₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
I dunno how many you want me to write what evidence is. Are you reading the responses at all?




It's a sign of frustration when all you are doing is being defensive. I haven't done any of the things you accuse me of so you clearly must have something going on with you.

I ask you again, are information not facts?

Please answer this or define the word, information

LordReed:
Dude can't even tell a joke from serious stuff. Why are you getting worked up man?

It's difficult to understand Buda. I know that from experience. here on this board.

Let tell you this and it would surprise you.

Buda is in the know of some of the things I am discussing here, but he is pretending not to .know.

But my reaction is because I suspect he is deliberately misconstruing my statements. I it is slowing things down for me to get out the rest of what I have already prepared, since I have to expend energy to explain things I shouldn't be wasting my time on

[quote author=LordReed post=113606344][/quote]Evidence is the sort of information or facts........
Don't remove the word, information, it is still evidence

LordReed:
LoLz! Are you assuming that the Wright brothers were the first to try heavier than air flight? People had been grappling with the problem centuries before the Wright brothers were born.

Never said so ,but nobody expected them to succeed with it ,as scientists already made the public believe that such ventures are only pursued by deluded folks.

Please read the full article and have some laugh reading reactions of some journalist and some scientists.

LordReed:
Dude you are expressing frustration. Several times I wrote that I am waiting for your evidence but some how you just gloss over it and now you are showing signs of frustration and I dunno why.

I ask you again what evidence. You can't read the information I have provided and still go on to ask for evidence.

Are information not evidence? Dispute those one's and let's move ahead

I can't give you scientific evidence. I am not in a position to do so.

Anyone asking for scientific evidence for a proposition is not doing the right thing.

I am not frustrated in anyway. I am not interested in his subjectivity.

What should I do with the statement that Jesus is a scientists?

I have said I am not interested in his poetry. He should keep it himself and not force it on me. I don't want learn metaphor and similes from him.

LordReed:
LoLz. You obviously either don't properly read stuff or you don't understand it. What I quoted has this clearly written:

"Is the Airship Possible?" with the remark, "That depends, first of all, on whether we are to make the requisite scientific discoveries." He ends with the remark "the construction of an aerial vehicle ... which could carry even a single man from place-to-place at pleasure requires the discovery of some new metal or some new force."

From someone who was not aware of the work of the Wright brothers it was a reasonable position.

If he was not aware,why the scientific explanation then .
And when he became fully aware , what support did he give, nothing. They never wanted to have anything to do with him.

Please read the link I sent. There's further details of what actually transpired.

You can't conclude with one part of the story.

The main reason I brought the story is not being addressed.

budaatum:
You mean they have not rigourously trained their senses to distinguish between the two? I guess I need not mention science and it's methods then, should I.

Triple, forgive me. I'll await you telling my Lord what this method of yours is.

Poof that you and Reed never read very well my first presentation. I had mentioned that in the final part I will provide demonstrations and proofs for proper understanding .
But since you think you know those already, then , I give you my full permission to explain to the public how to distinguish between the two.
I said before I don't know it all.
Thank you.

LordReed:
A quick response before a fuller one:

On the impossibility of a flying machine
Newcomb is famously quoted as having believed it impossible to build a "flying machine". He begins an article titled "Is the Airship Possible?" with the remark, "That depends, first of all, on whether we are to make the requisite scientific discoveries." He ends with the remark "the construction of an aerial vehicle ... which could carry even a single man from place-to-place at pleasure requires the discovery of some new metal or some new force."[18]

In the October 22, 1903, issue of The Independent, Newcomb made the well-known remark that "May not our mechanicians ... be ultimately forced to admit that aerial flight is one of the great class of problems with which man can never cope, and give up all attempts to grapple with it?",[19][20] He suggested that even if a man flew, he could not stop. "Once he slackens his speed, down he begins to fall. Once he stops, he falls as a dead mass." Newcomb had no concept of an airfoil. His "aeroplane" was an inclined "thin flat board". He therefore concluded that it could never carry the weight of a man.

Newcomb was particularly critical of the work of Samuel Pierpont Langley, who claimed that he could build a flying machine powered by a steam engine, but whose initial efforts at flight were public failures.[21] In 1903, however, Newcomb was also saying,

"Quite likely the 20th century is destined to see the natural forces which will enable us to fly from continent to continent with a speed far exceeding that of a bird. But when we inquire whether aerial flight is possible in the present state of our knowledge; whether, with such materials as we possess, a combination of steel, cloth and wire can be made which, moved by the power of electricity or steam, shall form a successful flying machine, the outlook may be altogether different."[22]

Newcomb was not aware of the Wright Brothers' efforts, whose work was done in relative obscurity (Santos-Dumont flew his 14-bis in Paris only in 1906) and apparently unaware of the internal combustion engine's better power-to-weight ratio. When Newcomb heard about the Wrights' flight in 1908, he was quick to accept it.[23]

Newcomb favored the development of rotating wing (helicopters) and airships that would float in the air (blimps). Within a few decades, Zeppelins regularly transported passengers between Europe and the United States, and the Graf Zeppelin circumnavigated the Earth.[24]

This story of yours has been proven to be a lie. The re several articles on this, but of course you won't see those one's.

