If

[Surgenator]

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?

Shifting of the burden of proof and argument from ignorance. Your lack of understanding of the physical world is not evidence for a spiritual world.

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.

You're not choosing the good and cutting the bad. You're choosing with what you agree with and ignoring what you don't. It's called dishonesty, a pigeon tactic.

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.

There is only one reason you care about, does it agree to with your already concluded reality or not.

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 mean how I point out that testimonials are not evidence and give the UFO's as an example. So the testimonials coming from NDE's, magic crystals, or UFOs are all the same, they are NOT 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.

So stop referring to NDE's when I ask for evidence. Where is your evidence?

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.

And like the religious people you despise, you don't show any evidence for your belief. So I reply that your belief is unjustified.

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?

You admit that computers cannot exist without microprocessors. Your only objection is that tools (computers are tools) are used by someone. Well duh. However, you still cannot build a tool from the top-down, you cannot build a house from the top-down. What can you build from the top down? Where is your evidence for it.

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?

Actually, neither

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.

Silly pigeon, your missing the imitation part which is very important.

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.

They definitely weren't practicing physical science. How would you know that they didn't practice intuitional science? Because they didn't come to the same conclusions as you? Please, elaborate on more on your dishonesty.

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

Dictionaries are like cars or any other physical-material-mental thing.

No they are not like cars. They tell people the meaning of words society has agreed upon. If you want to communicate within society, you have to use the words correctly. Otherwise, you only sound like an idiot.

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?

The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. You make lots of claims and provide terrible if any justification for them. Plus, your follow up questions don't make any sense. Most likely, you assumed something thinking I assumed the same thing.

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.

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 already gave two examples where this statement of your is false. Please stop repeating it. You're becoming boring.