In the context of when that "sometimes" occurs, as in just prior to death or near death and that the chemical is a powerful hallucinogen, it does prove that right before we die, the release of DMT can be what is behind near death experiences. In fact from a logical perspective, it's easy to conclude that DMT is indeed what's behind near death experiences. Now, the relevance to that and what happens after we die is this. Since we do know this is what happens prior to death, could that be why we believe there's an afterlife? It's very probable.
This of course is possible and even probable.....but, does not equate to "Knowing". Basically pretty much showing my initial assessment is accurate.
I wasn't necessarily out to disagree. However, we can use what we do know to extrapolate the answer. Now if new evidence comes along later down the line that destroys the previous answer, then it's back to the drawing board.
Whose facts...yours? Are you a leading scientists in NDE's or have you experienced this yourself? Obviously you have not and have your own beliefs or FAITH, but that is not the same as facts.
As far as the human body is concerned and all its organs, heart and brain included, there is really nothing after death. Well except ones legacy that is. And depending upon what is done with one's remains one could look at death as a continuance of life. But not of that of the dead. One might donate their remains to science and that might help somehow help or beneifit those humans still living. One could have their remains as ashes spread over land or sea and that might benefit the living organisms that inhabit those environments. But that would be the extent of the body's after death 'experience'. That is other than to wither away to dust in a coffin buried in the earth or on the earth depending upon the earth depending upon the circumstances of one's death.
The eternity you talk about has a measurement involved. Time. Time will not exist. That is the eternity, with the absent measurement of time removed. If you really want to believe in some sort of deity and the afterlife in a paradise or hell, then time will not exist. Whatever ultimate joy or torment would just "be"...which is for all intent and purposes is humanities way to describe "eternity". There would not be a time factor of regret (equalling your concept of hell) for those movies or restaurants etc. It would just be continual regret of hell, or, continual joy of paradise.
Religion doesnt require any reference to life after death. Atheism doesnt automatically exclude any life after death (only one involving any deity). Nobody knows what happens when we die and anyone claiming to know is either lying to themselves or the rest of us. Please stop making atheists look bad.
Reincarnation is unlikely and you probably wouldn't remember past lives anyways. Heaven is also unlikely. The soul and the spirit are imaginary things made up by people to feel warm and fuzzy. We're just meat like any other animal. Humans just think they are special animals. Heaven is wishful thinking but if it brings you comfort when you're close to death, I don't see what's wrong with believing in it.
I never said this was some sort of unified atheist view. In fact, there is none, so I can't, "give us a bad name" because there is no "us". People assume there is, but they're wrong. Don't fault me for their mistakes.
I have provided a repeatable experiment. Kill the bug. Does it go anywhere? No? Then there is no after life... other than decomposition. Your mother didn't "die". Her heart stopped, but clearly she had some sort of blood pumping oxygen to the brain, otherwise she would be completely brain dead. You know, we can simulate that experience of dying, though it would be at great risk to the participant.
The fact that when you die your body will simply become limp. You will not be able to move. You will have no brain function. You will experience rigamortis. The fact that no one has seen a body float up to heaven. The fact that all those who claim they saw heaven after a near death experience are questionable because there are many people who say that they saw nothing, and of course the whole DMT thing that Loki is talking about. The fact is that you don't know, and you have no reason to believe in some sort of after life, other than faith in something unseen. These are all facts. Whose facts? Your facts. You know that everything I said just now as true.
You made a definitive statement that to be an atheist you have to confront death which implies a certain level of unity (which indeed doesnt exist). Regardless, when flawed posts like yours are put out so definitively labelled as an atheist point of view, they colour readers opinion of atheism in general. It doesnt matter that it isnt fair. Its bad enough when theistic extremists misrepresent atheism without atheist ones backing them up. If you prefer though, please stop making yourself look bad.
There's no reason to assume anything happens to us after we die because there is no science behind it. In fact everything we know about human beings and nature points to nothing being able to happen after we die.
I am scared of death because it's permanent. I will no longer be able to feel good feelings. However, there will also be no bad feelings because I will be brain dead. I would much rather be alive, particularly because the dying process is likely to hurt and my instincts tell me so. I don't believe in bug heaven because I see the bug dead, lifeless, lying in my window sill.
I'm giving advice, not orders and I'm not suggesting you don't say anything, just consider what you say and how you say it comes across. I only really care because you've chosen to identify with a category that I happen to share.
That is backwards. The onus rests on those who claim that there is an "after life" to provide evidence. Until they can the statement that there is "nothing after death" stands for each individual since they won't have the ability to experience life any longer.
No choirs of angels singing praises for eternity? No preachers expounding on hell fire and damnation? So evangelicals insisting that everyone should believe as they do? Sounds like heaven to me!
The burden of proof is upon those who make absolute claims to the positive or the negative. I have made no claim to the positive or the negitive but I do challange the validity of those that do. As no irrefutable proof to the positive or negative can be presented I take a neutral position as I will not come to a firm conclusion based upon incomplete evidence.
OK OK...But where did the first-Ape come from? Where did the first Ape precursor come from? See what I mean?
"The First Primates Primates are remarkably recent animals. Most animal species flourished and became extinct long before the first monkeys and their prosimian ancestors evolved. While the earth is about 4.54 billion years old and the first life dates to at least 3.5 billion years ago, the first primates did not appear until around 50-55 million years ago. That was10-15 million years after the dinosaurs had become extinct." http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/early_2.htm These of course came from an earlier mammal which came from an earlier something which came from something earlier....rinse and repeat.