"We've evolved to be creationists"

Great Debates
101

[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, your physical body is operated by the autonomic nervous system, or so most people believe.
[/QUOTE]

No. Your autonomic nervous system, because you obviously didn’t look this up, is the part of your nervous system that controls involuntary motion. Reflex movements, heartbeat, etc. It doesn’t use the brain, it uses the spinal cord mostly, and you have only very limited control over it. Now I said part because there is another section of the nervous that controls voluntary motion. Guess what it’s called?

Um, this sentence makes no sense.

It’s only interesting if you don’t understand it. You are your brain. Period. There is no evidence to the contrary. Really. No, I’m not kidding here, as has been said before and most likely will be said again, you have never produced a single piece of real evidence that we are anything but our brains. That’s cuz there isn’t any.

Millions of people have not looked down on their body, millions of people think they have looked down on their body. See, humans have this thing called imagination, which can allow this. NDEs are clearly understood by modern medicine, reaction to brain dying, been reproduced repeatedly under controlled circumstances, etc etc. I’m not really going to bother spelling it out cuz it won’t do any good. You have demonstrated repeatedly that you cannot understand this, so I’m not going to waste my time. Of course, I am conversing with someone who claims to have talked to Jesus and God, so that’s kind of unavoidable at this point.

102

[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
No. Your autonomic nervous system, because you obviously didn’t look this up, is the part of your nervous system that controls involuntary motion. Reflex movements, heartbeat, etc. It doesn’t use the brain, it uses the spinal cord mostly, and you have only very limited control over it. Now I said part because there is another section of the nervous that controls voluntary motion. Guess what it’s called?
Um, this sentence makes no sense.
It’s only interesting if you don’t understand it. You are your brain. Period. There is no evidence to the contrary. Really. No, I’m not kidding here, as has been said before and most likely will be said again, you have never produced a single piece of real evidence that we are anything but our brains. That’s cuz there isn’t any.

Millions of people have not looked down on their body, millions of people think they have looked down on their body. See, humans have this thing called imagination, which can allow this. NDEs are clearly understood by modern medicine, reaction to brain dying, been reproduced repeatedly under controlled circumstances, etc etc. I’m not really going to bother spelling it out cuz it won’t do any good. You have demonstrated repeatedly that you cannot understand this, so I’m not going to waste my time. Of course, I am conversing with someone who claims to have talked to Jesus and God, so that’s kind of unavoidable at this point.
[/QUOTE]

No, you are not your brain. Millions of people have been out of body looking down on their body and accurately reporting about it. Research scientists from proved it, and yes their findings have been published in real scientific journals. Dozens of scientists, doctors, and PhDs have affirmed this to be true. I can shown you dozens of links to their research and material. However, I think it would be a waste of time. There is one I like:

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2002/10/55826

Here’s another good one:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence03.html

On July 13, ABC 20/20 will be a special on near death experiences, I hope they will talk about the research being done.

103

[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
To be fair, if we assume that God and Jesus exist, we’re also assuming their other attributes, and it’s reasonable to suggest that what applies to them probably doesn’t apply to us also. You can’t know something by testing it “as best you can”. That’s reason for believing something. Knowing something requires you to have tested it completely - both pretty much impossible to do and measure. After all, if you know something, you don’t have faith. Well, i’m still in disagreement, but we’re into beliefs now and not statements. All I really wanted was an agreement that your statement of “Scientific research has shown consciousness lives on after death” for “forever” is incorrect - at the least you should probably add some conditionals in there. “Scientific research has shown consciousness lives on after death for an hour”, or something.
[/QUOTE]

I believe it speaks for itself. While it may be true that “Scientific research has shown consciousness lives on after death for an hour”, it is only because the spirit reentered the body. It is not unreal to assume if the spirit does not reenter the body that it will continue to live for an indefinite amount of time.

104

[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
Well, i’m still in disagreement, but we’re into beliefs now and not statements.
[/QUOTE]

Dude, the very instant lekatt showed up, the thread catapulted into beliefs.

