do you belive in life after death?
I do...there,s life just the dead can know it and live it..
what about you?
do you belive in life after death?
I do...there,s life just the dead can know it and live it..
what about you?
do you belive in life after death?
I do...there,s life just the dead can know it and live it..
what about you?
No, when we die, we die.
I believe that we just disappears when we die but I think that no one alive can prove that...
I personally believe we don't just die and our beings simply dissipate into nothingness. We could say that we are energy, at least some form of it and since some smart guy once proved that energy cannot be neither created nor destroyed I would assume that out beings transform into some other unknown entity.
Yes, I know our bodies break down with time, and some sort of energy is released in this process, but the pump that keeps us running, the "Red Bull" that gives you wings doesn't simply stop... I'd like to say it flies...
I certainly do!
Heaven or hell - we're at the halfway point right now. Depending on what you believe here determines your fate in the eternity.
Ahh, but there is not only the notion of Heaven and Hell. There is also Reincarnation. Though, of course, that depends on what people believe in. According to Western religiosity and spirituality, they believe in Heaven and Hell while according to the Eastern point-of-view (generally speaking) would believe in Reincarnation. I, personally, would love to believe in Reincarnation. Just for me, personally, I wouldn't want Heaven or Hell -- even if it is Heaven. Because it'd mean that we would probably live on for centuries, millenia, and so forth and we'd be so... old then, so wise... knowing the things in our lives that we've regretted doing (that could possibly haunt us), all the horrors we may have seen and the sins and crimes we wished we'd never committed. I wouldn't want to live with that knowledge; that'd be... tiring.
In Reincarnation, we get to start anew and live life over, even if we do not know of what mistakes we'd done in our past life. Though hm... that would mean that we would most likely make those same mistakes once again. Hm... however... I think it would be best if we lived knowing the truth about something than living in bliss and ignorance. ...Maybe reincarnation is not a good choice either?
But I suppose it doesn't really matter. Of course, we humans have yet to prove that life either does or does not exist after death. But, if or before that is proven, I believe instead in the scientific way, as opposed to the religious one. That our bodies -- flesh, bones and all -- simply decompose after death and remains with the dirt.
I believe in life after death.
I believe that there's something that waits us after our physical bodies die.
Another question that comes to my mind whenever I get asked about life after death. I believe in ghosts. But, if they aren't real, what are they? Are they just a product of one's imagination?Aren't they spirits that prove that there is something else after death?
If there isn't life after death, I'm going to be really disappointed after I die... wait, I won't have any conciousness to be disappointed if there is none after death...
i believe life after death and i believe i have to give what ever i have done in my life good or bad , i will get punishment what i did wrong and will get benifit or reward what i have done good
I agree with you.
Reincarnation? False, nobody has been born again with the knowledge he had. Even if it were animal, wouldnt a big force required to this supposelly reincarnation? Who then makes this reincarnation? Is it tied with Mother Nature? So if is tied with Mother Nature, is there more lives outside our galaxy? then? .....
Bizarre, invention of man to fill that Spiritual thirst that we all humans need. Since we are spiritual beens.
Nope. Even if I did believe in life after death, I wouldn't become a crazy religous person worshiping Jesus or any other cult icon. If I did believe in it, reincarnation sounds more imaginative so I would assume that I would come back as a different animal.
I believe in reincarnation. It's not only eastern religions which believe in it. Pagan religions do as well. I believe that when I die I'll go to the Summerlands and eventaully be reborn.
People have been reincarnated with knowledge of a previous life. There's been quite a few TV programs looking into peoples claims of being reincarnated. One was a young Indian boy who claimed to have been a man before. he spoke of his wife, his family, his home. even his death. His mother traced this other family and his 'wife' was convinced this lad was her husband reincarnated. He knew things which nobody else could possibly have known
Jesus is a cult icon? I tend to think of him more as a pop star. He's definitely got a cult following but he's mainstream enough to attract the casual audience.
I believe in life after death, but what I also believe in is re-incarnation, and that the life you live is one big test. If you pass the test you go to the afterlife, heaven and if you have problems with the test you are re-incarnated in a form or life that will retest you to see whether you have learnt from your mistakes.
I would love to know if anyone believes the same as me.
if there is no hereafter , all deeds in this world will be meaningless.
Ehh, nothing strange that you and probably many others wouldn't like going to Heaven. In the people's minds there's still a medieval vision of God as an old guy sitting on a cloud, treating us like little kids - punishing for 'bad', rewarding for 'good'. This vision is good for little kids, as is right at their level of understanding, but I guess more mature people shouldn't stop at this level or they'll hate christianity sooner or later.
The visions of the Last Judgement throughout the centuries were the topic of my high school research project, so I'm rather into this kind of stuff. During collecting materials for my work, I've discovered that this conception of God and the Final Events was created during Medieval times, when hardly anyone could read or write, so they tried to evangelise people with lively images, to move their imaginations. Since then we imagine Heaven as a cloudy part of the sky with lots of angels playing the music, and the Hell as a flamy abyss, where all the sinners are bullied by cruel demons. [In the Apocalypse, all of the demons are defeated and stop existing, but someone must have missed it ]
I guess we shouldn't consider the Last Judegement in terms of punishment or reward. God is not like us, and doesn't need to take revenge for any reason. Following the Catholic Church, I believe that Heaven or Hell is not a place of any type, but a state. Heaven means the state of inity with God [some non-christian religions or philosophies say about the same thing calling it 'Nirvana', or 'joining the Spirit of Universe']. Hell means the opposite - the state of complete isolation from God [some theologians even claim that because God is everything, this actually means to stop existing]. That if we reach heaven or hell depends not as much on our 'good' or 'bad' acts during our live [remember that Jesus forgave a criminal in the moment of his death], as on our sincere will and attempt to follow God and become alike Him.
I'd ove to write more on the topic, but I'm running out of time at the moment. I'll continue another time if you aren't bored yet
guys and gals, it's already been proven that there is a life after death.
I would recommend those who know nothing about this, read the book called
'life after life' by Moody
You mean near death experiences? Those do not prove there is life after death, those experiences can merely be the product of a dieing brain.
life after death, is LIFE again.
you will be born again as soon as you (totally) death into other life form.
it maybe human, animal, plant, ghost, monster, or something we don't understand yet.
For this to be the case there would need to be an unknown energy source already within us. The energy contained in our mass is well understood, but this is unlikely to be converted into energy after death (e=m*c*c) unless you have been eating lots of fissile material for a long time . The energy released by an average male corpse would be (say 75kg) around 6.75*10e19 Joules - about the amount you would get from burning 500,000,000,000 gallons of petrol. Of course there is no way that this conversion can happen so our bodies instead break down into simpler chemicals and compounds in accordance with the other law of conservation (mass is conserved). In reality, mass and energy are essentially the same thing but let's keep it simple.
Well there is the problem. The energy contained in a body OTHER than the inherent mass, is measurable in several ways. One simple way is to measure the temperature in a confined area accurately, then put someone in and measure the rise in temp over time- a simple calculation gives energy output of the body. The chemical energy which we need to live is a conversion of calories via chemical oxidation and other routes, into energy. Some of this is used by muscles to do work and the result is radiated as heat.
Essentially we radiate energy according to surface area and in quantities defined as:
sigma*T^4 per unit area, where sigma is the 'Stefan-Boltzman' constant (5.67E-8 J K^-4 m^-2 s^-1), and T is the temperature in Kelvin*. So if you have a surface area of 1 m^2 and a surface temperature of 310 K, you radiate at a rate of a little over 500 Watts. That means that you would have to eat over 10,000 Calories per day just to maintain your temperature. No one eats that much, because your body is constantly absorbing radiation as well as emitting it. If you were thrown naked into a freezer with a temperature close to absolute zero, you really would radiate at a net rate of about 500 Watts (for a short time). But usually, things around you are warmer than that, and so they radiate too, and you absorb some of that radiation. Also, your effective surface temperature is the temperature of your clothes, which is less than your skin temperature.