Even if it were true, what about the scientific explanation he gave to debunked the idea that metal Can't fly.

What about the reaction of other scientists

You have ignored the main reason I brought out that story in the first place.

I can now conclude that while I take my time to read everything you sent so as to respond appropriately, you have not obliged me this in return.

It has shown in most of your replies as they do not have any bearing to what I have argued.

I had announced that I have just evidence ,not scientific evidencr, which I have tried to provide in form of information as support.

You have consistently ignored them to still ask for evidence. Haba

LordReed:
You are one who has been harping on scientific evidence. I have not for once told you to give me scientific evidence.

You're in denial. You never asked for scientific evidence, but when asked to indicate the evidence you're seeking.for ,you did nothing.
I already mentioned what I have has evidence; information .,logical truths Fault those one's if you think they are not good enough.

You can't pretend now because we know ourselves here for you to think I don't know the sort if evidence you wanted me to provide.



I don't have scientific evidence. I don't need scientific evidence all the time to know certain things. That would be misapplication of science..

Common sense and simple logic is what it takes most times to arrive at certain conclusion.

LordReed:
You hear triplechoice, I read it in a book or them say is not evidence. LoLz.

Which book ? You have been the one replying on what neuroscience says about who you are and not me. Anything I referenced is to let you see that I not speaking from my position alone.
I know what science says about the human being ,but I have not completely accepted all of that because at this time there's no strong scientific backing for such conclusions.

Neuroscientist admit to this, but you seem to know more than the people whose science you subscribe to, without carrying out any research of your own.

LordReed:
You are one who has been harping on scientific evidence. I have not for once told you to give me scientific evidence.

Me or you. I mentioned in my first presentation that I have evidence, not scientific evidence. Please go back and read it. It is clearly stated.
You are the one who says that you have scientific evidence backing the theory that mind has emerged from matter which you have failed to provide.

Severally I have asked you to indicate what sort of evidence you want from me,but you have ignored

budaatum:
And neither is I read it in a book or them say, please inform him.

I never said logic is evidence. I said there are logical truths which can be taken as evidence, not scientific evidence.

You and Lordreed seem not to know the difference between scientific evidence and just evidence. They are not the same.

Evidence can be a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid, while scientific evidence is evidence that serves to support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis.


Have I been proposing a scientific theory? No

What I have been doing is to provide a body of information which I am exposed to, to support what I have come to accept as truth.

I have not been proposing a scientific theory or hypothesis since I am not a scientist.

But your subjective understanding of science seems to blind you to this fact

Please educate yourself very well before trying to educate others.

@Lordreed,
I will reply all of responses later, but in the main time here below is Link to the Wright brothers story
https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/Aviations_Attic/They_Wouldnt_Believe/They_Wouldnt_Believe_the_Wrights_Had_Flown.htm

budaatum:
What you really mean is sometimes the mind fails us, which you then assume makes it necessary for you to abandon your mind temporarily and apply creativity. And by creativity you mean make crap up and believe it.

You know my thoughts on such non-mind use Triple. Such people end up believing like ignorant Adam that acquiring knowledge is what kills so they'd rather remain enslaved.

There are certain cognitive abilities we all possess, but which most of us are simply unaware of or don't know how they operate.

These abilities are beyond mind, that is, they are not due to brain functioning.

Your brain, (which helps ro modulate your conscious mind) compared to your true self which I have described as a force field of energy, as a limited perception of things in its environment.

Your true self has a complete overview of
every single thing in it's environment, but when you're not aware of who you are, how then is it possible to operate from that state consciously? You simply cannot. Remember those children raised by animals?

How ever, most people even though not aware of their true self , are still able to operate from that state unconsciously sometimes, but they can't be sure of what they get because brains can replay a memory of something in their heads, which they then, mistake for a revelation of something from God or whatever.

That is what has happened to the people you're referring to who come up with crap in their heads and call it creativity. They lack the proper guidance or training to know what is real from what is a figment of their imagination.

You find such persons mostly in Churches masquerading as Prophets , and elsewhere as seers and psychics.

However, this is not to say that they don't sometimes get it right , but what they produce is still highly influenced by brains that can deceive them, so it is mostly guesswork for them but which they will never admit.

When we go to sleep every night, our conscious mind is at abeyance ,which then enables our true self to operate unhindered, by having it's own experiences; seeing and knowing things that the conscious mind is unable to do while awake. The result of these experiences is what our brains record as dreams using the images already embedded in it so we can remember what we did while our bodies rest

I have already shared a link on this thread of people getting ideas from dreams to demonstrate that dreams are not just your brains processing thoughts in your heads while you sleep.

budaatum:
You are very amusing. I noticed you said you've influenced people with what you say. I see you doing it here.

First you started by claiming science, the use of my senses, is fallible, which I admit, then you ask me to accept what someone injected into your sense of hearing as so just because you have.

