Scientific Evidence says: "Yes, there is an after life"
AllSeeing-I
believe there is an after life.
Yep.
Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket science -
and who was the scientist who directed Hitler’s rocket and missile
program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
months before he died that his science shows life continues after
physical death. He wrote, “Science has found that nothing can
disappear without a trace."
"E=MC2 has been a very important symbol to me since then (which is why
you will find E=MC2 engraved on the back of many of the watches &
jewellery that I design), as I was led to realise just what an
implication this has - it is solid scientific evidence, by one of the
best minds in history - Albert Einstein, that there is such a thing as
life after death. If energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed -
and we know this, it's a scientifically proven fact - then of course
this must also apply to the energy that is human consciousness, soul,
spirit."
http://site.uri-geller.com/dr_wernher_von_braun
So there ya have it. We will all live on. Life as we know it is best
expkained as "energy".
So now comes the choice. How do we wish to exist in the next
dimension?
The bible confirmed, once again.
--
scattering the seeds of hope....
The All Seeing I
marks...@yahoo.com
OK, show that there is an energy loss between a live person and a dead
person that is not from the cessation of chemical processes.
Tim Miller
> On Jun 18, 3:54 pm, AllSeeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
>> believe there is an after life.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket science -
BWA-ha-ha-ha!!
>> and who was the scientist who directed Hitler’s rocket and missile
>> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
>> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
>> physical death. He wrote, “Science has found that nothing can
>> disappear without a trace."
>>
>> "E=MC2 has been a very important symbol to me since then (which is why
>> you will find E=MC2 engraved on the back of many of the watches &
>> jewellery that I design), as I was led to realise just what an
Say, did "Werhner" misspell his OWN name in the citation you made
up? And the word "jewellery"? Or did the fundy website you cut and
pasted this garbage fund do it?
>> implication this has - it is solid scientific evidence, by one of the
>> best minds in history - Albert Einstein, that there is such a thing as
>> life after death. If energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed -
>> and we know this, it's a scientifically proven fact - then of course
>> this must also apply to the energy that is human consciousness, soul,
>> spirit."
>>
>> http://site.uri-geller.com/dr_wernher_von_braun
>>
>> So there ya have it. We will all live on. Life as we know it is best
>> expkained as "energy".
LOL!!
>> So now comes the choice. How do we wish to exist in the next
>> dimension?
>>
>> The bible confirmed, once again.
"Again" would imply that you'd done it at least ONCE before.
You haven't.
>> --
>> scattering the seeds of hope....
>>
>> The All Seeing I
>
> OK, show that there is an energy loss between a live person and a dead
> person that is not from the cessation of chemical processes.
He can't. He's too busy looking for web "evidence" of "weight loss"
after death from the "soul" leaving the body.
But, as he's demonstrated time and time again, he really has NO
concept of what EVIDENCE really is. He reaffirms that with this
LATEST idiotic post.
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
Tim Miller
No answer. THERE'S a surprise.
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
It is not shown to be a fact that human consciousness is purely a
chemical reaction. Saying so is a theory foisted on to the general
public as if it were a truth by junk scientists. Which BTW are not
qualified to make such claims. All they have actually shown so far is
an ability to manipulate the media and public beliefs.
A chemical reaction showing brain function for instance, could be a
physical manifestation and a result of the energy we call life.
If a Physicist such as Braun states the empirical evidence points
toward an afterlife then he must be asserting such an idea from his
vast knowledge in the field of energy.
If there is anyone on the planet that has ever lived and is qualified
to make such a statement it would be Braun.
Still. The evolutionists refuse to hear it. They don't want to.
Because it would show there is a strong probability of an after life.
And if there is a strong posibility of an after life then that means
much of ancient history on the matter must be correct.
The ancient history says mankind was created.
Which of course, would disprove man's origins via speciation and
evolution.
AllSeeing-I
wrote:
Gee Timmy. This information must have really got to ya.
It is unlikely someone such as Braun is wrong about energy.
So grab your box of Kleenex.
marks...@yahoo.com
yes, it would create the problem of where souls come from , how they
survive independant of a physical host, what happens if a human body
loses its soul but remains alive, how are souls managing to deal with
a exponential population growth , can a faraday cage trap a soul or
keep one out, can a soul be destroyed or used as an energy source and
a bunch of other things.
It also raises the issue of animal souls. Do animals have souls or are
they meat machines ? if meat machines then animal cruelty is absurd,
like toaster cruelty.
If a human can exist with no soul directing it , how can we tell , and
is executing it wrong ?
Ken
> yes, it would create the problem of where souls come from , how they
> survive independant of a physical host, what happens if a human body
> loses its soul but remains alive, how are souls managing to deal with
> a exponential population growth , can a faraday cage trap a soul or
> keep one out, can a soul be destroyed or used as an energy source and
> a bunch of other things.