(*thanks to rr for the meat of the above which saved me looking up the formulae)
In essence then we know what energy your body has and when you stop putting calories in you stop getting energy out. There is no contravention of the laws of conservation of energy - just the reverse. Unless one proposes a sectret hidden store of energy then once death occurs the only energy released will be via chemical processes in decomposition. Any hidden store of energy would have to be completely shielded from all our detection equipment (they don't see it), rely on a method far more efficient than any we know for storage (otherwise it would 'leak' during your lifetime) and use a transmission system we don't know about after death to leave the body. Some people would say this is the 'soul' but there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the idea and plenty of good scientific reasons to think that such energy does not exist in a human body.
Lol. Just read the book. I saw a video based on the book, which shows an operation where a woman was killed. All oxygen drained from body, blood removed from brain, temperature minus 10, eyes taped shut, clicking things which made sounds in her ears. Yet amazingly she had out of body experience. When she was supposed to be dead. Her brainwaves stayed flat.
There are many examples where people died, had experiences, then were revived.
Besides, one blind woman, SAW herself, which is impossible since she had been born blind. She surroundings, and people, and lots of things.
No oxygen in the body and no blood in the brain = death. Not reversible.
I suspect this video may be something to do with either Elizabeth Kübler-Ross or maybe Raymond Moody. Both of these characters are suspect to a high degree and scientifically dishonest in their reporting (not too suprising since they both publish widely and make a nice living from it).
You could survive a -10 temp in theory but not without blood in the brain - cell damage would set in immediately. I suspect it might mean no blood FLOW to the brain which is entirely different.
Susan Blackmore has done some nice work on this subject which is worth a read :
There is also a well written article on this here :
All in all it seems certain that there is something happening, I agree. Why this should be regarded as supernatural or religious escapes me. We know that personality and sense of self originate in the brain. We know that we don't fully understand the brain. We know that deprived of oxygen and 'near death' the brain induces visions, sensations and other phenomena which are out of the ordinary and have a profound effect on the person experiencing it. Am I missing something or is this not entirely suprising and certainly not in need of a metaphysical or supernatural explanation ?
PS - in studies which actually examine the out of body experiences and other 'impossible' occurances that are reported, the findings are fairly inconclusive - most are negative but a very few seem to be based in reality - normally sensations of needles, hearing conversations and the like. This is not fully understood, to be sure, but it seems to me to be entirely plausible that people who are apparently 'dead' could still be able to hear and feel certain simulii. Hearing is the last sense to go at death so why not.
In the more ambitious claims where people report floating off to see things their body could not have then the results are in line with those for psi phenomena such as ESP, Telekenesis and the like - ie statistically insignificant.
Actually people do die scientifically, and can be revived within around 20 minutes.
Many people do like to make money, but not Moody. You are being told he's dishonest and wrong. Lol. Why don't you try reading his book? Many people include around 10 same things in their stories. Moody made a list of it.
No damge if it frozen. Nothing can move.
Lol. The operation i mentioned show no brainwaves! And no oxygen was in the brain.
Plus, for example, the blind woman knew stuff that happened on the opposite side of the hospital, and they checked and what she said was right.
You can't explain this away easily.
May God open you.
No living person has any way of knowing if there is life after death. As a living person, I don't know the answer to this question. I could develop a belief one way or the other but that is a different matter.
Have you read his books ? You could try his 'Elvis After Life' classic.
Me ? I don't routinely fork out cash for new-age type books because I have plenty of science books that I would like to buy and which I know contain theories which can be tested and which are produced by genuine scientists.
A few points on Moody. To say he does not like to make money is simply fantasy. He is a regular on the 'circuit' and makes pretty much his entire livelihood from this issue. He also charges for grief counselling, personal consultations and various other personal services...check his website.
I am willing to believe that he doesn't exploit people to the same extent that the noxious Kubler-Ross does and I do not criticise a person for earning a living, I merely point out that this IS his living and to expect disinterested impartial work from him is expecting a great deal.
