Life after death is impossible

[ChristineM]

God can and he will.

I assume you have evidence for this claim and are willing to share it

PS: stop your provocations; everyone can notice how you are trying to accuse me of things I didn´t say ... that's how you are in reality. Nice you show yourself how you are and how you act. Kudos for us, believers.

You started insulting atheists and misrepresenting them. Everyone noticed that. I counted six comments castigating you for your post.
If you want i will quote your insulting post and the several responses. So please don't put the blame for your hatred of atheists on me, it just doesn't wash

 

[Eli G]

You continue accusing me of things I didn't do. You are the ones insulting believers all the time.

I remember now why I put you in my ignore list. Welcome back there.

Good bye.

 

[ChristineM]

You continue accusing me of things I didn't do. You are the ones insulting believers all the time.

I remember now why I put you in my ignore list. Welcome back there.

Good bye.

Ok, let me find your posts and I'll copy them here. Ignored or not other people will see them.

 

[SalixIncendium]

You continue accusing me of things I didn't do. You are the ones insulting believers all the time.

Yeah, put someone on blast and then add them to your ignore list. How noble.

And I've known @ChristineM for quite a while here. She doesn't insult believers. She challenges their claims about their beliefs. I do believe you have the two confused.

Finally, I find your accusations here a bit more insulting than her challenge of your claims.

If you're going to make claims about your beliefs, be prepared to support them rather than resorting to character attacks.

 

[Eli G]

I am banning this forum out of my time for another month.

You need forumers a lot more than anyone needs you ... It is the participants who really make a forum, and it is something, you (plural), the bunch of atheists behind this show, forget sometimes.

Farewell.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I am banning this forum out of my time for another month.

You need forumers a lot more than anyone needs you ... It is the participants who really make a forum, and it is something, you (plural), the bunch of atheists behind this show, forget sometimes.

Farewell.

I'm not an atheist. Nice try, though.

See you in a month.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I am banning this forum out of my time for another month.

You need forumers a lot more than anyone needs you ... It is the participants who really make a forum, and it is something, you (plural), the bunch of atheists behind this show, forget sometimes.

Farewell.

If you come back with the same bad attitude toward others, then you will receive the same kind of negative reaction as you have now.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I don't know if there is a life after death but I wonder what if our souls switch between multiverse. Like you're dead in his universe and soon as you die you switch to another universe where you're just born? What if the greed of being alive makes us to go through different multiverses. And our current life is actually a after life of previous life? I don't know if this make sense lmao

I've heard of an unusual theory in the paranormal community that there could be another dimension running parallel to our own and that we see people in this dimension as ghosts and shadow figures, and that is how they perceive us. I'm not sure what I think of this theory, but it is an interesting thought.

 

[Whateverist]

I agree with you but even if it were possible, who’d want to go through life as a dead person? Ewww

 

[ChristineM]

@Eli G

Lets start with

The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution​

your post
The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

Followed by my reply
The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

To which you replied
The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

Then post 311. 312, 313 and 314

315 was the beginning of the backlifrom other members to you attitude.

316 is you throwing insults at atheism again.

317, 319;and 320 are more backlash to your insulting posts.

Much of the next page are more responses to your horrible comments about atheists im not listing them just go to the page
The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

And a few comments on page 18 too.
The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

But of course you know precisely what you have written

 

[ChristineM]

I agree with you but even if it were possible, who’d want to go through life as a dead person? Ewww

We are all made of dead people..

Atoms are the utlimate in recycling

 

[Whateverist]

We are all made of dead people..

Atoms are the utlimate in recycling

Always happy to recycle or reuse but zombie hood is not for me.

 

[ChristineM]

Always happy to recycle or reuse but zombie hood is not for me.

Just the atoms, not the consciousness.
The first law of thermodynamics tells us that in a closed system energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only altered in form. So energy/mass is essentially eternal... and reused throughout time

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Always happy to recycle or reuse but zombie hood is not for me.

I have an entirely different view on the recycling of the dead, as I explained further in another thread here.

