Yep, really no different than if your car engine blows up beyond repair, the car is no more, it cant run. Or you can look at it like taking a sledge hammer to your laptop or computer tower. Damage it beyond repair , it cannot function. All we are is our brains in motion. Once your brain dies, that is it, we die. There is no more an afterlife than there is a pre life. Making up all these different bullshit clubs called religion, painting them with gods or spirits or claims of mulitiple lifes is crap. 

"Its complecated" some here claim, which was never my argument in regards to religion. If some here want to coddle the insecurities of humanity beyond the human right to make the claim, we do live in a free society. But I refuse. Buddhist or Hindu or Christian or Scientology and even new age garbage pantheism. WE DO NOT continue on. 

We may be able to create artifical simulations of our personalities, much like we record videos or e books, but even then, that will not be us after we die, even then we still die. There is no such thing as "forever". 

I agree and I get tired of some people getting angry at others for telling a simple truth because others got caught up in needlessly complecated bullshit. 

No, Brian gets angry because noone here buys into his bullshit. We prefer the truth. Reality. Something Brian ignores ALL the time.

Your idiotic logic makes me angry. Luis started this post. A post stating the scientific fact that we don't live after we die. Now you don't like me agreeing with science? So we do live after our brains die?

Grow the fuck up. You don't like me personally, that is all your pettiness has ever been about with me.

You, "Mommy mommy, I don't like Brian"...........Yea, and? 

Brian hstes logic. He prefers make believe. He thinks all the philosophers that designed the working system of logic that allows us to have a society were idiots.

Brian should get a brain and grow the fuck up.

We die asshole, so if you want to deny that, then Luis is wrong too. 

No asshole. I know my species history, and my species falsely attributes discovery as meaning the group they ascribe to as being the patent holder of that discovery. You'd fucking know that if you had watched the entire Cosmos Series. 

Muslims "We invented Algebra, so therefore Allah is real"

Christians "Aquinas was smart, so therefore Jesus is real"

Buddhists, "We can endure lots of physical stuff" forgetting that Navey Seals are trained to do the same things.

The ancient Chinese, ancient aboriginies, ancient South Americans, independently without any connection, all made gap answers as to the patterns in the sky with the nightime stars. They also created their own myths about comits. 

The fact that humans stumble on useful things does not make their personal beliefs or religious clubs a fucking requirement. I am sorry you are too fucking stupid to understand that. The patterns we get right and build on are not because of the superstitions we invent. The patterns we get right are because of our evolution.

Grow up. Assholes like you allow humans to cling to old claims.

Brian doesn't understand this has nothing to do with Louis. Brian's too stupid to understand the truth. He can't handle the fact that I'm doing to him almost exactly the same thing he's done to me and everyone else here for years. The only difference is that Brian uses ignorance and make believe like a theist, while I use logic and fact like anyone claiming to be rational should. It eats away at him.

The absolute gold standard in irony is when he cries about it and says I'm picking him apart just because I don't like him, yet he thinks it is perfectly acceptable when he does it. lmfao. Keep crying Brian, I'm not going anywhere.

It's a free society asshole. You are the fuckwad getting upsest because I didn't kiss your ass. Your childish reaction to ridicule is what irritates me. Not in any "my life is over because Vastet picked on me". 

What make believe? The fact that humans don't have to get violent because they have their claims picked on? Or that the earth is older than any religion? Or that the  universe doesn't give a fuck about humans?

I think it is acceptable that you pick on me. I simply know you are fucking full of shit. Your dick has not fallen off because we cuss each other out. 

Get the fuck over yourself dipshit. We have been at each other's throats for years, you are still alive and so am I. 

You are not picking me apart FYI. You simply don't like my tactics. Now get your GPS fixed because the road to "give a fuck" is not here.

Brian SAYS it's a free society, but if he had his way it wouldn't be.Brian would force everyone to believe his bullshit lies, and kill everyone who disagreed with him.

Yes, it's a free society. So I'm free to chase Brian's dumb ass all over the forum and expose him for the lying sack of shit he is. And I will continue to do so until he leaves or dies, or I die, or the forum dies.

Pro tip to newcomers: I have barely been at this for a few months, not even close to years as Brian the chronic liar claims.

