Is there an afterlife?

[PA HOG]

Having said all that, this is probably the wrong thread to have said it all, but I did want to at least have a go at answering your question.

I don't agree with you but I most certainly respect you for your answers and for your civility.


My belief, for what it's worth, is that nobody has the foggiest notion in respect of "the afterlife".

 

[medusala]

There is no afterlife, I have it on good authority from Kerry Packer.

On the other hand I havent ruled out a death bed conversion to Islam. 70 virgin brides would definitely be a decent way to kickstart an afterlife.

 

[teams]

You there Yasser.

 

[FIGJAM]

can these experiences be reproduced? If not, then they remain, at best, an anomoly

They can and are every single day otaku!

Remote viewing is part of the US government's intelligence organisations. People can target a picture held by someone they don't know on the other side of the planet and describe what's on it and the people who are gifted at it have close to a 100% accuracy rate. The probability of luck is non-existent.

Out of body experiencers tell of not just looking at themselves remotely, but some travel through say the hospital and can tell doctors operating in another room, at a later date, what they were doing in a particular procedure and what equipment they were using, how many people were in the room, what was said etc.. The doctors understandable usually drop their clipboard!!

This website is if nothing else an amazing read:

http://www.near-death.com/

Please read the material written by Edgar Cayce (towards the bottom on the right), who could reproduce "near death experiences" under meditation. It's an intriguing read!!

 

[otaku]

do you have any documentation of your claims?

Any web sites (am looking at the NDE one atm)?

 

[mulhollanddrive]

I bet those findings werent published in any scientific journal. The same goes for how Benny Hinn makes people walk supposedly.

 

[MonkeyButterer]

They can and are every single day otaku!

Remote viewing is part of the US government's intelligence organisations. People can target a picture held by someone they don't know on the other side of the planet and describe what's on it and the people who are gifted at it have close to a 100% accuracy rate. The probability of luck is non-existent.

Out of body experiencers tell of not just looking at themselves remotely, but some travel through say the hospital and can tell doctors operating in another room, at a later date, what they were doing in a particular procedure and what equipment they were using, how many people were in the room, what was said etc.. The doctors understandable usually drop their clipboard!!

This website is if nothing else an amazing read:

http://www.near-death.com/

Please read the material written by Edgar Cayce (towards the bottom on the right), who could reproduce "near death experiences" under meditation. It's an intriguing read!!

Woah!! Calm down, sparky. Remote viewing was investigated in the 70's by a number of US intel organisations. While pretty interesting in a campy psuedo-sci-fi dime novel sense, it never really panned out for them - there sure as hell aren't any "close to" 100% accurate remote viewers in the available literature....

You can read the final report of the 1974-75 period here.

While that report is pretty eager in its executive summary, it later details just how ineffectual the program was. The program was discontinued, but a number of smaller, private sector efforts were funded in hte decades following. You can read the executive summary of one such here. That study also finds that while there were some cases of "hits" greater than guessing and randomness might account for, they could not be attributed to an actual "psychic" phenomenon either - they attribute it to *laboratory effect* - basically, they saw it because they were looking for it.

Mebbe you better lay off the fat ones while watching the sci-fi channel.

 

[FIGJAM]

do you have any documentation of your claims?

Any web sites (am looking at the NDE one atm)?

Just do a Google search for remote viewing. I'm not really sure where there are actually scientific studies, but there's heaps on it.

A program by the US government called "Star Gate" utilised remote viewers as spies with outstanding success. I'm not sure if their government released any scientific research.

And mulholland, I suppose the only things that exist are those which have been published in a bloody science journal!

The irony about me, is that I'm just as damn sceptical as you guys. I think that it is pretty much time for "metaphysics", for want of a better term, to be examined more closely as a field of science and I think it will be in due course. Until then, all of your well considered "source" arguments win out, despite the fact that there are mountains of anecdotal evidence.

 

[skipper kelly]

The same goes for how Benny Hinn makes people walk supposedly.

He has the ability to make my hand move to the remote control

 

[otaku]

Just do a Google search for remote viewing. I'm not really sure where there are actually scientific studies, but there's heaps on it.

A program by the US government called "Star Gate" utilised remote viewers as spies with outstanding success. I'm not sure if their government released any scientific research.

And mulholland, I suppose the only things that exist are those which have been published in a bloody science journal!

The irony about me, is that I'm just as damn sceptical as you guys. I think that it is pretty much time for "metaphysics", for want of a better term, to be examined more closely as a field of science and I think it will be in due course. Until then, all of your well considered "source" arguments win out, despite the fact that there are mountains of anecdotal evidence.

anecdoal evidence just doesnt cut the mustard.

