OT - Scientific proof that there is no afterlife!

Tigbit · #1 August 18th, 2003, 07:10 AM

Yo, Fyron!

There was an invisible, flying pink hippo named Daisy that used to hang out at the bar-b-ques that the old Moderators of the Calgary Theories echo had every week in summer. It was quite a few years ago but does that count?

Fyron · #2 August 18th, 2003, 07:19 AM

Damn, there goes that theory

(almost

). Stupid hippos...

j/k

Tigbit · #3 August 18th, 2003, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Damn, there goes that theory (almost ). Stupid hippos... j/k

C'mon I'm trying to support your Pink Elephant theory! Some thanks.

Fyron · #4 August 18th, 2003, 07:36 AM

Will · #5 August 18th, 2003, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by General Woundwort:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
What others? Please bring me some pictures from these other dimensions of yours. There is no proof of the existence of other dimensions, only a plethora of hypothesis (no theories, as there is no proof or concrete evidence of them).

If there were a picture, what would it look like? How could you tell?

Seriously, there is of course no direct evidence for hyperdimensions. But the mathematics of cosmology and quantum physics certainly point in that direction. And as for the standard of "direct evidence" itself, we don't have "direct evidence" for a lot of things (sub-atomic particles, "dark matter", etc) that are generally accepted. Heck, what "direct evidence" do I have for you other than these Posts (which are nothing more than electrons in cyberspace and my monitor)?

I think we all need to face the facts here... Fyron is really a rather sophisticated Eliza program that was unleashed on an unsuspecting internet. Which is why threads he gets involved in never end unless they are shut down or everyone else stops posting

General Woundwort · #6 August 18th, 2003, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tigbit:
Unfortunately that's exactly the way history is. Even science is not totally immune to the deliberate inacuracies that plague historical study. People will only write what supports their view.

This doesn't explain why people change their minds...

[ August 18, 2003, 09:53: Message edited by: General Woundwort ]

Ruatha · #7 August 18th, 2003, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Slick:

quote:
Originally posted by Jack Simth:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Your assumption: there is a soul.

Everything that exists is matter or energy (or something like anti-matter, which is equivalent for purposes of this post). But, matter is energy, and energy is matter. All waves of energy have particle-like properties, such as a mass equivalent property, though it is normally infintesimal. All particles of matter have wave-like properties, though those are normally infintesimal (except for very, very fast moving particles, such as electrons, which are particles, but act more like waves than particles). Thoughts are energy on a quantum level, which exist because of the properties of the neural cells in the brain (which are mass). So, if the soul exists, it is either energy or matter (or one of those other things (such as anti-matter), which are equivalent. Either way, it would have a mass. This is not saying that the post by Ed means anything, just saying that the theoretical soul has a mass value. Of course, proving that the soul actually exists is a much more complex issue. And keep in mind that any arguments akin to "the [holy scripture/person of choice] says we have a soul, so we have a soul" are laughable at best. Any reasoning being can do better than that, and all humans are reasoning beings.

There have been cases where humans were weighed as they died; it was found that weight was lost at the instant of death. Does this constitute proof that the soul exists? No - but it does qualify as supporting evidence. The existance of the soul is not an unreasonable assumption; it is impossible to disprove at the present time, and there is some supporting evidence for it.
Actually, I know of this study. It was eventually determined that the loss of weight (a very very small amount) was due to the the Last bit of air escaping from the lungs at death as the pressure equalizes with ambient. Interesting study, though.

Slick.

It was a study performed in 1909 (IIRC??) and even the author stated that it was a questionable result.
The result varied, between 9-47 grams I belive and on some cases none, and in most cases they didn't measure at the instant of death, I think they managed that in 1 or 2 cases, otherwise it was pre- and post-death measurements.
It is commonly said that it was a loss of 21 grams (again I'm not quite certain) but that was only in one case.
No validating study has been performed.

Will look for the author/study later, this is written from long memory....