On his scientific dishonesty..I would not make the claim unless I had very good grounds and I would certainly not do so on hearsay or second hand tale-telling. I am not in the habbit of slagging people off simply because they disagree with me - my postings, I hope, will show that. I object strongly, however, to people who cloak their views and beliefs in science to mislead or bolster their claims. Moody is guilty of this in spades.
OK - how is he dishonest ? I will be specific and use examples that I know to be true because I have personally researched them.
1) He has deliberately and consistently ignored all accounts and witness descriptions of 'bad' or disturbing or frightening near death experiences in his many publications and commentaries. As a so called 'leader' in the field he must be well aware that between 12 and 15% of NDEs are described by the person concerned as 'hellish' or 'terrifying'. This is not a simple oversight, this is scientific dishonesty. Ignoring contra-evindence is tantamount to lying in science - it is not just 'bad practice' as some say, it is enough on it's own to disgrace anyone claiming a scientific methodology and immediately call into question any conclusions or results they may have reached.
2) He misleads and distorts his own position to suit the audience and the context. The biggest and most demonstrable example of this is his consistent portrayal of himself to scientific observers as a disinterested neutral in this issue, seeking only the truth. As an example, in his 1975 book he states
This is echoed by numerous other similar comments in interviews - check them yourself.
When he has a book to peddle, or a non-scientific audience to lecture to, however, he switches positions like a chinese acrobat on amphetamins.
Here is his preface to his 1997 Book 'Reunions: Visionary Encounters With Departed Loved Ones'
His preface to the companion to his 1975 book reads thus :
His description (on his website) of a forthcoming talk his plans to give :
[quote]In this fascinating workshop, Moody teaches us how to see and interact with apparitions of deceased friends and family members. Moody recreated this procedure after applying modern knowledge about alternate states of consciousness to what has been discovered about the ancient Greek oracles of the dead, known as psychomanteums. The workshop includes instruction on how to build a psychomanteum chamber and how to facilitate the grief process of others through the use of the psychomanteums. [quote]
Neglecting to mention that he is one of the main retailers of this 'psychometrium' himself.
3) He consistently lies about statistics and known facts.
In a interview on a terrible chat show - (source - 'Shirley Show', mid 90s)
he is caught making the same claim that he frequently makes and positively knows to be false. Moody continues to state that two-thirds of all people have these NDEs.In 1982, a Gallup poll found that about 1 in 7 adult Americans had been close to death and about 1 in 20 had had an NDE - 35%, not the 66% claimed. When he is challenged he simply says that people are too embarrased and therefore lie about it. Unacceptible and dishonest.
Look, let's be clear. I don't think he is a monster or deserving of punishment. He may even think he is being honest open and truthful. I'm even willing to grant him that. The point is that the man repeats untruths, distorts data and misrepresents his own views and motives. Any scientist who did likewise would be unemployable.
All I say is - scientific standards of proof and conclusion are WAY WAY above anything that Moody has or can deliver and his work is best regarded as well intentioned speculation and comment, certainly not evidence or proof of anything, let alone an afterlife.
Finally on Moody : he has recently become a bit bizarre (in my view) in his publications. Beforehand he was at least attempting to conform to some idea of science and scientific method. Now he seems to have taken a journey into the mystic realms and forgotten his critical faculties completely. He has recently become interested in Transindental Meditation and Theosophy and has just published a new book : 'Coming Back' which I have read until I couldn't take any more - about 10 pages. It is complete unadorned piffle, being a confused mixture of re-incarnation, pseudo-scientific claptrap and genuine quotes from his earlier works which were, at least, attempting to be scientific.
You believe him if you like and spend good money on his books. Personally I would much rather complete my collection of Richard Feynman audio lectures with my next £20 - there was a man who was honest, reliable and truly impartial in his works. Moody is just another in a long line of (probably well meaning) educated non-scientists who think that they can do science and end up publishing mysicism, new-age mumbo jumbo and incoherent tripe.
