exchanging insults with the atheists.  Is it possible you are getting way too wound up about differences of opinion about what words mean?  Have you ever considered taking the world and everything in it on its own terms?  Instead of head slamming, perhaps a little meditation would help.  All I can do is point to the higher path, Rikster.  In the end there is only hanging out with atheists because you enjoy their company or bickering with people on the internet because you have an inferiority complex.  Which way will you choose, grasshopper?

Insults attract more insults.  

You never thought about that Whatever, did you?  

(July 17, 2016 at 1:35 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(July 17, 2016 at 6:24 am)Little Rik Wrote: Yog, I could go on and on with all the garbage-guessing that you guys spout day after day which could be
thrown in the garbage bin by an independent jury.
Get real yog.  

Back to this conspiracy theory crap.  I've explained that what matters is not the fault with the other guy's beliefs, but rather the evidence you bring for your own.

Whoooooooo, that is incredible yog.
You are saying that in a forum is ok. for somebody to spout crap after crap but not for someone in particular.
You reach a new high of stupidity.  

Quote:I've asked you for evidence before and you never provide it.  You just ramble on with a bunch of analogies or bare assertions.  If you cannot provide evidence for what you believe, then you aren't worth listening to.  So far the only evidence for anything you believe has been a handful of NDEs.  That's not evidence for karma or microvita or reincarnation, yet you continue to babble on anyway.  You're just full of crap because all you do is spew about the other guy.  I've given evidence for the things you claim are atheist dogma.  So what did you do?  You belittled my evidence and changed the meaning of dogma that you'd accept.  That's simply moving the goalposts.  What was your new definition, "things accepted as true yet not proven as true?"   That applies to practically all beliefs, including your own.  You see an independent judge would notice you changing definitions of words and be unconvinced.  See your analogies and be unmoved.  See your bare assertions and not care.  All you've got is your belief that the handful of veridical NDEs support your worldview.  That's not enough to convince an independent audience.  So you're full of shit with this independent audience crap.  It's just a bunch of whining.  "Ooh, it's not fair!  Ooh, I'm losing, things are stacked against me!"

Life is not easy yog especially for people that lock themselves in a corral of dogmas and prevent the reason to prevail.
Evidence eventually will come once we leave our physical body if of course you may believe that we can leave our physical body.
In the meantime is my opinion that we should go along with what make more sense and discard what doesn't.

Just one example.

Atheists in general say that the consciousness is a product of the brain.
And they get stuck in this idea no matter what.
But consciousness is not something physical that can be killed along with energy.
But no, no matter what atheists made already their mind without exploring first the possibility that
their belief is unfounded.

Here is where I am talking about what make sense and what doesn't.
You see a dead body but you can not see a dead consciousness and yet you believe that the consciousness is dead without a rag of evidence.

Do you follow?  

(July 18, 2016 at 7:28 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(July 17, 2016 at 1:35 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Back to this conspiracy theory crap.  I've explained that what matters is not the fault with the other guy's beliefs, but rather the evidence you bring for your own.

Whoooooooo, that is incredible yog.
You are saying that in a forum is ok. for somebody to spout crap after crap but not for someone in particular.
You reach a new high of stupidity.  

Everybody is judged individually. That other people speak crap doesn't lend any credence to your crap. You're just making more excuses as to why you don't provide evidence.

(July 18, 2016 at 7:28 am)Little Rik Wrote:

Quote:I've asked you for evidence before and you never provide it.  You just ramble on with a bunch of analogies or bare assertions.  If you cannot provide evidence for what you believe, then you aren't worth listening to.  So far the only evidence for anything you believe has been a handful of NDEs.  That's not evidence for karma or microvita or reincarnation, yet you continue to babble on anyway.  You're just full of crap because all you do is spew about the other guy.  I've given evidence for the things you claim are atheist dogma.  So what did you do?  You belittled my evidence and changed the meaning of dogma that you'd accept.  That's simply moving the goalposts.  What was your new definition, "things accepted as true yet not proven as true?"   That applies to practically all beliefs, including your own.  You see an independent judge would notice you changing definitions of words and be unconvinced.  See your analogies and be unmoved.  See your bare assertions and not care.  All you've got is your belief that the handful of veridical NDEs support your worldview.  That's not enough to convince an independent audience.  So you're full of shit with this independent audience crap.  It's just a bunch of whining.  "Ooh, it's not fair!  Ooh, I'm losing, things are stacked against me!"

Life is not easy yog especially for people that lock themselves in a corral of dogmas and prevent the reason to prevail.
Evidence eventually will come once we leave our physical body if of course you may believe that we can leave our physical body.
In the meantime is my opinion that we should go along with what make more sense and discard what doesn't.

What 'makes sense' to you doesn't make sense to the Christian. What makes sense to the Christian doesn't make sense to the Tibetan Buddhist. And around it goes. Because 'makes sense' is a worthless standard which only endorses meaningless bias and unfounded beliefs. That's why evidence is important. It separates the wheat from the chaff. You without any evidence are the chaff. You should be discarded. What 'makes sense' is as flexible as the imagination of the thinker. There are hundreds of strands within Hinduism, all of which 'make sense' to their advocates. That doesn't in the least incline us to believe they are true. In the absence of evidence, the reasonable person withholds belief and remains agnostic about whatever theory or hypothesis is presented. You'll note that consciousness being a product of the brain 'makes sense' to a lot of people. On top of that, despite your complaining otherwise, there is evidence that the proposition is true. Much more evidence than a handful of NDEs. That it doesn't make sense to you is irrelevant. Your free to remain agnostic on the question. But jumping to another worldview without any evidence is simply irrational.

(July 18, 2016 at 7:28 am)Little Rik Wrote: Just one example.
Atheists in general say that the consciousness is a product of the brain.
And they get stuck in this idea no matter what.
But consciousness is not something physical that can be killed along with energy.
But no, no matter what atheists made already their mind without exploring first the possibility that
their belief is unfounded.

Here is where I am talking about what make sense and what doesn't.
You see a dead body but you can not see a dead consciousness and yet you believe that the consciousness is dead without a rag of evidence.

Again you simply lie about things. I've already provided evidence for the proposition that consciousness is a product of the brain which supports the idea that death is the end. But this is irrelevant. Here you are back at your tricks. Making bare assertions about what is and is not. Finding fault in the other person's belief but not providing evidence for the things you believe like karma and microvita and reincarnation. This is nothing more than sleight of hand--you keep our attention focused on this so that we don't notice how little evidence for your own beliefs has been provided. It's nothing but a cheap trick.

'Atheists in general' are divided about what exactly consciousness is. They all have their individual views about what 'makes sense' and their ideas are no less sensible than yours. Christians have ideas that make sense too. As do Buddhists. The wise course is to remain independent of those views which do not provide evidence for their views. The handful of veridical NDEs are hard to explain and provide some meager support for the notion that consciousness is independent of the brain. But that evidence is slight, and ambiguous--there are many views of consciousness that work with it that aren't your views. Meanwhile, there is voluminous evidence from biology and medicine that the brain is directly involved in producing the mind. (And none for the idea that automobiles have mind.) Again, the question is the balance of evidence. In that, your handful of unexplained NDEs don't count for much.

I would post the evidence again, but we know that is a distraction from you presenting any for your view.

The part that is bugging me the most is that we won't be able to tell Rik "Told you so" when we all die.