105

[QUOTE=lekatt]
You are right, my computers were ancient by today’s standards. No, I never used a logic analyzer. Now I didn’t mean to inply that troubleshooting computers was an easy job. It certainly wasn’t easy for me either.

The signals produced by the EEG are real and physical, but since the human body is not connected to electric current what generates this signal. Does the brain generate this signal or is the signal produced by spirit. Is the signal going to the brain or coming from it. I know what you will say, but we now have some evidence. When the brain is dead it produces no signal, but research shows the consciousness continues to live which indicates to me that the signal is going to the brain from the consciousness.

I have to break here, someone needs me. Think about it.
[/QUOTE]

Well, we’ve made some progress. No one can prove that the physical reactions of the brain are not caused by consciousness, rather than the other way around, but even you should admit that it sure looks that way. Changes to personality are correlated with changes to the brain, chemicals have an impact on personality, we see a correlation between parts of the brain and brain function. The evidence is both repeatable and more solid than stories of consciousness outliving the brain. I figure if Houdini couldn’t make it back, no one can. But if it makes you feel better, fine with me.

106

[QUOTE=lekatt]
I believe it speaks for itself. While it may be true that “Scientific research has shown consciousness lives on after death for an hour”, it is only because the spirit reentered the body. It is not unreal to assume if the spirit does not reenter the body that it will continue to live for an indefinite amount of time.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps not. After all, there’s plenty of things people assume in their belief systems. But you cannot claim, as you did, that scientific research has shown it lives on forever. Because it’s objectively not true.
[QUOTE=Monty]
Dude, the very instant lekatt showed up, the thread catapulted into beliefs.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I know. But he doesn’t see it that way.

107

[QUOTE=lekatt]
No, you are not your brain. Millions of people have been out of body looking down on their body and accurately reporting about it. Research scientists from proved it, and yes their findings have been published in real scientific journals.
[/QUOTE]

So cite one.

Wow, I certainly haven’t seen this link before. Why don’t go over it again. This isn’t about a study that has been done. It’s about people trying to get money to do a study for something they believe. Really, that’s the word used.

My browser still remembers this link. And once again, this link has nothing. Blind people can imagine and hallucinate too? Alert the press!

Oh good, network TV. We’ll definitely see a fair well informed serious treatment of the subject, and not a sensationalist snow job designed to pull in viewers.

108

[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
So cite one.
Wow, I certainly haven’t seen this link before. Why don’t go over it again. This isn’t about a study that has been done. It’s about people trying to get money to do a study for something they believe. Really, that’s the word used.
My browser still remembers this link. And once again, this link has nothing. Blind people can imagine and hallucinate too? Alert the press!
Oh good, network TV. We’ll definitely see a fair well informed serious treatment of the subject, and not a sensationalist snow job designed to pull in viewers.
[/QUOTE]

The research was done and published in the “Lancet”. There are more studies also done by many doctors and many books published on these studies.

Come on now, how can someone hallucinate what he has never seen. Read it again you missed the most of it. People when out of body describe accurately not only their immediate surroundings but what is going on in the next room, the hall, the waiting room. You need only read the material, there is no way I can bring it all to you, there are mountains of it.

109

[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
Perhaps not. After all, there’s plenty of things people assume in their belief systems. But you cannot claim, as you did, that scientific research has shown it lives on forever. Because it’s objectively not true.Yeah, I know. But he doesn’t see it that way.
[/QUOTE]

I have provided more links to qualified scientific research in this thread than anyone. Count them. I can’t help it if scientists don’t believe in their own doctrine and data. Similar to the religious who don’t believe in the teachings of their founder.

110

[QUOTE=Voyager]
Well, we’ve made some progress. No one can prove that the physical reactions of the brain are not caused by consciousness, rather than the other way around, but even you should admit that it sure looks that way. Changes to personality are correlated with changes to the brain, chemicals have an impact on personality, we see a correlation between parts of the brain and brain function. The evidence is both repeatable and more solid than stories of consciousness outliving the brain. I figure if Houdini couldn’t make it back, no one can. But if it makes you feel better, fine with me.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, we have made progress, now we will try to build on that progress. This is only an analogy, but may help to understand some of the functions of the brain.

