Where else?

[Angrboda]

ETA:  I just noticed, you even confirmed exactly what I said, that all I'm doing is countering your bullshit.  Nice argument, "No Evidence" Rik!

The bulk of my posts have been in threads that you started, assmunch.  So don't blame me if you can't finish what you started.  Even those in the Howard Storm thread are attacking the notion that NDEs are real -- after you made claims about them.  That's your turf, douchebag.

If you can't provide any evidence, I guess trash talk and complaining about it is the best you can do.

There is nothing wrong with trying to contradict my ideas but there is something very wrong when
you do that and at the same time you say......I'm not defending anything here........

You stubbornly   defend your belief that NDEs are not real because if they would be proven real then
it would be the very end of atheism.
Be honest with yourself yog at least.
Stop be an hypocrite.  

(emphasis mine)

You've shown time and time again that you don't know jack about atheism. I'm skeptical of claims that NDEs require a non-physical explanation. My skepticism is validated by the medical science, by the lack of verification of the elements of NDEs, and by general prudence. Even if I weren't skeptical that NDEs demonstrate a separation of body and consciousness, I'd still find your claim that they confirm karma and reincarnation to be preposterous. We are justified in believing only those aspects of NDEs which have been confirmed, and that doesn't confirm heaven, god, karma, reincarnation or any of the other purely experiential side of NDEs. It is true that I am a materialist, but my materialism isn't founded upon my disbelief in gods. Finding out that consciousness can be separated from the body would do nothing to my belief in god because the evidence for gods still wouldn't be there; you'd have a bunch of experiences, many contradicting, that describe a broad range of particulars, and only in very general and vague terms agree on details about gods. As a rule, I prefer material explanations because material causes and effects can be demonstrated to exist -- my preference is pragmatic, not ideological. I had the same bias as a Hindu who worshiped a god as I do now. I don't unilaterally rule out spiritual explanations, and indeed I've even provided support for such in cases in which you made claims but failed to produce evidence.

So, no, I'm not a hypocrite, and I will continue to press my skepticism of your claims and note loudly where you fail to provide "solid evidence" for those claims.