(July 14, 2011 at 3:26 pm)xonage Wrote: The common theme I see here is "burden of proof" and "an afterlife has no evidence so dont believe in it." But why then firmly believe in no afterlife, if there is no evidence for it. You guys have it a little mixed up. The burden of proof lies on the one making a claim.
Don't you mean lack of belief in an afterlife? Also there is no evidence for an afterlife!
No claim has been made, merely stating what has been observed. We can observe and measure life and brain activity, and we have observed life and conciousness end. We have no evidence or reason to assume conciousness continues at all. Why? Do you have evidence that it does?
Biological life forms die, that's what they do. Death is the end of biological function, that's it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
