What do you believe happens after death?

[HouseMD]

That doesn't answer my question Moretorque. This isn't about religion. This is about the afterlife. How do you know there is none? Did you see the videos I posted above? If so, what's your comment on them? They are very interesting and worth considering.

All the curiosity doesn't fix the fact that we will never know while we live, so discussing it is moot. Live as you believe you should live in this world and that will either be reflected in the next or result in nothing, either way it doesn't matter.

[Moretorque]

That doesn't answer my question Moretorque. This isn't about religion. This is about the afterlife. How do you know there is none? Did you see the videos I posted above? If so, what's your comment on them? They are very interesting and worth considering.

All the curiosity doesn't fix the fact that we will never know while we live, so discussing it is moot. Live as you believe you should live in this world and that will either be reflected in the next or result in nothing, either way it doesn't matter.

You lived once so who is to say not again but as you stated a moot point.

[Winston]

That doesn't answer my question Moretorque. This isn't about religion. This is about the afterlife. How do you know there is none? Did you see the videos I posted above? If so, what's your comment on them? They are very interesting and worth considering.

All the curiosity doesn't fix the fact that we will never know while we live, so discussing it is moot. Live as you believe you should live in this world and that will either be reflected in the next or result in nothing, either way it doesn't matter.

There may not be proof in the scientific sense, but there is circumstantial proof, like NDE's and reincarnation stories for instance. We've been conditioned to believe that only scientific proof matters, but that's not true, there are other ways of knowing too, such as spiritual revelations or an inner knowing. Ghosts are another piece of evidence, so are genuine mediums like James Van Praagh and George Anderson. Etc. So there is some good circumstantial evidence, which would hold up in a court of law.

[HouseMD]

That doesn't answer my question Moretorque. This isn't about religion. This is about the afterlife. How do you know there is none? Did you see the videos I posted above? If so, what's your comment on them? They are very interesting and worth considering.

All the curiosity doesn't fix the fact that we will never know while we live, so discussing it is moot. Live as you believe you should live in this world and that will either be reflected in the next or result in nothing, either way it doesn't matter.

There may not be proof in the scientific sense, but there is circumstantial proof, like NDE's and reincarnation stories for instance. We've been conditioned to believe that only scientific proof matters, but that's not true, there are other ways of knowing too, such as spiritual revelations or an inner knowing. Ghosts are another piece of evidence, so are genuine mediums like James Van Praagh and George Anderson. Etc. So there is some good circumstantial evidence, which would hold up in a court of law.

Too much of it is contradictory and much can be replicated without dying through various means. There is a region of your brain you can stimulate with electrodes that causes you to lose your sense of position in space, resulting in out-of- body experiences. DMT functionally recreates both out of body sensations and vivid visual and auditory disturbances identical to NDEs. No report of a ghost has ever been substantiated in a replicable way. I've dealt with plenty of psychotic people over the years that were certain of their revelations or inner knowing that were completely out of their minds. Yeah, I believe in something after death, but no, there's no real proof

[Moretorque]

Yaa, I think Winston has been stimulating his with to much crack!

[Winston]

That doesn't answer my question Moretorque. This isn't about religion. This is about the afterlife. How do you know there is none? Did you see the videos I posted above? If so, what's your comment on them? They are very interesting and worth considering.

All the curiosity doesn't fix the fact that we will never know while we live, so discussing it is moot. Live as you believe you should live in this world and that will either be reflected in the next or result in nothing, either way it doesn't matter.

There may not be proof in the scientific sense, but there is circumstantial proof, like NDE's and reincarnation stories for instance. We've been conditioned to believe that only scientific proof matters, but that's not true, there are other ways of knowing too, such as spiritual revelations or an inner knowing. Ghosts are another piece of evidence, so are genuine mediums like James Van Praagh and George Anderson. Etc. So there is some good circumstantial evidence, which would hold up in a court of law.

Too much of it is contradictory and much can be replicated without dying through various means. There is a region of your brain you can stimulate with electrodes that causes you to lose your sense of position in space, resulting in out-of- body experiences. DMT functionally recreates both out of body sensations and vivid visual and auditory disturbances identical to NDEs. No report of a ghost has ever been substantiated in a replicable way. I've dealt with plenty of psychotic people over the years that were certain of their revelations or inner knowing that were completely out of their minds. Yeah, I believe in something after death, but no, there's no real proof

That's what skeptics say but FAQ chapters in NDE and paranormal books have refuted all that. You need to read both sides. See "The Science of Near Death Experiences" by Chris Carter. He addresses all your points in detail, as well as skeptical arguments. Hallucinations are disorganized and random, not coherent and meaningful. Dr. Raymond Moody pointed that out in 1975 in his book "Life After Life" and many since then have pointed that out too. See the interviews with Dr. Moody above that I posted where he addresses such common questions.

