IMG_0569
Blog powered by Typepad

« Quantum grapes | Main | Sunday morning bird attack »

Comments

Ooooohhh! It sounds delicious. I can't wait! Finally a movie I care enough about to actually go to the Movie theatre and watch instead of waiting for it to come out on Netflix.

You know what's strange to me? Some people I've met don't seem to have any interest whatsoever in the topic of life after death. It's like they either don't want to think about it or don't find it interesting? All they are interested in is this life. I don't know if they think they are going to live forever or whether they believe the topic is completely unknowable?

I went and did a search on the release date. It looks like it's coming out on 10-22-10 so I'll have to wait a little more than a month to go see it.

this movie will "make your day"

- Sounds great, would love to see it =D

Sounds very interesting, can't wait to see it.

@Art, I share your confusion on this point. To me there is nearly no greater question save perhaps "what is the meaning of it all?". That so many people can run through their lives without ever pondering these topics is as big a mystery to me as the questions themselves.

I guess they just don't want to think about death? Or they've all ready made up their minds? Reminds me of the old myth about an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand to avoid predators. It's like if I don't think about it then it's never going to happen to me.

True indeed. Of course, many people feel the same way about politics as we do about afterlife speculation, and I don't have much interest in that at all. So I'm sure we're all ostriches in some fashion or another. :)

Yeah, I hate politics. Just more "duality and separation" as far as I'm concerned. Seems to me life dishes up enough of that on it's own without me having to go and intentionally look for more! I actually made a D in Political Science 101 my freshman year in college at the University of Georgia (way back during Spring quarter 1972!). That is how much I hate politics. I have an older sister that is endlessly fascinated by politics and watches MSNBC all day long and likes to watch all those shows where they argue and it fills her head up. Me? Not so much! Lately I've been reading some really interesting stuff about how our universe is projected and where it comes from. What is especially interesting is that Emmanuel Swedenborg made a statement way back in the 17th century that sounds almost exactly like one I just read in Pim Van Lommel's book.

"At a subnuclear level, the quarks and gluons that constitute the neutrons and protons of our body's cells are destroyed and regenerated within the time frame of a staggering small 10 to the minus 23 seconds. So in fact throughout our lives our bodies are destroyed and reconstructed once every 10 to the minus 23 seconds." - excerpt from Consciousness Beyond Life by Dr. Pimm Van Lommel, M.D. (page 281)

"This One is the First and whatever exists both in this world and in other realms of the Universe owes it's existence to it. We must not think of existing beings - both material and immaterial, animate and inanimate, animal and human, as standing in themselves. Rather their being has to be constantly replenished from the First, the source of all being. Everything depends on the First for strength and vitality. "If anything were not kept in constant connection with the First, through intermediate means, it would instantly collapse and disintegrate." Nothing stands in itself as a complete and independent substance; everything derives it's power of being from a transcendent, otherworldly source - from the One or the First." - Emmanuel Swedenborg, 17th Century Mystic

Good stuff!

This sounds like a fantastic movie. As for people who don't seem to think about what happens after we pass on, I was reading Micheal Sabom last night, and he mentioned Freud's theory--that we subconsciously believe death will never happen to us. When I do think about my own death, I do seem sometimes to have an irrational belief that it will never happen. Maybe this is a defense reaction, or perhaps everyone at some level has some hidden knowledge about the true nature of reality. My most convincing evidence of an afterlife occurred when I was a very young child, I saw a ghost--or at least I thought I did--but the odd thing was that it was a person composed entirely of light and exuded more of a peaceful feeling than anything. It was quite unlike any description of ghosts I've ever come across in movies and books, and the fact that it was composed entirely of light has puzzled me for many years. Even if it was some figment of my imagination, why would it be composed entirely of light? If anyone has an idea, let me know. And sorry for the long rambling post.

The word 'angel' comes from the Greek angelos meaning a messenger of light.

When people see deceased relatives during ADC's (after death communications) they are often "backlit" with light. We live in a holographic universe and everything is composed entirely of coherent light. That is why when people pop out of their bodies during NDEs they say that our Universe seems "unreal" and why they can just pass through everything. Our Universe is Maya, an illusion.

Kathleen, I've had a number of experiences of people composed of light. I never understand those experiences particularly well. My most recent one was just a few days ago and my reaction was to have a bit of a meltdown.

I'm pretty good with "easy" anomalous experiences. Ghosts that look like people and say the sorts of things that people say. Dreams that turn out to be precognitive. Those things don't freak me out anymore.

But seeing people made of light always puts me into a state of cognitive dissonance. They don't seem threatening or scary. They have actually helped me at times. But I still have no idea what to make of them.

Interesting thought Art, I had the same sort of idea as I've read about people's NDEs and the holographic universe. By the way, this wasn't a deceased relative, he seemed to be a person from another time, and seemed peaceful and just curious if anything. Sandy, these images may just be some kind of "bleed-over" and as such are perfectly harmless. I've never had a similar experience, but the idea of the holographic universe certainly got me thinking. It reminds me of a person who experienced an NDE and said that he tried to get the doctor's attention, but his own form passed right through the doctor. The two sides might co-exist but can't interact.

mind blowing (quite literally) interview with Stu Hameroff.

http://www.ions.org/library/audio-teleseminars/what-is-consciousness-with-stuart-hameroff/

Michael D, you might enjoy this too.

http://vimeo.com/7357010

Art:
“You know what's strange to me? Some people I've met don't seem to have any interest whatsoever in the topic of life after death. It's like they either don't want to think about it or don't find it interesting? All they are interested in is this life. I don't know if they think they are going to live forever or whether they believe the topic is completely unknowable?“

Perhaps unintentionally, the question applies to me as well, so I will do my best to answer it.

I have spent several years closely following research in the field of parapsychology, reading books on near-death experiences and related subjects, discussing them with friends and colleagues, even going to mediums for readings. I’ve constructed a worldview from all this information that I think is consistent with the picture of the afterlife that they paint. This worldview has served as a basis for my decisions on how to live this life ever since.

I’ve since come to the conclusion that I could have arrived at an identical approach to living by following a completely different route – that of unearthing and honouring my feelings. This is an experiential approach rather than a metaphysical one, and it yields the same answers without giving much of an inkling as to what awaits us after death. This is not to say that engaging the questions of death and the afterlife is without value. I think that they can be tremendously powerful catalysts for helping us live this life to the height of its potential. I also think that this approach is one of many.

So, to answer your question, I don’t think that I’m going to live forever nor do I consider the topic of life after death to be unknowable. It has simply served its purpose in enabling me to live this life the best I can. I’m still somewhat interested in the topic, but not nearly to the same extent as I once was.

Given my changed perspective, I’m curious why you think that our focus should be on the afterlife rather than this life? If you agree that the focus should be on this life, what do you gain from continuously engaging with the question of the afterlife?

"Given my changed perspective, I’m curious why you think that our focus should be on the afterlife rather than this life? If you agree that the focus should be on this life, what do you gain from continuously engaging with the question of the afterlife?" - Hrvoje Butkovic
--------------------------------------------

Have you never lost anyone you love? Don't you wonder if you'll ever see them again? This life is the blink of an eye compared to eternity and death is inevitable. We are only here for a little while. It seems only yesterday I was in college at the University of Georgia and now I'm all ready 57 years old.

Where did those years go? Most members of my family die in their early to mid 70's which means most likely I've got maybe another 15 to 20 years left. 20 years ago was only 1990 which to me seems like just yesterday. 1990 to me is the recent past.

But mostly the truth is that I still miss my mom who died when I was 15 years old in 1968. She was 51 years old and she died of stomach cancer. I was a real momma's boy and it was a real shocker to me when she died. I think of her everyday and I'm hoping like heck that when it comes my turn to cross over that she will be there to meet me in that Light. My dad died in 1984 when he was 65 years old, and my sister Rose died in 1988 at the age of 46.

It's not like I don't have a life. I've been married for 36 years, have two degrees, one in Animal Science and one in Education, live in a house on two acres set back in the woods of Middle Tennessee, worked for 20 years in biomedical research (mostly cancer research), am now retired, and have time to ponder life's most interesting questions. Oh yeah, I've also got some fierce osteoarthritis in my hips and back and shoulder so I do a lot of setting and reading.

I’m curious why you think that our focus should be on the afterlife rather than this life? If you agree that the focus should be on this life, what do you gain from continuously engaging with the question of the afterlife?

Maybe because there is only one life albeit in different forms.

Spirit communicators suggest that there is a purpose to earth life which should be lived to the full but this doesn't mean we should not be interested in what is called the 'afterlife'.

After all it is where we will live once we 'shuffle off this mortal coil'.

Art:
”Have you never lost anyone you love? Don't you wonder if you'll ever see them again?”

My father died 9 years ago. I’m quite certain that I will see him again, largely because of a series of dream-state encounters that every member of my family has had with him since his death, encounters that were much too emotionally intense to be merely subconscious ramblings or something to that effect. I don’t really ponder this anymore.

That aside, it sounds like we are simply at different stages of our lives. I’m 36 and still have a lot that I want to accomplish. Spiritually speaking, I’m really just starting out. Perhaps I will eventually get bored with all the activity and become content to simply be. Right now, however, this feels many years away...

Being in pain everyday made me realize my mortality. To be honest before the arthritis set in I didn't think too much about it. Maybe it happened for a reason? Perhaps so I would start thinking about questions like "why are we here" and what happens after we die. I've got my own theories about those questions.

“I’ve since come to the conclusion that I could have arrived at an identical approach to living by following a completely different route – that of unearthing and honouring my feelings.”

An interesting thought, Hrvoje, and I really enjoyed reading your post.

I too have been deeply involved in “unearthing and honouring my feelings” for many years. And though it’s often been a painful process, the rewards have been substantial. Grasping the reality of the spiritual world gives me strength and courage when those qualities are sorely needed, as you seem to say here:

“nor do I consider the topic of life after death to be unknowable. It has simply served its purpose in enabling me to live this life the best I can.”

But I have a bone to pick with you here:

“unearthing and honouring my feelings . . . is an experiential approach rather than a metaphysical one”:

Can you really separate the two? Certainly, anyone whose metaphysical understanding has come about through an NDE or other profound spiritual event might have a hard time making that distinction.

And I like this exchange:

Hrvoje: “I’m curious why you think that our focus should be on the afterlife rather than this life? If you agree that the focus should be on this life, what do you gain from continuously engaging with the question of the afterlife?"

Zerdini: "Maybe because there is only one life albeit in different forms.”

The perfect answer, Zerdini.

I worry about being too interested in what comes next. As an NDEr, I really miss being dead. I know that sounds awful. It doesn't mean that I don't see the value in this life and appreciate my experiences here. I do value this life. It's incredibly important. But I feel homesick for where I was when I died.

It doesn't help that I still experience ghosts. I don't know what they are for sure. Maybe I just pick up information from the environment around me and somehow interpret it as a ghost. Or maybe they are just what they seem to be. People who have died but still survive.

I have trouble seeing that line between life and death. It just looks like we change. People are always changing in life. So maybe it makes sense that they change afterlife too.

"People are always changing in life. So maybe it makes sense that they change afterlife too."

Or, as Zerdini said, maybe there's only one life. With many chapters—to keep us interested!

