The brain

[Drich]

Oh, yeah...that;s absolutely what;s happened here in this thread.  You;re certainly not a credulous nutter with delusions of grandeur.  Impossibru! 

what delusions? the proof is on page!

Started with an op grounded in reality framed in the fantastic with proof backing the side of both.

then I let it simmer for 24 hours.

The brain trust of atheism (as anticipated) could not see past the fantastic implications. So like a pride of their simian ancestors would have, they flung the modern equivalent of their poo at what they did not understand and who they did not like.

Now ask yourself who defined the subject matters? who separate reality from fantasy? which one of your brothers did this? None of them had the ability while busy cooking up their verbal poo. all were too busy making poo cakes save one, and even that one did not understand the duality of the subject matter. That person thought or tried to accuse me of trolling a subject. 

Again out of everyone who participated, which one of you saw/identified the simple truth? who seperated the science from fantasy? who proved that the brain was not only a transmitter but a receiver? who pointed out the only real argument was how far/If the brain could transmit or receive fro this different heaven/cloud/matrix dimension??? all the wile being verbally assaulted by the intellectual poo factory that seems to be at the core of atheism...

Delusions of grandeur what If I met you 1/2 way and say that most of you just don't know how to interpret an opposing view without first filling yourselves with emotion. You can't simply just be in opposition with someone you have to hate them. For those of you who have to Hate, you are slaves to your emotion, because you hate you want to tear down or destroy what you oppose.

I live at odds with how the world works and I don't hate or hate the people in it. I have contempt for people who are one generation out of the trees mean who can not control their thoughts but to serve their emotion. Tat said how many times to I simply take apart an argument one of you construct line by line and apply the appropriate source material that supports my argument? verse how many time do I start out attacking the individual?

How about never. i have never outright just attacked anyone. I always and completely dissect each and every post and rebuttal, while I may call you stupid for copy and pasting someone else's work I never attack the individual without something to do with their failed reasoning or lack of research.

Now look at your grandiose brethren look at the first 3 pages of out right name calling.

When have I EVER done this..

Who is delusional now sport? is the first three pages of this thread how the grandiose act in your world? 

Who was the only one who was researched in this whole thread? who separates fact from fiction? who laid bare the possibilities and implications? ws it a believer in God or a 'student of science?' How about the believe who used science to not only purpose the question but quell an onslaught of personal attacks for even asking such a thing.

Despite me being at odds with all of your world views, I treat each and everyone of you with enough respect to seriously consider each question and throey every time you create a thread as if it were the first time we met. (meaning I cast off all and start over and give each of you the benifit of the doubt) and I put sometimes hours if not days into my responses to your questions. meaning you ask a legit question I give a well research legit answer no matter who you are and what was said between us in the past.

Then I ask one and I am met with so much hatred anger and negative emotion none of you could be bothered to even NOW that you have been made to see what I asked not one of you has the "grandeur" to even attempt a real answer.

If this shitty emotional/simeon primal behavior is grandeur to you then know I NEVER will strive to be like one of you. I will alway treat each person and each query with the same respect I started out with 20 years ago.

[Whateverist]

If this shitty emotional/simeon primal behavior is grandeur to you then know I NEVER will strive to be like one of you.

You're already the biggest poop flinger in the yard. You don't need any coaching from us. But boy are you a little over eager for confirmation or what? Boring.

[Alan V]

If Drich is saying all atheists have faith on this subject, he is most certainly over-generalizing.  I used to believe in the brain-as-a-receiver-of-consciousness idea when I was studying mysticism, but a closer study of the science changed my mind on the topic.  I was especially influenced by sleep and dream researcher Dr. Allan Hobson's many books about how the chemistry of conscious states influences their perceived content.  The brain-as-receiver idea is entirely uneconomical and unnecessary, given what we now know from brain and consciousness studies.

AGAIN, IF I provide scientific evidence that the brain sends and receive a signal from a different place (call it, a different dimension call it heaven call it the matrix or whatever your twist is) and despite this hard scientific evidence that I could produce, you continue to believe as you do now despite the scientific proof provided... You do so as a matter of faith.

Sorry for the confusion, but I was talking to Matilda rather than to you, since I was confident she had enough background information about brain science to understand what I meant. I know her from the Thinking Atheist forum.

No, I won't bother myself to refute you.  That's up to you, if you are interested in actually studying the science.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Sorry Drich, it's just not really working for me. I know you're trying but, well, maybe it's just me and it's been a long day.

I feel that you're shooting your load too quickly here. You're too eager. Maybe if you put more effort into the foreplay and build it up more slowly then we can get more into it ourselves.

[Angrboda]

Oh, yeah...that;s absolutely what;s happened here in this thread.  You;re certainly not a credulous nutter with delusions of grandeur.  Impossibru! 

what delusions? the proof is on page!

