• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of reincarnation

Sledge said:
This makes no sense. Science is asking simply for proof that something exists. You are now saying "I can't prove this exists, but you should accept it anyway." So no, we cannot accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence we're familiar with unless you start giving us good reasons to do so. So far, your evidence consists of pointing out that some people think reincarnation happens. This is useless.
Click to expand...
Well to be perfectly honest I don't think I'm going to convince you and have no need to do so. But by the same token I have never been convinced to not believe nor do I need to be. But the fact that more people on Earth believe in such things than don't belive makes it more than just "useless"
 
Resume said:
Where else would you like the rules of evidence relaxed? The courtroom? Hearsay about your fidelity towards your spouse/partner?
Click to expand...
No just solely Paranormal stuff as they fall outside the physical laws of nature. No one is suggesting relaxing evidence for court cases and fidelity..
 
What use does your idea of reinacarnation have? What can it predict? See, you're so bereft of any proof for your claim that you're reduced to arguing that the number of people who believe it means there must be something to it. History begs to differ with this approach.
 
gerg said:
No just solely Paranormal stuff as they fall outside the physical laws of nature. No one is suggesting relaxing evidence for court cases and fidelity..
Click to expand...

The "paranormal" falls outside the laws of physics you say?
 
gerg said:
But the fact that more people on Earth believe in such things than don't belive makes it more than just "useless"
Click to expand...

Now there we can agree. It is more than useless: it is dangerous because people suffering such delusions are more likely to make decisions based on those delusions than people who do not suffer those delusions. And those decisions are less likely to be good decisions than decisions based on reality.
 
gerg said:
Well to be perfectly honest I don't think I'm going to convince you and have no need to do so. But by the same token I have never been convinced to not believe nor do I need to be. But the fact that more people on Earth believe in such things than don't belive makes it more than just "useless"
Click to expand...


Ah, the old "Ten million flies can't be wrong" argument.

The fact that billions of people believe in nonsense doesn't make it right, merely sad.
 
Complexity said:
Ah, the old "Ten million flies can't be wrong" argument.

The fact that billions of people believe in nonsense doesn't make it right, merely sad.
Click to expand...
That's where you are confused. No one is suggesting it is "right". But the fact that there is such widespread belief makes it a possibility of more than mere "nonsense".
 
gerg said:
That's where you are confused. No one is suggesting it is "right". But the fact that there is such widespread belief makes it a possibility of more than mere "nonsense".[/QUOTE]

Actually no it doesn't. It just means the belief is widepread (so you claim) in much the same way that many believe evolution is the result of random chance. Which is incorrect.
Click to expand...
 
gerg said:
That's where you are confused. No one is suggesting it is "right". But the fact that there is such widespread belief makes it a possibility of more than mere "nonsense".
Click to expand...

Ah, so you are not claiming to have experience of ghosts and you do not think ghosts and reincarnation should be accepted.
Silly of us to have misunderstood you all this time.
Apologies.
 
gerg said:
That's where you are confused. No one is suggesting it is "right". But the fact that there is such widespread belief makes it a possibility of more than mere "nonsense".
Click to expand...


No, it doesn't.

The popularity of the belief has no bearing on the possibility of its being correct.
 
Resume said:
gerg said:
That's where you are confused. No one is suggesting it is "right". But the fact that there is such widespread belief makes it a possibility of more than mere "nonsense".[/QUOTE]

Actually no it doesn't. It just means the belief is widepread (so you claim) in much the same way that many believe evolution is the result of random chance. Which is incorrect.
Click to expand...
What I'm arguing is that there are many ideas that are feasible until they are proven wrong. And No I'm not talking about little known beliefs, I'm talking about beliefs that many people and cultures presently and historically believe.
Click to expand...
 
gerg said:
Once again I'll ignore the drivel and weak attempts at insult by the previous posters. Such immature posting seems all too common on this website. But I'll respond to your post by saying that if one can accept the theory of evolution based on the evidence of it, then one can accept life after death based on the evidence out there. ...:
Click to expand...

Such evidence as?

Popular superstition doesn't count as evidence in the scientific discipline I learned and practice.:)
 
kerikiwi said:
Ah, so you are not claiming to have experience of ghosts and you do not think ghosts and reincarnation should be accepted.
Silly of us to have misunderstood you all this time.
Apologies.
Click to expand...
No not quite..I'm saying it's not right to force the belief on other people in a way like "I'm right, you're wrong". One can choose like myself to accept the idea until proven otherwise, or choose not to accept the idea for whatever reason. That's free will for you. But the fact remains a significant number of people are exercising that free will to believe in such phenomena regardless off what Science suggests, as they see such phenomena as seperate from our physical laws of nature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom