If

[Little Rik]

You really collapsed down in the mental pit sur.
You still don't know what is the difference between physical and abstract and than you pretend that through your physical senses and perception you can understand what is abstract like the consciousness.
Get real sur.

Where is your proof? I'm still waiting.

Where is the physical prove that the mind exist?
We know that it exist but how can we touch it, smell it, see it and so on?
So according your demented idea nothing that is not physical can exist because our senses can not grasp hold of them.
You see how demented you are?

I do believe in NDEs because they make sense and i don't believe in UFO abductees because they don't make sense.
[quote]Clear and simple so you can keep your pigeons for yourself.

By choosing the good and rejecting the bad the humanity could go from the stone age to this age.
But of course not all of the humanity grew up.
Some humans are still floating in the dark age.

See, there is the admission that you don't care about testinomials unless they support your view. When they don't, then there 'garbage.' Pigeons use dishonest arguments.

See the answer above.

So you got the evidence that the NDEs are all bullshit?
Good sur, let us see your evidence.

Shifting the burden of proof again. Or do you want another round of NDE testimonials vs UFO testimonials?

Not at all sur.
If you would have said..........I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE NDEs AS ACCORDING TO ME THERE IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE TRUE instead of saying.......THE NDEs ARE NOT REAL OR THEY ARE BULLSHIT.
There is a lot of differences in these two statement.
In the first you may say that according to you they are not real leaving the possibility that they MAY be real but in your statement you declare that no matter what they are not real.
So in the first case you may well say that the burden of prove is on me but in the next statement you DECLARE something and a declaration always require evidence.
You see how silly you are sur in asking me the burden of prove when it is you that should come forward with such an evidence.
I never declare that NDEs are real.
I always said that i believe that NDEs are real and that make a big big difference.
The same thing apply to God.
I always say that i believe that God exist but i never say that God is real and exist like religious people say.
I believe means that is my understanding that such a thing is real opposite to declare that that thing is real.
It is most of you guys that say that God does not exist and therefore evidence for this statement is needed.
Got it Sur?

Show me that i disprove what i previously said so we can go ahead.
It seems that is typical of so many of you to allege something about my so called crap but when i ask you to show me where i suppose to have fail nothing is shown.
This is your failing not mine.

Since you have so much trouble using the gray matter between your ears, I don't know if you can understand. But I'll give it a shot. "Activating the computer" cannot be done without the microprocessors inside. If the microprocessors are not there, electricity cannot flow through non-existent microprocessors. So you NEED the microprocessors to be there before any activating can occur.

You keep on procrastinate the rot.
As i already said it is obvious that the computer can not go without this or that element but it is also true that even if you have all the physical-material elements you still need a mind that turn the computer on and tell the computer to deliver the good.
So who is the pigeon?

Analogies are all about comparison so in order to invent or improve something the scientists use to make comparisons with what is already invented.
Buy why should i waste my time explaining this to someone who is stuck in the corral of dogma?

You should peruse the dictionary more often. You'll learn the meaning of words like analogy.

So you know for sure that analogies are only related to theories and not to practice?
In other words you are saying that the scientists that created your computer did not study and take from the older model computer to see how the old can be improved?
Good on you son.
Everyday you invent a new dogma.
Maybe one day they will give you a Nobel price for stupidity.

That is funny sur.
Analogies are comparisons and comparisons meaning is to compare what you want to create with what is already created in order to get some help or to avoid mistakes.

Yep, you don't know what analogy means. You are partially correct about comparison, wrong about what needs to be compared to, and wrong about it entails. Scientist use models, not analogies. They may seem the same to a laymen as yourself but they are not. Unlike an analogy, a model imitates what you are describing.

Silly again sur.
Analogies are comparisons.
You take two similar things in order to see how they compare one another.

Wrong again sur.
What the followers of Mohammed were doing in the past is totally different from what the cleric are doing these days.

Like that matters. They were using your precious intuitional science to come to their understanding of reality. If they are wrong, then intuitional science is worthless on describing reality.

Silly 3 times now.
You are just declaring that in the past they were practicing intuitional science.
Sorry pal but your declaration need EVIDENCE.
Without evidence your statement is the usual pile o'crap.

It may be true that the dictionary say one thing and i do believe in something else.

Nobody cares what you believe words should mean. Look up the word definition.

Dictionaries are like cars or any other physical-material-mental thing.
After a while we need a new car in order to keep up with the changing condition.
Anything in this universe move and change and if you don't keep up with the change you go under that is why i may decide to neglect the old in favor of the new when the time and place call for a change.

Garbage sur.
First of all you got to specify in which way you expect a burden of proof.
Do you want something abstract to turn into something physical so you can understand how the system works and the proofs or you want to experience in a conscious way?
Make up your mind sur but in the meantime i suggest you to learn the difference between abstract and physical.

So you found one thing you disagree with, shifting the burden of proof, and decided to ignore the rest. Whats wrong pigeon? Do you now believe in UFO testimonies, computers can exist without microprocessor? Or did jump ship and now don't believe in NDE testimonies and don't believe computers can exist without microprocessor? As for the shifting the burden of proof, you should know the difference between "I claim this" with "I don't believe your claim."

All this bullshit of yours does not answer the question.
I did ask you in which way you expect the burden of prove about something abstract.
In a physical way?
In a abstract way or in which way?
Just answer the question without coming up with new bullshit.

I already been there and see that so i really don't need to do any experiment to know how the system works.
It is for you surgen in order to understand how the system works.

Oh the experiment was not for you but me. Since you claim to reach this high state of consciousness, then me shooting you in the foot would not result in you feeling any pain. So I want to shoot you in the foot and see your reaction.

More bullshit of yours sur.
It was all about real reality.
According to the laws of this universe if you insert a knife into your flesh you are bound to feel pain but the guys in the festival that i shown do not feel pain when they insert any metal in their flesh so this according to me means that this universe is not the real reality.
I was therefore asking you how you define the reality.
As simple as this so there is no need for your usual bullshit in answering this simple question.