Aren't our physical bodies always changing too, with our cells constantly dying and then being replaced? Perhaps death is similar. As to why some people are more concerned with life after death than others, it's been my experience that people who have lost someone close to them think about it more than others. They're not afraid for themselves, they are just concerned about the lost one. There are also many people who prefer not to think at all, and prefer others to do their thinking for them.

Bruce Siegel:
”Can you really separate the two? Certainly, anyone whose metaphysical understanding has come about through an NDE or other profound spiritual event might have a hard time making that distinction.”

Yes, a spiritual event like that would transform both one’s worldview and one’s approach to living. A different spiritual event, say a vision of one’s destiny, might transform one’s approach to living without giving much away in terms of what comes next. And intellectually pondering the afterlife, which is what reading books on the subject essentially amounts to, doesn’t necessarily seep into the way one lives in any substantial manner. At least this has been my experience. Past a certain point, I have found it very difficult to live this life to the full, as Zerdini put it, while devoting a significant amount of time to pondering what comes next.

I hope that makes sense.

Interesting thoughts above. I still vividly remember the day seven years ago when i froze solid at work as a realisation came over me that this is my only life, i'm going to die, and 'what if there's nothing after?' It came from nowhere and i was in shock for some time after. In the seven years since then i have also done my own research which started with buying Crossing Over by John Edward and finding websites such as survivalafterdeath.org. Now that i'm on the pro-survival side of the debate i also think about the matter less, but the future loss of my parents is a daily thought. Kathleen's mention of caring about the loss of family hits the nail squarely on the head for me.

"Kathleen's mention of caring about the loss of family hits the nail squarely on the head for me." - Andretti
----------------------------------

The loss of someone we love is the ultimate lesson in what it means and how it feels to be separate for the soul. Nothing else comes close. The more emotional the experience the more powerful and long lasting the memory it creates. We here in the physical universe can't begin to comprehend or understand the infinite and overwhelming feelings of oneness and connectedness in heaven. I have a sneaking suspicion that "separation" can't be learned there so it has to be learned here. From the moment we exit our mother's wombs and the umbilical cord is cut in two till the day we die and our death's become a lesson in separation to the loved ones we leave behind life is one big long lesson in what it means and how it feels to be separate.

"Aren't our physical bodies always changing too, with our cells constantly dying and then being replaced?" - Kathleen
--------------------------------------------

Here's a quote from Consciousness Beyond Life (page 281) by Dr. Pim Van Lommel that answers your question...

"At a subnuclear level, the quarks and gluons that constitute the neutrons and protons of our body's cells are destroyed and regenerated within the time frame of a staggering small 10 to the minus 23 seconds. So in fact throughout our lives our bodies are destroyed and reconstructed once every 10 to the minus 23 seconds."

And another quote by Emmanuel Swedenborg's book "Heaven and Hell" that says almost the same thing only in more spiritual terms....

"This One is the First and whatever exists both in this world and in other realms of the Universe owes it's existence to it. We must not think of existing beings - both material and immaterial, animate and inanimate, animal and human, as standing in themselves. Rather their being has to be constantly replenished from the First, the source of all being. Everything depends on the First for strength and vitality. "If anything were not kept in constant connection with the First, through intermediate means, it would instantly collapse and disintegrate." Nothing stands in itself as a complete and independent substance; everything derives it's power of being from a transcendent, otherworldly source - from the One or the First."

Swedenborg was a 17th Century Swedish Mystic who for the first part of his life was a Scientist and then in his late 50's, after a high fever, starting having mystical visions.


Off topic. I saw Devil today. It was actually good. Much better, I thought, than Shyamalan's last three efforts.

I'm looking forward to Clint Eastwood's movie Hereafter when it comes out. Old Clint's getting old enough now to where the topic of life after death is becoming interesting to him. I told my wife that we might actually have to go to the theatre and watch it before it comes out on DVD; that's how serious about it I am. I'm a terrible cheapskate tightwad but I'm so into "life after death" stuff that I would be willing to let go of a little cash to get to see and not have to wait till it goes to DVD. It's supposed to be out sometime towards the end of October.

