LIFE AFTER DEATH...New Evidence

[jimmygun]

October 2003 issue of Reader's Digest screaming headline...

LIFE AFTER DEATH
New Evidence

I wondered what new slant they were trying to pull over the reading public this time but to my dissappointment but not surprise it is the same old same old. As a matter of fact I think I remember reading the same story almost verbatum many years ago. Don't they ever change their tune?

Same old anecdotes, same old spiel that there can be only one explanation for the anecdotes. Same old bull!:rolleyes:

It however would be a good piece to use to demonstrate to someone who is a skeptik neophyte. Every clever dodge is used to present the case for life after death.

[Diogenes]

It's the ' Pam Reynolds ' (mostly ) and sneakers on the ledge stuff all over again..

No evidence, much less ' new ' at all.. Just the same old anecdotes...

Some of us joined in the discussion over at RD..


Does the soul exist? (http://communitytalk.rd.com/webx?50@46.5gV0apRYtVT.4@.efe9a79/2783)

But it quickly deteriorated into a buch of fundies quoting Bible verses..


The Forum is formatted in a way that is very detrimental to ongoing discussion.

We have invited many of the participants to JREF, but I am not aware that any have joined..

[Rolfe]

I kind of like the Babel Fish in this context.

(Belief without faith is nothing - so isn't the Babel Fish a dead giveaway, then, nothing that mindbogglingly useful could have evolved by chance - never thought of that, says God, and vanishes in a puff of logic. Of course you also have to consider the end of that story too.)

Rolfe.