References for the story ? Scientific analysis of the facts ? Disinterested witnesses to the events ? Anyone can post amazing sounding phenomena. To be credible needs a bit more than a second hand retelling....
Explain what away ? You have given me nothing to go at....give me some sourced and documented cases and I'll gladly look at them, but I'm not going to comment on a second hand recounting of a tale with no provenance....
And may he keep your mind from opening so wide that the brain falls out:-)
bikerman, thanks. I believe you. I won't trust moody anymore. Thanks for the information
May God bless you.
You are very welcome Loyal.
As I say, I don't make a habbit of slagging off people on messageboards - for one thing it goes against the grain to not give a right of reply. In Moody's case I think my criticisms are just, if not measured, and whilst I would certainly not single him out as a particularly bad example of a pseudo-science figure, he certainly has major flaws which need to be considered when reading his work.
I admit that I am a sceptic on all matters paranormal, metaphysical and to a lesser extent psychological/sociological. That, I believe, is the correct stance for anyone wishing to avoid being misled or hoodwinked. The internet has certainly had a negative influence in the pseudo-science arena. Do a web search on any pseudo-science and you will more than likely get many supporting hits for every sceptical one...this leads to the view that there must be 'something in it' which is natural. I've even had people present me with a page of Google hits as support for their claim or case - as if the number of hits meant it must be fact.
Science is the Gold Standard. Science contains its own baloney detection kit. Science assuimes and positively strains itself to prove that any new hypothesis is wrong. Peer review is brutal and serious. This, however, makes science fairly immune from major ******-ups and wrong turns.
Whilst science has not always got everything correct, you will struggle to find examples of major misconceptions or wrong theory. Most theory, if it is replaced, is actually incorporated into a bigger and wider theory.
We still use Newton's laws of motion to this day - 500 yrs after they were written - because they work. Einstein is only necessary if one is travelling at extreme speed or in extreme conditions of gravity - otherwise Isaac's forumlae do quite nicely thank you....that is the way most scientific theory develops. And that is why I get a bit touchy when pseudo-science tries to wrap a scientific vaneer around itself....it demeans and devalues the gold standard.
Sounds a bit pompous I know, but I really believe it
I'm not quite religious, but I do think there is life after death. Maybe because I think I had tried a sample of it. I'm goint to tell you:
Some days after my son was born I was home and had a strong and sudden haemorrhage. I was taken to the hospital. When I got the surgery room I was completely anaesthetized and had a tube put into my throat. Obviously, I couldn't see anything after that.
At least in the beginning. Because when they started the emergency operation my blood pressure dropped to zero. And then, I was watching, because I was near the ceiling . I couldn't understand: my body was on the bed, and I wasn't there .
The heart beats mchine was sounding quickly and loud. I was losting too much blood, and it wasn't enough to reach my head. So they turned me upside down to prevent the consequences to the brain. They cried each other to give me more blood transfusion.
After that I couldn't see anything because I was sleeping again. Everything was very fast but very clear too. Afterwards, the doctors confirmed the things I saw in the surgery room.
You may try to explain this with scientific theories. But I know what I experienced, nobody told me. And the most strange thing in this matter was the feeling of deep peace and calm I tried in those moments, impossible to explain with words.
Of course I am happy to be alive. My sons and the rest of my family would miss me and I would miss them too. I cal help them better standing here. But now I trust God more than never and I am not afraid to die. I think He knows the right moment for our leaving and He is controlling everything.
I would not try to convince you of anything since I have no definitive answer to offer. I have already stated that there is certainly a phenomenon happening - this is clear. I believe that it is a product of the brain since I see no other possibility. You believe what seems right to you. If you are saying that you witnessed things that your body could not have physically perceived (geographically dsistant for example) then I would say, respectfully, that I would need some evidence to support that before I was ready to accept it as fact.
If, as appears to be the case, you are saying you witnessed things in the room where you were lying close to death then OK - this is not a very unusual report from NDE witnesses and, as stated eatlier, I have no major problems in accepting that the nervous system can detect stimulii even when it appears the body is unconscious.
