What is logic?

[Little Rik]

You don't get it Atheo, do you?
Atheists do not keep in their mind only the idea that there is no deity.
They do keep in their mind a myriad of dogmas as previously posted.

These other views would be independent of atheism, since atheism is nothing more than the lack of a belief in any deity/god.

I am just saying that the various dogmas that atheists carry along are an extra burden.
Get it?  

Stop there Atheo.   

Don't you know the rule that the one who come up with a statement is the one who got to back up such a statement with evidence.

Yes, I know of it.

Very well Atheo.  

You are the one who said that science disprove God existence.

Where is that evidence mate?    

I said science is getting farther and farther away from god and the theist model is increasingly contradicted by science and already provided an example. The universe is large to the point that humans are insignificant and the inanimate beginning of the universe is disconnected from cosmic evolution that occurred after the singularity. Theism requires a guaranteed animate universe due to the necessitation of the deity's cause. However, it isn't guaranteed, so a contradiction exists and increases since our existence seems more and more insignificant. 
You could disprove that science is leaving theism if you provide one example of science demonstrating a deity as an explanation of a specific phenomena. It seems you are not willing to (because you can't)

That is total garbage Atheo.
Even a tiny ant can cause an avalanche that may kill a lot of people if she step (so to speak) in the wrong place.
Nothing is insignificant.
We are all connected to each other and the universe exist because of this.
Universal love is what is binding all together.
All the rest are dogmas and speculations.  

Hypothesis are like farts unless these hypothesis are follow by evidence.

So far there is no evidence about these hypothesis that is why they are confined in the corral of farts.    

I already provided evidence, stimulating certain areas of the brain give rise to hallucination produced by the brain.

Hallucinations are not NDEs Atheo.
NDEs are natural phenomena while induced experiences are not.

There are experts in the field that even they after years of study are unable to come up with any concluding evidence.
Have a look at this link just to see that even years of studies were unable come up with any conclusion.

http://deanradin.com/evidence/vanLommel2006.pdf

Finally, you provided a source. 
Based on what you said, these are survivors of death who required a functioning brain (otherwise they wouldn't be alive), NDEs are Near death experiences, so they were alive to produce these hallucinations. There is no evidence of brain dead people being able to have experiences, but there is evidence of brain alive people being able to have experiences. As for your source, his case includes objections to other explanations and therefore thinks that the failure to provide explanations results in reason to believe consciousness is independent of the brain. However, he fails to demonstrate explanations fail.
He acknowledged the evidence that certain phenomena can stimulate an NDE:

Yet, neurophysiologic processes must play some part in NDE, because NDElike experiences can be induced through electrical “stimulation” of some parts of the cortex in patients with epilepsy (Penfield, 1958), with high carbon dioxide levels (hypercarbia) (Meduna, 1950), in decreased cerebral perfusion resulting in local cerebral hypoxia, as in rapid acceleration during training of fighter pilots (Whinnery and Whinnery, 1990), or as in hyperventilation followed by Valsalva maneuver (Lempert et al., 1994). Also NDE-like experiences have been reported after the use of drugs like ketamine (Jansen, 1996), LSD (Grof and Halifax, 1977), or mushrooms (Schr¨oter-Kunhardt, 1999). These induced experiences can result in a period of unconsciousness, but can also sometimes consist of perception of sound, light, or flashes of recollections from the past.

His response?:

These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Also, exceptionally out-of-body experiences can occur during induced experiences. However, transformational processes are rarely reported after induced experiences. Thus, induced experiences are not identical to NDE.

First of all, many NDE's including the heaven experiences are relatable by people in their previous life (especially with religion). I provided evidence that out of the body experiences can indeed occur with stimulation of the the right temporoparietal junction. "Walking corpse" syndrome can give the delusional belief that someone is deceased. Indeed, even hallucinations of a person have been reported by simple atificial stimulation of the brain, so transformational processes are definitely capable of happening from the brain.

It makes sense why Dick Swaab* (Neurologist) claims the author Pim Van Lommel does not refute current neurological explanations and fails to give scientific basis for his perspective.

*In his book We are our Brains: From the womb to Alzheimer's 

Wrong again Atheo.
If you read the many NDEs experiences in here.......... http://www.nderf.org/Archives/exceptional.html ............you will see that these people really die as declared by a doctor so your idea that to have an NDE you must have your brain alive is garbage.

I guess you never thought what the word PHYSICAL means Atheo?

And I also guess you never understand what is the difference between something abstract and something physical?

Now you are claiming the mind connects to "abstract objects"?

Not at all At.
The connection is already there from birth to death.
It is when the bloke die that the consciousness get disconnected from the dead body.
The same thing happen when your old car give up and will not go anymore.
At that stage you get out and look for a new car to continue your journey that go from point A to point Z.
And when you get to point Z you don't need any more vehicles (bodies).
Why would you when you already reach your final destination?
You are an abstract entity but as far as you are connected to a physical body in a physical environment you think that you are not an abstract entity.
This is a dogma that atheists in particular are stuck to.

Come back when science will have discovered something about consciousness, NDEs and whether we die or not when our body die.
In the meantime please don't tired your brain too much in the effort of turning a guessing into evidence.
Look after yourself brother.  

Not guessing, but evidence. To you, not knowing is evidence of the supernatural. That has been the basis of religion and nothing more than pseudoscience.

Look mate you bring any evidence that physical science know the role of the pineal gland beside emitting melatonin and I will send you a cargo plane full of 24 carat gold bars.