Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
Depends what you seed your query with.Pretty intense one though. Aren't automated response robots generally a little less coked up?
Depends what you seed your query with.Pretty intense one though. Aren't automated response robots generally a little less coked up?
Coke, presumably.Depends what you seed your query with.
I want him to dig up that "research" of the dudes that weighed a person about to die and noted a tiny portion of a gram he lost on his last breath.You know that's an unfair question because everyone "understands" that spirits are transparent.
I want him to dig up that "research" of the dudes that weighed a person about to die and noted a tiny portion of a gram he lost on his last breath.You know that's an unfair question because everyone "understands" that spirits are transparent.
21 grams wasn’t it?I want him to dig up that "research" of the dudes that weighed a person about to die and noted a tiny portion of a gram he lost on his last breath.
Yup, they say they weighed a soul. It couldn't have been any biological factor.
Sam Parnia's contributions...
William Crookes was a prominent British chemist and physicist...
If you think it is, then it's your job to explain why—including addressing the existing skeptical responses to these offerings. Arguments involving those personalities do not suddenly lose their rebuttals simply because you wish to raise the issue all over again.maybe it's empirical evidence!
William Crookes was a prominent British chemist and physicist, known for his investigations into mediumistic phenomena and spiritualism in the late 19th century.
I'm just citing maybe evidenceIf you think it is, then it's your job to explain why—including addressing the existing skeptical responses to these offerings. Arguments involving those personalities do not suddenly lose their rebuttals simply because you wish to raise the issue all over again.
If you can't establish it as anything more than "maybe" evidence then no one is obliged to take it up. You wish to establish Crookes, for example, as an eminent scientist whose conclusions regarding spiritism should be given attention. Crookes lived in Victorian times. There is a wealth of critical treatment of his claims. If you cannot demonstrate awareness of that and explain why those existing analyses are in error, you deserve no attention.I'm just citing maybe evidence
No more so than the last time you proposed them. Stop repeating yourself and address the discussion.Maybe Allan Kardec's books are evidence!
No.You must refute this evidence!
Don't recall exactly as it was a laughable footnote in science done by not quite notable researchers.21 grams wasn’t it?
There is a song about it.
(Link irony is ironic