Although I am christian, I like to believe that there is. Well the thing is, I really dont care. In my religion, when we die, we go to heaven. That doesn't sound bad at all. The only thing is, life kicks ass. The one thing that bothers me is, what if there is no heaven or after life. It is quite interesting yet terrifying. Because we all have souls basicly, we really cant be destroyed. I mean its possible that we just dissapear, but how is it possible. We have to exist. Or else we wont be anywhere. I mean like imagine a black space where u spen the rest of your life. It may be hard to understand but try hard. Try to imagine being nothing. It feels impossible. You feel like you are invincible. But how, how would it be like to be nothing. The whole point is, it wont feel like anything, unless we just stay in our body and stay in coffin for eternity. Thats the whole thing, it sucks to know that everyday is going to be the same. That is why I like to believe that there is a after life or heaven.
You never know.
Sometimes I think I'd prefer just to *end*.
Sometimes "ending" seems ridiculous and unacceptable.
Working so hard to build something of yourself, and then just "*ending* seems absurd. If that's true, someone is doing something wrong....something has gone horribly wrong.
I think it would be nice to believe in something of the sorts. Heaven seems like a nice place in all
but as far as i can tell. its not gonna happen.
when you die you just go to sleep... forever.
heres an even nicer question. If there was an after life what body form would you take on? would you end up like how you died or would you take on an earlier form or simply take on another shape
One of the hardest parts of atheism is having to cast aside the idea of a universal 'justice' which means that ultimately you get your reward. It would be satisfying to believe that - I really mean that. Unfortunately if you take an atheist position (as I do) then that is not available as an option. It means that the good do not get their reward in the afterlife and suffering isn't balanced later. I'm sorry that I can't be more positive...really.
As for imagining eternal 'nothingness', I agree it is a hard concept to even approach. Personally, though, I find it no more difficult than imagining eternal existence or any concept involving infinity.
If you believe or not, everything is going to be the same. You do not need a philosophy to just live.
Stop thinking and start living.
Thought is a dead thing and you cannot capture life in it.
That would depend on your ethics/morals (whether you had any, that is). The other choices would be - act on instinct or do what you are told.....
I didn't know the two were incompatible..
And here was I imagining that it was homo sapiens crowning glory and the thing that distinguished him from the apes....damn...wrong again...
there is a life after death those who are not belive this plesae believe there is a life after death.
Why? Theres no proof of it and need death experiences can just be produced by the dieing brain.
So why believe?
There is an old Germanic belief that the dead fly about the earth as butterflies until it's time for them to be reborn. I've always liked that idea and I genuinely hope it's true.
I do believe in reincarnation. I also believe that there are other places like Valhalla, the Shadowlands, ect.
There must be something after death, I believe that we begin a new life. No hell or heaven, most people are not evil and bad enough to go to hell, nor pure enough to go to heaven. They stay in the middle after death, beginning new life.
Absolutely, LIFE will go on after I am dead.
topic- no i don't. and i hate the idea of living life and expecting something in return after death.
I really believe that your faith comes in at this point. Whether you believe in Heaven or Hell, reincarnation, or just simply we stop existing, etc. When we talk about faith, it's more than what you simply believe in, for you it's the entire truth whether supported by scientific facts or just simply because you really believe in it through the things you have personally experienced, and live your life according to its standard.
Just be reminded though that our faith can be easily swayed by other people. Bikerman is correct that we must carefully examine first that person's credibility. For me I have not read any NDE books, but I think it really doesn't matter whether if these events happened just because of our brain or that we have really experinced the "other side". When we say "life after death", the only one who can tell the truth are those who are "really" dead. Sad to say we have not heard from any.
I firmly believe that there is an afterlife, based solely on my faith, I don't care whether it's supported or not by science or other people, because just what I said it's my faith. I really think it is for us to find out ourselves after we really die. Can we really find out?
Do you actually understand salvation dude?
I think that dying will be like waking up from a dream.
