The Angel Effect

,    »  -   125 Comments

The Angel EffectThis documentary tries to break the barrier between science and the supernatural. It is based on Geiger's book The Third Man Factor: Surviving the Impossible, which profiles people in high-risk occupations who have survived near-death experiences with assistance from an unseen presence.

A 9/11 survivor, an astronaut and a sea diver - each felt a mysterious presence that guided them to safety in their time of greatest peril.

"This phenomenon is tremendously underreported," Geiger told TV critics. "When I started looking into it, climbers, solo sailors, shipwreck survivors, polar explorers - none wanted to talk about it because they're very tough men and women, and to concede there may be something else at play might be perceived as a sign of psychological weakness."

Geiger appeared at the National Geographic session alongside NASA astronaut Jerry Linenger, who spent several months aboard the Russian space station Mir on what was later described as the most dangerous mission in space travel history.

Linenger claims he felt the presence of his deceased father during the disastrous mission's lowest ebb. "I heard him talking to me, saying, 'Jerry, I'm proud of you. You always wanted to be an astronaut. You're going to make it through this.' And it was a positive thing that got me through the situation," said Linenger.

Watch the full documentary now

463
7.53
12345678910
Ratings: 7.53/10 from 17 users.
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Krisfalusci/100000457306764 John Krisfalusci

    When will these sad people learn? This angel effect is nothing more than the chemical effects of the lower brain that is smiliar to REM sleep. This also causes the feeling of 'walking through tunnel' effect and also feeling such things as 'another presence' in the room. Sigh..

  • http://www.newiphone5.net/ iPhone 5

    ..what about the UFO...is it the same story?...yeah it is..

  • Declan_Walsh

    About 20% and change of those that fit the "NDE" criteria actually experience that chemical reaction within the brain you and many refer to. I find that more interesting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Jacquard/1210162491 John Jacquard

    yeah right. like you know those type of details regarding each of these particular individuals, the percentages of each chemical compound during the experience and so on , to make assumptions like that is sad to me sir.

  • a_no_n

    Your willingness to believe superstition unconditionally before even considering regarding a logical, simple and reasonable explanation like the one John presented is beyond sad...It's down right depressing.

  • lex lexich

    and you know those details???

  • wald0

    No. see- you don't get it. It isn't necessary to know the persons exact brain chemistry when you know that people with perfectly normal brain chemistry experience these same sensations when you influence their brains in certain ways. For instance deprive the brain of oxygen and often you will get tunnel vision and see bright lights. Put a person in a very stressful frightening environment and their body will release endorphines- often making them feel warm and at peace like a morphine buzz almost. People who are stranded at sea or who experience long term solitary confinement often report talking to past friends and dead relatives, because the mind obviousely will create company if left alone for long enough. See knowing all this stuff and then choosing to believe it is hokus pokus instead- I can't do that. Not even if I wanted to. How do you un-know what you know? I am not capable of the mental gymnastics it would take to be that- illogical, for lack of a better term. How do you do that and take yourself seriouse?

  • zureal

    I wonder where the 'angels' where when those unfortunate people were gassed in the gas chambers during the Holocaust?

  • magarac

    The only explanation that would make any sense must be the use of angel proof steel. I just can´t imagine what else it could be:)

  • Viktor Klou?ek

    Hi people.
    Of course brain reacts to chemicals and creates altered states of consciousness. You cant do much without chemicals in a reality based on chemical substances. If you change your perception the world may become as bright darkness and/or dark brightness, everything depends of the way we filter information.
    So do you really care if a dead person talks to you, or an angel or you call that voice higher self or something like that?
    Get used to fact that universe is as easy as a clap, and as complicated as our bodies of different chemical elements. Both and none, depends on your choice

  • leonardobdas

    completelly agree. The same goes for so many esoteric experiences, such as some people which report having their awareness floating 10 or 20 ft above them as if they were looking at themselves walking about, after long meditations or even practicing certain sports and of course, specially with the aide of a little bit of weed.

  • dewflirt

    I read that when your life passes before your eyes it is basically your brain hunting through it memories, trying to find something that might be useful, a way to save itself. I wonder how closely this is related to Angels. The little calm voice you need, someone telling you what to do when you can't tell yourself. Not that strange really. A friend of mine thinks white feathers are a sign that angels are with you. She's even found feathers in places they shouldn't be, like on the train! Amazing. I thought they'd fly. :)

  • Hodd

    Angels, Gods, devils and demons. Personifications of aspects of the mind.

  • GunterGrass

    It would be comforting to believe, that's why they believe.