Also, the guy who wrote the book "DMT: The Spirit Molecule" said that just because DMT or Ayahuasca opens the pineal gland and produces divine experiences doesn't mean its all in the brain. If the brain is like a radio then the DMT merely opens up the channels more. This is explained in every NDE and DMT documentary. Haven't you seen them?

Just because ghosts don't like to be replicated in labs doesn't mean they don't exist. Lots of ghosts have been seen and felt and recorded on instruments in haunted places. I experienced one too one time. I saw it turn a heavy doorknob in my bedroom twice, which never happens. It was right after my landlord's husband died, so it was expected. Some ghosts have been seen by multiple people at once. Just because a science laboratory can't replicate it doesn't mean anything. Science is not everything, especially when its controlled by institutions with agendas and vested interests.

Have you heard of Skinwalker Ranch in Utah? It is not only super haunted, but a paranormal Disneyland where all sorts of interdimensional creatures lurk about. Government scientists studied it for years. The billionaire Bob Bigelow hired a team of scientists to study it for years. No one doubts that hauntings and paranormal activities there. If you experienced it, you will have no doubt either. Experience is everything, not science journals. That's for low IQ non-spiritual people who have no power and are dependent on science for everything, very weak and lame. Anyway, the scientists at Skinwalker Ranch all noticed one thing: When they turned on the cameras and instruments, the paranormal entities would not perform, until they were turned off. That was the pattern for years. So these entities know when they're being recorded and don't like to cooperate for some reason. This tends to be the case with hauntings too.

Ed and Lorraine Warren had a ton of proof of the paranormal. See their slide show below. It contains a lot of firsthand evidence and experiences.



Just because psychotic people say crazy things doesn't mean they aren't tuned to some extra dimensions or frequencies that they cannot handle. Some people are overwhelmed by extra sensory stimuli and can't handle it, so they have psychosis. It doesn't mean other dimensions aren't real. You go into other dimensions every night when you dream. If you study NDEs you will see that they are very different from hallucinations in multiple ways.

I told you, there is evidence, but it's circumstantial. There definitely is a PREPONDERENCE of evidence for the afterlife though, meaning that the weight of the data leans toward there being an afterlife. That is something most open minded experts agree on.

See this documentary "The Science of the Soul" so you are updated on the latest afterlife evidence, which may be circumstantial, but still it's compelling and persuasive.

[HouseMD]

Great claims require great evidence. The evidence is flimsy. I choose to believe in a lot of it despite this, but the evidence is poor overall. Even as someone who does believe in much of this, I've gone to many a supposedly haunted place to no effect. I have had one experience that couldn't be explained, so there's that. But the gist is I say we can't know.

My theory for what ghosts are, by the way, is that they are not an individual's soul, but rather an energy imprint of their feelings or emotions that persist in an area due to the relationship between energy and consciousness. Their feelings persist in the consciousness of the area in which they lived and died but they, themselves, do not persist there. It's like a photocopy of their emotional state, basically. For this reason I do not believe ghosts provide proof of any afterlife.

With regard to DMT, well... Try it and see. Experiences can be very organized and are completely different than ketamine or other dissociatives. I do consider the radio hypothesis to be more or less correct, but that is my belief and not backed by science.

[Winston]

Yes good point HouseMD. That ghost theory you described is called the "stone tape theory" of ghosts. But what about psychic mediums like George Anderson or James Van Praagh who have never been debunked? They can tell you many things about your dead relatives with no preparation or cold reading or research, even about things that were never recorded anywhere and could not be found out about by any researcher. That's spooky.

Btw, science deals with the physical, not metaphysical. If you want proof of the metaphysical or spiritual, it requires other ways like spiritual ways. After all, you can't expect materialistic science to validate the non-physical universe or dimensions. That would be an oxymoron. Besides nothing is more convincing than direct experience, as any NDEr would tell you.

There's also NDE evidence from people who saw things while out of body that they couldn't have known and later turned out to be accurate. How do you explain that? And how do you explain the compelling reincarnation cases documented by Dr. Ian Stevenson and others, which no one has been able to explain? Or children able to speak foreign languages from their past life that they never learned? Or people under past life regression hypnosis which were suddenly able to speak foreign languages? How can you account for that? That's strong circumstantial evidence.

