Scientiifc Proof of Survival After Death

[Henry17]

Well to refute something it has to actually be stated.

After reading 1/2 the article the proof / evidence for the thesis was never actually stated. Two things were established.

1. That they have proof / evidence
2. That since they are being supposedly censured that is proof that their evidence is valid.

We never actually get told what the evidence is. If the actual evidence appears later then I'll read the rest otherwise I am not wasting my time.

Has anyone read the whole thing? Is there any actual evidence offered?

[TomCowley]

Refute what? Some moron's opinion that dead people's ghosts wander around influencing the world? He presents no predictive theory, he presents no math, and he presents no evidence (no, I'm not chasing down references- the last time I did that, Carlo had me reading some Neanderthal talking about Ether Balls).

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
What did they claim to find?

I read a lot of words saying their proof and been surpressed, but nothing about what they claim to have done.

[/ QUOTE ]

I noticed the same thing. My [censored] detector pegged.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I tried to read the link but in the end I stopped because it is complete BS.

1. If there was actually something to say they would state it without all the rhetoric and double-speak which says nothing but is impressive to the uneducated and not that bright.

2. At least 2 statements that I came across just when skimming it were completely wrong and showed a lack of understanding of QM

[/ QUOTE ]


While the thesis is likely untrue, I'd like to hear you refute it. No offense, but points 1 and 2 sound like ad hominem to this layperson.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure you know what ad hominem means?

[CORed]

I skimmed most of it and didn't find anything remotely resembling evidence. They did mention something about "etheric substance", and claim that neither relativity nor quantum mechanics are valid. Surprisingly enough, I saw no mention of phlogiston or the geocentric theroy of the universe.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
Refute what? Some moron's opinion that dead people's ghosts wander around influencing the world? He presents no predictive theory, he presents no math, and he presents no evidence (no, I'm not chasing down references- the last time I did that, Carlo had me reading some Neanderthal talking about Ether Balls).

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't chase down the references. They've been suppressed by the evil purveyors of materialism, relativity and quantum mechanics.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/back...ficproof1.html

This article is quite interesting. I think we are coming upon a time where just about everything we were taught to be true will be proven false.

[/ QUOTE ]

Including the statement you just made?

Jimbo

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

[hitch1978]

I really didn't want to open this thread, I generally avoid ones with titles like this... But... I was weak. I folded in a moment of weakness and started reading it.

Blame curiosity, blame stubborness, blame bordome. Blame what you will, but the facts are clear for all to see.

That was seventeen minutes of my finite exsistence I cannot retrieve.

[Henry17]

I know it was a pretty bad article. I was kind of hoping for something more like Tipler's argument for an after-life. While I don't agree with Tipler at least there is actually something to discuss.

[tame_deuces]

Well, I offer you no sympathy Hitch, the words 'survival after death' should really have tipped you, [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]