  • Guest

    A brain studying a brain or a mind studying a mind?
    az

  • dmxi

    i liked your israel poem!i don't understand the whole upheavel,but maybe,that was your intention?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LDDNQATFBOY6BVTFX3ZT4YW554 Regan

    Well said zureal, or what about the 35million killed before that in WWI, or the 100's of millions that continue to die because they have no access to fresh drinking water, or how about the 35,000 children that die EVERYDAY because of preventable hunger and disease? Yes zureal, our Guardian Angels sure do a heck of a job in guiding us through near death situations, only it would seem that they pick their fights leaving most to suffer horribly while for whatever reason appearing to just a lucky few!

  • Bart Luyckx

    I find religion and believing in Angels fascinating. It's such an insult towards human intellect and yet so commonly accepted in even these modern times. Religion, fear and war always went hand in hand throughout history. Imagine how much time people could spend caring for eachother instead of worshipping Gods if earth and all life on this planet was at the center of our minds everyday.

  • kenergy599

    Would somebody please kill that lizard!

  • jubbs_sher

    there probably were angels for those that were gassed but you cant make a doco on them can you?

  • Robyn318

    That is one explanation of the phenomenon. The more you understand quantum physics, the more it is understood that as yet unexplained and unknown forces cause the reality of our existence, and that none of those ‘mysterious’ forces resemble anything we recognize in our tactile experiences. For instance trees are made of atoms that are 99.999% empty space; their mass should be undetectable, but it isnt. It is thought by some that what we perceive as a tree is the result of complex interpretations of the weak and strong forces by our senses and our brain. Another example is color; when we look at a red sports car, the car is not red; the car absorbs all colors except red which is reflected off of it and carried to our retina by light. In reality the car is anti-red.

    Everything about who we are is the result of chemical reactions taking place inside our body; from the feelings of being in love, to hunger, to extreme strength from the adrenalin rush of fear. Because these experiences are caused by chemical reactions, it doesn’t invalidate their existence. Likewise, the third man experience isnt nullified because it is the result of chemical changes in the brain…it too is a valid experience.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    lol anyone who believes in angels has the intellect of an infant.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5K567ETWVQ23E5PYUARAJGXQVU Itolduso

    I have met the third man and he is me!
    If I recall my anatomy correctly, humans have three nervous systems overlaying each other. The nomic,autonomic and notocord make up these systems. Each is more complex/advanced in succession of evolution with the notocord being the type of nervous system of sharks and rays.
    I have been in precarious situations several times that caused my system to be flooded with endorphens and adrenalin. Fight or flight is an understatement in describing the phenomena. I understand the concept "strength of the insane". At no point in life is one more alive. The exception though different may be an orgasm.
    The nervous system/s are hardwired with a complexity that defies description. Might in the presense of powerful drugs the conscience mind hears echos/input from the more primitive mind that enabled puny humans to survive in the past?
    Of course there are those who would credit supernatural causes. To comprehend deep geologic time and evolution is a difficult endeavor. It is "easier" to be religious than to truly be a part of survival of life on planet earth!
    The irony of my theory is that when a person is most alive, they are clinically insane.

  • explorerguy

    I think science has a way of particular way of interpreting the mysterious. Science will typically come from the assumption there are no angels or that the Bible cannot be a revelation book. With that bias in mind, scientists (like me) proceed to create environments (man made) to test different ideas and provoke conditions and analyse the results. This process however in my view has nothing to do with what happened to the guy on 9/11 and he probably would not believe those explanations. If the Bible is true, and I believe it is, the issue of angels, menssengers or being that are not bound by our material limitations (although having similar form, according to the Bible), is not a simple or uni phenomenon. The bible talks about two kinds of beings and one of them has extremely deceiving capacity. It is good to remember that this movie explores only the presence of beings (though not recognizing angels) Under circumstances of human stress. Angels have appeared in situation and helped change situations in human lives that do not follow this model and have to do with many and various kinds of experiences.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dahl-Kaiser/1298514045 Dahl Kaiser

    I was hoping this film would help explain my own experience – My life was saved on a Freeway in Southern California by a “third person” but I was not in any danger to trigger a pathological reaction and I am not a religionist.

    I had just dropped off my kids at Disneyland and traveling by myself on the 55 Freeway in the fast lane. I was behind a box truck at a safe distance – absolutely no reason for any stress. Quite suddenly I hear a male voice (I’m female), coming from the passenger’s side telling me to get out of this lane. I ignore it as my imagination but find myself looking to see if it is safe to get into the lane to my right. Again, I hear it louder “Move into the next lane!” OK, now I am actually arguing with the disembodied voice and yell, outloud “I have to let the yellow car pass” then I hear VERY loudly “MOVE!” – I swerved just behind the yellow car and at that very second the doors on the boxcar flew opened and a huge crate falls onto the freeway right where my car would have been! If I had stayed in the lane at the speed I was going, I would have been in a serious accident! I believe my fast exit from the lane gave the guy behind me enough time to swerve onto the shoulder.

    So was it my subconscious? Third person? Telepathic? I know the mind is the most powerful machine on earth and hope that the religionists and skeptics, and even some scientists do not interfere with the study of how this magnificent computer works.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1552150364 Debbie Beirne

    Dahl, many years ago I had the same experience. I was about to overtake a car on a road that I drove every day and knew really well, but this day I was day dreaming and as I overtook a male voice said very loudly and calm from behind me, "pull back". I braked hard and pulled in behind the car I was over taking and instantly a car appeared out of nowhere. There was a dip in the road that had hidden the on coming car from my view and if I had continued to over take It would have been a head on collision with no hope of survivors. I have never heard the voice since (thankfully).

  • Steve Savage

    Twenty years ago, I was driving 60 mph, at night, on the inside lane (the slow lane) of a three lane congested highway in a compact Nissan Stanza. My two year old son was in the passenger seat. With total disregard for oncoming traffic, an SUV pulled out onto the highway from a shopping center driveway, directly in my path. I was trapped; I could not swerve out of the path I was on because of the line of cars next to me, nor did I have enough room to slam on the brakes - collision was unavoidable as was certain death. Suddenly and impossibly, in an instant, I was beyond the car that pulled in front of me, like I had somehow passed through it. I have often wondered if I had died in that moment and somehow had my life reset - a kind of edited glitch in the reality of things.

    Steve Savage "King of the Beasts"

  • deskplant

    Well this was weak. The theories being put forward are full of holes. For example the comments here about driving and voices cannot be explained at all by these ideas. The theory that part of your brain is hardwired ignores those people who simply sit down and wait to die, even if they could avoid death by moving. In the 9/11 example all the other people who died didn't access the hardwiring - so what's wrong with them? And the expert at the end didn't seem to know this survivor's story. He didn't panic and leave the building. He stayed at his desk until a friend phoned him! Equally they've misunderstood the idea of 'seeing'. They randomly started talking about a physical object but in fact it's a mind's eye view of a person who has no physical image.

    Virtually all Third Man stories report a male voice or impression. Including for women... If it's a projection of self surely these images/voices should be female? To change gender is quite a feat. It's true the brain can play tricks, and that some illnesses fire off random sights, sounds and life form impressions such as schizophrenia. But traditionally ill people were 'possessed' and now scientific people are committing the same sin, clinging to weak theories to prove brain responsibility. Why can't they both be true - mental illness and spiritual help?

  • tomregit

    @ Debbie Beirne
    "I was about to overtake a car on a road that I drove every day and knew really well."
    "a car appeared out of nowhere."
    "There was a dip in the road that had hidden the on coming car from my view."

    If you know a road well, you know there is a dip ahead.
    Cars don't come out of nowhere.
    Listen to this male voice. "Get some driving lessons before you kill someone"

  • explorerguy

    As Martin Lutherking said once. We are not alone, we have cosmic companionship. I do believe in the revelation of the Bible and many of todays experiences they are not different, except that some times messengers from God have appeared to people. We are all in a great controversy between good and evil where we are to decide and there are just as manny voices on the other side too that come to our head to do evil, be selfish and indifferent to God and others, or faithless and incredulous. It is amazing how pervasive the experiences are to every human in all ages. So it is not an isolated phenomenon. We may deny biblical teaching and dress it with another complete interpretation that will suit our incredulity better but the truth in the end will be revealed to every man and woman who decided to not just believe God but to know He cares for us individually and if he lets us go he will hold our lives in his hand till that day he promised to restore all things. Life, love, faith and hope is what gives meaning to things. The idea that everything is in the mind is very finite and limiting. We talk about thinking outside the box, but when God calls us to believe sounds like we are not so ready to think that way and would rather either deny I heard a voice and chuck it to mind. If he sends you deliverance and you deny...what can he do? Would you believe if he came down from and told you in person any more than when he exercises his subtlety? I doubt. You would do what your mind usually does best, to say it was a dream or imaginative thinking....unbelief is a trap!

  • Julianht

    Many years ago, when I was a middle-school student, (I was 13 years old) I went to school by streetcar every morning. Those streetcars didn't have any doors and usually young people like me would jump on, grab a handrail, get a foot support and steal a ride virtually hanging half outside the cars.