Fuck you asshole.......You know damned well I have not, nor ever will call for phsycial violence against anyone. And FUCK YOU for even implying that. 

There is a huge difference between human rights, and the credibility of the claim. You've gone after me for what you say are false claims or bad claims, you have called me a liar just as you have here. Now show everyone here what a fucking liar you are now. I DO NOT WANT YOU DEAD ASSHOLE, I simpley think you are full of shit. 

You've been at this for a few months? No asshole, you turned on me years ago on this forum.

Hey crybaby, I DO NOT WANT YOU DEAD.......Now what?

Hey crybaby...... Calling religion poison is not a call for oppressive laws, or genocide.

Civility is not being free from getting offended, civility is what you do when someone offends you.

You called me a peice of shit. Ok, so show me where I called for your arrest because you did that. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

You don't like me and that is all this amounts to. GROW THE FUCK UP CRYBABY!

No, fuck YOU asshole. If you had even a shred of honesty within yourself you'd acknowledge you've advocated for violence against both theists and conservatives on multiple occasions.

No moron, I only turned on you a few months ago. You turned on me long before that, true.

You're the biggest piece of shit who ever posted on this forum. You hypocrite scum. Go fuck yourself.

You can only speak of the human body and what will happen at death. To say you "know" there is no after-life is an ignorant statement that is unfounded. You can only say there is no evidence to support such things.

That position requires the assumption that there are extraordinary forces at work that we cannot perceive or prove in any way. It is theism. I can certainly say I know what happens at death: the cessation of existence. Anything else is akin to suggesting there's a god. Scientifically we can not say one way or the other because science doesn't have any use on claims about unobservable and untestable phenomena, but logic says thinking there's anything more than oblivion is irrational.

It is an assumption to say "extraordinary forces at work". It might be completely natural and as I believe, unrelated to needing a god or creator. It could be that "life after death" is 100% normal in the process.

No. If there is life after death, then there is an extremely extraordinary nature to the universe that we are all completely blind to. It's a begging the question fallacy at it's finest.

Completely false and inaccurate. If there is life after death then it is 100% normal for this Universe.

^Doesn't understand logic. 100% Fail.

'If there'

'If'

'if'

Begging the question. /argument. You lose.

i think digital's problem is with the idea of "knowing" there is no life after death. we can say the notion of life after death is both implausible and illogical, but the OP used the word "know" in an absolute sense, and the idea of absolute knowledge is also implausible and illogical.

I'm willing to give Louis the benefit of the doubt and assume he knows enough about science to know that no absolute claim can ever be accurately made in such a discussion. He is still quite correct to hold the assumption there is nothing after death, and quite correct to point out that every single test we have ever come up with from physics to biology to chemistry and everything else points to that conclusion. Doubting the results is akin to doubting evolution. It is possible that we are wrong, but it is so very unlikely that there is absolutely no justification to think we are wrong.
Any other position is literally identical to theism. It immediately and irrevocably assumes qualities to the universe that do not appear in any observation or test, that would be extremely extraordinary by definition.

Agreed.

You will understand me best iwbiek because of your studies of Buddhism and eastern philosophy.

First I will say I don't believe in 'life after death' and when I use the term it is only for convenience. Life signifies the living in the physical world with interpretations of those experiences. When my body ceases to function it will cease to be alive.

There is no self. I do not exist. Yet I experience the physical world and my ego to use emotions to form attachments to sex, food and other material possessions. These attachments are a distract from the truth.

I rejected the idea that any view based from an emotional reaction to a physical experiences is truthful. Only when a person is completely calm and detached from a experience can they truly see the situation.

I do not support the idea of a god or creator because history shows that mankind has made up gods and religions to explain the unknown. Science would show that some humans are more predisposed to believe in gods. There is plenty of factual evidence to question and dismiss gods.

I do support the notion that when my body ceases that I will experience a transition. I will be reborn again and again until I reach a state of non-attachment to all things physical.

Pure bunk

yes, i understand your position, though i do not hold the same beliefs. my dabbling in indian philosophy has made me think very linguistically about everything. i may agree with louis in spirit but i don't care for dressing empiricism up in the language of polemics, and i'm allergic to wooly thinking.

