Scientific Evidence for the AfterlifeTherefore, a skeptic can disprove the existence of spirits and the afterlife by giving adequate reasons for rejecting the evidence said to demonstrate their existence.
This shouldn't be a problem. Most skeptics claim to believe only what is proved.
The theory of the afterlife has passed tests that could falsify it, and therefore it is supported by empirical evidence, which is to say, belief in the afterlife is scientific.
What happens to this thread when I introduce this evidence?
I have not heard any adequate rebuttals from skeptics to the Scientific Evidence for the Afterlife that I have presented. This shows me that the truth is out there but people will simply NOT bother to read it.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10583921#msg10583921https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10536444#msg10536444The second link will link you to peer-reviewed scientific evidence explaining the "machine" concept that BADecker is discussing; however, none of these sources even use the word "machine".
To summarize: skeptics should read moar!
The nearly universal structure of the genetic code and the handedness of proteins and nucleic acids is preserved in horizontal gene transfer and attests to a universal ancestor. Nevertheless, horizontal gene transfer has substantially erased the record of the earliest genetic sequences. This means that the earliest branches of the tree are not
knowable.
Bonus Link (mentions "machines" just once):
http://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho33.htm