actually no, I wouldn't question your belief system any more than I would question the Aztecs who did believe a serpent made the Earth. what does it matter to me what you believe? what harm does it do you if Makedde believes in reincarnation?
One cannot say that their personal case of deja vu is evidence of their past life, so they can only vote that they believe it. Unless they have physical evidence of that past life. Your poll was designed soley to attack those people who believe differently to you.
What other plausible explanation have you offered? Other than 'you are wrong'? If I consider those other explainations, and dismiss them, you would stil say I am wrong. That was the whole purpose of this poll, to mock the beliefs of other people.
Not necessarily. I think deja vu may merely be tapping into some pshycic phenomenon. For exmaple, sometimes someone from my past pops into my head, and the next thing you know I meet them. It's happened too many times for it to be a coincidence. This has NOTHING to do with past lives. There is obviously something more going on here, for which I get creeped out, but in an intriguing sort of way.
I remember when an old friends mother had a new baby. As soon as she told me, I got a picture in my head of what that baby would look like, down to the expression on her face and the color of the blanket she was wrapped in. My friend showed me her picture, and the baby looked exactly as I had pictured. Same position, same facial expression, same colored blanket, everything was exactly right. This baby was only three or four days old, yet how could I know exactly what she looked like? Coincidence? I don't think so.
What experiences? Who have you spoken to about them? How detailed are they? Go on, 'frazzle' the 'logical thinkers'....
I see. So this almighty power can be tricked into manifesting itself, by virtue of stupid man being able to replicate the conditions of death, is that what you are stating? Rather than it being entirely logical that as you die, and your brain is starved of oxygen, you are prone to hallucinate.
Even if he gave you every last detail of his experiences, you would insist that it wasn't true and that he was imagining it - right?
How do you explain the stories of people dying, and then coming back to life to tell everyone exactly what the doctors and family members were talking about while they were dead? How can you hallucinate something that is real?
Why not? If I think it true, then why shouldn't you? Esp if I take it on myself to extend the delusion, and insist others believe the same delusion. Then you have every right to be concerned. If reality and reason matter, that is. If they don't, then you're quids in.
Again, I don't. I would have to have an example cited, and see all the 'evidence' laid out in front of me, as well as having worked through all the logical explainations.
Because the Dragon is the true creator. It is the only path to afterlife. Anyone care to prove me wrong?
That's your view, I do not agree with you, but that is life I suppose. I just think things like truth, facts, evidence, and so on are important to keep us grounded in reality. I would love to see evidence of many things people claim to be true, but time and again, no matter the claim, one thing unites - no proof. My logic suggests to me that the most likely reason why is that the claims are baseless, which would explain a consistant lack of proof.
Lets say I did site you an example. Someone went into cardiac arrest, and while they were 'dead' they were able to somehow move around and take note of things. When they were brought back to life, they could tell you every word the doctors said when they were working on that person, but logically, that would be impossible because you cannot hallucinate something which isn't real. Are the doctors wrong and was the person actually alive all the time, or is it something you couldn't explain? What would be the logical explanation, in your opinion?
Yes, if I were that interested, I would ask for every detail, and want the evidence to be weighed up correctly. What would you prefer? That I blindly believe some guy on the internet? Yeah, okay then...
Without being able to speak to the doctors, and all involved, I cannot fairly say. It is like my asking you this. What if I told you that I knew a prophet of an alien race, who originally created all of mankind, and who had sent me here to spread the word. How can you logically explain that?
I have given you enough 'evidence' The facts are simple: Someone was dead, but was able to somehow move around and tell you details that they shouldn't know, given that they were dead at the time. What do you want? Doctors testimony that what they said at the time was what the person claimed? Make your decision based on what information I have given, or admit that there is a possibility there is life after death.
Ask your friends and everyone else if they've had deja vu experiences, believe in reincarnation, spirits, etc etc etc...... I did and I heard some really interesting stories... And one thing I noticed - people don't talk about their beliefs and/or what they experienced until someone has an interest and asks them - like my gal pal of 30 yrs. She didn't tell me b/c she didn't want me to think she was going crazy, then I asked her and she talked about it. And like I said, I know that woman - she's very stable w/common sense and has worked in the medical field for yrs......
I couldn't logically explain it, expect to assume you were a nutcase. However, without any proof, I couldn't say whether you were lying or not.
I believe anyone who says that they had a deja vu experience. Most of us have. I don't question them on it, because they have no reason to lie about it.
Sorry. What you have given is a claim. A claim with unnamed people, who cannot be asked questions. It is not evidence, far from it. An vaguely interesting coffee break story - maybe. But not evidence of a thing, least of all an afterlife or any such thing.
Maybe. But this is not evidence of past lives, or having lived before. The most likely explanation of déjà vu is not that it is an act of "precognition" or "prophecy", but rather that it is an anomaly of memory, giving the false impression that an experience is "being recalled". This explanation is supported by the fact that the sense of "recollection" at the time is strong in most cases, but that the circumstances of the "previous" experience (when, where, and how the earlier experience occurred) are quite uncertain or believed to be impossible. Likewise, as time passes, subjects can exhibit a strong recollection of having the "unsettling" experience of déjà vu itself, but little or no recollection of the specifics of the event(s) or circumstance(s) they were "remembering" when they had the déjà vu experience. In particular, this may result from an overlap between the neurological systems responsible for short-term memory and those responsible for long-term memory (events which are perceived as being in the past). The events would be stored into memory before the conscious part of the brain even receives the information and processes it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Déjà_vu
See? It doesn't matter what you are presented with, you will always dismiss it because you don't understand it. Sometimes science can't explain everything.