Forgive me for trusting my senses a lot more.


You use your senses of course, if you want to know at least, or you may not bother with sense use and just believe it because you were told it, but forgive me if I call you Adam. I am, of course, Eve.


Maybe you'd get it if I present it to you in another way.

If your daughter of about 4, suddenly looks into your eyes and tells you "daddy, I am a boy".....

Think carefully. Is it not more logical someone is telling your daughter stories and you are not using your mind?

Sorry triple. I have been rude.

It's why I mentioned you need to confirm that what you hear is from her is something she couldn't have possibly known or heard from some one else. Further questioning should reveal that.

There are. some guild lines to follow in asking those questions to make her talk more or you think of how to go about it yourself.

Sometimes, logic fails us, which makes
it then necessary to abandon it temporarily and apply creativity; outside how we used to think of certain things

budaatum:
Are they not discounted, as in found unworthy of consideration because they lack credibility, precisely because they are unreliable and stories, Triple?

The documented ones verified by Dr Tucker and his mentor, Ian Stevenson have never been discounted. You can search for their works on the net to find out what both have done and judge for yourself.

Before I stumbled on their works, I already was exposed to people who had no problem sharing their past life stories with me. Apart of the young girl I mentioned in my presentation, my childhood friend was constantly inundating me with stories of his past life from dreams which always end up true. Others have at different times recounted the same to me.

So the question now, would be ,how do I know if they were not just making up those stories?

If your daughter of about 4 , suddenly looks into your eyes and tell you " daddy, I know you before. I was your girlfriend in unilag But in final year, I died in a car accident" and then mentions her name and ask if you still remember ?

If you confirm all of these information to be true, and also confirm that there. is no way she would have known what she has revealed about the two of you, then it is something you shouldn't discount as just stories, except you a chronic sceptic who doubts everything even when presented with evidence.

If there's no outer kind of confirmation, then forget it. But hardly would you find a child of that age coming up with a make up story to deceive you. If that were to happen, take her to see a doctor immediately. Something is wrong.

Cases that were busted on the net, were stories made up by the people who pushed them to public space. Those stories could not be verified, with the people involved, later confessing that they lied

Some consideration is after all done to check if the stories have credibility which they are found to lack

.

The ones verified by Dr Tucker and his mentor have never been found to lack credibility. I am sure you never heard about them before. Even skeptics are silent about those ones.

The have developed a reliable method to investigate reincarnation stories. It has helped them to expose so many frauds who have tried to deceive the public. Some of the fake stories exposed that you may have heard of, is due to them. I already shared a link. You can follow that for a start.

HellVictorinho4:
In other words, you deprived me because of my attitude which is not less valuable than yours.


Your money doesn't make you a greater person....tell the whole world I said that!


If any bastard thinks it's funny, let the bastard retain such bastard thoughts till I change my lines.

Take your wailings to the people who deprived you. How is it possible for me to deprive you of something not in my control?

You're nothing thinking straight. Have you started doing drugs again?

HellVictorinho4:
Of course.


The person that is deprived of something that can't be retrieved doesn't forget but the person that deprives does.


A proof that the world is in shambles.

Nobody has deprived you of anything
It is your attitude that has deorived you of what you deserve .

Change your attitude and what you deserve will come to you without fighting for it.

If you don't learn from your mistakes and move on with your life, but to dwell on the past , you will remain where you are. You will remain where your attention is focused. That's a fact.

I will not give you shishi. Focus your attention on your life and make plans that will bring you success . Thats how you can move ahead and not by coming to nairaland to cry wolf all the time for help no one here is ready to render you, since most people here can already see through you.

Good luck

HellVictorinho4:
State where you exist before reincarnation after dying so that I will write a letter seeking its dwellers to settle our case

I don't have any case with you to settle. You should focus your attention on your own on life. It is your responsibility and not mine. I don't owe you anything, so stop mentioning me..

LordReed:
Those children who spent formative years in habitats other than human show deep psychological effects that are either hard to undo or even currently impossible to undo. If according to the current understanding of child development the brains neuroplasticity in young children is harder to undo when they are past certain ages then the phenomenon is well explained. However if the idea that there is some external thing producing the mind then simple exposure to new information should just cause a change since the only thing evolving is this external bit.

This is not the reason I brought that in. It was to show that ones environment shapens their personality. The reality of your bodily environment you entered at birth, is why you have grown up to believe you're the same as the body. Your body is not the real you. It is an illusion, and we know that illusion can influence what we think of ourselves..

The only thing you think is evolving is what you can see; the external part. If theres anything evovling separately with it which you cant see , you won't know. You can't know what others know that you don't know.

Why do you imagine dreams are not the brain functioning normally? Why are the brain patterns of sleeping people a pattern that can consistently be tracked? If dreams are external to the brain why are they showing as a pattern in the brain?

You have now turned to strawman me? Where did I say dreams are not the brains functioning normally? Without brains how do you know you have had a dream. I never mentioned that dreams are external to brains. How can that be?
The reason I brought dreams was to answer the question I raised in my first presentation, that there are alternative sources that one can use to peer further into reality to see things as they are when scientific instrumentation fails.. In the link I shared were inventions gotten through dreams.