>
> It also raises the issue of animal souls. Do animals have souls or are
> they meat machines ? if meat machines then animal cruelty is absurd,
> like toaster cruelty.
> If a human can exist with no soul directing it , how can we tell , and
> is executing it wrong ?
You're gonna make ASSman's head explode.
Where's my reserved seat?
AllSeeing-I
The physical host cannot survive without the spirit. But the spirit
can survive without the physical host because it is energy. Like the
scientists say, energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed.
However, the body is organic. So it will return to it's natural state
once the spirit has been removed. That natural state would be the
elements that make up the body. The bible puts it as "dust to dust"
upon death. So the body will return,(or decay),to the ground which is
also made up of the same elements that makes up the earth after the
spirit is removed.
The energy that annimates the organic matter we call the body is
spirit. Some argue it is purely a chemical process. But that does not
hold water on many levels. Braun seems to agree.
So man is both flesh and spirit in his current state of existence. The
flesh will degrade but the energy will be transformed upon the body
dying if science is right and energy cannot be destroyed, only
transformed.
Originally our bodies were designed to many live thousands of years.
Jesus showed up in one such body after he died.
That changed with the fall of man and the subsequent mingling with the
fallen angels.
>
> It also raises the issue of animal souls. Do animals have souls or are
> they meat machines ? if meat machines then animal cruelty is absurd,
> like toaster cruelty.
The animals were given specific foods to eat in the creation account
listed in Genesis. None of the foods included meat. So we can assume
the animals were created vegetairian.
Two points. 1) Gods says "all flesh will see his saving power". The
animals are flesh so on the last day the animals will see a
restoration too. We can now assume the animals have a spirit since
they will be in on the restoration.
The animals were also corrupted during the fall of man. In fact there
are etheopian ledgends that say it was Cane first to mate a female
horse with a male donkey to get a mule. We find in the book of Enoch
that it was the fallen Angels that taught man to do such things.
Things including how to make weapons for war, how to use herbs for
medicine, berries and barks for makeup --a whole host of things.
So we have no idea how much the animal kingdom has been corruptred
since the beginning.
Point 2) The apostle Paul says "all of creation groans". The word all
would would strongly suggest the animals too.
So to answer your question yes, the animals also have energy (or
spirit). After the last day they will be restored along with
everything else.
We see in the book of Isiah that lion will lay down with the lamb and
small children will play with snakes. We can assume from what Isiah
has told us that it is the way it was before the fall; A paradise. No
war. No killing for meat, etc etc..
> If a human can exist with no soul directing it , how can we tell , and
> is executing it wrong ?
It is energy that annimates the body not a chemical process. Without
that energy the body dies. That energy is the soul that will transform
once the body dies.
It cannot exist without the energy that annimates it.
Caranx latus
> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
> believe there is an after life.
>
> Yep.
>
> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket science -
> and who was the scientist who directed Hitler’s rocket and missile
> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
> physical death. He wrote, “Science has found that nothing can
> disappear without a trace."
>
> "E=MC2 has been a very important symbol to me since then (which is why
> you will find E=MC2 engraved on the back of many of the watches &
> jewellery that I design), as I was led to realise just what an
> implication this has - it is solid scientific evidence, by one of the
> best minds in history - Albert Einstein, that there is such a thing as
> life after death. If energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed -
> and we know this, it's a scientifically proven fact - then of course
> this must also apply to the energy that is human consciousness, soul,
> spirit."
>
> http://site.uri-geller.com/dr_wernher_von_braun
Are you aware that the only part of this quote that was actually
written by von Braun is the following sentence: "“Science has found
that nothing can disappear without a trace." Even that might be simply
a paraphrasing rather than an actual quote.
Are you aware that the rest of the words were written either by Uri
Geller, a man who has made his reputation by lying, or by Victor
Zammit, a lawyer/author. Neither of these men are scientists, and both
seem to have read far more into von Braun's words than von Braun
actually wrote. von Braun's actual words are here:
<http://www.thomaspynchon.com/gravitys-rainbow/extra/von-
braun.html>
Since the bulk of the item deals with religion rather than science,
and since the item concludes with an argument from ignorance, one has
to wonder what it is that you find so compelling about it. But of
course, one has to remember that you never actually sought out what
von Braun actually wrote. You simply accepted that what Geller or
Zammit had to say was somehow authoritative. Somehow, you seem to have
accepted that what was written by Geller/Zammit is somehow reflective
of von Braun's views. It isn't. If you were a normal person, you'd be
embarrassed by yourself.
> So there ya have it. We will all live on. Life as we know it is best
> expkained as "energy".
Life as we know it is best described as a complex series of self-
perpetuating chemical reactions. Life as you wish you could know it is
perhaps best explained as energy.
> So now comes the choice. How do we wish to exist in the next
> dimension?
>
> The bible confirmed, once again.
This could only be the case for someone with no actual rational
capabilities. That would be you, [M]adape.
marks...@yahoo.com
I favor serious scientific endevours , and the ghost traps from
Ghostbusters were awesome .
