Atheists is there life after death

[Rlyeh]

12 minutes ago, Einsteinium said:

Do you believe in life before birth?

Thinking that nothing existed forever into the past, then suddenly one comes into existence for a brief period of time only to return to forever non-existence seems...I don't know...lacking.

That's not unique to life though. A car doesn't function before it's creation and wont after it's destruction. Is it that odd the brain will also cease to function when destroyed?

[psyche101]

18 hours ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

Does that mean that people who claim 'nothingness' or 'eternal oblivion' is awaiting us at death are also making stuff up?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

No it doesn't. That conclusion comes from observation study and knowledge. There's just no good reason to believe in an afterlife. 

[Only_]

11 hours ago, Podo said:

There's no evidence-based reason to believe that there is any form of afterlife, therefore nothingness is currently the most logical conclusion based on the body of evidence. If someone declares that they 100% know that it is nothingness because that's what they believe, as opposed to where the evidence is, then they are guilty of the same woo as theists are. 

It's an assumption. There is simply nothing to indicate that eternal oblivion is the "most logical conclusion'', except one own's biases. We don't know what's going to happen to us when we die. That's the fact. Everything else is a matter of beliefs and assumptions. Eternal oblivion is no more likely than a cloud paradise with great food and naked, sexy people and beautiful nature and treasures. In fact, it's pretty irrational. Why would we be given a consciousness if it was just to experience oblivion? Surely there would be some means to engage with our surrounds.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[Only_]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

No it doesn't. That conclusion comes from observation study and knowledge. There's just no good reason to believe in an afterlife. 

 

[psyche101]

24 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

It's an assumption. There is simply nothing to indicate that eternal oblivion is the "most logical conclusion'', except one own's biases. 

That's simply not true. Its not an assumption its the logical conclusion based on facts, we know how atoms work, we know the mind is the brain and we understand thermodynamics. There is no way for what is you to survive death. 

Quote

We don't know what's going to happen to us when we die. That's the fact. Everything else is a matter of beliefs and assumptions. 

Afterlife claims are only beliefs, assumptions and myths. The records of results from body farms are fact, information on atoms is fact, the mind is indeed the brain, also fact. Oblivion is the best fit to all that data. 

Quote

Eternal oblivion is no more likely than a cloud paradise with great food and naked, sexy people and beautiful nature and treasures.

That's just plain ridiculous. Nothing at all aupports that conclusion whatsoever. That's just dreamland. 

Quote

In fact, it's pretty irrational.

Its not irrational, it's supportedby all the above. 

Quote

Why would we be given a consciousness if it was just to experience oblivion?

Because we're not given consciousness. It evolved over time like everything else. Your beginning with a religious concept, in effect a story book and claiming it overrides facts. The attention schema theory explains this. 

Quote

Surely there would be some means to engage with our surrounds.

That is what consciousness is. 

16 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

 

Still relying on photoshop for your 'evidence' I see. No wonder the real world is so alien to you. 

Edited April 4, 2018 by psyche101

[Davros of Skaro]

18 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

It's an assumption. There is simply nothing to indicate that eternal oblivion is the "most logical conclusion'', except one own's biases. We don't know what's going to happen to us when we die. That's the fact. Everything else is a matter of beliefs and assumptions. Eternal oblivion is no more likely than a cloud paradise with great food and naked, sexy people and beautiful nature and treasures. In fact, it's pretty irrational. Why would we be given a consciousness if it was just to experience oblivion? Surely there would be some means to engage with our surrounds.

You sure have your own biases.

There's no evidence we were given anything. People make more out of what molecules do over long periods of time.

[Rlyeh]

2 hours ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

It's an assumption. There is simply nothing to indicate that eternal oblivion is the "most logical conclusion'', except one own's biases. We don't know what's going to happen to us when we die. That's the fact. Everything else is a matter of beliefs and assumptions. Eternal oblivion is no more likely than a cloud paradise with great food and naked, sexy people and beautiful nature and treasures. In fact, it's pretty irrational. Why would we be given a consciousness if it was just to experience oblivion? Surely there would be some means to engage with our surrounds.

Have you ever been unconscious? Did you experience nothing or "a cloud paradise with great food and naked, sexy people and beautiful nature and treasures"?

Disrupting brain functions can bring about loss of consciousness what do you think destroying the brain would do?

[Only_]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Afterlife claims are only beliefs, assumptions and myths. The records of results from body farms are fact, information on atoms is fact, the mind is indeed the brain, also fact. Oblivion is the best fit to all that data.

There are no evidence that points to 'eternal oblivion'. It's only an assumption based on a reductionist interpretation of the data.

There are some serious scientists who think an afterlife is very likely:

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[Only_]

7 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

 

Disrupting brain functions can bring about loss of consciousness what do you think destroying the brain would do?