The brain is the computer that automates the human body. We (our spiritual selves) program that computer starting when the baby is born. Thought is used to do the programming because thought is very important. When the program is in place we feel like we are the body. Now, everything goes along pretty well until something happens. We are hit by someone, the body responds as programmed, many chemicals are dumped into the blood stream to prepare the body to fight or run in case he is bigger than you. Sure our personalities change, first fear, then anger, the hormones are kicking in now. Our opponent is too fast for us he strikes us down with a tire iron causing brain damage. We have lost the movement of an arm. As the body repairs itself the programmer (spirit) starts reprogramming an undamaged part of the brain to take over the function of moving the arm, in a few months the body is fully functional again. But at some point in time the body becomes too badly damaged to repair and the spirit exits to return to the spirit world.

Have fun with this and show me where I am wrong.

111

[QUOTE=lekatt]
I have provided more links to qualified scientific research in this thread than anyone. Count them.
[/QUOTE]
bolding mine

You have provided more links than anyone, because none of your opponents require external citations to demonstrate the fallacies of your claims.

You have not provided even one link to “qualified scientific research” (as identified by peer reviewed scientific papers). Heck, a third of your links have been to your own site.

It is one thing to witness by posting your own beliefs and linking to others who share those beliefs. It is another thing to lie about what you have posted. You should be ashamed to make such a claim.

112

[QUOTE=lekatt]
The research was done and published in the “Lancet”. There are more studies also done by many doctors and many books published on these studies.
[/QUOTE]

Nice and vague. Try again.

Just because the optic nerve doesn’t work doesn’t mean that the part of the brain used for sight doesn’t work. A blind person knows what a chair ‘looks’ like, even if they haven’t seen one. How can the blind person confirm that what they experienced what exactly what was in the room? They can’t look at it again to make sure. They can’t draw it. So all we have is the person’s subjective experience that everything was exactly right. It’s rather interesting that there was no color seen by this person. If all NDEs are the same thing, then this person should have seen color. Certainly the spirit world could spring for color, especially in the instance of a person who had never seen it. So this person could describe things they were already familiar with, but couldn’t describe something they weren’t familiar with at all, and it wasn’t even part of the experience. Gee, isn’t that interesting.

Oh I’ve read mountains of it. Big steaming mountains. Someone says there was a chair in the room and suddenly they accurate know all their surroundings. Interpreted personal experience doesn’t impress me. Anyone can claim whatever they feel like, it doesn’t mean it happened. The ears and eyes function even the person isn’t consciously aware of it. There are many cases of people who hear things said in an operating room while they aupposedly unconsious. That doesn’t mean they had some out of body experience, it means their ears are functioning.

113

[QUOTE=lekatt]
I have provided more links to qualified scientific research in this thread than anyone. Count them. I can’t help it if scientists don’t believe in their own doctrine and data. Similar to the religious who don’t believe in the teachings of their founder.
[/QUOTE]
Let me try again.

You have provided no proof and no links that show that science has proved that consciousness lasts forever after death. If you would like me to believe that science has proved that consciousness lasts forever after death, you will need to provide me with some cites to back this **specific claim ** up. Or, you must retract those statements. You have provided so far zero links which corroborate this specific claim. You yourself admit that to get from what you see there being an “forever” requires assumptions - assumptions beyond even the data *you believe * is appropriate. Normally, I would suggest that such a thing is just a mistake on your part, but given that you have already said that this specific claim is based on assumptions, I can only imagine the reason you do not want to come outright and take it back is because you fear it will make you look silly. Well, too bad. You shouldn’t have made such a hyperbolic claim - a hyperbolic claim that *you yourself * don’t believe is correct. Any statement you make making the same specific claim, should you not provide cites, I will consider a lie.