Mark Evans
You used Uri Geller as a source? I have a big bridge in NYC for
sale. You interested? As for me, I would not trust Geller if he told
me how he spelled his name. He is a con man, a fake, and a total
embarrasment to his species. And the fact that you are using his site
as a source does not speak well for you. So, you dishonest or just a
fool?
Mark Evans
Mark Evans
Bring your own protective plastic sheeting.
Mark Evans
Mark Evans
>
> - Show quoted text -
What a strange, nonsensical world you live in. Are you here on a day
pass?
Mark Evans
marks...@yahoo.com
I just noticed Yuri Gellers involvement *runs off to save spoons *
Tim Miller
No, but what IS likely is that you've cut and pasted ANOTHER
in a long line of completely made up and/or out of context
quotes...
That IS how you work, after all!
ROFLMAO@U!!
AllSeeing-I
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's ok. We all know you are scared shitless there is a GOD
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
Braun is quoted *even at your link* saying:
"But I think science has a real surprise for the skeptics. Science,
for instance, tells us that nothing in nature, not even the tiniest
particle, can disappear without a trace."
"Now, if God applies this fundamental principle to the most minute and
insignificant parts of His universe, doesn't it make sense to assume
that He applies it also to the masterpiece of His creation--the human
soul? I think it does. And everything science has taught me--and
continues to teach me--strengthens my belief in the continuity of our
spiritual existence after death. Nothing disappears without a trace".
No matter gow you spin it, Braun, one of the greatest scientists on
the planet, believes the soul will live on. He bases that idea on his
findings with science. He worked with energy. So he must have an
insight to this that the rest of us do not have.
But I realize how you love to be skeptical
So here is another Scientist.
This comes from a NASA web site. Surely a NASA website is good enough,
right?
The question:
I believe that the human "soul" is more than likely a pure form of
energy that exists as part of the physical body, and is created as a
by-product of the chemical reactions going on in the body. This energy
is then released at death. Now, all energy must be replenished or
eventually die out. Even the Sun needs fuel. If the soul is indeed
energy, would it not die from lack of replenishing fuel after a time?
Or are there energies that keep going without need of fuel?
The answer:
I don't want to get into questions that are more philosophical than
scientific, but I do have a few comments:
1.If the human soul is pure energy, it is of a type that is
unmeasurable by modern science.
2.Energy does not need to be replenished. Energy is constant. The
Sun's fusion burns mass energy to light and heat, but the total energy
is not created or destroyed, just changed.
3.Chemical reactions are very well understood, and there is no missing
energy generated that could create/replenish/whatever a soul.
Dr. Eric Christian
So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies. But the
body, which is made up of lifeless organic matter, cannot become
animated without the soul/energy
What have i said a billion times?
Science does not have the ability to measure a lot of phenomenon that
we know exists.
But we do have explanations for some of this phenomenon in books such
as the bible and other ancient texts.
Categorically, there are too many people today that have been
conditioned to believe all of this old information is false.
Which is highly unlikely
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
Your little rant changes braum's quote ---how?
And lay off that peace pipe d000d
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
Here is the link:
Tim Miller
> On Jun 19, 7:21 am, Tim Miller <replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>> AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>> On Jun 18, 5:18 pm, Tim Miller <replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> marks542...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 18, 3:54 pm, AllSeeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>>>>>> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
>>>>>> believe there is an after life.
>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket science -
>>>> BWA-ha-ha-ha!!
>>>>>> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
>>>>>> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
"We"? You have a gerbil up your ass again??
LOL!
Tim Miller
It merely demonstrates that I was correct AGAIN. You posted
a FALSE quote!
ROFLMAO!!
Dakota
> On Jun 18, 9:06 pm, Caranx latus<kar...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 5:54 pm, AllSeeing-I<allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
>>> believe there is an after life.
>>
>>> Yep.
>>
>>> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket science -
>>> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
>>> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
>>> disappear without a trace."
>>
>>> "E=MC2 has been a very important symbol to me since then (which is why
>>> you will find E=MC2 engraved on the back of many of the watches&
>>> jewellery that I design), as I was led to realise just what an
>>> implication this has - it is solid scientific evidence, by one of the
>>> best minds in history - Albert Einstein, that there is such a thing as
>>> life after death. If energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed -
>>> and we know this, it's a scientifically proven fact - then of course
>>> this must also apply to the energy that is human consciousness, soul,
>>> spirit."
>>
>>> http://site.uri-geller.com/dr_wernher_von_braun
>>
>> Are you aware that the only part of this quote that was actually
That's a pretty big 'if' and if it's true, how do you imagine your gods
will punish or reward pure energy?
>
> 2.Energy does not need to be replenished. Energy is constant. The
> Sun's fusion burns mass energy to light and heat, but the total energy
> is not created or destroyed, just changed.
