Fantastic post however just as the sceptic beliving based on what he saw.
He didn't really see what he started beliving in.
More, his argumenst are just as yours highly philosphical.
I don't say that your post doesn't make any sense.
It just the sceptic in the video offered a proof/evidence and then he didn't present it. I wouldn't say that all sceptics are too close minded to see the logic it just there could be 100 philophies making sense.
You explain why NDE' are different which isn't supported by biological activity.
You as well try to explain the lack of pattern while others claim that pattern exist. We can both agree that a proof can't be philosophical, not even for a sake of sceptics but what about people having different philosophy and don't agree with you? It isn't an excersise where everone can be right and everyone can be wrong. The whole proof meant to be at least a pattern existing in all those experiments, since the pattern doesn't exist and is even contradictionary, empirical evidence during touchable experience can't be even connected to the answer. You would need to state that majority supports that thesis for the empirical proof anyway but since there isn't a pattern, philosophies will aso he contradictionary.
Ps
Is there anyone else here on this forum besides you and I?
SCEPCOP Forum
Scientific Committee to Evaluate PseudoSkeptic Criticism of the Paranormal