 

[Whateverist]

I have an entirely different view on the recycling of the dead, as I explained further in another thread here.

I went ahead and responded to that other post there. Not as gratifying as outright agreement but I do think I found a little common ground.

 

[Ostronomos]

The arguments:​

1. Biological Perspective: life is a result of complex biological processes, death marks the irreversible cessation of these processes. Once the brain stops functioning, consciousness and self-awareness cannot persist.
2. Neurological Evidence: near-death experiences are explained by the brain's response to trauma or lack of oxygen, rather than evidence of an afterlife. These experiences can often be replicated through stimulation of certain brain regions.
3. Conservation of Energy: consciousness is a product of physical processes, and the law of conservation of energy dictates that energy cannot be created or destroyed but only transformed. Consciousness cannot exist independently beyond the body's death.
4. Lack of Empirical Evidence: the absence of robust empirical evidence that supports the existence of an afterlife. Claims of encounters with departed souls or supernatural phenomena lack scientific verifiability.
5. Evolutionary Perspective: belief in an afterlife may have evolutionary advantages in promoting social cohesion and cooperation, but this doesn't necessarily mean an afterlife truly exists.
6. Occam's Razor: This principle suggests that simpler explanations are more likely to be correct than complex ones. Since life after death introduces complex metaphysical concepts, it's considered less likely than explanations rooted in natural processes.
7. Cultural Influences: beliefs in an afterlife are an artifact of culture and groupthink which can cloud objectivity and critical thinking when evaluating the evidence.
8. Mind-Body Relationship: Consciousness arises from the interactions of neurons and brain chemistry. Without these physical processes, consciousness cannot persist.

Is that the best you can do?

You are merely appealing to common sense popularity. However, even common sense popularity does not support your dogmatic opposition to God.

 

[Brian2]

Like witness reports of alien abduction?

Sorry, I didn't want to go there, but don't claim there is evidence of something when there isn't.

Well yes, like witness reports of alien abduction is evidence.
It is not proof, and may be shown to be wrong, but is evidence nonetheless.

 

[blü 2]

But we don't know what those rules are, or how many others there are, or if, what, or when there are exceptions.

We know what we know. We follow the examinable evidence. We check out the possibilities. We form a conclusion and quite often act on it.

What we don't know we try to find out.

But what we don't know is never a license to invent things to fill the gaps, though arguably doing just that is part of human nature. If they're derived from existing evidence we can check our hypotheses, of course.

No evidence is just proof of our ignorance. You're taking it as proof of your opinions being right. That very illogical.

Ahm, I'm not the one proceeding on the basis of no evidence here.

Absence of evidence is different to exploring hypotheses to explain partial or ambiguous or insufficient evidence. You can't just make things up because they appeal to you and then offer them as statements about reality.

No one was talking about supernatural claims. We don't even know what "natural" means, or it's limitations, so to debate the "supernatural" is a fool's errand.

No, it's much simpler than that. 'Natural' means 'being an aspect of nature' where 'nature' means the world external to the self.

If you can't find it in nature, the only other place you can look for it is as an idea, a concept, a notion, a thing imagined in an individual brain.

That includes the supernatural.

All unknown possibilities are equally possible.

Really? How do you know that?

 

[Watchmen]

Is that the best you can do?

You are merely appealing to common sense popularity. However, even common sense popularity does not support your dogmatic opposition to God.

To the contrary, common sense is often the answer. Common sense supports that there is no God and there is no afterlife.

 

[idea]

Is that the best you can do?

You are merely appealing to common sense popularity. However, even common sense popularity does not support your dogmatic opposition to God.

What is dogmatic mindset?

Dogmatism is defined as avoidance from accepting others' beliefs, ideas and behaviors. Dogmatic individuals have many problems in understanding new ideas. They cannot accept reasonable ideas instead of their incorrect ideas. They do not cooperate with others with different ideas.


Have you ever changed your beliefs? Are you currently willing to change your beliefs? Can you consider other points of view?


I have changed my beliefs, I have listened to other views. I will change my views again should evidence support it.