>
> 3.Chemical reactions are very well understood, and there is no missing
> energy generated that could create/replenish/whatever a soul.
>
> Dr. Eric Christian
>
> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies. But the
> body, which is made up of lifeless organic matter, cannot become
> animated without the soul/energy
>
>
> What have i said a billion times?
>
> Science does not have the ability to measure a lot of phenomenon that
> we know exists.
>
> But we do have explanations for some of this phenomenon in books such
> as the bible and other ancient texts.
>
> Categorically, there are too many people today that have been
> conditioned to believe all of this old information is false.
>
> Which is highly unlikely
>
Categorically, there are too many people today that have been
conditioned to believe all of this old information is true.
Which is highly unlikely.
NHRA Fan
Yeah, poor little wuss timmy....
Budikka666
>
> "But I think science has a real surprise for the skeptics. Science,
> for instance, tells us that nothing in nature, not even the tiniest
> particle, can disappear without a trace."
LIE. Von Brain apparently never heard of vaccum energy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy
> "Now, if God applies this fundamental principle to the most minute and
> insignificant parts of His universe, doesn't it make sense to assume
> that He applies it also to the masterpiece of His creation--the human
> soul? I think it does. And everything science has taught me--and
> continues to teach me--strengthens my belief in the continuity of our
> spiritual existence after death. Nothing disappears without a trace".
No empirical evidence for any god or any after life here - just blind
belief. Even someone as fundamentally and irremediably boning-fido
stupid as "All Fleeing I" can't be so stupid that he didn't see the
phrase "strengthens my belief ", can he? I guess he can!
> No matter gow you spin it, Braun, one of the greatest scientists on
> the planet, believes the soul will live on.
"BELIEVES". Not "empirically demonstrates", but "BELIEVES". Not
"publishes a scientific paper on" but "BELIEVES". Obviously "All
Fleeing I" is too much of a moron to grasp that.
> He bases that idea on his
> findings with science. He worked with energy. So he must have an
> insight to this that the rest of us do not have.
LoL!
> This comes from a NASA web site. Surely a NASA website is good enough,
> right?
>
> The question:
>
> I believe that the human "soul" is more than likely a pure form of
> energy that exists as part of the physical body, and is created as a
> by-product of the chemical reactions going on in the body. This energy
> is then released at death. Now, all energy must be replenished or
> eventually die out. Even the Sun needs fuel. If the soul is indeed
> energy, would it not die from lack of replenishing fuel after a time?
> Or are there energies that keep going without need of fuel?
Once again "All Fleeign I" is too stupid to see the word "BELIEVE".
There's no science here, there's nothing but blind belief.
> The answer:
>
> I don't want to get into questions that are more philosophical than
> scientific, but I do have a few comments:
Admits openly that these are not scientific but philosphical....
> 1.If the human soul is pure energy, it is of a type that is
> unmeasurable by modern science.
IF! not scientific evidence but "IF"!
> 2.Energy does not need to be replenished. Energy is constant. The
> Sun's fusion burns mass energy to light and heat, but the total energy
> is not created or destroyed, just changed.
So what? This assumes - ASSUMES - that the human soul is energy. If
that's so how come we can't detect it? If the human soul had been
empirically demonstrated and found to be energy, then this claim might
find some application, but since there's no empirical evidence for a
soul whatsoever this argument is nothing but more of "All Fleeing I"'s
horseshit! No science here, No empirical evidence, only blind
belief. Just because a scientist blindly believes doesn't make that
blind belief any more insightful than the blind belief of the least
scientific among us.
> What have i said a billion times?
Dumb shit?
"All Fleeing I" has once again been caught outright LYING on Usenet.
Nothing new here.
"All Fleeing I" has once again proven that he can't tell the
difference between blind belief and empirical evidence. Nothing new
here.
"All Fleeing I" has once again failed to notice that if you get the F
out of belief all you have is BELIE.
Budikka
Ralph
Look, you thick-headed son of a bitch, there isn't an atheist that I
know, who spends one second worrying about the existence of your
imaginary god. Those are games for believers to play.
Ralph
> On 6/19/2010 11:39 AM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
>> On Jun 19, 7:21 am, Tim Miller<replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>>> On Jun 18, 5:18 pm, Tim Miller<replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> marks542...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 18, 3:54 pm, AllSeeing-I<allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
>>>>>>> believe there is an after life.
>>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>>> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket
>>>>>>> science -
>>>>> BWA-ha-ha-ha!!
>>>
>>>>>>> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
>>>>>>> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
What's the matter nitro-sniffer, are you worried that your name isn't in
the book? As I told your shit eating buddy, atheists don't consider
whether or not your imaginary playmate exists, anymore than an ordinary
person today worries about the existence of talking demons within our
bodies.
