Life After Death Is Impossible, Says Scientist

[John 6IX Breezy]

IIT doesn't allow for a resurrection or afterlife of any kind.

No one here has used IIT, resurrection, and afterlife in the same sentence besides you—stop obfuscating.

[Brian37]

IIT doesn't allow for a resurrection or afterlife of any kind.

No one here has used IIT, resurrection, and afterlife in the same sentence besides you—stop obfuscating.

Do you remember what life was like before you were born? Hate to burst your bubble, but that is how life will feel to you after you die.

And as far as "resurrection", you really believe that a man was speared in the side, had all the blood drained out of his body, suffered complete organ and brain death, went through rigor mortis, then magically came back to life? No law that says you can't believe it if you wish, but I find it silly to believe knowing that the people who wrote that story had no modern knowledge of human biology back then.

FYI, rising from the dead is not a motif unique to Christianity in ancient mythology.

Now, before you answer, do understand this is not our first rodeo with apologists. 

Other apologists have come back with, "Oh no, he died, but just his "spirit" went on, to avoid the fact that back then, most followers literally believed in a physical resurrection, not just a "spiritual" one. 

There are Christians even today that believe in a physical ascension of their own bodies when the "end times come". 

I'd defy anyone who believes in either myth to spend time in a morgue and see if the bodies get up and move after hours and days of death.

[John 6IX Breezy]

And as far as "resurrection", you really believe that a man was speared in the side, had all the blood drained out of his body, suffered complete organ and brain death, went through rigor mortis, then magically came back to life? No law that says you can't believe it if you wish, but I find it silly to believe knowing that the people who wrote that story had no modern knowledge of human biology back then.

I find it silly to believe resurrections are the stuff of fiction and magic. Consciousness is lost and restored to various degrees during comatose, anesthesia, and sleep―there is nothing special about death that logically exempts it from similar restoration. Neural regeneration is already an active field of study. And we have several disciplines (including neurology, neurosurgery, psychiatry, and clinical psychology) whose entire focus is the restoration of health in the brain and mind.

You are not just making an argument against religion―you are getting in the way of human progress.

[R00tKiT]

An afterlife definitely exists as long as there is a just God, even if all religions are false. This life cannot be the end. From rapists, murderers to war criminals, everyone will face the consequences of what he's done.

Ressurection can be done in a sleight of hand for an all powerful deity, it's logically possible, and therefore trivial for the deity.

[Brian37]

And as far as "resurrection", you really believe that a man was speared in the side, had all the blood drained out of his body, suffered complete organ and brain death, went through rigor mortis, then magically came back to life? No law that says you can't believe it if you wish, but I find it silly to believe knowing that the people who wrote that story had no modern knowledge of human biology back then.

I find it silly to believe resurrections are the stuff of fiction and magic. Consciousness is lost and restored to various degrees during comatose, anesthesia, and sleep―there is nothing special about death that logically exempts it from similar restoration. Neural regeneration is an active field of study. And we have several disciplines (including neurology, neurosurgery, psychiatry, and clinical psychology) whose entire focus is the restoration of health in the brain and mind.

You are not just making an argument against religion―you are getting in the way of human progress.

Do you seriously think Christians are the only religion that tries to use science to point to their club? How many Jews, Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists have you debated?

It is absolutely true that humans have come out of comas, anesthesia, and sleep, but that does not mean they were dead, it just means conditions allowed for that individual to come out of it. Permanent death is beyond repair. Not detecting vital signs doesn't always mean permanent death. Misdiagnosis also does not constitute permanent death. 

If consciousness could survive permanent death one could literally put a shotgun in their mouth, blow their brains out, and come back from it. Funny how nobody survives that. Funny how when people come out of the states you listed,  their head and brain are in tact and the damage is minimal or nothing. 

You cannot treat, say a car tire, as the entire engine. Blow up that engine, the car will not work even if the tire is not flat. One part is not the sum of all the parts. A single atom cannot act like an entire in tact undamaged brain. 

NDE,s are bullshit claims, and "near" gives it away. "Near" isn't beyond repair, just "near". 

You are literally your brain in motion, nothing more. Damage it enough you will not get back to 100% normal. Damage it beyond repair, you eventually die. No more you. Just like if you blew up your car engine, your car will not run anymore.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Permanent death is beyond repair.

