If

[Little Rik]

How is the spirit suppose to differentiate between feeling pain or not feeling pain?
Who told you that it was the spirit's role?
Get rid of your many dogmas mate.
http://neuroscience.uth.tmc.edu/s2/chapter06.html

I knew you wouldn't get it.
How can you when your mind is confined to this physical world?
In the pictures that i showed you you can see people doing things without feeling pain like perforating their bodies.
Under normal circumstances people would feel a lot of pain but they don't.
How come?
Because by elevating their consciousness above their mind the mind itself can not act in a normal way.
You silence the mind.
You control the mind.
So this prove that the consciousness is well above the mind.
Your dogmas or false truth come from the fact that you and the physical science that you believe can not go behind the mind therefore nothing exist behind the mind.
This however is not the reality as you can see in the picture.
This is pure evidence surgen.

"No real progress" The irony is sweet. If only I typed this up 2000 years ago and sent it digitially over thousands of miles to a person I haven't even meet, oh wait, we can only do this in this age. I wonder why.
If only I had my slaves, damn human rights.

Dreaming again surgen.
You only propose the goodies leaving the crap behind.
Again you do not understand how the system works.
The positive ALWAYS go hand in hand with the negative physically and mentally speaking but you can't get it.
In the past the air was clean, the water was not polluted, the fruits and the food taste very suit and free from pesticides.
Their bodies were strong and able to deal with the elements.
They didn't have to take viagra to have a normal intercourse.
They didn't suffer from insomnia.
I could continue on and on but it would be like talking to a brick wall.

Translation: If you never try to believe in unproven claims, then you will never believe in unproven claims.
And thats the way I like it.
To answer your question, no. I would not asked for a medical certificate because syphilis and AIDs rarely spread through kissing. Plus, syphilis gives you sores that are easily spotted.

That was just an example in order to see your opinion.
We were talking about taking risks but your risks are confined to the physical-mental world only that is why you come to the belief that above the mind there is nothing else.

Delusion 101.

The bigger delusion must be to believe that there is nothing above the mind but fortunally that is not my problem.

You're still a house cat in jungle of dinosaurs. But don't worry, you can still play with yarn.......it will always be there...........
See, I can also make pointless statements too. However, you have a lot more experience.

It really depend with who i am talking about.
When i talk with someone really intelligent i bow my head in sign of respect but when i am talking with someone confined to inside a corral of dogma then i can enjoy myself by being funny.

Are you saying that the atheists that had an NDE and no longer are atheists had all an hallucination?

WOW. Just WOW. How the fuck did you jump from a talk about the validity of testmonials to atheist stop being atheist? You must really hate this topic to try to change it this badly. So.... prove that testimonials are scientific evidences.

WOW WOW WOW.
Since when your scientific evidence has been able to understand the supernatural world?

Oh look, you also don't like to talk about the null hypothesis either. Why not? Why are you changing the subject?

Hypothesis do not apply to you.
You already made up your mind
Again you are convinced that there is nothing above the mind.

[Surgenator]

How is the spirit suppose to differentiate between feeling pain or not feeling pain?
Who told you that it was the spirit's role?
Get rid of your many dogmas mate.
http://neuroscience.uth.tmc.edu/s2/chapter06.html

I knew you wouldn't get it.
How can you when your mind is confined to this physical world?
In the pictures that i showed you you can see people doing things without feeling pain like perforating their bodies.
Under normal circumstances people would feel a lot of pain but they don't.
How come?
Because by elevating their consciousness above their mind the mind itself can not act in a normal way.
You silence the mind.
You control the mind.
So this prove that the consciousness is well above the mind.
Your dogmas or false truth come from the fact that you and the physical science that you believe can not go behind the mind therefore nothing exist behind the mind.
This however is not the reality as you can see in the picture.
This is pure evidence surgen.

So let me guess, you found a phenomena that you think (not proved) cannot be explained by the brain. Therefore, spirits. How do you know this cannot be explained by the brain? You admitted that you don't have the medical expertise to do so. For the record, neither do I. Yet you make the bold accertion that it can't. Your presenting a prime example of the argument-from-ignorance fallacy.

"No real progress" The irony is sweet. If only I typed this up 2000 years ago and sent it digitially over thousands of miles to a person I haven't even meet, oh wait, we can only do this in this age. I wonder why.
If only I had my slaves, damn human rights.

Dreaming again surgen.
You only propose the goodies leaving the crap behind.
Again you do not understand how the system works.
The positive ALWAYS go hand in hand with the negative physically and mentally speaking but you can't get it.
In the past the air was clean, the water was not polluted, the fruits and the food taste very suit and free from pesticides.
Their bodies were strong and able to deal with the elements.
They didn't have to take viagra to have a normal intercourse.
They didn't suffer from insomnia.
I could continue on and on but it would be like talking to a brick wall.

The wonderful past where people died from tooth decay and had a lifespace of 30 years. But now we have all this dirty air, water, and pesticides that prevents us progressing past the age of 30. Oh wait, we now live up to 80 years old. How is that not progress. How the fact that people have more leisure time today than in the past 100 years considered not progress.

