1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

what are 3 strongest evidence that make you believe after life does exist?

Discussion in 'Afterlife Evidence' started by dogtree, Jul 21, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
  2. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Welcome to our family, dear whylifeispointless! Since most of what you say here (and elsewhere in this thread) evidences a lack of knowledge or research on your part, I gather that you may be a determined denier. And if that is the case - if you are comforted to think that life is pointless and this material reality is all there is - then please understand that is fine with everyone here. Go in peace, with our blessing. We cannot convince you otherwise, and there is no need to waste your time and ours in trying. But if you have a semi-open mind and you are susceptible to reason, then please understand the following:

    1) Reality is not what you think it is. Quantum physics experiments, consciousness research, and nearly 200 years of abundant and consistent afterlife-related evidence all work together to give us a pretty good - if preliminary - understanding of what reality actually is. You may not want to know, of course, which is fine. But you seem to be very bright, and I know that you don't want to seem ignorant. All your posts in this tread make you seem ignorant, I am sorry to say, and I ask everyone reading you to understand that what you say comes just from the fact that you have not yet bothered to do any research beyond perhaps reading some debunker and denier websites.

    2) Religious concepts of God and the afterlife are generally erroneous, based upon all the evidence. Mainstream religions are wrong about these matters for the same reason that you are - they haven't done their research. But unlike you, they are probably incapable of absorbing new information now.

    3) NDEs and OBEs can be genuine instances of human beings who are fully aware while they are separated from their bodies. This is a fact. If you want to learn the truth, just stop reading denier and debunker websites, and start doing a little actual research. There are so many instances of NDEs and OBEs in which the participant was able to report conversations and events far removed from the site of his comatose body that the only way to deny that these phenomena are real is to stick one's fingers in one's ears and sing "La-la-la!" loudly. And you seem too smart to waste yourself in doing that!

    4) Your brain is a two-way communication device that is also capable of some ancillary functions. It's a computer - you are right about that! But its primary function is to pick up the signal of your mind and then to transmit back to your mind whatever its sensory organs are perceiving. It doesn't generate the complex wonder of who you are, dear Whylifeispointless. You are an eternal energy-being having a brief, strange - and perhaps in your case pointless ;-)! - earth-experience.

    5) Debunkers and deniers are ignorant folks with an agenda. The truth, as it continues to dawn on the world, is goring a lot of people's oxes, sad to say. So for most of the past century there have been people - generally scientists, which is the most shameful part - who have tried to make it all go away. I have read a lot of debunkers, and I have never encountered an honest researcher among them, sad to say - but because they have scientific credentials people tend to give them more credit than they deserve. Most of them follow the same general pattern. They will take a reported phenomenon - like NDEs - and choose one or two commonly-reported aspects which seem to them to be critical to the whole phenomenon. Then they will try to prove that whatever that aspect is could have been produced in some natural way, and they will thereby claim to have "debunked" the whole idea of NDEs. Because they never bother to do much research, they never seem to realize that actually they have not debunked anything, having instead misunderstood the phenomenon and what it really entails. They have only made themselves ridiculous. Dear friend, your posts here make me assume that you get your information from debunker books and websites, so no wonder you have no idea what is true!

    - These are facts. Eventually they will be known by everyone, and recognized - duh! - as self-evidently obvious. Whether that dawning will come sooner or later is going to be dependent primarily on the strength of the vested interests (universities primarily) whose views of reality - and whose pocketbooks! - are so threatened by truths which are becoming more and more obvious. These established institutions are ever more desperately fighting little pieces of gigantic, amazing and universal truths. But the truth will out. It always does!

    If you would like to spend a little time trying to understand what is going on, then we are happy to help you here. If you have questions, we are happy to answer them, but please ask questions and don't make yourself look silly by pronouncing as facts things that we all know are untrue. For example, there are many verified photos of disembodied beings! Good grief, dear friend, this is basic stuff. There are many instances of double-blind and triple-blind studies of mediums who brought information from the dead which could not have been known until it was researched and verified. The energy level where the dead reside is separated from ours in the same way that Channel Five and Channel Ten are separated on your TV set, so communication directly between our levels is extraordinarily difficult. Iit's a wonder that it happens at all. But thanks to the ingenuity of the dead, it does happen!

    Now you have a choice to make, dear Whylifeispointless. You have made what you consider to be good points, and in the process you have given us a good giggle. Now, would you like to open your mind a bit and let us introduce you to a greater reality that has been right here all along?
    kim likes this.
  3. You make a lot of points that you come across as fact-based. In the end, people are going to believe what they perceive to be true based on personal experiences.

    If I see a ghost, it's automatically a hallucination? Maybe I can't say for sure that it's a ghost, but you can't say that it's not.

    The brain is still a mysterious organ, and "modern science" is not always accurate.
  4. I've already asked questions but i've yet received answers here so here's just another question.

    When a brain is split in half through the corpus callosum severance procedure, do you get 2 souls or is it still one? And what happens when a brain is combined again?