One of the saddest stories I’ve ever read:

From Sky News today -

A 13-day-old baby girl has been left orphaned after her parents died in an horrific car crash on their way home from visiting her in hospital.

Lucy Schollbach was born 12 weeks premature, weighing just two-and-a-half pounds.

Her parents Justin Schollbach, 42, and Leah James, 33, died instantly when their car veered off the road and hit a street lamp, Sydney's Sunday Telegraph has reported.

They were just a few minutes away from their home in the Sydney suburb of Kurnell after the hour-long trip to visit Lucy.

Mr Schollbach and Ms James made the trip twice a day to see their daughter, who spends most of her time in an incubator at Sydney's Royal Hospital For Women.

It was during one of these visits that Andrew Loxton, the father of Ms James' nine-year-old son Stephen, filmed the couple cuddling Lucy.

Mr Loxton said Ms James was a loving and devoted mother.

"Leah was always smiling like a Cheshire cat, so happy to be visiting her little baby girl," he told the Sunday Telegraph.

"I'd just like to see that smile again."

Mr Schollbach's father, Rob, said: "Having Lucy changed Justin.

"It's the happiest I have seen him in his whole life and now this has happened."

Doctors say Lucy is expected to stay in hospital until November.

She is in the care of Sydney social services until it is decided who will raise her.

Her parents' funerals will be held next week.

Here's a link to an upcoming movie readers of this blog would be interested in. It's described as a documentary. Looks very interesting.

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/wakeup/

I lost my son 2 years ago - he was 25. He was my only child. During that same time my brother committed suicide and died after lingering on in an excruciatingly "locked in" neurological state for several months.

I had already lost my mother many years ago and felt cheated at never having a mother to share my own child raising experiences with.

I had to place my aging father in a nursing home where he still survives. He does not seem like my father although the man looks and talks in a similar fashion at times. At other times he is lost in whatever version of reality he calls home. I visit him several times a week even though it pains me to see his deterioration.

And now,I ask,who am I? Where is my son? Why can't I go with him?

Questions like this haunt me everyday and I spend hours in metaphysical pursuits hoping to find a glimpse of my dear child. No one seems to understand that this life really has little hold on me anymore. I am 52 and I feel it is over for me. Actually hope it is over.

I seem to know more people on the other side than who exist here so it makes sense that I think of the afterlife more than this one.

Such a broken existence it is. I am amazed that I can pull on my shoes and shop for light bulbs.


Sorry to hear that you've had so much pain to deal with in your life, Marcelle. Have you considered counseling or therapy to address the sadness you feel? There are people who can help.

Marcelle, grief counseling is something many people are quick to dismiss, but it is something worth looking into. I'm so sorry you've had to deal with so much loss. I wish you well.

http://www.foreverfamilyfoundation.org/index2.html

Thank you for your comments. I had been participating in individual grief counseling for awhile but felt the need to move on to something less intense such as a support group. It has been difficult locating one that feels appropriate but I will continue the search. The grief counselor I had been working with was an extraordinary individual and I can probably return for "booster shots" if I need too. It has been such a life changing experience though - this loss that now defines me, surrounds me at every stage and season. I have always been a voracious reader and now I troll the libraries and bookstores and the internet trying to fashion some idea of what has happened to my child. The idea of an evolutionary spirituality has always appealed to me and even more so now. The static version of an afterlife that has been with me since childhood no longer works.
I have enjoyed reading your blog here and have learned some things that otherwise would not have occurred to me. I am glad I stopped by.

What a great conversation going on here. I can't wait to check out Hereafter.

Somebody made a good point earlier related to focusing on this life instead of on the afterlife. I think that many get caught up in the various notions of the "afterlife" and the "beyond" as a result of fear… a way to find certainty amongst uncertainty... similar to the way in which we might embrace certain beliefs to give us a sense of hope (perhaps false, perhaps not).