There may be more to conciousness than the physical brain but this is what you refuse to consider.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[Rlyeh]

Just now, Clockwork_Spirit said:

There may be more to conciousness than the physical brain but this is what you refuse to consider.

But a physical brain can still shut it off?

[Only_]

5 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

But a physical brain can still shut it off?

No doubt, the brain plays an incredibly important role. But our mind cannot be confined to what’s inside our skull, or even our body. If the receiver (physical brain) dies, ultimately the signal (mind) will return to it's source.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[psyche101]

4 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

There are no evidence that points to 'eternal oblivion'.

Yes there is, the knowledge on the individual parts of the human body right down to an atomic level. 

4 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

It's only an assumption based on an certain interpretation of the data.

Its the only interpretation that fits the data. Nothing shows how a person can survive death. 

Opinions vary, the data doesn't. 

4 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

There are some serious scientists who thinks an afterlife is very likely:

 

You chose the wrong dust cover to post that you haven't read. That book does not support the notion of an afterlife. It discusses the need for a new set of standards in cardiac arrest care and provides ideas on how we can implement them. It also goes into detail about how what we thought was the life death boundary, how we have reducing that and how they might move even further in the future. NDEs are not described as life after death but from a scientific view and how we initiate them. Rather than speculate on the afterlife it gives us facts like the 1500 bodies picked up 2 hours after the titanic had sunk, if that happened today, a significant portion of those people might have been revived. 

You do Parnias good work a disservice with your inane rambling. And you don't read the dust covers you post. Parnia us not in the business of afterlife, the AWARE project is all about recusditation. I've explain this to you several times but you still don't seem to get it. What's next? Crackpot Jonathan Wells? 

[psyche101]

37 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

No doubt, the brain plays an incredibly important role. But our mind cannot be confined to what’s inside our skull, or even our body. If the receiver (physical brain) dies, ultimately the signal (mind) will return to it's source.

Now your just being silly again. 

[Only_]

42 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

You do Parnias good work a disservice with your inane rambling. And you don't read the dust covers you post. Parnia us not in the business of afterlife, the AWARE project is all about recusditation. I've explain this to you several times but you still don't seem to get it. What's next? Crackpot Jonathan Wells? 

If you are not going to read the book (as I think you should), at least do read what the author himself has to say about it.

''In view of the rapidly evolving progress in the field of resuscitation science and the ever-expanding gray-zone period after death, I believe it is important to include what we would refer to as human consciousness, psyche or soul in future definitions and considerations regarding death. It would also perhaps be wise to concentrate some of our future research efforts on understanding the state of human consciousness after death has started, since the evidence currently suggests that it is not lost immediately after death but continues to exist for at least some time afterward.''

LINK: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-parnia-md-phd/resuscitation-science_b_2767935.html

Parnia is proving that consciousness survives death. This is what I call evidence. Not mere assumptions.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[Davros of Skaro]

1 hour ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

No doubt, the brain plays an incredibly important role. But our mind cannot be confined to what’s inside our skull, or even our body. If the receiver (physical brain) dies, ultimately the signal (mind) will return to it's source.

I know the above is completely rational to you. 

Keep in mind to a junkie sticking a needle in their arm is a completely reasonable act to them.

Thoughts can be just as addictive as drugs.

Now there's this guy I talk to sometimes. He loves, and believes in some whacky conspiracy theories. When I tell him a CT he's all ears, and wants to check it out. But when I rationalize, debunk, or suggest a link that deflates a CT he ignores, hand waves, and, or talks over me.

Why does he do that? Hmmm?

I loved learning about the paranormal growing up. What I eventually learned is that there's a possibility of a needle of truth to some things? It's going to take science a sort of what Isaac Newton did for math to even put the clutter of guesses aside.

The worst part is that if there's a needle? Too many people with fists full of hay, and straw maniacally throw it on the pile while screaming "TWOOOOFFF!".

[Davros of Skaro]

32 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

If you are not going to read the book (as I think you should), at least do read what the author himself has to say about it.

''In view of the rapidly evolving progress in the field of resuscitation science and the ever-expanding gray-zone period after death, I believe it is important to include what we would refer to as human consciousness, psyche or soul in future definitions and considerations regarding death. It would also perhaps be wise to concentrate some of our future research efforts on understanding the state of human consciousness after death has started, since the evidence currently suggests that it is not lost immediately after death but continues to exist for at least some time afterward.''

LINK: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-parnia-md-phd/resuscitation-science_b_2767935.html

Parnia is proving that consciousness survives death. This is what I call evidence. Not mere assumptions.

Looks like since the word "soul" is thrown in the mix you become cross eyed. Meanwhile he's just talking about the science of resuscitation breakthroughs which extends the period between death and revival. 