You can also employ the dreamn method if you know how to go about it, but it must be something you're familiar with and working on. That's what leads to quicker results

LordReed:
Evidence required.

What kind of evidence ? Specify it. I already mentioned the kind of evidence I would be providing.

LordReed:
No. I have concluded that no sufficient has been presented so I cannot acknowledge its existence. People who believe they are aware of this pressure have the onus to present sufficient evidence. If it is being described as something else then why do you just point to the thing it is been already described as?

Pressure may not be the proper word. Thoughts triggers brain response if not hypnotism won't work Another person can send thoughts to your brain to control your body to act on such thoughts. I have demonstrated this myself. But I have avoided doing it again since it is not respecting another person individual space. I have a childhood friend who was very good at that ,but we have lost contact so dont know where he is now to
confirm if he is still doing it. Even you ,yourself can do it once you learn how it's done.

Again it's all about the evidence. You cannot find a person with an affected brain that doesn't have an affected mind. This is why medicines work.

. You don't have all the information. There are individuals with brain defects without behavior impairment and vice versa. There's an index case of an American whose brain scan result is published on the net. You can search for that.

What was the disclaimer?

It's more of a warning. People act on what they think of themselves. So if you're not sure ,don't make people to accept a sense of self that is not true which may distort how they should normally view themselves.
Here is it


Recently, a leading neuroscientist noted in Nature:

“The general public might think that this goal has already been achieved; when they read that a behavior is associated with some part of the brain, they take that statement as an explanation. But most neuroscientists would agree that, with a few notable exceptions, the relationship between neural circuits and behavior has yet to be established.“

Has such an experiment been rigorously conducted then rejected? Find me such a study if you can.

I sent one already on reincarnation, but obviously didn't read it ,since you have not commented on the article but to refer me to a skeptical website which doesn't directly address anything. I want to read your own thoughts and not the thoughts of others who are trying to come up with conjecture to explain away what the have not directly experienced themselves.

There are several problems with these reincarnation stories. One, the sample size is too small. You cannot reliable test somethings with certain small sample sizes. Two, some of those involved are unreliable. Not because they are lying but because there isn't adequate documentation of the events so recollection gets jumbled. Read here for more on that: https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4612

And are you aware that neuroscience is also hammered with the same problem of small sample sizes?

Because some reincarnation stories are unrealible,, then the realible ones should be discounted? There's enough documentation, but you're just echoing the thoughts of the skeptical website, obviously controlled by atheists who are trying to explain away something which threatens their world view.

Dr Tucker's mentor , Ian stevenson,had garnered enough documentation before he died . Tucker has worked on that and has also provided his on own documentation on the cases he has worked on . All of these were revealed in the link I shared with you.

Your skeptical website deliberately avoided mentioning Dr Tucker an the work of his mentor for obvious reason. They don't want you to see the information which renders their explanation invalid, but instead were filling your mind with other reincarnation stories which were obviously fraud from the word go to discredit the documentated one that has been verified. The behavior of the writer on that skeptical website is not different from certain religious leaders who try to keep the faithful in line once an information comes out that threatens the lies they have
been feeding their ignorant members. I expect you not to fall for that kind of thing.

So ,please go back, read the article and also search for Dr Tucker, and Jan Stevenson works on the net and do your own independent assessment.

I describe as nebulous anything that cannot be adequately described which is the position most dualists find themselves.

I am not a dualist . The word is a negative reference for those believed to hold views about the self that are not logical or scientifically explained. If scientists were to discover that consciousness has not emerged from matter would they accept to be called dualist? Not of course. I know what I know

We aren't. Which is why we keep searching. It is folk who claim to have answers they cannot support with evidence we can ignore.

Yes we aren't. But at least I have tried to come with with an explanation and not inundating you with quotes from religious books.

Produce the evidence and we will come to terms with it. It's that simple.

I have tried to do that. I already mentioned that I have logical evidence not scientific. The re are truths that are self evident which doesn't need scientific evidence.

Of course they are slow to respond. If you took everything hook, line and sinker all the time you'll leave yourself open to scammers. And science has had its share of scammers as I assume you know.

They won't ever respond for some because of the limitations of the scientific method. For instance, scientists can't process reincarnation data .The scientific method is not suited for that at the moment.

Current mind theories makes us understand that consciousness can't exist independent of the physical body, so how, for instance, do they start considering reincarnation? That is the problem.

Again a strawman. I didn't say it was close to animal or human consciousness, I said they would have their own form of consciousness.

Everything shouldn't be strawman. Explain how this form of consciousness would operate different from that of humans, if not , you're still guilty

I don't think scientists dismiss it because it is a religious idea. I think they dismiss it because there is no where to start a reasonable investigation from. Many of the so called paranormal practitioners turn out to be frauds. Even clinical analysis of some supposedly paranormal powers turned out to be no better than chance.