I belive in live after dead. I'm a christian and I belive in god. I read a lot about the karma and religion and accept this position. Maybe things on this planet and in the whole universe aren't so simple and our souls neads to take a lot of different experience
I do beleive in life after death.
Most of the religious scripts like
Quran, Bible etc speaks about
Good for you. Shouting it in huge blue letters , though, is not a requirement for salvation.
There is no life after death. There is only death after life.
Its a curious notion, but my opinion is that the concept of life after death is like so many other religious beliefs ... wishful thinking.
I have not read of anyone who since recording media became verifiable, has come back after suffering a case of prolonged death, neither do I think it will ever happen.
The concept is a crutch to help with the unthinkable. The fact that there is nothing more. I believe the concept of life after death is merely a single strand that forms a part of the greater relious web designed to explain the unexplainable and quell the terrors of the unknown.
It has been stated elsewhere than man is different from monkeys
Why are we different?
Do monkeys fear death? - Yes, they must. Why else would they run from a preditor? Exercise? Call it instinct but they know death is bad.
Man who has higher reasoning power knows the same thing. Death is bad.
Man, who has a higher reasoning ability also has the power to rationalise. "Death wouldn't be so bad if there was a higher purpose. We are superior to the ape so we are special. There must be something more. Im not exactly sure what, but its going to be good."
Man, who has higher reasoning ability also has the power to conceptualise.
"Death is a transitional phase, we will return, we have a soul it is indistructable"
But from the monkey to the man, other than a few thoughts .. is anything fundamentally different?
To be absolutely honest, I hope I'm wrong, I would truely like to have a soul and the rest, but I cant bring myself to believe it.
To me it is wrong to focus on the result, only to miss the game.
Do you remember as a kid wanting to grow up, only to find as an adult you long to be a kid again.
Two quick points to come back to topic.
Ive been dead/nonexistant for a lot longer than I have been alive.
Were reincarnation an accepted fact ... how do you explain population growth ... animalistic promotion?
I believe what IM sings. Iron Maiden - Live After Death
Not even Discovery Ch. can convince you, hm? I guess you would believe if you had seen it with your own four eyes.
Fact is that few people look at NDE's without having a truly objective mind. Chris, no offences intented, but quoting skepdic is quite subjectively tinted.
No offence taken. Can you elaborate on which quotes I made from skepdic..
Life must continue after death. If we see life or consiousness as a form of energy (which we must, if a rock rolling down a hill is enegy then surly the force of life it's self must be energy) then the the First Law of Thermodynamics must aply. That states (as I posted in the re-incarnation forum): Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. No ifs ands or buts, that is as simple as the laws of nature.
This is a repeat of the same pseudo science. Understand that pseudo means false or pretend and accept that you either a) don't understand thermodynamics and conservation laws properly, or b) you deliberately choose to misrepresent them.
What energy is lost ? Kinetic, chemical, thermal and potential energy are balanced over a lifetime with no extra surplus.
Consciousness is the result of electrical signals operating in a complex biological matrix. The electricity is produced by cells - neurones - several trillion per brain, which interlink to represent sensory data in some (as yet) unknown pattern. This is consciousness. Here is what a single neurone looks like when it 'fires'.
The neurones 'fire' using a chemical process. Cells contain liquid sodium and food nourishment and the walls of the cells are loaded with potassium that the salty acids breaks down.The by-product from the acid break down is electricity in the form of Direct Current. In other words the nourishment taken in by the body is converted via chemical reaction into electicity which itself is converted, via the brains structure, into consciousness. Energy is conserved and nobody needs to roll any rocks down any hills at all.
You also misunderstand and misquote the 1st law of thermodynamics. It states that :
What you quoted is the Conservation of Energy law which is general principle from which this thermodynamic application is derived. If you are going to quote a theory in support then you really should at least be aware of what it says. One again, of course, this presents no contradiction or paradox.
I was at a pagan moot last night, and the subject was about death. Someone made a very good point, it went like this, only more scientific. We have an enormous amount of enery within us which is no longer therewhen we die. Energy cannot be destroyed or created, so what happens to that energy when we die?