If

[Surgenator]

I know surgen that you try your very best but sometime your best it is not enough.
Spirituality is the system to reduce the distance that separate you from God like suppose the planet earth reduce the distance that separate itself from the sun or a drop of water reduce the distance that separate itself from the ocean in order to unite with the ocean and become the ocean.
Religion on the other hand has lost this way of working and it is engaged in pretending that God is something external.
In this way they will never get there but more important things could be said to explain in detail how the system works.

Sorry, but the definitions don't agree with your descriptions.

How do you know the guru didnt sold you bullshit?

By the results.
If after sometime the practice does not give results you understand that it is not the real thing.

What results? How do you know the results aren't placebo? How do you know you didn't become delusional?

Evidence please. I want to see evidence for these spirits each of us suppose to have.

When you dig in order to find a nugget of gold and you find it you will get the evidence that the nugget is there.
The same thing happen in the spiritual world.
If you never dig you will never find any evidence.
Do you really think that i can dig in your life or third eye and find the gold and the evidence for you?

So, I first have to believe the spirit world exist before I can get the evidence for it? Thats delusional.

It is not a diversion. It was meant to point out how simplistic your view is that it doesn't make any sense under closer inspection.
And your whining about people's "mind has become materialistic" has no bearing on the evidence.

It is a question of priorities.
We humans can not be in two places at the same time so you decide whether you priorities are materialistic or spiritual.
Why should i be whining?
It is their lives after all.
Just look around and see where people priorities are.
It is not that difficult to find out.

Pointing out your lazy reasoning shows you prioritize your happy feelings for truth. Then you follow up with non sequitur, something to do with "two places at once."

Pointing out flaws in your simplified thinking is not a diversion. It shows that you haven't think about this too deeply.
And I state again, the difficulty of obtaining evidence is not the same as no evidence.

I leave the last word to you.
To me it all seems to circle around a post at infinitum and getting nowhere.

For once I agree. Do you what they call when you argue in circles?

No spirits have been shown to exist. No other space has been shown to exist. You might as well be saying hogsworth instead of spiritual arena. Both are equally valid.

Externally there are no spirits to be found anywhere.
It is when you look within that you will find you own spirit.

Bullshit.

Reincarnation is bullshit. The population of the world has varied greatly, and I'm including human and non-human life. Just imagine how many living things there were during the ice age to how many are living now.

Your dogma is that you think in a physical way so space and other physical phenomena are the only think that exist but again according to yoga this universe is God mental projection so in a mental projection you can create as much space and dimension as you like.
In this way the space to put whatever you like is there.

My dogma, . You mean my skepticism to your claim. You should also notice the difference between our statements. I present a counter argument through reasoning, and you present more claims.

Plus, you are ignoring the people's psycology in making your assesment of the truth of these claims. One group knows that the feelings are not real. So those people will not take the feelings seriously. The other group doesn't know that the feelings are not real. So there would be a lot more people willing to take whatever derived "message" they got to heart.

It happen all the time.
There may be a group of children that grow up loved and looked after by their parents.
These kids think that the reality is very good, on the other hand there are children that grow in a dreadful situation. They have no one to look after them and they realize that the real reality is quite bad.
So who is right and who is wrong?

Easy, both are partically right and wrong.

Your response has nothing to do with my point.

They can both be right and wrong if you judge in this way and this type of judgement doesn't make much sense at all.
It is all about karma.
You get what you deserve but the ultimate truth is that at the very end the price will be won.

No, it's has nothing to do with karma. A person doesn't determine which environment (good or bad) he is born into.

I've never read Sherman's book. I've only pointed out the article to you that specifically talks about NDE's. Plus, you have to be more specific about what didn't make sense to you.

If i recalled correct you said that Sherman doesn't make the claim therefore it is up to the one who make the claim to show evidence.
Well well dear surgen Mr Sherman did point to the evidence (with no evidence of course) that NDEs that point to God are more or less bullshit but at the same time he doesn't back up his claim with evidence that is why i said that what Sharman said doesn't make any sense.
Capisci?

You misunderstood me. When someone makes a claim, the person countering doesn't have to make the opposite claim. What Sherman claimed (and backed up) was that these NDE's could be explained with the mind doing funny things. What he also exposed the assumptions NDE's researchers use haven't been demonstated to be true. For example, absolutely no brain activity in NDE.

First off, Sherman is not a researcher of NDEs that is why he relies on Oliver Sacks, a neurologist, study's. Second, a person's beliefs do not affect on the evidence. That is why you can have christians, buddhist, muslims, etc do great science; even though, they believe in wacky things.