    Here's a vid of a guy believing in both god and athiesm at the same time.
  5. "I do have evidence that Italy exists due to satellite mapping of the Earth. So that's how I believe Italy exists without going to Italy. There is evidence."

    This is interesting. Italy has existed, according to common belief, for quite some time, well before there was satellite mapping of the earth. Before then, was there no way to be certain that Italy existed, without going there? Even if I went there, could I be sure I had not gone somewhere else by mistake? For that matter, couldn't that satellite mapping all be a scam -- just like those films of the moon landing in 1969? Everyone knows that was a fake!

    If you are going to think that anything can be a fake, or an error, or a bit of errant biochemistry, then the whole world can be discredited, one observation at a time.

    See, whylifeispointless, you think that you are bringing logic and science to the unenlightened, but this is not the case. We are more enlightened than you think, and your knowledge of logic and science is much more rudimentary than you realize. You are embarrassing yourself more than you know.
  6. A soul is not a part of the brain, nor is the brain a part of the soul. The brain, like any organ, can be injured, and this can cause thinking and perception to be altered. And for a person's brain to malfunction in such a way that they have dual personalities or inconsistent beliefs does not mean that their soul is similarly affected.

    Just like if my car breaks down, I myself am not broken or altered.

    The question is illogical.
  7. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Heh - Curious. No, there is no evidence that severing the hemispheres of a brain from one another would create a second being. Your brain doesn't create "you" at all, so splitting it would have rather the same effect as cleaving your radio with an axe might have: if it still works, of course. Still just one radio signal, and still just one mind. Perhaps splitting the brain could weaken its defenses, so spirit possession might be a possible explanation for the phenomenon in your video - it's hard to say for sure.
    dan t and kim like this.
  8. ChuckAnderson

    ChuckAnderson New Member

    Have you been to a site called The Straight Dope?
    I know that there are a lot of people there that hold many of the same views that you seem to have, and you might find it a useful place to discuss this with "fellow travelers".
  9. Ok, I see that the question I asked wasn't good because the definition of a soul could change to answer the question.

    How about this one.

    What was the first thing which had a soul or afterlife that came from Earth?

    First replicating molecule - 3.5-3.9 billion years ago
    Prokaryotes - 3.5-3.9 billion years ago
    Eukaryotes - 2 billion years ago
    Multicellular Life - 1 billion years ago
    Fish - 500 million years ago
    Reptiles - 300 million years ago
    Homo Habilis - 1.4 million years ago
    Homo Antecessor - 800,000 years ago
    Homo Rhodesiensis - 125,000 years ago
    Homo Sapiens - Present

    Now if you pick something from this list, you need to tell me why. If you say that Homo Sapiens get to have an afterlife while all the other creatures don't, then why and how do you know?

    If you picked the first replicating molecule, then what about rocks, aren't those full of molecules as well?

    If you think insects do not have an afterlife, but humans do, then aren't humans just like insects but with more cells? So because humans have more cells, they get an afterlife while insects do not?

    If you think insects get an afterlife but bacteria don't, then why does having billions of cells work together make some sort of an afterlife while one cell working by itself does not?
  10. ravensgate

    ravensgate Regular Contributor

    I don't mean to come across as a rude person, but what is the point in protracting this dubious thread? Really, we have Whylifeispointless regurgitating data derived from various sources which he/she may consider reputable; he/she seems to already have made up his/her mind, and no amount of exchange is going to change that - jmho. I too was a skeptic, and in many ways I still am; Whylifeispointless may be a uberskeptic, can't be sure though.

    The "problem" with uberskeptics (and this does not mean Whylifeispointless shares the "problem") is that they delight in a false sense of superiority, erroneously believing their thinking is "rational and scientific"; they will go to great lengths to disprove what they think is bunk. In many cases, their false bravado is an attempt to conceal the fear of the possibilities. They'll say we have no instruments that can prove the existence of a spiritual world; if the instruments we have cannot prove it, then it does not exist. They will not entertain the possibility that it may be a question of not having developed the right instruments. In the history of science, how long did it take to observe the various strains of bacteria, the viruses, etc. etc. They always existed but we couldn't see them because we did not have the right instruments.
    So perhaps one day we will develop the right instruments and convert a few skeptics, lol.

    I'd just like to address the part in regard's to the tennis shoe on the hospital window ledge. As a health care professional with over 20 years in ICU and trauma, I can tell you that we (medical staff) will not go to great lengths to appease a patient; to suggest that some doctor asked a janitor to place the shoe on the ledge is.... never mind. Also, fyi, many health care professionals have experienced phenomena that could not be explained; I am one of them, and I'm one of many.

    I have just one question for Whylifeispointless, please: what was/is your reason for joining this forum? You see, I'm sure we could go back and forth with this thread until the cows come home, but chances are we will not change Whylifeispointless's worldview and he/she won't change ours.
    Peace to all :)
    dan t likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page