"While we don’t have all the answers, we do know that the once-held philosophical idea that there is no way back after death is not accurate and that there is a significant period of time after death in which death is fully reversible. The goalposts have moved, and we don’t know where the science will take us. But exploring this in its totality opens up an unchartered frontier that affects us all."

You are twisting what's said to feed your desires, and alleviate fears..

Edited April 4, 2018 by davros of skaro
Clarity

[Davros of Skaro]

12 hours ago, Guyver said:

I do love me some ghost stories.  

Your welcome...

http://historygoesbump.com

[Torchwood]

I believe that after death I am broken down into all my component parts; every cell, every particle, every atom, bit by by bit disassembled, and the energies stored are released into the universe to be recycled, reused, and recombined with other particles to make new things and to strengthen other lifeforms. 

 

 

 

And I believe it because that is what actually happens   

[XenoFish]

3 minutes ago, Torchwood said:

I believe that after death I am broken down into all my component parts; every cell, every particle, every atom, bit by by bit disassembled, and the energies stored are released into the universe to be recycled, reused, and recombined with other particles to make new things and to strengthen other lifeforms. 

 

 

 

And I believe it because that is what actually happens   

From stardust you were formed, to stardust you return.

Edited April 4, 2018 by XenoFish

[Davros of Skaro]

7 minutes ago, Torchwood said:

I believe that after death I am broken down into all my component parts; every cell, every particle, every atom, bit by by bit disassembled, and the energies stored are released into the universe to be recycled, reused, and recombined with other particles to make new things and to strengthen other lifeforms. 

 

 

 

And I believe it because that is what actually happens   

Are you saying there's no Goldfish Heaven?

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by davros of skaro

[psyche101]

51 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

If you are not going to read the book (as I think you should), at least do read what the author himself has to say about it.

I think you should read somthing that you post for a change, I know you haven't read this one. It's actually rather long winded IMHO. 

51 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

''In view of the rapidly evolving progress in the field of resuscitation science and the ever-expanding gray-zone period after death, I believe it is important to include what we would refer to as human consciousness, psyche or soul in future definitions and considerations regarding death.

You haven't read his definition of 'soul' it's nothing like your woo version, did you read the chapter where he discussed how some people in a vegetative state can wiggle their toes when asked? That indicates the mind is the brain. 

51 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

It would also perhaps be wise to concentrate some of our future research efforts on understanding the state of human consciousness after death has started, since the evidence currently suggests that it is not lost immediately after death but continues to exist for at least some time afterward.''

LINK: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-parnia-md-phd/resuscitation-science_b_2767935.html

So you think you know what the book is about by reading a critique in a newspaper hey? Well that's a start, you read something for a change you don't even bother with that much usually. 

Well done! Keep it up! Try getting one of these books you rant about and see if you can make it through a whole chapter!!! 

51 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

Parnia is proving that consciousness survives death. This is what I call evidence. Not mere assumptions.

No he's not, he's exploring if consciousness can be rebooted. I've explained to you before that's the point of Parnias AWARE project, to find a new standard for clinical death. He is hoping to be able to revive people even hours after what we now consider the point of no return, moving that line further back. He is not suggesting there is an afterlife or other woo such as a the brain being separate from the body, that's just crackpots raping his work. 

And you fell for it. I've suspected for a long time that you haven't read a single dust jacket you have posted, and I do feel you just confirmed that suspicion. 

[psyche101]

44 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

From stardust you were formed, to stardust you return.

I'm rather fond of this quote

Edited April 4, 2018 by psyche101

[psyche101]

50 minutes ago, Torchwood said:

I believe that after death I am broken down into all my component parts; every cell, every particle, every atom, bit by by bit disassembled, and the energies stored are released into the universe to be recycled, reused, and recombined with other particles to make new things and to strengthen other lifeforms. 

 

 

 

And I believe it because that is what actually happens   

Sometimes it night be better not to think about that too hard.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/www.techtimes.com/amp/articles/56727/20150530/you-are-drinking-dinosaur-pee-everyday-heres-why.htm

[Only_]

1 hour ago, davros of skaro said:

Looks like since the word "soul" is thrown in the mix you become cross eyed. Meanwhile he's just talking about the science of resuscitation breakthroughs which extends the period between death and revival. 

 

No matter what you believe, the research will continue. But so far the data do not suggest 'eternal oblivion'.

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[danydandan]

3 hours ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

There are no evidence that points to 'eternal oblivion'. It's only an assumption based on a reductionist interpretation of the data.

There are some serious scientists who think an afterlife is very likely:

 

 

 

I have read that book it's fascinating. But it's more to do with self awerness and or consciousness and where the line stops or starts regarding being dead.

It's makes claims regarding the afterlife which really can't be substantiated. Other than that it's very well researched.