FYI, they didn't take viagra because they didn't live past 30. Viagra is for old people that are in the 50's and up.

Translation: If you never try to believe in unproven claims, then you will never believe in unproven claims.
And thats the way I like it.
To answer your question, no. I would not asked for a medical certificate because syphilis and AIDs rarely spread through kissing. Plus, syphilis gives you sores that are easily spotted.

That was just an example in order to see your opinion.
We were talking about taking risks but your risks are confined to the physical-mental world only that is why you come to the belief that above the mind there is nothing else.

The reason why I don't believe in anything beyond the physical worlds is simple. There is no evidence for it.

Delusion 101.

The bigger delusion must be to believe that there is nothing above the mind but fortunally that is not my problem.

Look up occam's razor. It will point out the logical fail in your line of thinking.

You're still a house cat in jungle of dinosaurs. But don't worry, you can still play with yarn.......it will always be there...........
See, I can also make pointless statements too. However, you have a lot more experience.

It really depend with who i am talking about.
When i talk with someone really intelligent i bow my head in sign of respect but when i am talking with someone confined to inside a corral of dogma then i can enjoy myself by being funny.

Irony, how sweet thy is.

Are you saying that the atheists that had an NDE and no longer are atheists had all an hallucination?

WOW. Just WOW. How the fuck did you jump from a talk about the validity of testmonials to atheist stop being atheist? You must really hate this topic to try to change it this badly. So.... prove that testimonials are scientific evidences.

WOW WOW WOW.
Since when your scientific evidence has been able to understand the supernatural world?

There you go again, trying to change the subject. Prove that testimonials are scientific evidences.

Oh look, you also don't like to talk about the null hypothesis either. Why not? Why are you changing the subject?

Hypothesis do not apply to you.
You already made up your mind
Again you are convinced that there is nothing above the mind.

See I told you don't understand the null hypothesis. My position is the null hypothesis. It is your job to prove that the null hypothesis isn't sufficient to explain the observations.

[Cyberman]

Irony, how sweet thy is.

How sweet thou art.

[Surgenator]

Irony, how sweet thy is.

How sweet thou art.

My old english is pretty bad.

[Cyberman]

Most of my language is bad.

[Davka]

I'd be totally cool with it.

If there is a god and she loves me and knows my heart, she'll be glad to see me.

If there is a god and he's a capricious asshole like the YHWH figure in the wholly babble, I don't want to spend the afterlife anywhere near him. Who knows what weird sadistic shit he might get up to next?

Frankly, I'd be much more surprised that my consciousness could exist after my brain stopped working than I would to discover a deity. Once you posit a disembodied afterlife, anything else is just gilding the lily.

Ok.
Now for a minute try to think that you are God and you are dealing with an atheist that just pop up in the supernatural world after his physical death.
As an hypothetical God and as the master of the universe what would you think or do.
Would you be pleased to see him or would you be pissed off to see him.

That would depend entirely on my personality.

If I were a capricious, wrathful, jealous trickster-god, I'd be both pleased and pissed. Pleased because I'd have a new toy to torment, and pissed just because that's who I am.

If I were a loving, forgiving, kind and merciful god, I'd be pleased to see anyone and everyone. I would be able to ease the pain and suffering that is inherent to life, and I'd finally be able to explain the purpose and workings of the Universe.

[Angrboda]

In the pictures that i showed you you can see people doing things without feeling pain like perforating their bodies.
Under normal circumstances people would feel a lot of pain but they don't.
How come?
Because by elevating their consciousness above their mind the mind itself can not act in a normal way.
You silence the mind.
You control the mind.
So this prove that the consciousness is well above the mind.
Your dogmas or false truth come from the fact that you and the physical science that you believe can not go behind the mind therefore nothing exist behind the mind.
This however is not the reality as you can see in the picture.
This is pure evidence surgen.

When I lost 9 fingers due to frostbite, they didn't amputate the dead flesh right away. For several weeks, they allowed the dead flesh to necrotize so as to separate the good flesh from the bad. During this time I essentially had two large open wounds on each hand. In order to deal with the pain, they fed me a constant diet of opiates, painkillers derived from poppies. I felt rather little pain this way. The reason these opiates worked to suppress the pain is that they mirror the effect of natural opiates produced by the brain. The brain produces its own painkillers. Under the right circumstances, the brain can, on its own, suppress considerable pain using things like dissociation and natural opiates. What you claim is evidence of the separateness of consciousness from the mind is no such thing. It's just another example of the many strange capacities of the brain. Pure evidence my ass.

[pocaracas]

When I lost 9 fingers due to frostbite

Mountain climbing?

[Little Rik]

In the pictures that i showed you you can see people doing things without feeling pain like perforating their bodies.
Under normal circumstances people would feel a lot of pain but they don't.
How come?
Because by elevating their consciousness above their mind the mind itself can not act in a normal way.
You silence the mind.
You control the mind.
So this prove that the consciousness is well above the mind.
Your dogmas or false truth come from the fact that you and the physical science that you believe can not go behind the mind therefore nothing exist behind the mind.
This however is not the reality as you can see in the picture.
This is pure evidence surgen.

