Can you believe in certain things without being religious?

[madnak]

This stuff isn't science, man. It sounds like you don't know what science is. I don't know the subject, maybe some of these books make some valid points, but they don't constitute research. They're largely editorial. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily, I mean "The Selfish Gene" falls into the same category. But Dawkins wouldn't be convincing if he didn't have solid experimental data to back up his claims, and if his claims weren't falsifiable.

Either show me the research itself (that should be a paper with an abstract and sections explaining how the research was conducted), or link me to a reference in a scholarly journal, preferably peer reviewed.

[GaSSPaNiCC]

Well, i'm definaely glad your interested, what is it would like to see? If you go to the website of skeptiko, www.skeptiko.com, there are numerous guests who are the leading para psychology researchers, NDE researchers etc, and also interviews with skeptics(James Randi, Steven Novella, Richard Wiseman and others). The interviews i would recommend are with Dean Radin, Ed and Emily Kelly, and Steven Novella. There are plenty of other great podcasts as well. I highly recommend this website. This is the best i can do, to address your specific claims, as there is just to much research to talk about. I'd much rather you listen to the experts, then myself. And after if there is a specific topic or interview you would like to debate about, once you have listened to a podcast or two, i would be more then happy to have a discussion.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, i'm definaely glad your interested, what is it would like to see? If you go to the website of skeptiko, www.skeptiko.com, there are numerous guests who are the leading para psychology researchers, NDE researchers etc, and also interviews with skeptics(James Randi, Steven Novella, Richard Wiseman and others). The interviews i would recommend are with Dean Radin, Ed and Emily Kelly, and Steven Novella. There are plenty of other great podcasts as well. I highly recommend this website. This is the best i can do, to address your specific claims, as there is just to much research to talk about. I'd much rather you listen to the experts, then myself. And after if there is a specific topic or interview you would like to debate about, once you have listened to a podcast or two, i would be more then happy to have a discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too much research to talk about? Pick your favorite paper or experiment or article and at the very least, I'm willing to discuss it with you. Probably luckyme and madnak and others as well. But I dont plan on being nice about it, and I expect you to give your own opinions and explanations based on what you've read.

[JammyDodga]

[x]leading researchers
[x]interviews
[x]experts
[x]podcasts
[ ]any evidence or science

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[x]leading researchers
[x]interviews
[x]experts
[x]podcasts
[ ]any evidence or science

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[GaSSPaNiCC]

Maybe you should actually listen to some of the podcasts, before being so ignorant. And on the discussion, i would liek to consider the debate between michael shermer and deepak chopra on the Afterlife published in skeptic.

http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/...afterlife.html

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you should actually listen to some of the podcasts, before being so ignorant. And on the discussion, i would liek to consider the debate between michael shermer and deepak chopra on the Afterlife published in skeptic.

http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/...afterlife.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Listening to them is a big investment of my time, I'd rather you present the information contained within to me and answer some direct questions so that I know whether its worth my time or not.

You've been asked this about 20 times now and if you'd spent all the words you've used dodging and evading you'd probably be through the worst of it by now. This leads me to believe you are hiding something...either the knowledge that this is mostly flimflammery or some sort of self-esteem issue that you arent capable of defending this research you find so interesting. We wont lynch you or anything so out with it.

[GaSSPaNiCC]

Noooo, i'm trying still trying to figure the best case to discuss with you. Trust me it's not easy as you think, it's not because i'm hiding anything, i wasn't sure exactly what topic you wanted to debate about, because frankly there is a lot we can debate on, but i want to be fair with respect to you, if you're not familiar with the research. So i think we debate on something more general, how about consciousness or the NDE?

[JammyDodga]

Easy, give us one piece of evidence or research of any kind in favour of the kind of stuff you are talking about which you think will stand up to scrutiny.

[GaSSPaNiCC]

Alright, NDE of Pam Reynolds

http://near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html

Probably the best case in favour for an NDE.