If a governmental agency was using remote viewing, there would be at least some scientific documentation on it.

People dont throw money at things that havent been proved to work.

 

[FIGJAM]

While that report is pretty eager in its executive summary, it later details just how ineffectual the program was. The program was discontinued, but a number of smaller, private sector efforts were funded in hte decades following. You can read the executive summary of one such here. That study also finds that while there were some cases of "hits" greater than guessing and randomness might account for, they could not be attributed to an actual "psychic" phenomenon either - they attribute it to *laboratory effect* - basically, they saw it because they were looking for it.

This guy here explains about the inadequacies of that CIA research:

http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/rvreview.htm

Anyway, there are heaps of active viewers worldwide and it is an ability which can be learnt by anybody.

People dont throw money at things that havent been proved to work.

People don't throw money at things that don't make money.

anecdoal evidence just doesnt cut the mustard.

Maybe not, but again, who's going to pay money for something which can't make money or kill people??

There are some reported public demonstrations which show a very high degree of matches at this website:

http://www.farsight.org/

There are more websites all over the net which show matches of targets which they have no connection to. Either that or there's a whole bunch of liars out there!

But hey, who's going to throw money to do a proper scientific studies when there's no money or death in it. Maybe you should learn it, and let us know whether or not it works...oh, but that would be anecdotal evidence only, so we wouldn't be able to listen to you!

 

[MonkeyButterer]

People dont throw money at things that havent been proved to work.

I saw some guy in a soiled raincoat throwing dollar coins at your mom, and she hasn't lifted a finger in years.

Her *skirts*, sure, but not a single finger.

 

[otaku]

I saw some guy in a soiled raincoat throwing dollar coins at your mom, and she hasn't lifted a finger in years.

Her *skirts*, sure, but not a single finger.

hey! she lifts her arm on regular occasions for you - why you like her armpit that much - I dont know though.

 

[otaku]

There are some reported public demonstrations which show a very high degree of matches at this website:

http://www.farsight.org/

There are more websites all over the net which show matches of targets which they have no connection to. Either that or there's a whole bunch of liars out there!

But hey, who's going to throw money to do a proper scientific studies when there's no money or death in it. Maybe you should learn it, and let us know whether or not it works...oh, but that would be anecdotal evidence only, so we wouldn't be able to listen to you!

Actually - we can conduct an experiment, if you wish.

You say anyone can learn it?

How about you learn it, and i will set up a series of objects on my desk that I will not touch.

These objects will be unusual enough to discount any chance of you guessing the objects.

There will be 8 objects. If you can "see" 6 or more, I will accept that you can "see" these objects.

When you see them, you simply post what they are to Big Footy, and I will confirm or deny them.

 

[MonkeyButterer]

This guy here explains about the inadequacies of that CIA research:

http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/rvreview.htm

Anyway, there are heaps of active viewers worldwide and it is an ability which can be learnt by anybody.


People don't throw money at things that don't make money.


Maybe not, but again, who's going to pay money for something which can't make money or kill people??

There are some reported public demonstrations which show a very high degree of matches at this website:

http://www.farsight.org/

There are more websites all over the net which show matches of targets which they have no connection to. Either that or there's a whole bunch of liars out there!

But hey, who's going to throw money to do a proper scientific studies when there's no money or death in it. Maybe you should learn it, and let us know whether or not it works...oh, but that would be anecdotal evidence only, so we wouldn't be able to listen to you!

Really? Anyone can do it? And not a single one has called James Randi about the million bucks he owes them??

Remote Viewers - Click here to recieve your million bucks now!!

That article on the "inadequacies" of the scientific review is a load of bollocks - he essentially claims the findings were false because the testers only used the viewers available to them at the time, and under lab conditions, and ignored all the hearsay evidence about how successful the program had been in the glorious past.

Imagine - scientists basing their judgment on the evidence observed under controlled, repeateable conditions - its an outrage!!. The article is written by a guy who makes money out of teaching people to remote view. I also note he hasn't contacted Randi.

If anyone of the active viewers can do it under lab conditions, they have a big bag o cash waiting at randi.org. If its easy to learn, get to it, and there's a million US for you, FIGJAM.

Somehow, i think Mr. Randi's million can sleep easy tonight.

 

[skipper kelly]

Actually - we can conduct an experiment, if you wish.

You say anyone can learn it?

How about you learn it, and i will set up a series of objects on my desk that I will not touch.