Sherman and Sacks do not have believes, they clearly state that NDEs that lead to God are all bullshit.
Can't you see the differences between have a belief and come up with the so called evidence?
What about doing great science?
Of course they can do that but for God sake leave alone what you can not understand like spirituality.

So Sherman have to first accept the conclusion before they can prove the conclusion. There is a difference between leading the evidence and the evidence leading you. The former is what pseudoscientist do. The latter is what real scientist do.

Plus, we all know the mind exist. If we can explain easily explain an effect with something we know to exist. There is no need to introduce something new to existence. We all know the mind exist. And Oliver Sacks has shown these experiences can be explained through the mind.

I beg your pardon!!!
Oliver Sacks has explained what?
You show me that Sacks has explained the role of the pineal gland and i will cover you in 24 carat gold.

There you go again, indirectly claiming something that doesn't necessary follow or true. Before I make any further assumptions, please explain to me what you think the significance of the pineal gland.

So we are in agreement that you can't disprove the spiritual beings exist. Here is the very important follow up questions. What can you prove to exist? What can you not disprove to exist (exclude spiritual beings and anything in the spiritual arena)?

The nugget of spiritual gold is there waiting for you to be discovered.
Nobody will discover for you.
Until you discover it you will not know that it exist.
All the rest it is like going around a pole tight with a rope at infinitum and getting nowhere.

Avoiding the question I see. Personally, I don't care if you don't answer my other questions, but these importants ones I would prefer to focus on.

[Little Rik]

Oh, please Stim don't make me suffer anymore.
Why don't you give to me your definition of reality.
You seem to know what reality means so please help the small Rik to understand this
important meaning.
I will shower you with an abundance of KUDU. 

Go and play under a train. Come back tomorrow and tell me how reality went.Troll.

Stim, well well what can i say.
When an undertaker saying that you really got to believe what he says.
What a bad news you gave me.
You sort of say that when someone put his neck under the passing train he not only loose his physical life but he also loose his real self (consciousness) and this is the real reality.
Please Stim tell me that this is not true and you just say that to upset the little Rik. hock:hock:

[Cyberman]

Drop the ad homs.

[No_God]

Id say "where's all the blow and hookers?"

[Little Rik]

Sorry, but the definitions don't agree with your descriptions.

Sorry, but real definitions can only be given by someone involved in a practical way in that particular study of that particular item.
Anybody can define how a system works according to his-her own way of perceiving things.
Most of definitions come from people that perceive in a theoretical way.
Very rarely in a practical way that is why you got to be extra careful before you put your ok. on a particular definition.

What results? How do you know the results aren't placebo? How do you know you didn't become delusional?

Delusional involve being sad and perceive a sense of worthless.
Good results give the opposite feeling.

So, I first have to believe the spirit world exist before I can get the evidence for it? Thats delusional.

You must have a problem with your delusion surgen.
Being so defeatist doesn't take you anywhere.
It would be too easy to tell you that in a particular place there is a nugget of gold.
The game would be over well before it start.
The rule of the game is that you got to struggle to get there so in the meantime you achieve more and more consciousness.

Pointing out your lazy reasoning shows you prioritize your happy feelings for truth. Then you follow up with non sequitur, something to do with "two places at once."

Love is truth.
Have you ever seen a murderer full of love?

Bullshit.

When you say bullshit you make a statement.
Making a statement without backing it up with evidence that is a real bullshit.

My dogma, . You mean my skepticism to your claim. You should also notice the difference between our statements. I present a counter argument through reasoning, and you present more claims.

Reasoning without having practical evidence is a claim.
On the contrary a claim based on practical work is not a claim.

Easy, both are partically right and wrong.
Your response has nothing to do with my point.

Unfortunately it is you that haven't got the point.
It is not the temporary truth that is the real truth.
It is the ultimate and permanent truth that is the real truth.

No, it's has nothing to do with karma. A person doesn't determine which environment (good or bad) he is born into.

You are making a claim surgen.
And your evidence is......?

You misunderstood me. When someone makes a claim, the person countering doesn't have to make the opposite claim. What Sherman claimed (and backed up) was that these NDE's could be explained with the mind doing funny things. What he also exposed the assumptions NDE's researchers use haven't been demonstated to be true. For example, absolutely no brain activity in NDE.

Thousands of those who experienced NDEs say very clearly that when the brain stop functioning the consciousness take over so this tell us that Sacks keep on masturbating his brains thinking that NDE are bullshit.
This idiot and his followers keep on making claims after claims without understanding that even without brain activity you can perceive the reality.