Scientists are unable to investigate paranormal claims. That's it.
Nearly all ,if not ,all of those who have come out to display anything are frauds. Those who can do such display would never ever engage in such open display as it is against the ethics which guides their practice.



Ok.

The sports betting thing? I thought you wanted to illustrate something LoLz.

LordReed:
I didn't even quote him for you to say I misquoted him. It seems you didn't read the article yourself.

He said: Astrocytes, not neurons, are the cells that determine blood flow by having feet on each vessel and opening and closing them to provide local neurons with blood (see post on astrocytes).

By the time the blood flow is measured in the region of the 80,000 neurons, signaling in milliseconds has occurred in large circuits around the entire brain, none of which is picked up at all. There is no way, really, to say that the mental event is correlated with this voxel (blood flow in the region of 80,000 neurons), instead of one of the thousands of small events that cannot be measured. Also, it is not known how the astrocytes changing blood flow really reflects the action of neurons.

Meaning fMRI is not measuring the activity of neurons. My point was if fMRI is not measuring the activity of neurons then he should be able to explain why the fMRI scans can predict political affiliation. I never mentioned anything about reading minds or thoughts so I dunno where you got that from.

His argument is that brain scanners can't show thoughts ,and not that they can't read any other thing. I agree with him. If brain scanners Can't show thoughts, how then do you conclude that they have emerged from brain, matter, and not elsewhere.

The wetness of water which you have used before as comparison can be scientifically explained . We can see how the molecules of water has combined to emerged it. This you can't do for mind

LoLz! You are so invested in strawmanning what I say. Nowhere did I say the article concluded that brain scans make neuroscientists know individual subjective experiences. Kindly reread what I wrote and respond only to what I wrote and stop strawmanning it.

What I wrote again: No single part of the brain is responsible for the mind.

Which was an answer to the question: what part of the brain is responsible for the human subjective experience. I referred you to 2 articles, one on political leanings and the other on the nature of consciousness. It was the one on the nature of consciousness that I was referring to in my response. A quote from the article: Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, resulting from the communication of information across all its regions [b]and cannot be reduced to something residing in specific areas that control for qualities like attention, hearing, or mem

But the article on scientists being able to predict anything is misleading. It is just confirming ideology after the fact.

Before you start accusing me of avoiding anything, show me where you previously asked me this question.

Nevertheless here is my answer: Mind is the sum total of all thoughts both conscious and unconscious as well the processes that give rise to thoughts and the information required for thoughts to be processed.

Where has thoughts that form mind come from ?
What is brain? Please define it.

You are the one who has been declaring what neuroscientists position is.

It is one thing to mention their conclusions from how I understand it and another thing to talk confidently as if I am a neuroscientist.

LordReed:
Lemme illustrate. The sun was discovered to be a fusion reaction in the 1930s, it would have been silly to say that before that discovery people experiencing the heat of the sun should not confidently conclude that the sun is hot because they didn't know how the sun functioned. Similarly the conclusions we can see stemming from the results we have now about the mind can be confidently stated based on the preponderance of evidence. What is not in evidence is what cannot be confidently stated and one such thing is that mind has an external source to the body and brain.

You're unwilling to see things from my own position . If you have done so ,by now you would have understood what I have been trying to establish; that there are truths about the world we live in, which others know so well, but which those in the main body of science are ignorant of, and even if they know it, or it is reveal to them, they won't acknowledge it immediately because of the way they are trained to think

I will give you an instance in history . When the Wright brothers were experimenting with their Craft, the aeroplane, and succeeded in test running it for the first time, scientists in the main body of science immediately came out to discredit it.They said it happened by chance due to strong wind .

On what grounds were they dismissing it? It was based on the scientific theory as at that time , that "nothing heavier than air can float
on it" This was accepted as "fact" in physics during that peroid. But the wright brothers knew more than the scientists as they later proved it.

Added to this , was the arrogant attitude of scientists, especially those in the main body of science ,that no one else , apart from them can understand and apply the scientific method to discover and establish truths in our world. This attitude has not changed .It's even worse now with the cancel culture thats common everywhere..

And it will surprise you that further successes by the Wright brothers still did not convince scientists, with eminent scientists granting interviews on national TV and elsewhere, to debunk the invention as not scientifically possible, thereby ending up "hypnotising" the general American public scientifically .


So by the time the wright brothers stablised their invention, and were flying everywhere, the "hypnotized" Americans did not take notice and see the evidence, with some of them concluding that what they saw flying over them ,was a balloon that was painted to look like metal.

One can only imagine what would have happened if it was now that, according to TenQ, scientists in the main body of sciences are operating like cultist. They certainly would have raised an uproar to get them arrested for trying to endanger public safety with the "nonsense" that is not scientifically possible. Some persons have argued that the cult like behavior of scientists in the main body of sciences, is why we have had not much progressed beyond, cars, airplanes phones, computers and the rest ,which were inventions from Long time ago.

So my point is this, dont think that non scientists can't know better than trained scientists. They certainly can ,but may not come up with scientific explanation for what they know. Sometimes ,when the come up with evidence, it is often ignored as such evidence would have threatened other theories scientists are currently working with. That's is it.