114

[QUOTE=lekatt]
Yes, we have made progress, now we will try to build on that progress. This is only an analogy, but may help to understand some of the functions of the brain.

The brain is the computer that automates the human body. We (our spiritual selves) program that computer starting when the baby is born. Thought is used to do the programming because thought is very important. When the program is in place we feel like we are the body. Now, everything goes along pretty well until something happens. We are hit by someone, the body responds as programmed, many chemicals are dumped into the blood stream to prepare the body to fight or run in case he is bigger than you. Sure our personalities change, first fear, then anger, the hormones are kicking in now. Our opponent is too fast for us he strikes us down with a tire iron causing brain damage. We have lost the movement of an arm. As the body repairs itself the programmer (spirit) starts reprogramming an undamaged part of the brain to take over the function of moving the arm, in a few months the body is fully functional again. But at some point in time the body becomes too badly damaged to repair and the spirit exits to return to the spirit world.

Have fun with this and show me where I am wrong.
[/QUOTE]

No, you have to provide some evidence - and even if there is something that survives death, that doesn’t demonstrate it controls anything. It might be a field generated by the brain. No wackier than your spirit.

Children’s intellect and personalities mature and grow as they get older. If there is an intelligent spirit, how come they don’t start off at maturity? Does the spirit affect our personality? If so, why do changes to the physical brain affect personality, since these should have no impact on a spirit that survives death?

Hormones certainly do affect our thinking, just like they affect animals. Do animals have a similar spirit? Why don’t animals spirits exhibit intelligence if there are any? If there aren’t, how come the brain function of animals is so similar to ours?

How would you have felt if, while debugging a program, someone told you that the computer was really being run by a software spirit, which just happened to make various parts operate the way they would if your code was controlling them? I can come up with ways that the software spirit works in the same way you have ways in which your spirit works.
If you were clever you’d ask me to define an experiment to distinguish the cases where there is and isn’t a software spirit - and then I’d be stuck. I challenge you to do the same thing. Forget the survival stuff, since that doesn’t imply anything about brain control. Give me an experiment or finding that can only be explained by your spirit. If you can’t, everything about the brain can be explained more simply without one.

115

[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
Nice and vague. Try again.
Just because the optic nerve doesn’t work doesn’t mean that the part of the brain used for sight doesn’t work. A blind person knows what a chair ‘looks’ like, even if they haven’t seen one. How can the blind person confirm that what they experienced what exactly what was in the room? They can’t look at it again to make sure. They can’t draw it. So all we have is the person’s subjective experience that everything was exactly right. It’s rather interesting that there was no color seen by this person. If all NDEs are the same thing, then this person should have seen color. Certainly the spirit world could spring for color, especially in the instance of a person who had never seen it. So this person could describe things they were already familiar with, but couldn’t describe something they weren’t familiar with at all, and it wasn’t even part of the experience. Gee, isn’t that interesting.
Oh I’ve read mountains of it. Big steaming mountains. Someone says there was a chair in the room and suddenly they accurate know all their surroundings. Interpreted personal experience doesn’t impress me. Anyone can claim whatever they feel like, it doesn’t mean it happened. The ears and eyes function even the person isn’t consciously aware of it. There are many cases of people who hear things said in an operating room while they aupposedly unconsious. That doesn’t mean they had some out of body experience, it means their ears are functioning.[/QUOTE
You haven’t read any of it.

116

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
bolding mine

You have provided more links than anyone, because none of your opponents require external citations to demonstrate the fallacies of your claims.

You have not provided even one link to “qualified scientific research” (as identified by peer reviewed scientific papers). Heck, a third of your links have been to your own site.

It is one thing to witness by posting your own beliefs and linking to others who share those beliefs. It is another thing to lie about what you have posted. You should be ashamed to make such a claim.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, Tom, I have. Studies that have been published in the “Lancet”.

