Dear Convolution, yet again, what you are saying here is based in bits of nonsense so your conclusions inevitably also are nonsense. But apparently playing with nonsense is what you enjoy?
Ian Stevenson
- Thread starter zilch
- Start date
- Status
Dear Convolution, yet again, what you are saying here is based in bits of nonsense so your conclusions inevitably also are nonsense. But apparently playing with nonsense is what you enjoy?
When you say "failing to notice things.." you may be referring to the start of this thread which was considering the failure of Prof Stevenson to transmit the numbers to open his lock. Many would take this to indicate failure to survive, but, as you say, we cannot assume that this is the kind of thing that would be retained. These kinds of things are terribly easy to forget at the best of times.
Dear all, I do have to part my ways with ALF. Obviously, I do not fit here as someone who prefers research rather than just what i see as acquiring unverifiable beliefs. I hope to find some convincing evidence elsewhere. One side comment from me is that I am a scientist and work in a research institute. As a non-believer and sceptic I keep being amazed that I meet very rational scientists who are also religious/believers. I just talked today with a biologist who is one of such people. I think that there is no problem with reconciling beliefs in something non-material and being a rational scientifically-minded person.
I have not encountered anyone from the 'spiritual' side who decides to pick up real math/physics/biology book and really learn, which takes years and lots of failures. And you don't seem very welcoming to our kind of people, I'm afraid.
I have not encountered anyone from the 'spiritual' side who decides to pick up real math/physics/biology book and really learn, which takes years and lots of failures. And you don't seem very welcoming to our kind of people, I'm afraid.
innerperson
Occasional Contributor
Good luck Zilch. I hope you find what you're looking for. 
Looks like we've - I've - failed in many ways.....
Perhaps when you NEED to learn and understand about survival et al you'll approach matters in a different way. The sad fact is that many only reach that point when they've experienced crushing bereavement and those who haven't may just not be 'keyed in'.
It's a real shame you're hobbled by being a scientist but whadya do?
bluebird
Major Contributor
I completely understand your frustrations; I feel much the same about some of the aspects of this site, and certain of its members. I do think the site would be much better if it were less dogmatic.
Nonetheless, I have found that there are certain members here with whom I am able to have good, friendly, interesting exchanges and conversations, whether or not we agree on the issue being discussed. For me, it is still worth visiting and participating here; only you can decide if it is worth it for you.
poeticblue
member
It’s unfortunate that you feel the need to leave. I’ve been at that point several times here on this forum.
However, it is in my opinion that you should stay. I sense that you just need a break to soak in certain information and advice given to you from here that you otherwise didn’t or couldn’t have gotten from another source. I’m not saying that what certain folks here have stated was right and/or absolutely true, all I’m saying is to have a little more patience and to stick it out here because we do care about you. Yes certain folks may fuss and disagree but for the majority of us here, we fuss and disagree because we want to learn. How can we learn anything from one another without disagreements at some point?
The choice is up to you, but if you really wanted to leave would you have made a post about it? Thinking ‘logically’ like you and Convolution, perhaps in my opinion you’re just simply overwhelmed mentally wether it be with current or past matters. You can choose to leave or not, but if you ever need a place to come to, we will be here.
Last edited:
Dear Zilch, we are sorry to see you go because you do seem to be open-minded and if you want to learn what is true about the afterlife and the greater reality you never will learn it from a scientific community that refuses even to consider the evidence and is still zealously taking the radio apart to find the source of Frank Sinatra's voice. We have tried, dear Zilch. There are wonderful people with strong scientific backgrounds who still are trying now to find some way to breach the wall that the mainstream scientific community has erected against ever finding any truth that is not based in materialism. So, yes, at 72 and after close to 50 years of trying and hoping, I am no longer expecting an invitation from some Lothario in a white coat to join him at last in doing that dance. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango! And the scientific community will steadfastly refuse to study anything related to the afterlife until the moment when every Alexa in every kitchen is picking up great-great-grandma's voice whenever you ask her to get that old recipe for great-great-grandma's special cornbread. It will be then - and only then - that the mainstream scientific community will at last be shamed into seeking to understand the whole truth, and not just its preferred portion of it. But you have been a good contributor and a very pleasant Member here, dear Zilch, and we are grateful that you have spent time with us. If you ever want to return, please know that we will be delighted to have you back! And meanwhile, I'm sure that everyone here wishes you well.
genewardsmith
Active Member
I'm a mathematician with a considerable knowledge of physics, for what that is worth.
It is worth a great deal to us! We love you here, dear Genewardsmith. Thank you for participating on ALF so wonderfully!
- Status