Pure ignorance.

Pure stupidity and ignorance combined with the arrogance to believe in the unbelievable and say I'm the ignorant one.

Besides putting words in my mouth, your an idiot from canada who celebrates thanksgiving in October when that is the time for ghouls and monsters. November is a much better month for Thanksgiving.

I didn't put any words in your mouth moron. I didn't have to. And our Thanksgiving actually occurs at roughly the time the events it celebrates occurred. Trust Americans to do everything wrong.

Typical Canadian bacon. It's loin morons. Loin.

You said I believed in something that I didn't.

Canadians can't even make up there mind on when to celebrate it. You might as well call it Thanksgiving week.

No I didn't.

So either you lied there or you're lying now. Either way you're lying.

Ridiculous. More ignorance.

Then you misused a word.

Nope.

Your use of the word unbelievable applies only to your reality. You said it in a manner which forces your opinion on to my position of the subject.

Nope. You'd like to believe otherwise but it doesn't work that way. All religions and ludicrous beliefs like this are unbelievable. Just because some people choose to believe in the unbelievable doesn't make it unbelievable.

Saying something in unbelievable doesn't make it incorrect.

Saying you believe in something which is highly unlikely doesn't make it right.

Saying that some one ignorant to believe in something you consider unbelievable is self righteous.

---

You might have some good points about my experiences being misleading to me. It was overwhelming to experience. The odds of it being coincidental is beyond calculations. For me to explain it would be very difficult because it is personal. However you can't take it away from me just because you think you are right. You can only assume.

There is very credible research in the field of rebirth. People who are attempting to find testable evidence of it.

People who research string theory are thought of being quacks but others in their area of expertise. Yet, the evidence must be tested and worked with, examined, tested, examined again, tested.

You know as well as any one else that research can take decades. I find it too early in the field to say nay or yea to it. I can only use my life to define my belief.

I also don't compare this to believing in a creator. I find that believing in a creator silly because there are so many of them. History shows that gods were created to fill a void. They show their rise and fall through the centuries. People want to say "my god is the right one" but 500 years from now what will their god be? morphed? dead?

By the same standards used to define the universe and everything in it it IS incorrect. In fact I am so certain it is incorrect I would bet my life and everything I ever owned on it. I would bet the whole solar system and everything in it. Just like christians and scientologists and muslims and jews and every other theist, you read the words that some human wrote down after inventing a ridiculous idea and you chose to believe it even though it was absolutely ridiculous.

There is NO credible research on life after death or reincarnation. Absolutely none. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar. The 'field' is older than gravity and yet nothing has ever been found.

There is nothing after death, and you are a fool for thinking otherwise.

Those who believe in a specific creator and lay claim to know their creator as the most powerful, blah blah blah, are unfounded in their beliefs. Their religions all came about in a period when ignorance ruled. Their stories have foundations in assumptions and lies used to gain power over the public. They don't observe and question their environment. They see lightning and say their god created it.

I look at the world, Universe, etc and see limits. I know there is an edge to the Universe in some form. If there is a limit or edge to this Universe then there must be something beyond. Multiuniverses or what ever string theory is popular today, asks many questions that I ask myself. What is beyond? What was the beginning? what is the end?

I remove myself from the situation, including atheism, to see what could be possible that science has yet to ask or research. At one time mankind would have thought that flight was inpossible, going to the moon was impossible. I believe that one day mankind will figure it out, after the petty wars have ended and materialism is no longer needed.

http://www.npr.org/2014/01/05/259886077/searching-for-science-behind-reincarnation

Those who believe in an afterlife or reincarnation are just as off kilter as anyone who believes in a god. The belief of such originally, just like theism, came about in a period when ignorance ruled.

In fact there is no 'edge' to the universe. This has been explicitly proven thanks in part to Einstein.

At no time in history was flight thought to be impossible. There are records of attempts to fly going back as far as history can take us. The mere fact that there are species that can fly has always been absolute proof that it is possible to fly.

If reincarnation were true, then everyone would have memoryies of past lives. The article you link to is completely heresay. There's no article in a scientific journal, no peer review, no controls, absolutely nothing scientific at all. It's pure bullshit, and you're a fool to think otherwise. It's literally identical in every aspect to every claim of miraculous events propagated by the catholic church.