Dr. Raymond Moody, Jr. was a near death researcher that wrote many books. His last book was called “The Last Laugh.” In this book he took to task three groups of people. Fundamental religious people, skeptical science people, and parapsychologists. About the skeptical science people he wrote that they were the most dishonest of all the people he ever met. It seems no matter how many times solid research is offered it is not read. He adds at the end which you might have figured out when the real death experience comes to all then all will know.

117

[QUOTE=Voyager]
No, you have to provide some evidence - and even if there is something that survives death, that doesn’t demonstrate it controls anything. It might be a field generated by the brain. No wackier than your spirit.

Children’s intellect and personalities mature and grow as they get older. If there is an intelligent spirit, how come they don’t start off at maturity? Does the spirit affect our personality? If so, why do changes to the physical brain affect personality, since these should have no impact on a spirit that survives death?

Hormones certainly do affect our thinking, just like they affect animals. Do animals have a similar spirit? Why don’t animals spirits exhibit intelligence if there are any? If there aren’t, how come the brain function of animals is so similar to ours?

How would you have felt if, while debugging a program, someone told you that the computer was really being run by a software spirit, which just happened to make various parts operate the way they would if your code was controlling them? I can come up with ways that the software spirit works in the same way you have ways in which your spirit works.
If you were clever you’d ask me to define an experiment to distinguish the cases where there is and isn’t a software spirit - and then I’d be stuck. I challenge you to do the same thing. Forget the survival stuff, since that doesn’t imply anything about brain control. Give me an experiment or finding that can only be explained by your spirit. If you can’t, everything about the brain can be explained more simply without one.
[/QUOTE]

Ok, I thought we had already established that consciousness continues to live after the death of the brain. Seems not. I would think it would be apparent that we are not created by our brains. Can a brain examine a brain. I am not a brain, if you wish to be one it is ok with me.

118

[QUOTE=lekatt]
You haven’t read any of it.
[/QUOTE]

:rolleyes:

We’re done here. I’m sorry I wasted my time bothering to respond to you.

119

[QUOTE=lekatt]
I have provided more links to qualified scientific research in this thread than anyone. Count them.
[/QUOTE]
Okay… Three. No wait… Zero. None of them point to anything a reasonable person would call “qualified scientific research”.

Post 24: A Near Death Experience, No. 39. Personal “pre-birth experience” anecdote from Mike Maguire posted on lekatt’s website, no peer-reviewed science referenced.

Post 45: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence03.html “People Born Blind Can See During a NDE” article about a “two-year study” by Dr. Ken Ring and author Sharon Cooper. No indications of any peer-review. They have published a book entitled “Mindsight”.

Post 102: http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2002/10/55826 Wired magazine article on how “[t]wo British scientists are seeking £165,000 ($256,000) to carry out a large-scale study to discover if clinically dead people really have out-of-body experiences.” The article comes to no conclusions other than “there’s life left yet in speculating about the afterlife.”

Post 102: A repeat of the link in post 45.

120

[QUOTE=the PC apeman]
Okay… Three. No wait… Zero. None of them point to anything a reasonable person would call “qualified scientific research”.

Post 24: A Near Death Experience, No. 39. Personal “pre-birth experience” anecdote from Mike Maguire posted on lekatt’s website, no peer-reviewed science referenced.

Post 45: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence03.html “People Born Blind Can See During a NDE” article about a “two-year study” by Dr. Ken Ring and author Sharon Cooper. No indications of any peer-review. They have published a book entitled “Mindsight”.

Post 102: http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2002/10/55826 Wired magazine article on how “[t]wo British scientists are seeking £165,000 ($256,000) to carry out a large-scale study to discover if clinically dead people really have out-of-body experiences.” The article comes to no conclusions other than “there’s life left yet in speculating about the afterlife.”

Post 102: A repeat of the link in post 45.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, I think I discovered what is missing here. The data must be prepared in a certain form and meet the criterion of science doctrine. There is no such thing as independent thought allowed. The research was done, but it don’t count because of X and Y and Z. Ok, we will drop it. However, the general public understand it easily. That is why 90% of the world believe in a spiritual realm, that and a lot of experience.