@SergeantLynch
Anaesthesia is used as a pain killer. It leaves its own memories behind.
Anaesthesia is used as a pain killer. It leaves its own memories behind.
According to Sean Carroll, a cosmologist and physics professor at the California Institute of Technology, life after death is 'impossible'.
Carroll said: "The laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood."
For there to be an afterlife, this theory rests on the premise that human consciousness is separate from our bodies.
However, it is scientifically believed that consciousness is the result of atoms and electrons, rather than a soul that can lie outside the human body.
Dr Carroll continued: "Claims that some form of consciousness persists after our bodies die and decay into their constituent atoms face one huge, insuperable obstacle.
"The laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood. And there's no way within those laws to allow for the information stored in our brains to persist after we die."
He also points to the Quantum Field Theory (QFT) as proof that there is no afterlife for the souls of the deceased to go to.
This theory essentially says that each type of particle has a field within the universe - one for photons, another for electrons and an additional one for every kind of particle.
And no 'spirit' particles have been discovered by quantum tests, which would point to no afterlife existing.
Hmmmmm...Bold claim.
Debby wrote:
Anaesthesia is used as a pain killer. It leaves its own memories behind.
Is there any peer reviewed scientific research to back up such claims.
My own experience of anaesthesia, has never knowingly given rise to specifically related memories.
Hmmmm..."Insuperable"...Good word...I must remember to utilise it.
But yes, currently in terms of logic, spirituality is simply a fanciful product of the internal workings of the human brain.
Though I do think that technology will eventually provide the means to transfer the human database to an alternative storage device...Whether or not such data will be blessed with awareness of a previous human existence, is perhaps currently a less superable thought, but perhaps not an insuperable reality in the long term.
The experience NDEs report are spiritual. Science needs to explore it some more.
Yes, and I expect that it will
Something is true if it can be verified (the scientific standard) or is corroborated as in the Gospels.
Well, something is true if it is true.
Whereas corroborated folk tales are corroborated folk tales.
Though the Basis of the gospel folk tales cannot be verified.
And therefore because is a poor "scientific standard".
You know something is true if you get the information from a reliable source.
As I stated previously, something is true only if it is true.
"Reliable sources" are no guarantee of truth...Just a repetition of information from a respected source.
So "BIG BANG" theory is the product of respected sources, but nonetheless only theory, so therefore not a truth....Same applies to naive theistic/deistic hypotheses.
You are admitting The Big Bang theory has not been replaced by any other theory. So it stands on its merits.
Well, the Big Bang theory is a general theory based upon observations of universal expansion, so therefore is a meritorious proposal.
So it is generally agreed that universal expansion is a truth, whereas the actual cause of universal expansion and material existence therein, remains unknown.
None of which, corroborates or verifies any factual basis in respect of archaic Judaic folk myths and latterly "The Bible".
The Big Bang like creation had a beginning and continued to expand/develop over time linked 6 days in the Bible . Considering how far apart in time they were written strangely corroborates each other.
For sure, such a naive analogy was probably inevitable.
Though not strange that a desperate Canadian Catholic who is currently obsessed with corroboration, should suggest that A proves B...Or B proves A...Or whatever.
Nonetheless, the real beginning remains unknown and we are also pretty certain that 6 days is a wee bit of an underestimation.
The Bible even supports an expanding universe that is similar to the Big Bang.
See verses.Isaiah 40:22, Isaiah 40:5, Jeremiah 10:12, Job 9:8, Psalms 104:2. It uses the word stretches instead of expansion. Thats corroboration.
Debby wrote:
The Bible even supports an expanding universe that is similar to the Big Bang.
See verses.Isaiah 40:22, Isaiah 40:5, Jeremiah 10:12, Job 9:8, Psalms 104:2. It uses the word stretches instead of expansion. Thats corroboration.
No Debs, notwithstanding that these are all second millennium AD interpretations, none of these verses ever mentions an expanding universe.
Plus all verses are clearly adaptations of the same... So one tale, reinterpreted and retold many times over.
Stretching out the heavens like a curtain, is clearly a reference to the visible sky and how it appears to enshroud the Earth from horizon to horizon.
Nothing whatsoever to do with "BIG BANG" and universal expansion.
The Big Bang and the theological concept of creation fundamentally agree that the universe had a definitive beginning in space and time.
Hmmmmmm...I would guess that 99% of aware people would assume that the universe had some sort of beginning...One doesn't need to be either a scientist or a theologian to come up with that assumption.
So Debs, 6000 years ago or 13.79 billion years ago?
How addicted to theological baloney are you.
Both the big Bang theory and the Bible confirm the universe had a beginning and continue to expand with time. That is science and religion agreeing on a single fundamental truth.
Typical Christian deception and usurpation tactics Debs.
Neither "Big Bang" theory nor "The Bible" confirm anything.
The clues are in the word "theory" and the fact that "The Bible" never actually touched on the subject of universal expansion.
Though as I said previously, general agreement on the concept of cause and effect does not require either "The Bible" or "Big Bang" theory.
No doubt Islam also proposed "Big Bang" theory...And of course the Jews even earlier.
And when Og and Ug first considered their predicament, Ug pointed to the night sky and uttered the word expansion....And of course this was accurately recorded in Australopithecus and later translated into Aramaic...And as we see, is now a necessary part of Christian deception...Best drop the old 6000 year nonsense and claim "Big Bang" theory for ourselves.
I'm still smiling Debs.
The Bible was written before the Big Bang Theory. The Bible speaks about creation of the universe at the beginning, the different stages of development of the universe over a period of time and concludes with the stretching of the universe. Scientists have observed the same and came out with the Big Bang Theory independently of the Bible. But Christianity has moved to the next stage of creation which is heaven whereas the scientists are still amazed with the Big Bang Theory.
As I say, theists will claim whatever is necessary in order to justify themselves.
The Big Bang came after the Bible creation story, it was a scientific theory about the beginning of the universe with scientific evidence to prove iIt had a beginning and developed over time. But that was exactly how creation of the universe was described in the Bible. This unified science and religion o one key aspect of creation of the universe.
Ask a chimpanzee and they would probably say the same.
Start, middle bit and maybe an end...Give me a banana.
Why did you choose to be a cat/dog?
Debby wrote:
The Big Bang came after the Bible creation story, it was a scientific theory about the beginning of the universe with scientific evidence to prove iIt had a beginning and developed over time. But that was exactly how creation of the universe was described in the Bible. This unified science and religion o one key aspect of creation of the universe.
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
T.S. Eliot
I think Penny is so hot on the The Big Bang Theory.
Yes, they utilise her assets well.
Give credit where credit is due.