The best they can come up with is logical explanation which doesn't require scientific backing all the time. You should judge what such person have to say based on the correctness of their logic and not ask for scientific evidence

That's is why it doesn't make sense to demand from religious people evidence for their belief, which is faith based, that only requires common sense and logic to debunk

Yes ,because of this, I can confidently state what I know as fact ,especially if I have had a direct experience of what I am talking about, while you , on the other hand,, might just be stating what you know based on what you have read from conclusions made by neuroscientist, without any experience of your own to confirm it.

That is why I going to ask you to do this, use your own self as demonstration that what you have accepted from neuroscience is true and not because they are experts nd you think they can't go wrong.

Hopefully you won't simply state it, you'll present the evidence along with it.

I believe I have in a way answered this. I am not a trained scientists, so I am not in a position to give you scientific evidence, but logical evidence which you should accept from me. I don't expect you not to know what is acceptable as evidence in the sciences ,and also ,those qualified to give it. Even scientists themselves have had their evidence ignored or rejected not minding the strength of such evidence.

This is not an appropriate analogy. What is more analogous is if any of the critical parts of you phone get destroyed or taken out, your phone ceases to function. But unlike phones not everything in the human body can be resuscitated or replaced, especially the critical ones like the neurons in our brains which when they deteriorate, never get replaced and leads to all sorts of problems later in life.

You should have looked at the sense of it and not whether it is appropriate or not. My point was this, if the body is damaged beyond repair, consciousness can no longer express itself through it, and then vacates it . But for you , you cant observe consciousness to know what has happened to it after the body is damaged , hence you have concluded it expired with the body. You're unwilling to for once see it from my position, and that's exactly the problem.. You want me to consider it from your viewpoint at all times, which I have done severally, while you on your part is religiously sticking to your own.

I'd like you to find one example where any of the the systems I mentioned have catastrophically failed as in completely gone and the person came back without that functioning organ.

Providing such example can't convince you since you already made you mind on what to accept. However, there's something close I can present. Some persons have had severe brain damage and went into coma. During that state it was observed that their brains was disconnected from their bodies which made it impossible for them act on any instructions passed through the device their care givers using to communicate with them; They received the message ,but were unable to make their bodies move using their brains .

What this has proven, even though scientists have interpreted it differently, is that the brain is a device consciousness uses to control the body to manifest its intentions objectively, and not that brains is what has emerged consciousness.( You have argued before that the wetness of water can't be separated from the water it emerged from) If the brain and body is completely damaged ,then, consciousness detaches itself from it as we have seen in those who went into coma. Except you can scientifically explain how consciousness has emerge from matter, then you can't dispute my position that consciousness detaches from the body when the body system which keeps it on collapses.

Wait for the evidence.

please define the kind of evidence or modify the ,word, evidence.

Because that is what the evidence suggests and no contrary evidence for an "elsewhere" has been given. Unless you have it up your sleeve.

Suggests, meaning evidence is subjected to interpretation. Scientists have in the past interpreted evidence wrongly and they still do.

The confidence is pretty high at this point given the preponderance of evidence while at best there is very little support of an "external" source for the mind. And I am being generous.

You not being generous Reed, . let me tease you now . You may have been scientifically hypnotized and don't even know it, and now speaking from that state.

LoLz. Nothing irrational about what has been discovered so far. The evidence is stark. Meanwhile we are yet to see any evidence of nebulous spirits, souls or whatever else you'll like to call it.

I have not dwell on spirits or soul. Those terms and what they reference may be something religious people have misinterpreted. I said we are a product of pure energy, and this is not far from the truth. The argument is ,if this energy has emerged separately. So focus on me and not what others are saying.

No. The fMRI is not scanning thoughts so it doesn't fit with your analogy. What the scans revealed are brain patterns that so closely correlated with certain ideologies it became relatively easy to reliably predict what those ideologies are before they were known. This is not mind reading or thought scanning.

Read your article again.



Waiting.[/quote]

LordReed:
This is not the current position of neuroscience. This is the position of a single neuroscientist and while that doesn't invalidate his concerns it puts him at odds with the evidence on ground, to which the appropriate response in science is to do a study that supports your own claims to compare evidence. The other study I point you to showed that political leanings can be reliably predicted by fMRI scans so if someone says fMRI is not scanning neurons then he has to go do a study to explain why fMRI scans can provide the basis for such reliable predictions for example. .

You said it's not the current position , then tell us the current one. But remember you, yourself ,are not a neuroscientist, so whatever you state should find support in what is currently known in neuroscience.
The article is not the singular opinion of neuroscientist,but represents the general opinion of most neuroscientist, with the exception of a view. Apart from the authors own opinion, supported by what is currently know in that field,there were citations and statements from others which he referenced. It appears you didn't take your time to read. He explained that brain scanners can at this time read blood flow in a region of neurons and other brain activity, but doesn't read thoughts or mind. But you have misquoted him.

