Doctor claims he has evidence of the afterlif

[FlyingAngel]

dont think you have a real definition of either word, intelligent or domination. There are ways animals and insects are far more intelligent than we are. You would not understand this unless you were to live in their world. Their envrionment. Yes we are able to slice an atom, which is something that suits our need in our environment. Now take an ant for instance, an ant can communicate and manipulate their environment in ways we can only fathom. So I would say that intelligence is subjective. As far as domination.... were do you get the idea that we dominate the world? If you are talking numbers.... the insects have us beat there. Or perhaps you are thinking about our ability to manipulate or destroy OUR world. I say OUR, because, even if we kill ourselves off, (which is a pretty dumb thing to do)we still would not have destroyed the world. There will still be plants, insects, and other creatures that would benifit from our destruction. Even here we see that insects are capable of doing the same thing on their level. They populate and eat untill there is nothing left.

So as far as this debate goes, I say if I have a soul, so does every living creature on this planet. Yeah im including shrubs as well.

Intelligent is just one thing. All the combination of properties make us overcome other species. Fact is we can kill any animals we want, even destroy a whole planter, other can't.

The stronger lives, then winner dies. That's how survival works. => domination.

[mattavich123]

Intelligent is just one thing. All the combination of properties make us overcome other species. Fact is we can kill any animals we want, even destroy a whole planter, other can't.

The stronger lives, then winner dies. That's how survival works. => domination.

I find the human race quite weak in that sense. We are far from the most survivable.

Edited January 31, 2011 by mattavich123

[FlyingAngel]

I find the human race quite weak in that sense. We are far from the most survivable.

Survive from the environment, disaster is on think. But since we are intelligent, we are conscious, we know what we can do, we can kill any animal we like.

Other animal is more intelligent or stronger, so what? They lack either property to decide who they can kill.

If human wants to war with other race, human will win after all.

[Arpee]

Humans are not superior to anything else. We are all the same, human, dog, flower, tree, cockroach...

[Agent. Mulder]

Intelligent is just one thing. All the combination of properties make us overcome other species. Fact is we can kill any animals we want, even destroy a whole planter, other can't.

We as humans are hindered, and sometimes killed, by tiny little things we cannt kill or see.

Yes, we sure are powerful.

The stronger lives, then winner dies. That's how survival works. => domination.

The stronger lives.....then, then winner...dies?

Anyways, I, must protest, that thats Not how survival works exactly.

[Agent. Mulder]

Survive from the environment, disaster is on think. But since we are intelligent, we are conscious, we know what we can do, we can kill any animal we like.

Other animal is more intelligent or stronger, so what? They lack either property to decide who they can kill.

If human wants to war with other race, human will win after all.

Yet, if we put you out in the middle of the amazon. Youd died within a week

[FlyingAngel]

Yet, if we put you out in the middle of the amazon. Youd died within a week

Nope, probable but not a sure thing.

[JGirl]

Survive from the environment, disaster is on think. But since we are intelligent, we are conscious, we know what we can do, we can kill any animal we like.

Other animal is more intelligent or stronger, so what? They lack either property to decide who they can kill.

If human wants to war with other race, human will win after all.

i keep seeing you refer to being able to kill anything we like as evidence of our being the dominant and most intelligent.

the cockroach is more adaptable, more resourceful, and much much tougher than humans.

thank your lucky stars they aren't looking to take us over.

[McFakename]

Of course there is life after death you morons. Where do you think ghost and spirits and such come from? Why is there even research being done on this? Who actually believes we die and that's it.. Some of you peoples are just stern unbelievers....

Wow settle down. You believe in ghosts and spirits. How many children across the globe believe in Santa, Tooth Fairy, or the Easter Bunny? They are absolutely positive they all exist until their parents show them they don't. So my question to you is may I see your evidence that proves without a doubt that a ghost watched me type this or I have a spirit watching TV with me at home? If not I would think twice about calling an entire forum morons.

[Agent. Mulder]

Nope, probable but not a sure thing.

Its more than probable. Its almost guaranteed.

[Disbeliever]

Of course there is life after death you morons. Where do you think ghost and spirits and such come from? Why is there even research being done on this? Who actually believes we die and that's it.. Some of you peoples are just stern unbelievers....

Yep, sure am.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Disbeliever

[FlyingAngel]

Its more than probable. Its almost guaranteed.

"Almost" is not the same as "always", "always" is 100%, almost is <100%. Generalization and deny other variables would blind you to see the truth.

i keep seeing you refer to being able to kill anything we like as evidence of our being the dominant and most intelligent.

the cockroach is more adaptable, more resourceful, and much much tougher than humans.

thank your lucky stars they aren't looking to take us over.

