A review of Is There an Afterlife?

#1
I have found this brief article and we could discuss:

http://paranormal.about.com/od/lifeafterdeathreincarnat/f/Is-There-An-Afterlife.htm

The truth is, there isn't any hard evidence for an afterlife.
True, but there is reasonable evidence to conclude that there is an afterlife.

This could be evidence of the survival of consciousness after death... or it could be evidence for the psychic retrieval of information unknown to the living person (which would be another mystery).
There good reasons to discard psi only bewteen living in some cases: there is no reason (unless we have already ruled out a priori the existence of an afterlife, which I do not consider valid) for the information psychically gained adopt the appearance of a deceased, in mediumship the communicators vary their communication skills regardless of sitters, the "drop in" communications, etc.

These cases could be indications of life after death (life after life!), if true, but there is no way to prove them definitively.
True, but it is more likely that reincarnation happens in the light of such data that not.

So could all of the above combined be considered evidence for an afterlife? Not by scientific standars certainly, but many paranormal researchers might consider it so. But this also raises the question: What would stand as definitive evidence that would withstand scientific scrutiny? Maybe nothing can. Perhaps we'll only finally know after we die. Until then, ideas about the afterlife are a matter of faith and philosophy.
Science is not a unified whole; standars are different for different sciences; evidence of an afterlife is no valid evidence for the standars of the hard sciences, physics and chemistry, but it is a valid evidence for the standars of the soft sciences, human and social sciences.
 
#2
I'll tell you what. In about 30 or 40 years, when I leave this world, I will happily haunt the skeptic community. If my spirit guides will let me, and the atheist skeptics are willing to accept full responsibility for my actions as a ghost, I will gleefully scratch them and shove them around the way other spirits do during hauntings. Or I can point you to the body of evidence of a guy named Bill Bean who was haunted by demons and got some good pictures of them. http://www.billbean.net/index.php?page=photo-gallery

The problem with proving their existence is that the skeptical scientific community has no idea what to even look for. I'm telling you that ghosts should be treated like a quantum field. If the scientific community had the will, they could prove the existence of ghosts.
 
#3
There is a lot more evidence for the afterlife than is included in that article:
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2014/04/near-death-experiences-and-afterlife.html#facts_evidence

If you are not familiar with the evidence for the afterlife, don't make up your mind based on one short web article, read the free e-books on the subject available here:
http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/summary_of_evidence

Also at that link, more information on evidence for the afterlife including:
Mediumship: Proxy sittings, Drop-in communicators , Cross-correspondences.
Near-death experiences, veridical near-death experiences, and shared near-death experiences.
Death-bed visions, veridical death-bed visions, and shared death-bed visions.
Apparitions and multiple witness apparitions.
Children who remember past lives including those with an unusual type of birth mark on their body where an injury was sustained in the previous life.

Neither ESP or Super-psi can exlain the evidence for the afterlife:
Poltergeist phenomena not associated with a particular person, drop-in communicators, cross-correspondences, etc.
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2009/06/survival-and-super-psi.html
Mrs. Piper's Mediumship:
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2009/05/further-record-of-observations-of.html

Nobel Prize winners and other great scientists and philosophers who believed in non-physical consciousness
because of the evidence:
http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers
Nobelists: Max Planck, Erwin Schrödinger, Sir John Eccles, Eugene Wigner. Others: Kurt Gödel, Wernher von Braun, Karl Popper.

Consciousness is not produced by the brain:
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-materialist-explanation-of.html

Why you should demand the same level of proof from "skeptics" that they demand for claims of the paranormal:
Skeptical Misdirection: http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_misdirection
 
Last edited:
#4
I thought this was a reference to the book of the same name written by David Fontana. Nevertheless I would mention that it is an excellent book to get a brief overview of the range of evidence for survival IMHO.
 
#5
I thought this was a reference to the book of the same name written by David Fontana. Nevertheless I would mention that it is an excellent book to get a brief overview of the range of evidence for survival IMHO.
Yes, indeed, that's one very good book to read.
 
#10
From the same article, they said "That is not the probability that the Higgs boson doesn't exist. It is, rather, the inverse: If the particle doesn't exist, one in 3.5 million is the chance an experiment just like the one announced this week would nevertheless come up with a result appearing to confirm it does exist."

But how many times did they slam protons into each other? 4 million times? Maybe it was just a statistical oddity.
 
#11
So they tell us. Maybe they're confabulating. Or maybe they're having a delusion or it's a fantasy. Or maybe they're detecting something, but it's not a Higgs particle. Maybe what they saw was swamp gas. Can they prove what they saw is real?
I see what you mean :D

You may be right... see this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_...rticle_as_a_Higgs_boson.2C_and_current_status

Words such as "preliminary", "tentatively" and "to be studied" don't really sound like a done deal... and yet Mr.Carrol (se other thread) sells it as such.

This is interesting too:
http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/checking-the-higgs-boson/
 

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#12
So they tell us. Maybe they're confabulating. Or maybe they're having a delusion or it's a fantasy. Or maybe they're detecting something, but it's not a Higgs particle. Maybe what they saw was swamp gas. Can they prove what they saw is real?
You need to make some distinctions between various points on the weak <-> strong evidence spectrum.

~~ Paul
 
#13
You need to make some distinctions between various points on the weak <-> strong evidence spectrum.

~~ Paul
I actually benefit from science's acceptance of a Higgs field because Higgs fields are aetherial. You can't detect the Higgs field like you can a magnetic field because you need a $9billion dollar super collider to detect Higgs bosons. Even then, Higgs bosons only appear briefly and then decompose into other products. Higgs field and Higgs bosons are a very strong statement that nature can behave aetherially. Do you understand what I mean by aetherial?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethereal
 

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#14
I actually benefit from science's acceptance of a Higgs field because Higgs fields are aetherial. You can't detect the Higgs field like you can a magnetic field because you need a $9billion dollar super collider to detect Higgs bosons. Even then, Higgs bosons only appear briefly and then decompose into other products. Higgs field and Higgs bosons are a very strong statement that nature can behave aetherially. Do you understand what I mean by aetherial?
No.

~~ Paul
 
#15
Alright, I've been thinking about this, of comparing wave-functions (which are quantum fields) to ghosts and spirits. Let us say that the cell membranes of our cellular bodies have a potential energy, a voltage across the membrane that has spherical shell symmetry. The result would be a potential energy V(x,y,z) that resembles a hundred trillion tiny quantum wells. Quantum wave-functions will appear in any potential well, even if there is no quantum particle inside. As a proponent of spiritualism, I believe that there are ghosts and spirits who will populate the potential energy V(x,y,z) of the cells because that's what ghosts, spirits and souls are supposed to do.

Anyway, aetherial would mean otherworldly in a non physical way. A spirit would be non-physical, non-corporeal, that is without a physical body made of atoms. A spirit that is similar to a quantum field would be non-corporeal when separated from the physical body. Do you understand?

The only complication I can see is that a potential energy V(x,y,z) would automatically have a wave-function associated with it. I am trying to fill a wave-function/quantum field with another wave-function/quantum field which has energy. I am doing this even before I tell you that a spirit has some energy content. I don't know that it does.

Any questions?
 
#20
The Higgs boson is proof that materialism is wrong. if materialism is struck down, it means that nature allows ethereal things to exist, like Higgs fields and disembodied life forms like ghosts.
I do not think. Currently physicalism is the modern version of materialism, the quantum fields are physical despite having ethereal connotations and what we need is more evidence for the existence of an afterlife and its nature rather than argue about the "isms".
 
Top