Indeed, the proof is on the page, unfortunately the evidence is against you rather than in your favor. That you come to other conclusions seems largely a function of the fact that you're an egotistical moron who is lacking in any real skill in evaluating arguments and evidence. Wanting to respect other people is noble and all, but when you've shit the bed as often as you have, people stop bringing out the fine linens when you come to call.

[Mystic]

Looks like you'se guys is in trouble... looks like you precious has turned on you or rather 'science' latest theory is make room for the soul... I was going to reference several different websites but instead will just post

Here is a goggle search:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHB...AsOHogIh4k

here is a few min break down:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-6hosFAObI
start at 1:45

In short the brain is not the host or contains consciousness. that the brain is a simple receiver of memory and consciousness. nothing is stored in the brain it is mearly a relay point breaking down our sensor experience and transmitting it to our consciousness and vise versa..

For you hard of imagination I am describing in scifi terms "the matrix." or in biblical terms the living soul and the resurrection.

Meaning when you die if you brain was the host of consciousness you cease to exist as so many of you 'good people' think. However many 'scientists' believe there is too much growing evidence (the more we understand the brain the greater evidence is that the brain sends and receives thought rather than create it and store our memories electrochemically.) to maintain that we are contain only within our brain, which means this world this life we live in avatars or if you older we live in the matrix.

So the beggs the question where is our consciousness stored? the scientific answer is in an alternate dimension, meaning we die here and wake up there... Which to me sounds alot like heaven... "absent from the body present with the lord."

WFT are you guys going to do if we can 'ping/verify this alternate universe?

Or is this junk science because your group of egg heads haven't told you what to think about this yet.

Well done, thank you for bringing this topic. I will read it through and reply very soon.

---

Drich, to get started what books do you recommend regarding this? I saw some in the youtube, but I Want to know which ones you recommend.

---

Post-Materialism Science, 1st time hearing the notion. Looks like a treasure box of books I got to start reading.

Ok so the fact checking I Want to research:

 Does the Brain really cease electrical activity (ie. consciousness is off) in those post-death experiences. And what are the implications, and what are explanations as to how it get's rebooted materialistically if there is any... any theories... I Want to see them... before I Conclude on this argument alone.

I will do some more research on other things stated...

Will be read post-Materialism Science and let you know my thoughts.

[Alan V]

Indeed, the proof is on the page, unfortunately the evidence is against you rather than in your favor. 

The whole idea that mainstream neurophysiologists and other accomplished scientists should quake in their boots because a handful of spiritually-minded scientists disagree with them is nonsense.  While it's always important and interesting to have dissenting voices to clarify gaps in our understanding, any conclusive pronouncements against materialism are premature, to say the least, when the vast majority of the evidence supports its perspectives.  A mere argument from analogy with a TV set is incredibly weak.

And Rupert Sheldrake?  Give me a break.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Well done, thank you for bringing this topic. I will read it through and reply very soon.

---

Drich, to get started what books do you recommend regarding this? I saw some in the youtube, but I Want to know which ones you recommend.

---

Post-Materialism Science, 1st time hearing the notion. Looks like a treasure box of books I got to start reading.

Ok so the fact checking I Want to research:

 Does the Brain really cease electrical activity (ie. consciousness is off) in those post-death experiences. And what are the implications, and what are explanations as to how it get's rebooted materialistically if there is any... any theories... I Want to see them... before I Conclude on this argument alone.

I will do some more research on other things stated...

Will be read post-Materialism Science and let you know my thoughts.

You might as well just make it all up yourself. It would be just as inaccurate and far less effort.

[Mystic]

Well done, thank you for bringing this topic. I will read it through and reply very soon.

---

Drich, to get started what books do you recommend regarding this? I saw some in the youtube, but I Want to know which ones you recommend.

---

Post-Materialism Science, 1st time hearing the notion. Looks like a treasure box of books I got to start reading.

Ok so the fact checking I Want to research:

 Does the Brain really cease electrical activity (ie. consciousness is off) in those post-death experiences. And what are the implications, and what are explanations as to how it get's rebooted materialistically if there is any... any theories... I Want to see them... before I Conclude on this argument alone.

I will do some more research on other things stated...

Will be read post-Materialism Science and let you know my thoughts.

You might as well just make it all up yourself. It would be just as inaccurate and far less effort.

I have to see if consciousness can be rebooted if it turns off or if I can't according to science. I don't know now. So if it's true what the guy was saying, consciousness off means it's off for good and can't reboot itself (what mechanism does it have to do that?)... then it's a major proof with the post-death experiences.

And there is more evidence that can prove, but I will look into one at a time to see if the evidence holds true.

[Pat Mustard]

you live life according to what 'feels right.' So what is the harm in that? Ask a jew from 1930's germany, how is it wrong for a soceity to live according to what 'feels right' rather thn to live by a God OR IN THIS CASE SCIENCE ITSELF!!!

Didn't take long for Godwin's law to kick in.

What are dripshit's two guiding morals? God and anti-science. What were the Nazi's? anti- science & god.

And yet we're the ones more likely to oppress others?