Tim Miller
Heh heh, I'm EXACTLY as "scared" of his god as I am of the Easter
Bunny. :)
NHRA Fan
Not even a little bit. BTW, your name isn't timmy...timmy could
answer for himself if he weren't such a wuss. However, you atheists have
gained a reputation of being somewhat like the KKK in one respect,
it takes 50 of you to do the job of one man, proving that there isn't a
man present in any of you.
Take your op-inion and shove it up your rectum where it came from, Ralph.
Mark Evans
>
> - Show quoted text -
Can't resist those innacurate racist comments, eh?
And your response does not change the fact that you are citing a
supposed "quote", which, BTW, has been shown elsewhere to be
innacurate, from a web site of a well-known fraud, liar and disgusting
person. And you did not address my question. Are you dishonest or a
fool. And by the way, hide your spoons lest Geller bend them.
Mark Evans
AllSeeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
Looks like NHRA spanked that ass babe.
Does it hurt?
Ghod Dhammit
[snip]
> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies.
It doesn't exist inside the body, nor does it exist outside the body.
Rather like your intelligence.
> But the
> body, which is made up of lifeless organic matter, cannot become
> animated without the soul/energy
Can you sound any more foolish? I dare you to try.
> What have i said a billion times?
Not a thing worth repeating.
> Science does not have the ability to measure a lot of phenomenon that
> we know exists.
We know that your idiocy exists, yet we have no means with which to
measure it.
> But we do have explanations for some of this phenomenon in books such
> as the bible and other ancient texts.
It comes as no surprise, that you cannot differentiate between
explanations and lies.
> Categorically, there are too many people today that have been
> conditioned to believe all of this old information is false.
As always, you've got it backward. If you ever get it right, many
people will die of shock.
> Which is highly unlikely
Because you say so? You're fucking funny, fuckwit.
NHRA Fan
> On 6/19/2010 12:04 PM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
> [snip]
>> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies.
>
> It doesn't exist inside the body, nor does it exist outside the body.
> Rather like your intelligence.
This is far from factual. As it was explained earlier, energy changes
but it is not destroyed, and so it is with energy in the form of
electrical patterns. Take energy in the electromagnetic spectrum;
it is transmitted and travels forever, only stopping when it is
absorbed, and this absorption simply changes it into another form
of energy.
So it will also be with thought; thought itself being an electrical
pattern that alternates between 7 hertz and 21 hertz. The thought
pattern, or pattern of voltage peaks and lows being evidence of
the soul itself; ergo conscious thought is itself a form of energy.
>
> > But the
>> body, which is made up of lifeless organic matter, cannot become
>> animated without the soul/energy
>
> Can you sound any more foolish? I dare you to try.
It is your assumption that it is foolishness that in itself shows
you to be ignorant of biochemical processes and the processes that
in turn control them. The human brain itself being the model for
computers, has also boot processes of it's own.
Without that certain pattern of electrical activity in the human brain
the body dies unless kept alive by mechanical means. This has been
demonstrated time and again in cases of severe trauma resulting in
brain death.
Actually, metaphorically speaking, you haven't a leg to stand on here,
and your post amounts to very little more than harassment and lies.
Is this all the adventure and surprise that life holds for you ?
Mark Evans
>
> - Show quoted text -
I dunno. If the Easter Bunny is anything like the killer rabbit in
"Holy Grail" he would be a tough carrot muncher.
Mark Evans
Free Lunch
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>On 6/20/2010 7:09 AM, Ghod Dhammit wrote:
>> On 6/19/2010 12:04 PM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies.
>>
>> It doesn't exist inside the body, nor does it exist outside the body.
>> Rather like your intelligence.
>
> This is far from factual. As it was explained earlier, energy changes
> but it is not destroyed, and so it is with energy in the form of
> electrical patterns. Take energy in the electromagnetic spectrum;
> it is transmitted and travels forever, only stopping when it is
> absorbed, and this absorption simply changes it into another form
> of energy.
This, of course, has nothing to do with how a brain works.
> So it will also be with thought; thought itself being an electrical
> pattern that alternates between 7 hertz and 21 hertz. The thought
> pattern, or pattern of voltage peaks and lows being evidence of
> the soul itself; ergo conscious thought is itself a form of energy.
How is it evidence of a soul? No, there is no evidence that conscious
thought is a form of energy. It's a process that is going on in the
brain.
>>> But the
>>> body, which is made up of lifeless organic matter, cannot become
>>> animated without the soul/energy
>>
>> Can you sound any more foolish? I dare you to try.
>
> It is your assumption that it is foolishness that in itself shows
> you to be ignorant of biochemical processes and the processes that
> in turn control them. The human brain itself being the model for
> computers, has also boot processes of it's own.
No, the brain does not work like a computer. It certainly does not have
a BIOS to boot from. Where did you get those silly ideas from?
> Without that certain pattern of electrical activity in the human brain
> the body dies unless kept alive by mechanical means. This has been
> demonstrated time and again in cases of severe trauma resulting in
> brain death.