Nope. They may be more adaptable, but they lack of intelligence. Thus they can't decide whether they can kill human or not. As for humans, it's just that people doesn't want to kill; but if they want to kill, they can kill anything in sight.

How many animals (chicken, bird, pig, cow, etc...) do you think human can kill everyday? Countless. How many animals kill a human everyday? Countable.

More adaptive to the environment, so what? Still killed by human after all.

Human > all animals

Edited February 2, 2011 by FlyingAngel

[JGirl]

"Almost" is not the same as "always", "always" is 100%, almost is <100%. Generalization and deny other variables would blind you to see the truth.

Nope. They may be more adaptable, but they lack of intelligence. Thus they can't decide whether they can kill human or not. As for humans, it's just that people doesn't want to kill; but if they want to kill, they can kill anything in sight.

How many animals (chicken, bird, pig, cow, etc...) do you think human can kill everyday? Countless. How many animals kill a human everyday? Countable.

More adaptive to the environment, so what? Still killed by human after all.

Human > all animals

we domesticate animals for slaughter so we can eat them. if you go to the jungle and stand there long enough, something will kill you. animals have far less opportunity, or inclination for that matter, to kill something or someone unnecessarily.

i still find it amusing and slightly confusing (hey that rhymes ) that one would consider who can kill whom an indicator of superiority.

Edited February 2, 2011 by JGirl

[Agent. Mulder]

"Almost" is not the same as "always", "always" is 100%, almost is <100%. Generalization and deny other variables would blind you to see the truth.

It appears, you are under the impression i claimed Almost means Always?

How come?

Nope. They may be more adaptable, but they lack of intelligence. Thus they can't decide whether they can kill human or not. As for humans, it's just that people doesn't want to kill; but if they want to kill, they can kill anything in sight.

No, they cant. Because many cant decide whether or not they CAN kill any animal or not.

[Chronii]

FlyingAngel, being able to kill someone does not you better than that someone. That's a ridiculously primitive and dangerous mindset.

[Robbie333]

Thank you for the link and info. I am very interested. Have a good day.--Robbie

[FlyingAngel]

we domesticate animals for slaughter so we can eat them. if you go to the jungle and stand there long enough, something will kill you. animals have far less opportunity, or inclination for that matter, to kill something or someone unnecessarily.

i still find it amusing and slightly confusing (hey that rhymes ) that one would consider who can kill whom an indicator of superiority.

It's because a human going to jungle unprepared. If it goes in armed, steel armor, with a mind to kill anything in his way. Nothing can stop him. You can tell to an animal to prepare everything you want. First, it can't understand you (lack of intelligence), second it can't get through a steel armor. Simple as that, human still win.

We domesticate animals because we are able to control them => dominate over them. If there is really a war against species, human still win. Guns, knife, fire, nuclear, bombs. We have all needed technology to kill all.

FlyingAngel, being able to kill someone does not you better than that someone. That's a ridiculously primitive and dangerous mindset.

I didn't say to kill someone, I said we can kill any animal when we want.

Edited February 2, 2011 by FlyingAngel

[FlyingAngel]

It appears, you are under the impression i claimed Almost means Always?

How come?

No, they cant. Because many cant decide whether or not they CAN kill any animal or not.

It doesn't matter, it's not a 100% sure that when one is put in the Amazon, it will die in 7 days.

They can if they want to. Give them 1 million $ and tell them to kill one animal. They'll do

[JGirl]

It's because a human going to jungle unprepared. If it goes in armed, steel armor, with a mind to kill anything in his way. Nothing can stop him. You can tell to an animal to prepare everything you want. First, it can't understand you (lack of intelligence), second it can't get through a steel armor. Simple as that, human still win.

We domesticate animals because we are able to control them => dominate over them. If there is really a war against species, human still win. Guns, knife, fire, nuclear, bombs. We have all needed technology to kill all.

I didn't say to kill someone, I said we can kill any animal when we want.

wow you are really stuck on this killing thing aren't you?

edit to repeat what i said earlier -

animals have far less opportunity, or inclination for that matter, to kill something or someone unnecessarily

Edited February 2, 2011 by JGirl

[Daniel_Knight]

Exactly. A death certificate is just like a marriage certificate: a legal fiction. Some people just want to privilege being dead from merely shacking up with the dead. Some do it for religious reasons; others, for financial purposes.

Personally, I'd give more credence to NDEs if "dead" Christians sometimes saw Buddha and "dead" Buddhists sometimes saw Jesus. But they don't. "Dead" Christians see Jesus or angels, and "dead" Buddhists see Buddha or bodhisattvas. These "near-death" experiences are culturally conditioned.

And your evidence that Buddhists claimed to have seen Buddha and Krishna when they died IS? Or are you just being a parrot and parroting a deadly myth that can lead people astray from Christ? Please don't assume things are true just because someone tells you, or out right LIE.