randman writes:
Imo, this simply shows the incredible inconsistency and biasness of science overall towards certain belief systems.
I have never seen science as being biased...thats a bit like saying that Christianity is exclusivist.
This topic DOES venture into an unverifiable realm of data, however...
so perhaps many scientists would dismiss any evidence that cannot be quantified.
Randman, in post#1 writes:
the study published in the Lancet scientifically confirms that consciousness exists outside of the brain and after death. The fact people can remember what happened when their brain is inactive and they are dead is proof positive of this.
If I were a scientist, I would ask you to show me the quantifiable evidence that "scientifically confirms" the proof.
randman writes:
I see a flaw in the magazine's depiction of the study (haven't read the original) in that some people do not have such a positive experience, and have even had the experience of being in a pit not being able to get out.
Are we discussing the science of the design (as in NDE experiences) or are we discussing the Designer and His reality? (i.e. Hell, Pit, scary afterlife NDE versus Angelic P.G. version)
Crashfrog writes:
The fact is that this is not a fact
websters writes:
fact \"fakt\ n 1 : deed; esp : crime 2 : the quality of being actual 3 : something that exists or occurs 4 : a piece of information
the”o”ry \"th--r, "thir-\ n, pl -ries 1 : abstract thought 2 : the general principles of a subject 3 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle offered to explain observed facts 4 : hypothesis, conjecture
This message has been edited by Phat, 11-29-2005 06:03 PM
™ Version 4.2