That being said, it does seem important that we ask the big questions and try to find some probable truths as to our existence. Any findings have to exist as “probable truths” as apposed to “truths”. Uncertainty is something that we have to accept and live with. The best we can do is to put all of our information and findings though our own probability filter and move toward those truths that are most probable. Tom Campbell (author of My Big Toe) gives a great bit of advice in this approach of uncovering these big questions about life: proceed with open-minded skepticism. In this way we can seek answers without being tempted to hold or refuse something as a means to comfort our fears.

Michael, you seem to be using some of this open-minded skepticism toward your NDE:

"The doctors told me it was a combination of the intense pain and the morphine. Maybe, but how did these, visions I suppose attach themselves so powerfully to my soul, to my mind? To this day the memory of the visions haunts me, and thus I believe we go somewhere after this life, though I don’t know where".

The idea of things being or seeming as real in your NDE as the experiences here in your normal day-to-day life is interesting to me. This is something that I have explored with lucid dreaming. I have found that the level of realness while lucid in a dream is equal to the level of realness in my waking life. Granted, things do not operate and react in the same way, but the “level” of realness is equal. I also found this to be true during the few out-of-body experiences that I have had. I use the term out-of-body because it is the common term use to describe such experiences. During these experiences, the level (or perhaps power) of realness seemed to be a bit higher or larger than normal or waking life. Mix all this plus near death experiences and the like in a blender, and we have some pretty interesting questions to ask about our current existence and the reality in which we exist.

My fail safe in all things has been this: The purpose of life is to grow toward or become more like love. If I am wrong, then that’s okay. In that case, I will remain content having tried to live in love anyway. If I am correct, then I will have tried to live life according to the actual purpose and can pat myself on the back later. All the other details about this life and reality are certainly interesting and can lead us to better understand our existence and this reality, but that love thing seems to be the key ☺

For those interested, I highly recommend checking out My Big Toe by Tom Campbell. Of the 100’s of books that I have read related to religion, existence, physics, metaphysics, etc, this is the one that has truly changed my life. It is thick with both pages and concepts, but worth the time.

"Michael, you seem to be using some of this open-minded skepticism toward your NDE"

For the record, the NDE was John H. Foote's, not mine. I was quoting him. I've never had an NDE.

At least, not one you remember :)

Here's a link to My Big Toe on Amazon. ($25 or so new; 824 pages!)

I tried reading "My Big TOE" but couldn't get very far into it. I was turned off by the author's repetitious writing style.

That said, many people speak very highly of the book.

Has anyone read Raymond Moody's new Book Glimpses of Eternity? about Shared Death Experiences.

Has good reviews on Amazon so far.

"For the record, the NDE was John H. Foote's, not mine. I was quoting him. I've never had an NDE."

Sorry about that Michael. I'm not sure how I missed that.

Roger Ebert has reviewed "Hereafter", which you can find here:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101019/REVIEWS/101019979

There are some interesting comments from Ebert though that just makes me wonder about his belief system, just out of curiosity and nothing else.

"Hereafter" considers the idea of an afterlife with tenderness, beauty and a gentle tact. I was surprised to find it enthralling. I don't believe in woo-woo, but then neither, I suspect, does Eastwood. This is a film about the afterlife that carefully avoids committing itself on such a possibility. The closest it comes is the idea of consciousness after apparent death. This is plausible. Many near-death survivors report the same memories, of the white light, the waiting figures and a feeling of peace.

Ebert is a former Catholic who in the past has criticized movies that bashed the religion but when questioned about his belief system, he doesn't want to provide a category for people to apply him to or his convictions reduced to a word. He says at minimum, he is a secular humanist despite people having called him an atheist or agnostic.