I think you are off kilter for many other reasons other than your belief in non-reincarnation.

Reincarnation existed because of rational thinking rather than ignorance.

I love to hear this "in fact there is no 'edge' to the universe' but in the link I provide below they contradict their own explainations. 

https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/faq.htm#e1

If space existed before the expansion of the known Universe, then space was filled with the expansion after the "Big Bang". There would be an edge to the expansion of matter and energy.

No. Not every one would have memories.

I can not prove to you my experience. I know reincarnation exists. I've experienced death of a loved one half way around the world. It happened.

All lies, no science, pure bullshit.

"Reincarnation existed because of rational thinking rather than ignorance."

Absolute bullshit. Reincarnation began because of wishful thinking and the fear of death. Not rational thinking.

"If space existed before the expansion of the known Universe"

Begging the question. Fail.

"No. Not every one would have memories."

Yes, everyone would.

"I can not prove to you my experience. I know reincarnation exists. I've experienced death of a loved one half way around the world. It happened."

No, it didn't. And even if you did experience this telepathic event, it still wouldn't have any impact on the question of reincarnation.

You need to see a psychiatrist. You're just as loony as any theist.

Reincarnation existed before organized religion. It was a natural process for humans because every thing they saw was being recycled. You'd bury a body, it would decompose and they a tree would grow.

No begging the question, actual facts provided by the Harvard link. If you have a single point which expands within space then there is an edge to the expansion.

No not every one would.

Yes it did happen. I have video tape of the morning after when I spoke to my room mate about it. I was in China when she died. I had the dream twice then on the second day my girlfriend at the time told me that she had died. Then the dreams stopped.

I think you are the looney one. You argue with people like Brian over shit threads. You must have a lot of free time on your hands and you like filling it with constant comments about ridiculous subject matter which is pointless. You go on, and on, and on... over and over... the threads just keep going. You'd think that after the first few comments you'd walk away and say "I've had enough of this, my time is more valuable spent elsewhere" but instead you post rebuttal after rebuttal.

You defintely have issues dude. You are the one needing a shrink.

"Reincarnation existed before organized religion."

Taking pages from Brian's playbook now I see. This is an assertion without evidence, and patently ridiculous as an argument considering how irrational people were before the invention of logic, science, and organised religion. Makes suicide bombers and abortion clinic shooters look perfectly sane in comparison.

" It was a natural process for humans because every thing they saw was being recycled."

Bullshit. It wasn't until the 19th century when people even had the means to see the worlds recycling system, and it really wasn't until the last couple decades that we could truly witness it in action.

"You'd bury a body, it would decompose and they a tree would grow."

Ridiculous. That's not even what happens, and even I did accept your exceptionally crude and misleading description, it happens on a timescale so large that noone would even have noticed a correlation.

"No begging the question, actual facts provided by the Harvard link."

I don't care if Hawking himself said it, you CANNOT assume ANYTHING before the Big Bang without begging the question. Period. Lrn2logic.

"No not every one would."

Yes, everyone would.

"Yes it did happen."

No, it didn't.

"I have video tape of the morning after when I spoke to my room mate about it. I was in China when she died. I had the dream twice then on the second day my girlfriend at the time told me that she had died. Then the dreams stopped."

Irrelevant. Have enough dreams and some of them will come true. That's a statistical fact. Not proof of magical bullshit. You're assuming cause and effect with absolutely no evidence to support it.

"I think you are the looney one. "

Loony ones always think the sane people are loony, so I don't care what you think. I know with certainty that you are as nutty as a jar of peanut butter.

"You argue with people like Brian over shit threads. "

Mischaracterisation. 99% of the time I'm not even talking to him. And I have damn good reason for what I'm doing. Not to mention this conversation has nothing to do with Brian and you're just stacking up more fallacies by even mentioning him.

"You must have a lot of free time on your hands and you like filling it with constant comments about ridiculous subject matter which is pointless."

Like you're doing here? lol hypocrite.

"You defintely have issues dude. You are the one needing a shrink."

Repeat this while looking in the mirror until it sinks in to your thick skull.