When I lost 9 fingers due to frostbite, they didn't amputate the dead flesh right away. For several weeks, they allowed the dead flesh to necrotize so as to separate the good flesh from the bad. During this time I essentially had two large open wounds on each hand. In order to deal with the pain, they fed me a constant diet of opiates, painkillers derived from poppies. I felt rather little pain this way. The reason these opiates worked to suppress the pain is that they mirror the effect of natural opiates produced by the brain. The brain produces its own painkillers. Under the right circumstances, the brain can, on its own, suppress considerable pain using things like dissociation and natural opiates. What you claim is evidence of the separateness of consciousness from the mind is no such thing. It's just another example of the many strange capacities of the brain. Pure evidence my ass.

The circumstances vary from individual to individual.
You build up these circumstances.
It is like having people with money and people without money.
During the war some people scream full throat for a small wound while some other people with big wound hardly scream.
But again this is only the physical-mental side of the equation.
If you don't believe the pictures that i showed you you can go one day to one of these festival and experience for yourself how the consciousness can be disconnected from the mind so again this is evidence.

http://jamie-monk.blogspot.com.au/2011/0...urite.html

---

Ok.
Now for a minute try to think that you are God and you are dealing with an atheist that just pop up in the supernatural world after his physical death.
As an hypothetical God and as the master of the universe what would you think or do.
Would you be pleased to see him or would you be pissed off to see him.

That would depend entirely on my personality.

If I were a capricious, wrathful, jealous trickster-god, I'd be both pleased and pissed. Pleased because I'd have a new toy to torment, and pissed just because that's who I am.

If I were a loving, forgiving, kind and merciful god, I'd be pleased to see anyone and everyone. I would be able to ease the pain and suffering that is inherent to life, and I'd finally be able to explain the purpose and workings of the Universe.

You mean that you would act like a father that do his son homework?
So how your son would ever learn anything?
I would have thought that a good father would try to use a bit of stick in order to educate his son.
Suppose you in this life exploit the labour.
As God i would make you reborn as an exploited labour in order to see the evil of exploitation and in order to learn how to live better.
And as an atheist i would let you born and reborn again until you realize that the real progress con not exist in this material-physical world but again i may be wrong.

[Little Rik]

So let me guess, you found a phenomena that you think (not proved) cannot be explained by the brain. Therefore, spirits. How do you know this cannot be explained by the brain? You admitted that you don't have the medical expertise to do so. For the record, neither do I. Yet you make the bold accertion that it can't. Your presenting a prime example of the argument-from-ignorance fallacy.

Try yourself to perforate your body with a knife or something else and then tell your brain to not let you feel any pain and to close the cut as soon as you take the knife out.
Do you think your brain will listen to you?
Do you think your medical expertise would help you in any way to understand how the system works?
So how come that some people can do and other can not do?

The wonderful past where people died from tooth decay and had a lifespace of 30 years. But now we have all this dirty air, water, and pesticides that prevents us progressing past the age of 30. Oh wait, we now live up to 80 years old. How is that not progress. How the fact that people have more leisure time today than in the past 100 years considered not progress. FYI, they didn't take viagra because they didn't live past 30. Viagra is for old people that are in the 50's and up.

You never give up dreaming surgen.
The consciousness of people in the past was different from today consciousness.
Peace of mind is not related to having or not having a computer or as in the past to have or not having a cart with a pulling ox.
You could be 100% happy with a cart and 100% unhappy with a computer.
Peace of mind and happiness have nothing to do with material-physical possession or having a perfect body.
Beautiful and rich people commit suicide regardless of what they got, on the other hand you may find ugly and poor people happy with what they got.

The reason why I don't believe in anything beyond the physical worlds is simple. There is no evidence for it.

That is mental laziness.
Intelligent people would try to understand where happiness and peace of mind can be found.
It doesn't take long to understand that can not be found in this finite universe in which the positive and negative (yang and yin) always balance each other so they would look elsewhere rather than wait for father Christmas to bring the goodies.

WOW WOW WOW.
Since when your scientific evidence has been able to understand the supernatural world?

There you go again, trying to change the subject. Prove that testimonials are scientific evidences.

What is scientific surgen?
Does your idea of scientific is related to this physical world?
How do you know that this universe is not an illusion and the supernatural is?
Can your scientific evidence explain why some people don't feel any pain when they perforate their flesh?
So if your scientific evidence CAN NOT explain these facts then how can you rely on something that fail to understand this thing?
Don't you think that an intelligent person would think that is much better to rely on something that can explain these facts.

See I told you don't understand the null hypothesis. My position is the null hypothesis. It is your job to prove that the null hypothesis isn't sufficient to explain the observations.

Hypothesis are used by someone with an open mind not by someone that lock himself inside a corral of dogmas and doesn't allow anyone to enter and challenge his ideas as in your case.
As far as you insist that scientific evidence has to be related to this physical world then you automatically reject any hypothesis.