I wouldn't use "scientific consensus" as the yardstick, because scientists have been wrong before and they will be wrong again. It's the nature of the beast.
The yardstick is that the best evidence that we do have for a continuation of consciousness after death is weak anecdotes and competing mythologies that offer no proof. Enrico is no different from any other person here who claims that our soul or consciousness live on without our physical body. If he ever provides some proof he would be. 'You guys don't get it' is neither evidence, nor proof, nor even an argument.
The yardstick is that the best evidence that we do have for a continuation of consciousness after death is weak anecdotes and competing mythologies that offer no proof. Enrico is no different from any other person here who claims that our soul or consciousness live on without our physical body. If he ever provides some proof he would be. 'You guys don't get it' is neither evidence, nor proof, nor even an argument.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
