The brain

[Drich]

Who's laughing now sport?

Definitely still me, lol.  Please, keep at it.  I need a good laugh or two today.

---

I also have to ask whether or not your overall argument here is not itself a grand ad hominem argument?  If your argument is that atheists are incapable of reliably and productively reasoning about these issues, therefore their conclusions are not true, then it is an ad hominem argument.  Beyond making your argument invalid, that would seem to be an example of rank hypocrisy, given that your primary fault with the majority of posters here has been that their arguments were ad hominems instead of actually addressing the evidence.  Furthermore, even if the atheists' arguments were invalid, it would not demonstrate that their conclusions are not true, as that simply doesn't follow.  A faulty argument can support a true conclusion, so concluding that the conclusion is false because the arguments are fallacious is an example of the fallacy fallacy.

Ah! great conclusion if I had no other point or direction for this thread, but the post I made that follows your last post points to the civil topic I had intended to discuss.

I was going to allow the sensationalism in the video stir up the idea that a trans dimensional human/cloud storage is the only meaning or purpose for the brain to be a transmitter and receiver, then if the topic was taken i would like i did prove without doubt that the brain transmits and receives electrical signals., which would bring us back to the original question what if science could prove the existence of this extra dimension.

I wasn't originally looking to use the subject to intentionally troll anyone. It just doesn't seem like the bar for discussion will allow someone of a different core belief the leeway to voice their opinion without the knee jerk being an adhom attack. Remember i simply posted the question, and let it go for more than 24 hours without a word from my side and I got 3 pages of hate mail. 

How is it then wrong to dissect said mail and show the senders that they are not who they pretend to be? I did in fact give credit to you and the oe other person who tried to stay on topic, and it is to you that I continue the discussion showing you not only where I am right, but provide irrefutable proof that it is so. Then I laid out the bit that could be topically argued. Is it truly my fault that the rest of the asylum chooses to argue from feeling rather than fact?

---

I think I got what I came here for. that being a cross section of people who think for themselves, verse atheists of "faith"  I skimmed through the answers already and before I blow you all up one at a time, I want to first show you that only maybe one or two of you truly thinks for themselves. meaning they took the info provided and moved to discredit the info based on addressing the points made in the video or articles. 

The rest of you are faith based atheists. meaing you simply hold on to the current model of what is considered 'truth/scientific fact' and refuse to challenge it unless your atheist culture were to move that way and provide you with the reasons why. Meaning you can not take new info annalize it andaccet or discredit it on your own. you are stuck in what you believe till a dawkins or someone of good standing in your community tells you what to think. then you will quote and paste his work even if it does not directly address what I had to say.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe...just maybe...after acting like a complete cunt for several years, most of us simply don’t respect you enough to be bothered?  You may have had a platform here at one time Drich.  But, sadly, you burned it to ashes a long time ago.

Define cunt?

Someone who is unapologetically correct? someone who forces thought when none is preferred? Someone who does not respect the heavy hitter/the great minds who support your world view?

I am hated because I can not be dismissed out of hand. I bring point and counterpoint for anyone seeking the truth. it is only when you choose to ignore the truth and seek peer approval/full indoctrination that my words cease to matter.


If that's it, then that is my burden to bear.

---

I also have to ask whether or not your overall argument here is not itself a grand ad hominem argument?  If your argument is that atheists are incapable of reliably and productively reasoning about these issues, therefore their conclusions are not true, then it is an ad hominem argument.  Beyond making your argument invalid, that would seem to be an example of rank hypocrisy, given that your primary fault with the majority of posters here has been that their arguments were ad hominems instead of actually addressing the evidence.  Furthermore, even if the atheists' arguments were invalid, it would not demonstrate that their conclusions are not true, as that simply doesn't follow.  A faulty argument can support a true conclusion, so concluding that the conclusion is false because the arguments are fallacious is an example of the fallacy fallacy.

post 39 proves my argument is not false. in fact the opposite as it is undeniable true.

Again All I provided was evidence to show both sides of the argument meaning how far our ability to transmit and receive brain signals can go. that was the point of the discussion was to ask what if science could prove this human cloud/heaven/other dimension

---

Did it ever occur to you that maybe...just maybe...after acting like a complete cunt for several years, most of us simply don’t respect you enough to be bothered?  

This. Drich's OP wasn't even interesting or worthy enough to bother thinking about in too much detail.

Maybe Drich would like to propose a hypothesis for us to discuss with details rather than two links, one of which was of search results mainly dismissing what he had said.

It seems that Drich's only goal here is to try and accuse atheists of having faith.

 
How many threads have you made/how many posts have you made where I said nothing at all?

That my "good person" is how one response when a peer says something NOT WORTH RESPONDING TO.

rather i got 3 pages of you and you buddies "responding to my thread."

What a liar. 

What say you now? just proved that the brain is a transmitter and receiver...  You can't scientifically argue that without changing the literal defination of the word transmitter and receiver.

Now what if the video you didn't watch was correct and that these signal are remotely transmitted and or received. meaning what if our bodies were remotely piloted by a being not even in this dimension?

Can't pretend the world in not interested in that subject unless you are stupid and a liar.. as between the matrix and the movie avatar have made over a billion dollars in just movie ticket sales. Nor can you pretend that being remotely piloted bodied answers about 2 dozen things people commonly ask about the afterlife. not only that the repercussions dispels the great atheist position that once your brain dies yu float off into nothiness, because in this scenario is correct if you brain dies it would be like waking up from the matrix or it would be like downloading all your phone info from the cloud in you destroyed you old phone into the new version.

IF you could not see the potential of the OP, it is because you mind is sown closed from years and years of cold hearted hate and blind dedication to a singular world view that puts you and your buddies in a position where to question you is to be shat upon ...

Despited you narrow minded world view there is indeed great interest in the idea of uploading or being an avatar if that description make more sense. What makes this exciting, to the open minded person is the fact that we are transmitting and receiving all the time in a method that can currently be identified and recorded and duplicated. we can mimic these signals to help people hear or see or move a robotic arm

The idea that these electrical signals can one day even be recorded by terrestrial means leaves it wide open from a celestial method of transmission and reception/human cloud/heaven

That is what this subject could have been about, but no. honestly look at your part in all of this.. one failed attempt at character assassination after another