So Sherman have to first accept the conclusion before they can prove the conclusion. There is a difference between leading the evidence and the evidence leading you. The former is what pseudoscientist do. The latter is what real scientist do.

All Sherman got to do is to get deeper into consciousness before he can make claim about consciousness.
Is this so complicate to understand?

There you go again, indirectly claiming something that doesn't necessary follow or true. Before I make any further assumptions, please explain to me what you think the significance of the pineal gland.

If i would tell you that since the very beginning of intuitional science practices people believe in the role of the pineal gland as the access to the spiritual world all this wouldn't make any sense to you.
If i also would tell you that the pineal gland is located at the very top of the spinal column and control all the other glands also this wouldn't make any sense to you.
I could tell you a book full of claims but claims in this instance can only be demonstrate when you activate your hidden subconscious and as i already said i can not do this for you so in the meantime you will have to wait thinking again that it is all a load of bullshit.

Avoiding the question I see. Personally, I don't care if you don't answer my other questions, but these importants ones I would prefer to focus on.

There is a difference between thinking that i did not answer the question and not understanding the answer.
The latter relate more to your problem.

[Whateverist]

Rik, are you ultra spiritual by any chance?

[Surgenator]

Sorry, but the definitions don't agree with your descriptions.

Sorry, but real definitions can only be given by someone involved in a practical way in that particular study of that particular item.
Anybody can define how a system works according to his-her own way of perceiving things.
Most of definitions come from people that perceive in a theoretical way.
Very rarely in a practical way that is why you got to be extra careful before you put your ok. on a particular definition.

There is no such thing as "real" definitions. There are only definitions.

What results? How do you know the results aren't placebo? How do you know you didn't become delusional?

Delusional involve being sad and perceive a sense of worthless.
Good results give the opposite feeling.

That is just plainly wrong. A drunk person is generally happier than a sober one. The sober one has a more realistic view of reality.

So, I first have to believe the spirit world exist before I can get the evidence for it? Thats delusional.

You must have a problem with your delusion surgen.
Being so defeatist doesn't take you anywhere.
It would be too easy to tell you that in a particular place there is a nugget of gold.
The game would be over well before it start.
The rule of the game is that you got to struggle to get there so in the meantime you achieve more and more consciousness.

Oh, I'm the delusional one, and lifes a game now. Please amuse me with your "more consciousness" logic on how this is so.

Pointing out your lazy reasoning shows you prioritize your happy feelings for truth. Then you follow up with non sequitur, something to do with "two places at once."

Love is truth.
Have you ever seen a murderer full of love?

Bullshit.

When you say bullshit you make a statement.
Making a statement without backing it up with evidence that is a real bullshit.

Your statement didn't have anything to comment on. It was pure bullshit, and I called it such.

Reasoning without having practical evidence is a claim.
On the contrary a claim based on practical work is not a claim.

Reasoning based on presented evidence is not a claim. That is called thinking.

Easy, both are partically right and wrong.
Your response has nothing to do with my point.

Unfortunately it is you that haven't got the point.
It is not the temporary truth that is the real truth.
It is the ultimate and permanent truth that is the real truth.

Could it be that you don't understand my point.

FYI, truth is truth. There is no temporary truth or ultimate truth.

No, it's has nothing to do with karma. A person doesn't determine which environment (good or bad) he is born into.

You are making a claim surgen.
And your evidence is......?

Because there is no reincarnation. A baby cannot have commited a crime that is paying for.

Thousands of those who experienced NDEs say very clearly that when the brain stop functioning the consciousness take over so this tell us that Sacks keep on masturbating his brains thinking that NDE are bullshit.
This idiot and his followers keep on making claims after claims without understanding that even without brain activity you can perceive the reality.

Did they put these people in fMRI machines to check if they're brains actually had no activity? No, none of them did. So the doctors thought the person was dead and assumed there was no brain activity.

So Sherman have to first accept the conclusion before they can prove the conclusion. There is a difference between leading the evidence and the evidence leading you. The former is what pseudoscientist do. The latter is what real scientist do.

All Sherman got to do is to get deeper into consciousness before he can make claim about consciousness.
Is this so complicate to understand?

So he has to accept the conclusion before the conclusion can be proven to him. Thanks for clarifing that you want us to accept pseudoscience philosophy.

There you go again, indirectly claiming something that doesn't necessary follow or true. Before I make any further assumptions, please explain to me what you think the significance of the pineal gland.