You cannot hold this belief while simultaneously ascribing the origins of life to one form of abiogenesis or another. 

As my neuroscience professor would say―life is disequilibrium. It is the separation of various homeostatic properties (such as temperature, fluid concentrations, pressure, etc.) from the environment. Once the distinction with the environment is lost, and equilibrium is reached, death has occurred. Restoring life is as simple, or as complicated, as restoring disequilibrium with the environment.

[Brian37]

Permanent death is beyond repair.

You cannot hold this belief while simultaneously ascribing the origins of life to one form of abiogenesis or another. 

As my neuroscience professor would say―life is disequilibrium. It is the separation of various homeostatic properties (such as temperature, fluid concentrations, pressure, etc.) from the environment. Once the distinction with the environment is lost, and equilibrium is reached, death has occurred. Restoring life is as simple, or as complicated, as restoring disequilibrium with the environment.

Ok, see if you can get 1000 people with another 1000 as a control group. Get one control group of 500 to agree to having their heads put in a guillotine and agree to have their heads chopped off completely free from their bodies. Then get the other 500 to agree to being put under with a mild anesthesia and see how many of each come back to 100% normal. Doubt you'd get any sane person to agree to be part of the guillotine group.

You will never find an example in medical history where a dead bloated body say, that has sat in an apartment for weeks, or a dead bloated body that has been dead for the same time out in the hot desert come back to life. 

I watched my late mother take her last breath in a nursing home. It is a horrifying thing for any person to witness. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. But when she died, she didn't come back. She didn't go anywhere, she isn't in a fictional heaven, or fictional hell. She "her brain" is gone and the only place she exists now, are in the memories of those who knew her.

When your brain dies, it has a neurological dump, basically a last ditch spasm. It is what causes that so called "bright light" and "seeing your life pass before you." If one is lucky enough they can be pulled out of that if there isn't enough brain damage. But, what I saw watching my mother I knew it was the brain shutting down like a dimmer switch at first going bright, then slowly fading out to off.  The brain stem controls basic functions and is normally the last part of the brain to die. When she got to that point, the last thing on her body to move were her lips. Her brain stem was putting up that last futile fight to keep her breathing. As morbid as it sounds, it would be no different if one were to step on a daddy long leg spider and the legs twitch for a couple of seconds after you step on it. I hate being bluntly honest about this, but I will not coddle superstitions in facing that harsh reality. I loved my mother more than anyone else in the world. 

But if you blow your brains out, like in a suicide, your brain will not have the opportunity to go through that shut down stage, you'd simply be skipping it. And NO, I am not suggesting anyone test that. I am simply stating the physical reality. 

Death is an unfortunate part of life. But we all die. Surviving something does not mean you survive forever. If you survive an event, it merely means your brain was not beyond irreversible damage. My late mother didn't jump out of the casket at the funeral home. Her brain died, it was not alive when she was cremated. I'd give anything to have her back, but there is no magic to life or death.

[brewer]

Yes; being published with the likes of Newton, Darwin, Turing, Maxwell, and so on, is arguably a good day for many scientists (to put it mildly). The paper is open access; you're welcome to read more than the abstract.

I don't need or want to.

[The Grand Nudger]

IIT doesn't allow for a resurrection or afterlife of any kind.

No one here has used IIT, resurrection, and afterlife in the same sentence besides you—stop obfuscating.

Obfuscating what you feckless troll, lol? 

You've indicated that you believe in a bodily resurrection, and determined that someone else's comments about consciousness don't fit with IIT as though this were relevant.   Your beliefs don't square with IIT. 

It's a problem, or it isn't. If you don't think that not squaring with IIT is a problem for a belief, then who is obfuscating what, with all this IIT bullshit.....exactly....?

[John 6IX Breezy]

That's funny. You don't even understand your own strawman well enough to argue it:

IIT provides a mathematical recipe for consciousness. They literally give you the instructions on how to build a minimally conscious system. And describe which simple systems could be conscious, and which complex systems remain unconscious (Oizumi, 2014). Far from being incompatible with the possibility of resurrections, IIT tells us what exactly needs to be done to a brain to reconstruct consciousness—reintegrate its information.

Reference: Oizumi M, Albantakis L& Tononi G. (2014). From the phenomenology to the mechanisms of consciousness: Integrated information theory 3.0. PLoS Computational Biology 10(5).