Secondly he says no single region of the brain can explain the human subjective experience, the other study I pointed you to answers this. .

You're again guilty here of not reading very well the article you referenced
The brain scanners only fairly revealed "brain signatures" which correlates with the subjective experience, but failed to let us see what subjective experience has led to their production, hence the researchers highlighted this problem below

“What we don’t know is whether that brain signature is there because of the ideology that people choose or whether people’s ideology is caused by the signatures we found,” he said.

“It also could be a combination of both, but our study does not have the data to address this question.”

Again, the title of the article is misleading. It is bait to draw traffic to the website the columnist is writing for.
The headline and the opening statements of the article, creates the false impression that neuroscientist can now predict peoples ideology position ,without knowing before hand if they hold such position. But this is not true.

All the participants in the research already answered a questionnaire detailing their ideology position. Armed with this information, the researchers then looked for brain "signatures" which they believe correlates with it.
So it wasn't a prediction, since it was after the fact.

This is from the article

. "They found correlations between the scan results and the participants’ reports of their ideology on a six-point scale from “very liberal” to “very conservative.”

They were just confirming the participants reports of their ideology in a questionnaire already given to them. So don't be misled that neuroscientist can now directly know individuals subjective experience just be mere "brain signatures" alone

No single part of the brain is responsible for the mind. It bares repeating that the current conclusion is that the mind is an outcroping of many systems not just a singular part of one.

You're still avoiding the question, what is mind?
Both of us are not neuroscientist, and so shouldn't try to speak on their behalf . We can only state the fact as we know and understand it. That's all

If anyone is still expecting science to discover a singular kernel where the mind resides I think they are going to be disappointed.

What do you know about the human mind to know they won't discover it someday? I ask again what is mind?

Wonderz1:
back to the reincarnation topic how can one remember his or her past life? Cause it is somewgat unfair for someone to receive punishment for a crime or sin he cant remember.

Just focus on this life and do your best to succeed in it.

If you somehow get to remember your past life, how do you validate the information?

You're not receiving any punishment for a crime you committed in any previous life Any body who makes you feel so is only trying to postulate you to accept something that would set confusion in your mind.

Focus on this life and try to make the best out of it. You're in a better position to answer the questions you're asking. Just believe in yourself.

Wonderz1:
Happy sunday nairalanders, pls i would love to have a clear understanding about reincarnation. I am open to any kind of views on this (any religion). Pls I just want to be enligthened more

Follow the link below to read the interview of a top scientist in America, Dr Tucker, who has done extensive research on reincarnation stories from different parts of the world.

He has provided compelling proof that reincarnation is a fact of life and not just based on religious beliefs.

https://www.npr.org/2014/01/05/259886077/searching-for-science-behind-reincarnation

budaatum:
"They" Triple? Do you listen to them like you'd listen to a pastor perhaps, and unquestionably believe whatever they say? Even scientists don't unquestionably believe what other scientists say!

I have carried my inside around with me since the day I was born and I can't say I know so much about my inside, but I do know that my brain is just a part of my body and if you remove my brain from my body neither could exist alone, and neither would you look at any one part of buda and claim that is buda. I hope.

Nothing wrong in listening to other people's opinion. It is what we make of what we have listened to that matters.

When those children at a very age, found themselves amongst those animals, they immediately adopted the perspective of the animals around, and then got "hypnotized into thinking they were the same as the animals who have now taken the place of their human parents. By the time some of these children were discovered and rescued from the animals that adopted them, it was observed they have lost most of their cognitive ability which makes them function as normal humans. They were now behaving exactly like the animals that adopted them. It is almost the same for we humans after occupying our physical shell which has tricked us into believing we are one with it or we are the same as the body.

https://www.treehugger.com/children-who-were-raised-by-animals-4869172 link for children raised by animals


But not everyone at birth is hypnotized or don't know they have occupied a body. Some persons. still retain a full awareness of their true selves, and also where they just came from prior to the time they entered their bodies . From this group, we have some children who usually shock us with stories of their previous life

When I was teaching in a private school, one of my students, a girl of about 10, who just enrolled, and immediately got attached to me, blurted out of no where one day, while the two of us were alone in a classroom waiting for other students to come for the normal after-school lessons, that she knew me as a child in her previous life, and went on to provide further details to confirm she was not joking. I was unable respond, and didn't know what to make of it all at that time.



There are stories all over the net of children able to remember their previous life. Most scientists. dont know what to make of it. However, some scientist working independently have been able to garner enough evidence which those in the main body of science have consistently ignored in support reincarnation as a fact of life..

The re recent cases of reincarnation stories investigated and confirmed as true, with verifiable proofs , by prominent scientist

A link to read about latest reincarnation stories investigated by a top psychiatric, Dr Tucker. Please read and let me know what you think

https://uvamagazine.org/articles/the_science_of_reincarnation


Remembering who you are, means you're now fully awaken to your true self and can consciously operate from that state. Before then ,you are living life unconsciously, with your brain and body dictating your life for you.