If i would tell you that since the very beginning of intuitional science practices people believe in the role of the pineal gland as the access to the spiritual world all this wouldn't make any sense to you.
If i also would tell you that the pineal gland is located at the very top of the spinal column and control all the other glands also this wouldn't make any sense to you.
I could tell you a book full of claims but claims in this instance can only be demonstrate when you activate your hidden subconscious and as i already said i can not do this for you so in the meantime you will have to wait thinking again that it is all a load of bullshit.

I know that the pituitary gland exist. I just don't believe you on the function you claim it has. This is the function that I got from the first medical site I got. It mentions nothing about spirits. Also, science changes over time with better information. So "since the beginning" means nothing in a scientific standpoint. For an example, science believed that everything is made out of four things: earth, fire, wind, and water since the beginning. It doesn't anymore.

Finally, the people who born without a pituitary gland or a malfunctioning one are spiritless? It's funny how they can function perfectly fine with proper medication. The medication is for hormone production that the gland would normally do. It's if the spirit thing is bullshit.

Avoiding the question I see. Personally, I don't care if you don't answer my other questions, but these importants ones I would prefer to focus on.

There is a difference between thinking that i did not answer the question and not understanding the answer.
The latter relate more to your problem.

If that is the case, you should elaborate.

[Little Rik]

Rik, are you ultra spiritual by any chance?

You mean fanatical?

[Whateverist]

Nah, I mean are you this guy:

http://youtu.be/1kDso5ElFRg

[Little Rik]

There is no such thing as "real" definitions. There are only definitions.

Today i define something.
Tomorrow my vision of that particular item get better so i give a different definition.
This could go on and on for long time until it reach the perfection so the real definition get perfected when the arrow hit the target right in the middle.

Delusional involve being sad and perceive a sense of worthless.
Good results give the opposite feeling.

That is just plainly wrong. A drunk person is generally happier than a sober one. The sober one has a more realistic view of reality.

First feeling can be deceptive.
It is when the water become calm that you can see the reality.

Oh, I'm the delusional one, and lifes a game now. Please amuse me with your "more consciousness" logic on how this is so.

The life is all about learning.
It is when you put obstacles in front of you that you slow down or stop your progress.

Your statement didn't have anything to comment on. It was pure bullshit, and I called it such.

Good night.

Reasoning based on presented evidence is not a claim. That is called thinking.

After few weeks of talking i still have to see any of your evidence.
As granny said.........IS NEVER TOO LATE.

FYI, truth is truth. There is no temporary truth or ultimate truth.

Everything in this universe is moving and changing.
The truth of yesterday end up in the rubbish bin of history to be replaced by a new truth but again this new truth will also end up in the rubbish bin of history and this is a clear sign that the ultimate truth can not be found in this universe.
If (and i leave to you the word HYPOTHETICALLY) can be found somewhere that truth belong to the creator of this universe and to no one else.

Because there is no reincarnation. A baby cannot have commited a crime that is paying for.

Again you keep on making claims without evidence. hock:

Did they put these people in fMRI machines to check if they're brains actually had no activity? No, none of them did. So the doctors thought the person was dead and assumed there was no brain activity.

You are missing the point.
It was all about Sacks that believe that if it is not from the brains it is all bullshit so NDEs that relate to God are all bullshit.
This goes against thousand of NDE experimentators that say that when the brain is off the consciousness take over.

All Sherman got to do is to get deeper into consciousness before he can make claim about consciousness.
Is this so complicate to understand?

So he has to accept the conclusion before the conclusion can be proven to him. Thanks for clarifing that you want us to accept pseudoscience philosophy.

You are running too much with your fantasy.
I didn't say that surgen.
I instead say that he should try or experiment before he come up with judgments.

I know that the pituitary gland exist. I just don't believe you on the function you claim it has. This is the function that I got from the first medical site I got. It mentions nothing about spirits. Also, science changes over time with better information. So "since the beginning" means nothing in a scientific standpoint. For an example, science believed that everything is made out of four things: earth, fire, wind, and water since the beginning. It doesn't anymore.

1) I am talking about the pineal gland not the pituitary.
2) Today science study physical science not intuitional science so it is obvious that so far they are not getting anywhere spiritually speaking.

Finally, the people who born without a pituitary gland or a malfunctioning one are spiritless? It's funny how they can function perfectly fine with proper medication. The medication is for hormone production that the gland would normally do. It's if the spirit thing is bullshit.

Again you keep on talking about the pituitary and not the pineal.
In any case with proper medication may be possible to survive.
What you don't understand is that what is not physical like the consciousness
can not be detected with physical means or physical science.
The gland in question may be as sick as you want but this has nothing to do with the fact that the third eye is there.