--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data and
logic. That is the way science is supposed to work. One person gives
his
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@ wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data and
logic.
Science is all about trying to prove the negative. That is what the
crucial experiment is all about. But you may not know very much
about science. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN is a fairly low level publication.
You might start with my data: That we perceive images.
Do you have any reason to claim that we
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Science is all about trying to prove the negative. That is what the
crucial experiment is all about. But you may not know very much
about science. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN is a fairly low level publication.
You might
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell jfnewell7@
wrote:
The conversation is too massive for me to have time to reply to
everyone, but I think I will step in here. That is a good point about
what might
Curtis wrote:
This is such an excellent thread,
I hope you guys continue it.
Yeah, me too, it's just your basic
Fwap:
Rama claimed that he was the ninth
reincarnation of the Hindu God Vishnu;
in 1531-1575, a Zen Master, from Japan;
1602-1771, Head of Zen Order, Japan;
1725-1804, Master
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
As usual Judy your argument leads to meta-
communication. Far from the original topic,
a post-modern jumble of questioned syntax
and illusive trops.
Oh,
On Nov 30, 2008, at 11:53 PM, Stu wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
As usual Judy your argument leads to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Nov 30, 2008, at 11:53 PM, Stu wrote:
snip
There is not enough time in the day for this
Now, Stu, it's obvious you're just copping out because
Judy's arguments are so darn irrefutable, just like the
ones about
The conversation is too massive for me to have time to reply to
everyone, but I think I will step in here. That is a good point about
what might be pre-wired in. In fact, evolution works very slowly, so
the pre-wiring would have had to occur over the past couple of million
years. It is hard to see
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The argument was not about your beliefs or disbeliefs. The discussion
was about the motivations that would lead one to accept the doctrine of
reincarnation.
Jim::: Motivations are something to double check to make sure one
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
snip
There is not enough time in the day for this.
You dragged me into this,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The conversation is too massive for me to have time to reply to
everyone, but I think I will step in here. That is a good point about
what might be pre-wired in. In fact, evolution works very slowly, so
the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
snip
snip
There is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data and
logic. That is the way science is supposed to work. One person gives
his theory, with specific data and logic, not opinion, and then other
people try to disconfirm
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data and
logic.
I don't consider myself a scientist or a materialist.
I do know there
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data
and logic. That is the way science is supposed to work. One person
gives his
On Dec 1, 2008, at 7:20 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid data
and logic. That is the way
But that's not meant to validate the projectors of thought constructs
and the mediums of mind, the channelers of think, the radios of
discursive babble. They are what, if you are honest with yourself, you
really already know. They are what they what really appear to be: bad
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@
wrote:
Stu,
But if you are a responsible scientist, then you do have a
responsibility to try to disconfirm the theory with specifid
data and
logic.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-snip-
It's the same with reincarnation. If you've rebooted creation so
many
times, you just know. You also grok the fractal interpenetration
of
these same patterns upon layer and layer of living, of death
and
On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:18 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
But that's not meant to validate the projectors of thought constructs
and the mediums of mind, the channelers of think, the radios of
discursive babble. They are what, if you are honest with yourself,
you
really already know. They are
On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:41 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
the fact that the question about reincarnation remains, invalidates
what the yogi may or may not know. you may be convinced, and have a
great story to convince others of the validity of the yogi. but all
that does is leave each of us with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:41 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
the fact that the question about reincarnation remains, invalidates
what the yogi may or may not know. you may be convinced, and have a
great story to convince
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:41 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
the fact that the question about reincarnation remains, invalidates
what the yogi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
On Dec 1, 2008, at 8:41 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
the fact that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@
wrote:
snip
recognition of this finite life seems to drive two ways of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
My gut feeling on this is people who make specious
claims of contacting the unified field or pure
consciousness or the clear light are just by and
large bullshitters.
What a surprise!
(If their claims are specious, BTW,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@
wrote:
++ This doesn't play well with the people who recall past lives
and, others to whom it has become obvious.