But his comments kind of some ambiguous as seen in the quoted paragraph. First he says he doesn't believe in "woo-woo", which many of us unfortunately know as a term skeptics that aren't too tactful use to deride those who have non-materialistic beliefs. One could assume that Ebert is saying he doesn't believe in the afterlife, but at then he later admits the plausibility that consciousness maybe able to continue after death.

I wonder if Ebert is intentionally vague on his beliefs, considering his audience may have a wide range of beliefs.

Note that Ebert says "consciousness after apparent death." The key word may be "apparent." Or maybe not.

At any rate, I'm interested in seeing this movie, and I'm glad to see it's getting some respectful reviews.

True, Michael. Actually, the more I dig into Ebert, the more I think he current leans towards a non-belief in survival:

I know it is coming, and I do not fear it, because I believe there is nothing on the other side of death to fear. I hope to be spared as much pain as possible on the approach path. I was perfectly content before I was born, and I think of death as the same state. What I am grateful for is the gift of intelligence, and for life, love, wonder, and laughter. You can't say it wasn't interesting. My lifetime's memories are what I have brought home from the trip. I will require them for eternity no more than that little souvenir of the Eiffel Tower I brought home from Paris.

That quote was from a few months to a year go about Ebert on his impending death. The one thing I don't get is how he says the memories are what he brought home from the "trip" (referring to life most likely) but then seems to imply he doesn't need them anyways.

But the Ebert's comment does make me wonder about any purpose in a materialistic view: why bother with building a lifetime of memories you're going to eventually forget and not even know you had in the first place?

One more thing, I've noticed that Ebert mentions that the film's writer Peter Morgan doesn't believe in the afterlife (according to Clint Eastwood). It's funny, some skeptics say there is too much "woo" in our society today (Dawkins says we should have more science minded books than Harry Potter) yet it seems that it's not necessarily the "fault" of the "woo-ists" but also among the ranks of people that are similarly minded to them.

From that I conclude that while while not everyone may believe in the paranormal, not all non-believers are apprehended by it in the way some skeptics are. After all, if that was the case I doubt Morgan would've written this film nor would Ebert have recommended it (remember, while Ebert claims the movie doesn't side with the afterlife it doesn't go against it either apparently).

If Ebert believed in an afterlife, would that make one more likely? Less likely?

I truly don't get the almost non stop obsession to want to find other folks of stature, even random stature - who seem to side with survival.....as a way of making it more likely, or intellectually viable.


What I find most interesting is even professional "skeptics" and folks who earn a living from writing about matters of life and death, more often than not....are completely unaware of most of the more persuasive research and suggestive evidence.

I went through a whole bunch of the Skeptiko podcasts a few weeks back....and it amazed me how many "skeptics" said some variation of - "uh....no, I'm not familiar with that" or - "i'm busy, and can't be expected to read up on X...", etc.

I'll betcha, just like 99% of the population - Roger Ebert has had no exposure to the vast majority of the books, authors and more serious studies shared on this blog or others.

If he did - his review on the potential for an afterlife would be equally as interesting, as his review of Hereafter.

But otherwise - I'm not sure it matters.


My wife and I are planning on going to see Hereafter for a matinee on Sunday afternoon. In order to save a few bucks! We normally go to Church on Sunday morning with my wife's parents. I really like our preacher so it's not that onerous. I like the socializing and the singing. Most of the time when there is a movie I want to see I will wait till it comes to Netflix but this movie has piqued my interest so much that I don't want to wait. There have been a few movies that I wanted to see that came out years ago that are still in the "saved" part of my Netflix queue. I don't know why they never made it to DVD.

Dear Michael,
Please take a glimpse at my rare spiritual book,about my paranormal dreams predicting real events in the near future,offering proof of a supernatural entity which can only know the future,by visiting www.thelibertytrust.com and enjoying a free reading of some excerpts from it.
Any feedback will be appreciated.

With anticipated thanks,Ioan Dirina

The comments to this entry are closed.