Evolution

[Angrboda]

Do you know why I dismissed what you presented?  Because it wasn't evidence.  You presented two things: bare ass assertions and unsubstantiated analogies.  If I just bare asserted something like "Consciousness ends at death," then you'd dismiss it too.  Bare assertions aren't evidence so I didn't dismiss anything that wasn't worthy of dismissing.  The other thing you presented was lame analogies which are just assertions in a different form.  You claimed that such and so is like X, to which I pointed out that I can equally arbitrarily say that such and so is NOT like X.  All we have is your claim that it's like X.  That's not evidence.  That's just more assertion.  So despite your crying like a whiny bitch, I didn't dismiss anything that didn't deserve dismissal.  And I gave solid reasons for each dismissal.  Each time I rebuffed one of your bare assertions, you immediately changed the subject to something else.  I'm not responsible for the fact that you gave up each time and switched to something else.  

But I'll be nice.  You present one piece of evidence that you presented that you feel was dismissed unfairly and we'll talk about it.  If you're just going to cry about being butthurt over how badly you fared in this discussion though, you can take your attitude and shove it up your ass sideways.  Present one piece of evidence, and we'll discuss it.  Or don't, and continue acting like a loser and whining about being schooled by someone you feel is inferior to you.

Sorry darl.
NDEs are not bare assertions.
They are 100% evidence.
Real people, real accidents, real hospitals, real doctors, real death, real coming back to life and real witnesses so your dismissing is like a fart worth nothing.

Let's recount exactly what was discussed to see whether or not I dismissed NDEs as bare assertion.

1.  You made an argument that God would not "send them back" if reincarnation did not exist (HERE).  At this point I objected that your introducing God without evidence for his existence was logically vapid, and that we only have your bare assertion as to what this God character would or wouldn't do.

2.  In your next post you claimed that Newton's first law of motion was an example of karma, and that the existence of karma demonstrates the existence of God (HERE).  I pointed out that Newton's first law was not in fact an example of karma, but that even if it was, extending laws of motion to a law of moral behaviors required justification beyond simply claiming that it applies equally to motion and moral acts.  You never followed up on this point.

3. You then made the claim that if God did not exist, then the universe would have disintegrated because of "bad luck" long ago (HERE).  I pointed out that things happen in the universe because of "causes" and that "bad luck" was not itself a cause, so you needed to demonstrate a cause that would have resulted in the disintegration of the universe.  You never followed up on that argument either.  This appears to be a common theme with you.  You have all the staying power of a limp dick.

4. What followed next was your post filled with whining and crying about how I arbitrarily dismissed your evidence (HERE).

As we can see from the history of the discussion, at no point did I dismiss NDEs as bare assertion on your part.  So you can take your claim that I did and shove it up your fucking ass.  What I do see is you making several lame arguments, my rebuffing them with good reasons for doing so, and your failing to follow up on your own arguments.  I did not dismiss NDEs nor did I arbitrarily dismiss any argument made.  If you failed to pursue your own arguments, then you have only yourself to blame.  But instead you bounced from topic to topic like a hyperactive child.

But let's set all that aside and look at the argument you originally made which set all this up.

Obviousy NDEs in most cases entails reincarnation.
Why then God would send these people back?
If these people would be ready to be with God right then then God would not send them back.
It is like in this physical-material life that if you still have some work to do you are not ready to get your degree.

Now, even if we ignore the fact that you've introduced a "God" which you have no evidence actually exists, and simply look at your argument, there are still problems to be found.

You claim that the "sent back" theme is evidence that reincarnation exists.  In the first place, this is just your own conjecture about the reason why "God" would send people back.  It's worth noting that this is certainly not the only possible interpretation of why these people are being "sent back."  It's fully consistent with the sent back theme that these people are being sent back, not because it is not time for them to reincarnate, but rather that death in fact entails complete annihilation of an individual and an end to their existence.  In that case they would be being sent back because it is premature for them to be snuffed out altogether.  There is no indication in the NDE accounts that an interpretation of reincarnation fits the facts better than one of annihilation, so your asserting the one rather than the other is purely arbitrary and is based upon your prior beliefs rather than any actual evidence from the NDEs themselves.

Furthermore, it's interesting to note what people from India, the original home of the concepts of karma and reincarnation, have to say about the theme of being sent back.  In Indian NDEs, the person being sent back is typically understood to be the result of a clerical error in the cosmic bureaucracy, that they are being sent back because the death that they are approaching was actually meant for another person (see Near-Death Experiences and Hinduism).  They do not recount anything having to do with karma or reincarnation.  If anybody knows the correct interpretation of the sent back theme you would think it would be Indian Hindus who are steeped in the concepts of karma and reincarnation their whole lives, yet they do not interpret their NDEs in the way you suggest they should be interpreted.

So what we have is your claim about what the correct way to interpret the theme of being sent back is, with no corroboration for your claim from the NDEs themselves or from anywhere else.  I would accept if you were to show that your interpretation is the most probable one, but you can't even do that.  Instead what you have is a claim about the implications of being sent back, which is not corroborated by the NDEs themselves in anyway, and competing explanations that are equally likely.  Even if I accept that the experiences of being sent back are real, this idea that they entail karma/reincarnation is an addition to the evidence from the NDEs themselves which you've added solely because it fits with your prior beliefs.  What you believe independent of the evidence is not itself evidence.

So, yet again, even if I'm extremely charitable toward you here, you have failed to make your case.  Your attempt to provide evidence for the existence of karma and reincarnation is nothing but a colossal failure.  Your claims that I dismissed NDEs are false.  And the notion that I arbitrarily dismissed anything is just a lie.  No, what we see here is you assuming a great deal not in evidence, and providing piss poor support for the things that you do claim.  Your allegations as to what occurred in this discussion are completely unfounded and nothing more than the product of your imagination

Now, all that being said, you have yet to provide good evidence that NDEs are evidence of karma or reincarnation, both of which are required for your idea of the evolution of consciousness to be valid.  Feel free to provide arguments or evidence of either of these.  As far as your claims that I arbitrarily dismissed shit, or that I dismissed NDEs as unreal, you can take both those claims and go fuck yourself.  I did no such thing.


Additionally:

---

On top of this we have ex hard and staunch atheists that are now strong theists so you are just fooling yourself     in believing that evidence is not there.

This isn't evidence for either karma or reincarnation, so your complaint here is irrelevant to this discussion.

---