Give it some time and keep looking and,
for millions of years, they lose sight as it has no
need for it.
--- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid Proof of Reincarnation
Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 1:19 PM
Three things occur to me (BTW, I lean toward the idea
of reincarnation) .
First, humans
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
nelsonriddle2001@ wrote:
++ This doesn't play well with the people who recall
past lives and,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
nelsonriddle2001@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@
wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof
of consciousness, in
other words, consciousness as something that is needed to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
nelsonriddle2001@
wrote:
++ This doesn't play well with the people who recall past
lives
and,
it is a similar problem for us humans when someone is said to be
enlightened-- there is no verifiable proof, like their left thumb
having turned blue, or something.
same with reincarnation. no way to ever prove it.
so those who insist they are a product of reincarnation are as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, humans are far from the only animal that decodes
nerve impulses into images. If you're going to use the
fact that humans do so as an argument for reincarnation,
you have to include all animals that do so as
. So are the
Organisms that live in sealed underground caves for millions of years,
they lose sight as it has no need for it.
--- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid Proof of Reincarnation
Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 1:19 PM
Three things occur to me
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof
of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Our ability to discern sensory data is hardwired. Looking at the
evolution of vision it is clear that sentient being at first could only
discern slight light and shadow. As the process evolved the visual
system becomes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
First, humans are far from the only animal that
decodes nerve impulses into images. If you're
going to use the fact that humans do so as an
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
Everyone has different circumstance, age,experience,
etc. and see things differently and as a thought for
Judy, instead of pointing out someone was a dunce,
wouldn't it have more impact if they discover it on
their
According to Einstein, time acts mathematically like a spatial
dimension, so if one rotates a graph of all of them, they will project
shrinking and growing distances in a mathematically connected way. Of
course, time seems a little different from a spatial dimension, even
though it acts like a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it is a similar problem for us humans when someone is said to be
enlightened-- there is no verifiable proof, like their left thumb
having turned blue, or something.
same with reincarnation. no way to ever
To also keep the record straight, diversity is a wonderful research
tool. For example, there is a Dutch school of mathematics that only
accepts mathematical deduction, and unlike other schools of
mathematics, rejects the use of mathematical induction. By limiting
their focus, they discover things
++ On being concerned with the past-it would probably be well to
live in the present as they say.
In school,we generally do one grade at a time and move on.
Too much concern for the past would be a distraction it seems.
You are mixing up fields of knowledge. Living in the present is a
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
--- On Sun, 11/30/08, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid Proof of Reincarnation
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 30, 2008, 1:44 PM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
I do. As long as there exists something
that can identify with the concept of I,
there is something that exists that can
identify with the concept of it reincarnating.
If one
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
The jiva is what reincarnates.
From Wikipedia:
Jiva
In Hinduism and Jainism, a jiva is a living being[1], or more
specifically the immortal essence of a living being (human,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those are radical and bizarre motives to subscribe to the scientific
community.
Jim::: No they aren't. I am not ascribing them because I have actually
heard scientists say that. Nor is it really bizarre. People were
burned at
First of all, let me apologize for the rib about believing in
Reincarnation. I was only trying to point out the article that stated
in an experiment that people who believe in reincarnation have a 94%
failure rate in source monitoring tests.
You may be one of the 6% who have excellent source
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson
nelsonriddle2001@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote:
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
The jiva is what reincarnates.
Precisely. What is tantamount to saying nothing reincarnates.
Do
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly what is needed for both perceiving an image and for
Quantum Entanglement.
If each point in the image, or each nerve impulse, is encoded into a
point in a point cluster, then the information of
Top posting. No comments at bottom:
Both Jews AND Christians expoused a belief in reincarnation at some point.
Some Jews still do.
L
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote:
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
The jiva is what reincarnates.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Wouldn't Jesus have preached about our inevitable
movement into the next life if the reincarnation
story is so absolutely correct?
Did I say anywhere that the reincarnation story
is so absolutely correct, or did you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it is a similar problem for us humans when someone is said to be
enlightened-- there is no verifiable proof, like their left
thumb
having turned blue, or something.
same with reincarnation. no way to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a question for you; what reincarnates?
