Roller

Hello!

Have any of you guys read this article <a href="http://tristateghosts.homestead.com/evidenceofsoul.html" target="_blank">http://tristateghosts.homestead.com/evidenceofsoul.html</a> ? Do you think there's something going on?

Freethinking Ferret

I know I'm sold! someone find me a church, STAT!

Roller

Hahahah

I didnt thought to sell anything to anyone, I run across a group of geeks who are taking this for granted and saying how this is undeniable proof for the existence of soul.

Actually, it seems that article originated from <a href="http://www.artbell.com/duncan.html" target="_blank">http://www.artbell.com/duncan.html</a> Do any of you hold Art Bell as a reliable source? I'm mean, after Hale-Bopp and God knows what else, does he have any credibility (IF he had any to start with)?

crocodile deathroll

There have been plenty of extraordinary claims about the discovery of the souls. <a href="http://lilt.ilstu.edu/kfmachin/FOI/Weight%20of%20human%20soul.htm" target="_blank"> Here is another one </a>
But that does not expain the experience of the "soul" because it may well be another objective entity with properties that can be observed. Then it just becomes like the revealing of another Russian doll and you would go on forever.
So I have made a stand as of now to ditch the idea of "soul" altogether because of all the traditional religious overtones, and istead just think of it as "subjective reality". It all just stops with subjective reality or the sesation you feel time in passing you by while you are in the center of your own little private universe. No need to reveal yet another Russian doll.

[ December 15, 2002: Message edited by: crocodile deathroll ]</p>

ps418

If the soul has weight, it cannot be nonphysical. It would have to be made of something, and therefore should be easily detectable. A big clue that the claims are a load of horsesh** is that the claimed weight of the soul had decline as measurement techniques have improved. Here's what Susan Blackmore says about these claims:

<a href="http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/si91nde.html" target="_blank">Near-Death Experiences: In or out of the body? Skeptical Inquirer 1991, 16, 34-45.</a>

Oxymoron

Oh I like this:

The ether, huh? What's that noise? Why it's Michelson and Morley turning in their graves... godammit there is life after death

eh

Well the ether was never disproven. The MM experiment did prove that the ether could not be detected, and thus is outside the realm of science.

Oddly enough, spiritualists of 100 years ago claimed the ether could explain souls. Humans have a body made of matter, AND an ether based body, which we call the soul. I guess some bad ideas never die down.

crocodile deathroll

Many funtionalist have substituted the "ether" with something even more intangible; information.
Because of the large degree of matter turnover in out bodies it is largely only a pattern of information that remains. So we may not be made of atoms after all.

We are made of bits and bytes

Origian

All we can do is laugh and smile folks.... I don't really think an 'article' written by a guy who uses way to many commas with huge sentences discussing the ether (the ETHER!!!) should be taken too seriously. Perhaps, though, somebody could repeat the experiments???!!

Oxymoron

Personally, I really like the information-is-everything idea. But it's just that - it's everything, not just us; so it explains nothing, least of all how something undetectable directly or indirectly can said to "exist" in whatever sense of the word we choose.