[Winston]

Check out this Art Bell interview with Jon Ronner about angels and the afterlife. He explains why there's a lot of circumstantial evidence for the afterlife that constitutes a PREPONDERENCE of evidence -- meaning that it's more likely true than not -- for the afterlife.

[Winston]

Interesting Indian yogic demonstration video of what happens after death and how the chakras dissolve one by one. A dramatization is shown of a cancer patient girl dying and what it's like as each chakra dissolves from the base on up. Very interesting and soothing and comforting.

[Winston]

Wow check out these what these women say about what the other side is like and what they experienced during their NDE and what people do in heaven. It's very fascinating and mind blowing! Unfortunately though, there's no sex in heaven, so that sucks. Maybe you won't even want it when you're in heaven?

[Winston]

Also check out what this Atheist experienced when he had his NDE and asked God why there are so many dark humans on Earth. Atheists like Gali should hear this.

Atheist Asks God “Why Are Humans So Dark and Doomed?" He Was Amazed By The Answers He Received





His full interview on Coast to Coast AM.

[Winston]

Anita says that during her NDE, she realized that we don't love ourselves enough. WTF?! I posted this to her below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-A1Fo0dl1o

Anita, why do you New Agers always say that we need to love ourselves more? That's definitely NOT something that Americans lack. That's like saying an Eskimo lacks ice and snow. Americans already love themselves too much and are too narcissistic. Not humble like in Asia and Europe. That's why they always demand top notch service and tips and high incomes. They aren't humble like in Asia. Americans expect the best of the best and are very SPOILED. I learned that while living and traveling overseas to 14 countries. These New Agers couldn't be more wrong. Also, how come only Americans tell you to love yourself? Because in America, no one loves you for you and friendships aren't true like they are in other countries like SE Asia or Latin America or Russia, etc. In other countries no one needs to tell you to love yourself. The great Eastern philosopher Alan Watts said you can't love yourself, that's like trying to kiss yourself. So he agrees with me that "loving yourself" is a fallacy and delusion. You can't kiss yourself, there's no satisfaction or pleasure in that. You can't be romantic when alone either. You need a soulmate or companion. But in America, no one cares about you, so you are forced to try to love yourself. It's all VAIN. In other countries I can find good companionship and don't need to try to "love myself". It's so fake. Sorry if this is offensive. Just being honest about my experiences and observations in 14 countries and seeing so much American and New Age BS.

The great Eastern philosopher Alan Watts said in his lectures that it's impossible to "love yourself". It's like trying to kiss yourself. There's no romance or pleasure in it. I agree with him. So why do new agers and truthers always talk about that? I don't get it. It's an obvious fallacy. Being confident is fine but you gotta have some basis to your confidence by making small accomplishments. However that's not the same as loving yourself. Americans do not lack self love, they are very narcissistic and spoiled and think they deserve the best of the best and demand tips and high salaries. They aren't humble like people in other countries. I learned that after living in many countries and traveling in 14 countries. So this new age nonsense is totally false in my view. No offense, but I hate hive minds, even in the spirituality movement.

[Yohan]

Nothing happens after your death. You will be same after death as before birth. Simply said, not existing.

[Winston]

Nothing happens after your death. You will be same after death as before birth. Simply said, not existing.

How do you know that? Why do you declare it as fact? How do you explain NDE's and other lines of evidence that are presented above? There are many aspects of NDEs, ghosts, seeing the spirits of the deceased, and genuine psychic mediums that cannot be explained by hallucination, dream, or scams. And there's lots of evidence for reincarnation and past lives too. Maybe you have no soul and are an NPC, so there's no afterlife for you? If so, you only speak for yourself and other NPCs that are generated by the matrix and are merely programs without souls. But you don't speak for those of us who do have souls. After all, why would a real soul deny that he or she had a soul? Only an NPC would do that, not a real soul. Also it's not logical to ignore data that doesn't fit into your materialistic model, which only existed since the 1800s when materialism dominated western culture, which was a step in the wrong direction.

Why not just be honest and admit that you don't know? Why do you act like atheism is a fact and the ultimate truth, just because western science went in the WRONG direction in removing the creator out of creation and denying the existence of the soul? Every year, atheistic science is being proven wrong all the time and has been since the 1960s. So you are on the losing side. Why do you choose to be on a losing side?