The Reincarnator reincarnates.
OffWorld
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
snip
Wouldn't Jesus have preached about our inevitable
movement into the next life if the reincarnation
story is so absolutely correct?
Did I say
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Top posting. No comments at bottom:
Both Jews AND Christians expoused a belief in reincarnation at some
point.
Some Jews still do.
L
A very small percentage. In Catholicism the belief in reincarnation
is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
snip
Wouldn't Jesus have preached about our inevitable
movement into the next life if the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote:
Top posting. No comments at bottom:
Both Jews AND Christians expoused a belief in
reincarnation at some point.
Some Jews still do.
A very small
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it is a similar problem for us humans when someone is said to be
enlightened-- there is no verifiable proof, like their left thumb
having turned blue, or something.
same with reincarnation. no way to ever
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
snip
Where could the infant have
had
the time to learn such an advanced
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
jfnewell7@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
snip
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
++ On being concerned with the past-it would probably be well to
live in the present as they say.
In school,we generally do one grade at a time and move on.
Too much concern for the past would be a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote:
Top posting. No comments at bottom:
Both Jews AND Christians expoused a belief
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote:
Top posting. No comments at bottom:
Both Jews AND Christians expoused a belief in reincarnation at some
point.
Some Jews still do.
L
A
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@
wrote:
Top posting. No
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
The real question here is why you can't seem to
grasp that I'm not espousing any particular
afterlife model (there are many more than two,
BTW), or
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
As usual Judy your argument leads to meta-communication. Far from the
original topic,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
There is no solid proof of reincarnation. However there are very
observable brain functions that indicate a hard wired proclivit
towards a belief in life after death.
Jim::: Of course the brain is an information processor.
This is such an excellent thread, I hope you guys continue it.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote
There is no solid proof of reincarnation. However there are very
observable brain
Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof of consciousness, in
other words, consciousness as something that is needed to
subjectively correlate all of the pixelated data that the brain
processes. i am ok with what you have said as being a plausible
proof of consciousness.
however, why
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof
of consciousness, in
other words, consciousness as something that is needed to
subjectively correlate all of the pixelated data that the brain
processes. i am ok
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Jim:::I am thinking in terms of how long it takes to
learn something new. For example, it takes a
considerable amount of time to learn another language,
or the field of mathematics. Now decoding nerve
Per Curtis Delta Blues I will continue.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu buttsplicer@ wrote
There is no solid proof of reincarnation. However there are very
observable brain functions that indicate a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof
of consciousness, in
other words, consciousness as something that is needed to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell jfnewell7@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:Jim, i understand your assumption here as proof
of consciousness, in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subjective images are not at all like the patterns of nerve impulses
that the brain uses as its computer-like codes for the images. Nerve
impulses don't have colors, for example, and the shapes of the
patterns in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, James F. Newell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Subjective images are not at all like the patterns of nerve impulses
that the brain uses as its computer-like codes for the images. Nerve
impulses don't have colors, for example, and the shapes of the
patterns in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
++ This doesn't play well with the people who recall past lives and,
others to whom it has become obvious.
Give it some time and keep looking and, being a wise individual,
it will become obvious to you. N.
I had a
Thanks for keeping up the good work Stu. Your posts make me feel sane.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@
wrote:
++ This doesn't play well with the people who recall past lives and,
others
I had a Mormon tell me the same thing on a long road trip after he
told me all about how my personality will live forever in heaven
reunited with my family.
People who recall past lives have predictable results to source
monitoring tests.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shanti18411 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It seems to me that the subject of reincarnation cannot be separated
from what you think is true about the nature of time and the personal
self.As far as what we call time is concerned the separation between
There is no solid proof of reincarnation. However there are very
observable brain functions that indicate a hard wired proclivity
towards a belief in life after death.
You may be very interested in the October edition of Scientific
American Mind, an article called, The End Why so many of us
92 matches
Mail list logo
