(July 15, 2011 at 4:23 am)xonage Wrote: The only reasonable, honest answer to whether there is some form of existence after death is to simply say, "As of now we dont have enough evidence, but who knows, stranger things have happened, so I really dont know."

I think what you meant here was, "We have no evidence there is life after death, so until we do, there is absolutely no reason to think otherwise."

You keep asserting that we do not have any evidence against the idea of an afterlife, but we do. Not a little, a lot. That's the thing we're trying to express to you here. The only evidence we do have regarding an afterlife is evidence against the position.

The idea of an afterlife, apart from your body, assumes, at the very least, that all of the biological machinery we depend upon to experience things around us is not strictly essential. That our bodies are elaborate, but ultimately irrelevant rube goldberg contraptions. If a soul can experience an afterlife..then why eyes, ears, nose and mouth? Why do we require these things in life but not in death?

We can demonstrate that life and experience are dependent upon your biological machinery. This isn't some fuzzy area of science where we're scratching our heads saying "I don't know". When you propose an afterlife, you are also proposing a great many other things, requirements for the afterlife, which you may not have considered.

Not only is there no evidence for an afterlife, the very idea of an afterlife makes assumptions which are in direct contradiction with almost everything we know about human beings, life, and energy itself.

(July 15, 2011 at 8:45 am)Rhythm Wrote: Not only is there no evidence for an afterlife, the very idea of an afterlife makes assumptions which are in direct contradiction with almost everything we know about human beings, life, and energy itself.

That's the main point. With the knowledge we possess an afterlife is completely impossible. To deny so is being willfully ignorant.

Quote:Well, there are a couple things going on here. If atheism simply means a disbelief in a creator god, then should atheism have anything to say on other subjects?

Atheism does simply mean a disbelief (in my case) in ALL gods, etc. Atheists, however, have a right to express an opinion on any subject just like fucking theists. You do need to learn the difference.

Excuse my sense of humor mods. I am not tying to make any trouble. It's a little sad to see what a closed minded forum this can be.

Pay no attention to the flames, O' members.

The possibility of life after death, seeing zero evidence, is roughly the same probability as pink unicorns being farted out my ass.

Evidence is all that we have to keep from believing in ridiculous shit like the above and instead work with what we have.

Fucking christian tool.

(July 15, 2011 at 4:51 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Fucking christian tool.

I was going to say he demonstrated that one doesn't actually have to be a christian in order to be christian stupid. But maybe you are right.

Return to the topic, guys.

The entire question is ass-backward.

"Is there any evidence we don't live on in some way after death?"

The answer is this: Is there any evidence that we -do- live on in some way after death?

The answer to that one is simple. No. Which begs the real question. Why do people believe that we live on in some way after death?

The answer? Because their religion tells them so.

Now the fake Atheist (xonage is it?) wants to know why atheists feel they can claim that we do not live on in some way after death. The answer to that is obvious to anyone that isn't a moron. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that we do live on in some way after death, so thinking (or believing) that we do is idiotic wishful thinking at best.

For the fun of it, here is another take on the example that's been used several times already. I do not have any evidence that a spider monkey doesn't live up my ass, so a spider monkey must live up my ass. Ouch. Thinking like a Christian makes my head hurt.