These objects will be unusual enough to discount any chance of you guessing the objects.

There will be 8 objects. If you can "see" 6 or more, I will accept that you can "see" these objects.

When you see them, you simply post what they are to Big Footy, and I will confirm or deny them.

I see a keyboard

 

[purplesoul]

I see a keyboard

I see a pen.

 

[skipper kelly]

I see a pen.

Im seeing a fluffy dice

 

[MightyFighting]

Im seeing a fluffy dice

I see a stack of hard-core German fetish pr0n.

 

[otaku]

Skipper: nope
purplesoul: nope
skip: nope
MightyFighting: Thats 1.

 

[MonkeyButterer]

I see a stack of hard-core German fetish pr0n.

I see Otaku washing sticky white goo off a gerbil-esque sock puppet....no, wait!! That's my precognition kicking in.

 

[otaku]

I see Otaku washing sticky white goo off a gerbil-esque sock puppet....no, wait!! That's my precognition kicking in.

precog? You saw it the other night - as I was using your tongue to wash my sock puppet.

 

[MonkeyButterer]

precog? You saw it the other night - as I was using your tongue to wash my sock puppet.

That tongue doesnt belong to me.. I dont *own* your mom's tongue - i just rent it, whenever my dog's arse needs washing.

 

[FIGJAM]

Actually - we can conduct an experiment, if you wish.

You say anyone can learn it?

How about you learn it, and i will set up a series of objects on my desk that I will not touch.

These objects will be unusual enough to discount any chance of you guessing the objects.

There will be 8 objects. If you can "see" 6 or more, I will accept that you can "see" these objects.

When you see them, you simply post what they are to Big Footy, and I will confirm or deny them.

Sounds like a lot of work on my part, which is why I asked you to do it in the first place.

A chance at a million bucks though sounds like it's worth a crack though!

 

[FIGJAM]

Really? Anyone can do it? And not a single one has called James Randi about the million bucks he owes them??

If anyone of the active viewers can do it under lab conditions, they have a big bag o cash waiting at randi.org. If its easy to learn, get to it, and there's a million US for you, FIGJAM.

Somehow, i think Mr. Randi's million can sleep easy tonight.

Funny how you place credence in an unscientific "experiment" when it suits your needs.

Randi has so many "small print" lines in the conditions of his offer, there's practically no way anyone can win, even if they're bloody close!

He's a real trustworthy guy!

-------------------------

Randi runs away


In June 1999, a Mr Rico Kolodzey of Germany wrote to James Randi and challenged for the reputed $1 million prize. Mr Kolodzey is one of several thousand people who believe and claim that they can live on water alone, absorbing 'prana' or life energy from space around them.

Now this claim is, to say the least, extraordinary. It is perhaps even more extraordinary that an individual should offer to prove this claim by submitting himself to a controlled test.

The claim is one that most people would treat with great skepticism, and might well run a mile from. But James Randi is not most people -- he is the person who has publicly claimed that he has $1 million on offer to all comers who challenge him and are willing to submit to rigorous testing, as Mr Kolodzey has offered to do.

It should not be very difficult to arrange a test of Mr Kolodzey's claim. All that is needed is to lock him in a police cell, under CCTV observation, with only water to drink. If he experiences significant measurable weight loss, or asks for food, then his claim is false. If, on the other hand, he does somehow survive on water alone, then Randi is wrong, conventional science is wrong, and Mr Kolodzey has won $1 million.

It ought therefore to have been a very simple matter for Randi to offer to lock Mr Kolodzey up for a week or two. But that is not what Randi did. Instead he ignored Mr Kolodzey entirely. When Mr Kolodzey wrote again to Randi asking about his challenge, he received the following email from Randi (later confirmed with a hard copy):-

Date: 6/18/99 12:03 PM

Mr. Kolodzey:

Don't treat us like children. We only respond to responsible claims.

Are you actually claiming that you have not consumed any food products except water, since the end of 1998? If this is what you are saying, did you think for one moment that we would believe it?

If this is actually your claim, you're a liar and a fraud. We are not interested in pursuing this further, nor will we exchange correspondence with you on the matter.

Signed, James Randi.
(A hard-copy of this letter will be sent by post to you, today.)

James Randi Educational Foundation
201 S.E. 12th Street (Davie Blvd.)
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316-1815


So, now we know exactly how much confidence can be placed in James Randi's "challenge" and exactly how Randi behaves when confronted by a real challenger, willing to submit to rigorous scientific testing of his claims.


----------------------------