The observable electro-chemical activity of the brain is evidence that
it is working, not the other way around. The end of observable brain
activity is evidence that the brain has stopped working.
> Actually, metaphorically speaking, you haven't a leg to stand on here,
> and your post amounts to very little more than harassment and lies.
You make up just-so stories about a soul and complain about others?
> Is this all the adventure and surprise that life holds for you ?
I like what I do.
Larry
NmIPRnZ2dn...@supernews.com:
>> Science does not have the ability to measure a lot of phenomenon that
>> we know exists.
>
> We know that your idiocy exists, yet we have no means with which to
> measure it.
>
>
I have to agree with his statement about science on this point, I'm afraid.
Science still doesn't know how to measure the radiation coming out of 8
Baptists, holding hands to increase directivity and power output sort of
like a steerable array antenna, while praying over the crap they're about
to eat at a Hardees burger joint. Science also doesn't know how the
Baptists can get whatever power output they're sending through the wiring,
metal roof plates and rooftop air conditioner units, right over their
table, either!
We've tried measuring "prayer power" on several instruments between DC and
Xrays and have yet to see the slightest wiggle of any meter on any
frequency....making us think it's all bullshit, like Penn and Teller said
it was.
That Penn is a genius!
--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics...
Larry
Even an E-meter showed no prayer power over the normal Scientology Reality
Distortion Field it was reading!
Larry
september.org:
> So it will also be with thought; thought itself being an electrical
> pattern that alternates between 7 hertz and 21 hertz. The thought
> pattern, or pattern of voltage peaks and lows being evidence of
> the soul itself; ergo conscious thought is itself a form of energy.
>
>
Horseshit! The most elemental radiating antenna on 7 Hz is 468/Mhz = feet
468/.000007 = 66857142,85 ft/5280ft per mile = 12,662 MILES long!
At 21 Hz the dipole is 4,220 miles long.
Those signals aren't going anywhere to a "soul", even by the most warped
imagination on the planet.
marks...@yahoo.com
The Easter Bunny is the enforcer for a Godess , dont mess with the
bunny .
Smiler.
Applying a size 9 boot, hard, to the area where his brain should be *may*
have some beneficial effect.
--
Smiler
The godless one.
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to perfectly
fit the prejudices of their believers.
Caranx latus
You persist in reading words that are not in the texts that you quote.
Please contact me if you are in need of EFL (English as a first
language) classes. I'm getting tired of giving you instruction for
free.
EFL instruction is required, definitely.
> What have i said a billion times?
"That would be you."
<snip>
AllSeeing-I
fish Fish FISH... [face palm]
The words say what they say.
A scientist, one that has spent his entire life dealing with energy,
says: "He (the creator, God) applies it also to the masterpiece of His
creation--the human soul? I think it does."
What part of "I think it does" is so hard to comprehend?
The man obviously believes 1) there is a soul. 2) It was created. 3)
the soul is energy and 4) It cannot simply vanish because energy can
only be transformed.
Now, since science cannot explain exactly what life is or what
animates otherwise lifeless organic matter, one can assume that Braun
is correct in his hypothesis of the soul. Especially since we have
tons of ancient documents that back him up.
It is is energy that makes up the force that animates the body. That
force is commonly referred to as a "soul" or "spirit". Science says
that energy cannot vanish, it can only change. The chemical reactions
are a physical manifestation of that energy at work.
Which just so happens to be what the bible says. When we die we will
live on in a different dimension with a 'spiritual body'.
If anyone on this planet is qualified to make the correlation between
energy and the soul it is Braun.
But still the atheists deny it.
When you give them religious web sites they whine for science. When
you give them the most brilliant scientist on the planet, one that
deals directly with energy, they STILL whine.
I think the atheists just like to whine.
The best argument for God is everything needs instruction.
And God said (instructed) "Let there be Light"
>
> > What have i said a billion times?
>
> "That would be you."
>
> <snip>
Couldn't address the rest, eh? How come?
AllSeeing-I
Everything is a fraud if it does not say what you want it to say,
right?
Tim Miller
Naah, simply everything YOU post.
Caranx latus
>
> > > "But I think science has a real surprise for the skeptics. Science,
> > > for instance, tells us that nothing in nature, not even the tiniest
> > > particle, can disappear without a trace."
>
> > > "Now, if God applies this fundamental principle to the most minute and
> > > insignificant parts of His universe, doesn't it make sense to assume
> > > that He applies it also to the masterpiece of His creation--the human
> > > soul? I think it does. And everything science has taught me--and
> > > continues to teach me--strengthens my belief in the continuity of our
> > > spiritual existence after death. Nothing disappears without a trace".
>
> > > No matter gow you spin it, Braun, one of the greatest scientists on
> > > the planet, believes the soul will live on. He bases that idea on his
> > > findings with science. He worked with energy. So he must have an
> > > insight to this that the rest of us do not have.
>
> > You persist in reading words that are not in the texts that you quote.