3. When science fails,there are alternative methods of knowing or coming up with truths in our world Prominent scientists in the past and till now, have used those methods consciously to get ideas and inspiration for their inventions and scientific theories, but these days no one wants to openly discusses such methods for fear of ridicule .


I will discuss one of these methods.; Dreams.

Some of the great inventions we now enjoy in our world today, whether in the sciences, the arts or any other field of human endeavor, were gotten through dreams.

If you think they happened through mere chance or coincidences, then, I am afraid, you very naive and not too well informed. There are definite practices you can engage in to get information directly from your dreams . Infact, current dream research in the sciences has proven this to be true.

However it is not as straight forward as I have explained it. You will need to learn how to interpret for yourself the symbols in your dreams, and this may take time. The symbols in your dreams are unique to you . Know one else can correctly interpret your dreams for . However, some dreams can reveal truths without any symbols; You have a direct perception of things in your dreams.

Ignorant people are quick to conclude that ",oh, dreams are just your brain processing thoughts in your head as you sleep, and don't mean anything." blah blah blah .

Yes ,there are meaningless dreams, but not all. You need to learn to shift the grains from the shaft to understand your dreams. It can be done. Dreams also, are a means of having experiences in other dimension of reality while your body is at rest.

Below is a link that discusses inventions gotten through dreams.

https://www.bedguru.co.uk/9-inventions-inspired-by-dreams


So ,to understand who you're truly are , different from what your ego self makes you think, and where your. consciousness has emerged from ,dreams can be a reliable source , better than any outside source, either in the sciences or in philosophy.

HellVictorinho4:
Intelligent design .... there's nothing intelligent about planet Earth allowing your presence at all... budaatum will add to the misdemeanor.., to hell with your Nairaland account and that of budaatum at least!

It depends from which perspective you're viewing things from

budaatum:
Neuroscientist probably know more when it comes to mind and consciousness than just about any field out there, and this is due to their use of science and it's methods, and however you wish to look at it, we humans have come a very long way from when the mind and consciousness were things only women have and which made them converse with a supposed serpent.

The problem starts when you read what they say as if it were gospel that you must believe instead of using your senses to understand what is presented to you.

Note that different neuroscientist are presenting different views here. The scientific method would be used by we humans to sift out the wheat from the chaff in the end, just as pre-corpernicus and pre-gallileo was sifted out by the use of the senses, and as the gods are being sifted out by the use of the senses.

But our brains and the overall human body is just an extension of who we are inside.

They know so much about the outside but not much of the inside.

Most of the things I will explain here has been stripped of the usual spirituality attached to it elsewhere.

So ,instead of the word, spirit or soul, terms like energy or true self (core consciousness) is used instead. There are all the same, but different ways of naming the same thing.

1.Our material bodies, a product of biology, is formed in our mother's womb; its not what we are.. Our true selves which exist as a force field of energy has occupied the material body at birth, after it has evolved to a point where it's now capable of generating conscious independent thoughts that can be expressed through a physical body.

This energy that we are, is sourced from the purest form of energy that is responsible for the "creation" of our world and its content. This pure energy is present in all thingnd It's not a blind arbitrary force. It has intelligence , and the evidence of this, is seen in the intelligent design of our world.

In some groups, this purest form of energy that we're drawn from, is often refer to as spirit due to the unique features it possesses, and the peculiar characteristics it displays at different levels of manifestation. Others have personified this energy as God .

Before we begin to occupy human bodies, we have been evolving as energy from the mineral state , where we were unconscoius ,to the animal state. ,where we acted mostly with insincts, and finally the human state where we are now fully conscious, with the ability to generate independent thoughts which finds material expression through a modulating brain that has the capacity to trigger our bodies to act on such thoughts.

We exist within our bodies as a force field of aware energy. . We are not "floathing" inside our bodies as this energy that we are , is present in every single cell in order to enliven our bodies.. Those gifted with the special ability to "see" what others can't, are able to picture our true selves as a globe of brilliant white light within us.They are not hallucinating because what they see can be validated.



Those who have had out of body experience or near death experience usually report seeing themselves surrounded by a brilliant white light or they are the light itself. Pure energy can either manifest as light or sound..


However, those out of body experiences are not properly understood by religious people who have misinterpreted it, and have been using it as a validation for their religious beliefs. Individual scientists who have also tried to explain it, don't understand it very well , and have hastily labeled it as hallucination caused by the brain.

The re are two kinds if OBE; one ,hallucinatory and the other, not, but the two has been conflated as one both by religious people and scientists who experience and investigate it.



In the final part, I will tthrow more light on OBE to clear the misconception surrounding it.

2. We are not conscious of who we are as energy because at birth when we occupied our physical bodies crreated in our mothers womb , we automatically took on the perspective of the human body, and then sort of got hypnotized into thinking we are a body and not different from it.

It is difficult to see any separateness anymore, as we have gotten so attached to the body we occupy that we now feel what it feels through the brains attached to it.

Cases of children who unfortunately found themselves growing up amongst animals and ended up behaving like the animals that adopted them are a good parallel to help us understand better what I am trying to explain