University Professor to study life after death

Well well A university professor John Martin Fischer wants to study life after death and get scientists involved in it with a 5 million dollar fund. The problem is there is already an vastly abundant amount of scientific evidence for life after death. Why reinvent the wheel?. Is mainstream science going to be open minded about this research like that were before?. Which history clearly shows they weren't they shoved it off as pure nonsense. Sure adding more evidence to an mountain of evidence doesn't hurt however giving the impression that no hardcore research has been done on this topic is laughable. Also, knowing this philosopher is a christian don't mean he's closed minded no. It means though we very well could skew the data to fit his christian worldview. He can ignore the overwhelming evidence for the existence of an afterlife that doesn't fit into a christian worldview all he wants but it comes with a price. A price in the truth.

What I got for Christmas

Here is what I got for christmas. - Ps3 system 320gb Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception - Wwe 13 video game - Ufc Undisputed - Additional Ps3 controller - Sweater and pair of pants - A bag of black socks - Wwe encyclopedia book - 50 pack of blank cds - A poster - Some candy, lotto tickets Was pleased with everything I got this christmas.

Well the world didn't end

As we all know the world did not end on Dec 26. No surprise there at all I am sure the doomsayers aren't happy. Of course, the gullible people that did fall for this are out of lots of money buying books, preparation kits etc. I can't feel sorry for them was their ever any evidence that this would really happen?. Of course there was no evidence.

Ad Hoc Excuse?

I seen today a older forum post by a skeptic who says that its an ad hoc excuse to say that patients who have had a out of body experience would not be able to see the signs from near the ceiling because there attention would be on their body and the people around them. He also says that if we don't get the results we want (else believers) from the aware study we will just make up endless ad hoc excuses. However, me along with others see it as a legitimate problem one that has been taken into account.

Why live? rebuttal to youtube video by QualiaSoup and TheraminTrees

It first mentions that death and pain are difficult but are essential parts of life. I agree we all must physically die. Then they go on about false teachings like hell and heaven. Well right there is their bias I would be one to say that the hell and heaven viewed by christians probably doesn't exist but its very difficult to ignore massive amounts of evidence pointing towards there being an afterlife existence that is much different from the ones often depicted by world religions. Heres the video

A song that brings back memories

Sheila by Tommy Roe

Rebuttal to Life After Death: Examining the Evidence

There's a blog post out there where the blogger says that the evidence for an afterlife probably doesn't exist based on what the scientific evidence has shown. He couldn't be any more wrong. He says We can think of a simple test setup. Place a target, such as a card with a secret message, on a high shelf in the operating room, facing the ceiling so that it is unreadable not only by the patient on the table but by the hospital staff in the room. Then if a patient has a near-death experience that involves the commonly reported sensation of moving outside her body and floating above the operating table, she should be able to read that message. Yes, but there is one big factor that would play a major role here that is not being accounted for and that is if you were outside your own body would your attention be on seeing a sign. Your main attention would be on seeing our own body laying there on the operating table. That doesn't mean controlled experiments can't be done. They can but they need to rule out this factor. Then says Furthermore, none of these people returned from the dead. A flat EEG us not brain death because it only measures activity on the surface of the brain. And there is no way of determining that the experience actually happened during a flat EEG. Most likely the experience happened before or after, when the brain was highly active I guess this guy never heard what an EEG expert has to say on this skeptic argument. Then he says that no replicable scientific evidence has ever been found for an immaterial mind. Which is wrong and I have mentioned many of the evidence's that supports the view that consciousness probably does survive the death of the brain.