> > Please contact me if you are in need of EFL (English as a first
> > language) classes. I'm getting tired of giving you instruction for
> > free.
>
> fish Fish FISH... [face palm]
>
> The words say what they say.
Indeed they do. They do not, however, say what you think they say.
> A scientist, one that has spent his entire life dealing with energy,
> says: "He (the creator, God) applies it also to the masterpiece of His
> creation--the human soul? I think it does."
>
> What part of "I think it does" is so hard to comprehend?
>
> The man obviously believes 1) there is a soul. 2) It was created. 3)
> the soul is energy and 4) It cannot simply vanish because energy can
> only be transformed.
#1 and #2 are correct. It's clear that van Braun said that. #3 and #4
are incorrect. He never said those things. Contact me for EFL lessons.
> Now, since science cannot explain exactly what life is or what
> animates otherwise lifeless organic matter, one can assume that Braun
> is correct in his hypothesis of the soul.
And here's where you jump the shark. At a very simple level, life
could be described as a collection of self-sustaining, self-
replication chemical reactions. It doesn't animate "otherwise
lifeless" organic matter. Life is an emergent property. Additionally,
even if science couldn't explain what life is, that does not mean that
some alternate undemonstrable hypothesis (the existence of souls) is
automatically true. When you can demonstrate that the word "soul"
actually refers to something real, then we can talk about that.
> Especially since we have
> tons of ancient documents that back him up.
>
> It is is energy that makes up the force that animates the body.
Forces are not composed of energy. This is gobbledegook. As is the
suggestion that there is a force that animates the body.
> That
> force is commonly referred to as a "soul" or "spirit". Science says
> that energy cannot vanish, it can only change. The chemical reactions
> are a physical manifestation of that energy at work.
>
> Which just so happens to be what the bible says. When we die we will
> live on in a different dimension with a 'spiritual body'.
The day you can demonstrate that there are such things as spiritual
bodies (the term doesn't even make sense), then you'll have something
worth talking about. Until then, you're just bloviating like you've
always done.
> If anyone on this planet is qualified to make the correlation between
> energy and the soul it is Braun.
He didn't know any more about the "soul" than you do. And you don't
*know* anything. There are things that you'd prefer to believe, sure,
and I wouldn't ever suggest that you not believe them, but it is also
incumbent on you to recognize the difference between the things that
you know and the things that you believe. You really don't seem to
have any clue where the dividing line is.
Not couldn't. More like didn't care enough to.
Ghod Dhammit
> Ghod Dhammit<gh...@att.net> wrote in news:3I2dnQTlsp-
> NmIPRnZ2dn...@supernews.com:
>
>>> Science does not have the ability to measure a lot of phenomenon that
>>> we know exists.
>>
>> We know that your idiocy exists, yet we have no means with which to
>> measure it.
>>
>>
>
> I have to agree with his statement about science on this point, I'm afraid.
My comment was about what he meant, not whether science can measure
everything right now.
> Science still doesn't know how to measure the radiation coming out of 8
> Baptists, holding hands to increase directivity and power output sort of
> like a steerable array antenna, while praying over the crap they're about
> to eat at a Hardees burger joint. Science also doesn't know how the
> Baptists can get whatever power output they're sending through the wiring,
> metal roof plates and rooftop air conditioner units, right over their
> table, either!
>
> We've tried measuring "prayer power" on several instruments between DC and
> Xrays and have yet to see the slightest wiggle of any meter on any
> frequency....making us think it's all bullshit, like Penn and Teller said
> it was.
>
> That Penn is a genius!
No doubt there.
Mark Evans
>
> - Show quoted text -
No. If you cite it it is most likely a fraud. Or over your reading
level. And I am still waiting for an aswer. Are you dishonest or a
fool? Any spoons bent yet?
Mark Evans
NHRA Fan
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 08:41:16 -0500, NHRA Fan<nhra_...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>
>> On 6/20/2010 7:09 AM, Ghod Dhammit wrote:
>>> On 6/19/2010 12:04 PM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies.
>>>
>>> It doesn't exist inside the body, nor does it exist outside the body.
>>> Rather like your intelligence.
>>
>> This is far from factual. As it was explained earlier, energy changes
>> but it is not destroyed, and so it is with energy in the form of
>> electrical patterns. Take energy in the electromagnetic spectrum;
>> it is transmitted and travels forever, only stopping when it is
>> absorbed, and this absorption simply changes it into another form
>> of energy.
>
> This, of course, has nothing to do with how a brain works.
And everything about provoking atheists to verbal violence,
exposing who the violent ones are.
So tell me freeloader, what do you think your pals have walked
into here ? Keep in mind that your response will be on the
record...
Ralph
Look "nitro", I've been here much longer than you and so I have 'walked'
into nothing. Perhaps you were the one doing the walking, albeit a
little wobbly after sniffing all of those fumes.
