Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)

[Little Rik]

You are making a hell of a confusion mate.
All your points are build on guessing and guessing alone.
Physical death is no evidence that YOU die.
First of all you should consider that body-brain and consciousness can be separate and will separate as soon as the parallelism between body and consciousness is over.

Unsupported claim. Please give evidence that consciousness is separate from the functions of the brain and can exist outside of it. (89th time we're asking you this)

First of all let me say that atheists pop up all the time saying that consciousness can not exist outside the brain.
Have they got any solid evidence to state so?
NO.
By not having any evidence at all they break their own rule that say that statements should always have evidence or else are sort of rubbish.
By me saying that consciousness can live outside the brain once the brain is dead i at least have thousand
of NDEs evidences.
Not only that but it make sense that when the vehicle rot away you are not bound to rot away as well.

If you go along with the theory that when the body die is all over then you may well think that when your car rot away you rot away as well.

This analogy falls flat on its face when you consider that I am demonstrably an entity separate from my car, while my consciousness (whatever that is anyway) is not in any way demonstrably separate from my body.

Your thought is very weak Luc.
Life is very short.
You are stuck inside a body.
In the same way your journey in a vehicle from point A to point B is also short.
You can get out from your vehicle during your journey so you can say that you are not stuck to your vehicle and therefore you are separate but by terminate your journey from point A to point B you defeat the purpose of going from point A to point B.
You can also put an end to your life by committing suicide and in this way you will defeat the purpose of advancing toward the goal of life so in this way you can say that you are a separate entity from your body or vehicle but it wouldn't make any sense after all.
The reality is that we are fully connected until death brake the parallelism between body-brain and consciousness.

This sort of believes belong to the stone age not to this age of knowledge.

Yeah, sure

Sure, sure Luc.  

My believes are based on results.
Suppose someone tell you......IF YOU DO SUCH A THING YOU WILL GET SUCH RESULT.
I did that thing and i got that result so i believe that by doing that thing the result will be as was indicated to me.

Sorry, but what did you do exactly? What results did you get and with what premises? The way you present your reasoning is not clear.

A lot of peace of mind but most of all vision about the road to follow.

Why i do not do the claim then?
Because the matter in question is not physical where the evidence must be physical.
Here we are in the real of spirituality and the evidence obviously is not physical.
Atheism is based on matter but matter has really nothing to do with something much
higher and more subtle.  

Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). What you mean is probably materialism, but whatever, there are worse mistakes in your post here.
What is the realm of spirituality? How do you prove its existence? And why shouldn't physical evidence count when "energy", which affects all of the "physical realm" is supposedly "spiritual" in nature? If the spiritual interacts with the physical, shouldn't we be able to tell? If so, why? And if not, why bother with postulating something that can't be experienced at all (and whose  existence therefore doesn't mean anything)?

You presume that energy and consciousness can not go hand in hand but the evidence is quite clear.
You eat meat and you feel aggressive while if you eat vegetarian food you don't feel aggressive.
What this means other than indicate that the energy goes hand in hand with consciousness which in these two cases give different results.