NHRA Fan
> On 6/21/2010 9:05 AM, NHRA Fan wrote:
>> On 6/20/2010 11:23 AM, Free Lunch wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 08:41:16 -0500, NHRA Fan<nhra_...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>>>
>>>> On 6/20/2010 7:09 AM, Ghod Dhammit wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/2010 12:04 PM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> So the soul could exist outside of the body once it dies.
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't exist inside the body, nor does it exist outside the body.
>>>>> Rather like your intelligence.
>>>>
>>>> This is far from factual. As it was explained earlier, energy changes
>>>> but it is not destroyed, and so it is with energy in the form of
>>>> electrical patterns. Take energy in the electromagnetic spectrum;
>>>> it is transmitted and travels forever, only stopping when it is
>>>> absorbed, and this absorption simply changes it into another form
>>>> of energy.
>>>
>>> This, of course, has nothing to do with how a brain works.
>>
>>
>> And everything about provoking atheists to verbal violence,
>> exposing who the violent ones are.
>>
>> So tell me freeloader, what do you think your pals have walked
>> into here ? Keep in mind that your response will be on the
>> record...
>
>
>
> Look "nitro", I've been here much longer than you
and apparently still no brighter for the efforts....
NHRA Fan
You will likely be awaiting an "aswer" for a very long time to
come...:<)))...
Ralph
> On 6/19/2010 6:40 PM, Ralph wrote:
>> On 6/19/2010 5:58 PM, NHRA Fan wrote:
>>> On 6/19/2010 11:39 AM, AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>>> On Jun 19, 7:21 am, Tim Miller<replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> AllSeeing-I wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 18, 5:18 pm, Tim Miller<replytonewsgr...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> marks542...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 3:54 pm, AllSeeing-I<allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> A Physicist states the empiricle evidence is what caused him to
>>>>>>>>> believe there is an after life.
>>>>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>>>>> Dr Werhner von Braun, who was first to conceptualize rocket
>>>>>>>>> science -
>>>>>>> BWA-ha-ha-ha!!
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> program - and later helped the U.S. rocket program, conceded some
>>>>>>>>> months before he died that his science shows life continues after
Perhaps you should. Read all of the words in the bible pertaining to the
book of life and think about your own life. From the evidence you have
presented in your posts, you are a long way from being an "automatic
qualifier":-)))).
> BTW, your name isn't timmy...timmy could answer
> for himself if he weren't such a wuss. However, you atheists have gained
> a reputation of being somewhat like the KKK in one respect,
> it takes 50 of you to do the job of one man, proving that there isn't a
> man present in any of you.
Little man, you have a lot to learn about newsgroups. When you make a
post it is to all of the group and any of the group may reply. If you
want to make it private, take it private! Understand....or have you
sniffed too much nitro?
> Take your op-inion and shove it up your rectum where it came from, Ralph.
Go fuck yourself little Christian.
Tim Miller
He has a lot to learn about *everything*.
>> Take your op-inion and shove it up your rectum where it came from, Ralph.
>
>
> Go fuck yourself little Christian.
>
He probably lets his priest do it for him.
AllSeeing-I
How can you deny such in your face statements by Braun?
He said "I think there is" a soul
He worked with energy his entire life. He says the soul is energy.
Energy can only be transformed.
That means the bible is correct.
Your thoughts, feelings, memories, and everything that makes you
uniquely different from everyone else that has ever been born or will
be born, will be transformed
We will all exist in a different state of existence.
Hope to see ya there d00d.
Ken
wrote:
> "We"? You have a gerbil up your ass again??
>
> LOL!-
ASSMan has that gerbil confused with Dimwitted Dave's dick
Tim Miller
>
> How can you deny such in your face statements by Braun?
>
Easy. YOU posted some unsubstantiated crap you *claim* is
a quote.
You lie and falsely attribute quotes on a daily basis.
You see where we're going with this?
Caranx latus
He, like you, is entitled to his opinions.
> He worked with energy his entire life. He says the soul is energy.
He never said that the soul is energy. That's just you reading words
that aren't actually there, [M]adape. Contact me for EFL instruction:
my rates are quite reasonable.
> Energy can only be transformed.
>
> That means the bible is correct.
I'm pretty sure that no one that wrote anything in the Bible had any
inkling what energy is.
> Your thoughts, feelings, memories, and everything that makes you
> uniquely different from everyone else that has ever been born or will
> be born, will be transformed
>
> We will all exist in a different state of existence.
That is true, but it won't be a state of existence in which there will
be such a thing as you or me.
> Hope to see ya there d00d.
Hopes are wonderful things. Absolutely no reason why hopes need to be
tied to reality.
AllSeeing-I
wrote:
Yeah. You like to blame others for your mistakes
Tim Miller
If I ever MADE any mistakes, I'd take the blame.
Unlike you, liar.
(inability to substantiate "quote", noted)
Free Lunch
wrote in alt.atheism:
Why would atheists post in alt.atheism? I have no idea.