    One morning, I was late for school and the streetcar I wanted to catch just started before I reached the tram stop. Afraid of being punished for being late, I ran after the moving streetcar for about 200 meters and when it slowed down a bit, I jumped on and grabbed a handrail and pulled myself up.

    However, the frantic run to catch the streetcar had used up all my energy, i was out of breath and I didn't have the energy to hold on. I was hanging outside of the streetcar, my hand let go and I started to fall.

    Suddenly, out of nowhere, I felt a hand on my back pushing me back onto the streetcar. I was flabbergasted because there was nobody behind me. There couldn't have been anyone behind me since I was hanging outside the streetcar and falling. I grabbed the hand support again and got back into safety. There was no feeling of a presence, no voice, not light, just a strong hand between my shoulder blades that stopped me from falling onto a busy road with morning traffic and pushed me back onto that street car.
    A guardian angel? I believe to think so. I am 69 now and have never forgotten that experience.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    I can't say I have ever had any similar experiences. But I CAN say that enough wierdness has happened to me in my life that, if ONLY what science can measure is what keeps us alive, then I should be dead at least fifty times over. Some might call it luck. I only know that if I had listened to all these so-called "realists" who tried to give me advice throughout my life, that I most likely WOULD be dead by now. Instead, I chose to listen to that little voice in my head -- you know, the one that everyone says you're "crazy" for listening to -- and for that, not only am I here to tell about it, but also I am the richest man I know... and I'm not even employed!

    So, to all you phuckers who say there ain't nothing to all this supernatural nonsense; all I can say is: PBBBBBBBBBT!!!

  • BizzyM

    Interesting. When I was 16 (surprisingly 20 years ago, as well), I was driving on a wet roadway approaching an intersection. Being a young driver, I failed to notice that traffic was stopped where it was at the intersection and I locked up the brakes. Instantly, I knew that the distance was too short and I was going to hit.

    Now, I could skip the middle and say that "miraculously" I ended up in the medial without a scratch on the car, but that would be misleading. Instead, I will tell you that as I was sliding up to stopped traffic I noticed that my car was slightly yawwing to the left. I heard about the technique of letting off the brakes when you are sliding to regain traction and figured that worse case scenario, I would still crash. As it so happened, as I let off the brake, the wheels began turning and quickly regained traction and I shot off into the median without hitting the car in front of me. The car behind me did not fare as well and went straight into the rear of the car I was about to hit.

    The difference between your experience and mine is that I kept my eyes open and can explain what actually took place. There was no devine intervention. I analyzed the situation I was in and I took action. Most likely, you did the same, you just don't remember it.

  • BizzyM

    I was driving to work one day and was stopped at a red light in the left lane, 1st car. To my left was a semi. When the light went green, my usual reaction would have been to gun it and get to work. I would eventually need to be in the right lane, so the sooner, the better. As I was letting out the clutch, I realized that the semi next to me, who also had a green was hesitating. Since I could not see the cross road to the left because of the semi, I decided... let me reiterate that... *I* decided to shadow the semi through the intersection. Sure enough, a pickup came barreling across from the left on what would have been a majorly stale red light.

    There was no mystical force involved. I was attentive to my surroundings and I did something on a whim. I had no indication that anyone was going to run that light and no one tipped me off. People get hit by drunk and careless drivers all day and all night, why does no one blame god for that?

    There is no god and everything you do is what you chose to do. Your mind is more powerful that you give it credit. To say that your actions and thoughts are controlled or influenced by some mystical force only serves to discount your own abilities. Don't do that. Take responsibility and say, "I did that. I did that all on my own and I can do more!"

  • sknb

    Awesome. Well Said.

  • tomregit

    @eplorerguy
    OK, praise Allah.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/47EQQ3KNYHSQ3Y7P4CCUUPGPME Hilda

    Well said,,

  • Scott Greer

    I walked out of my apt in N. Philly one morning (rush hour, very busy streets and sidewalks) and I got this "feeling" that I was being watched and followed. I turned around and there was a tall, skinny man with a long, gray beard wearing a camouflage jacket -- he looked EXACTLY like the images of Osama Bin Laden that were being shown just after 9/11; this was in 2002).

    I delayed going to my car so he wouldn't see what I drove, so I tried to weave in and out of some corners and alley ways. When I got to my car, I strapped in, started it up and there he was...standing RIGHT in front of my car with a huge cinder block. He pulled the block above his head, positioned himself for an inevitable "heave-ho" aimed right at my head, through the windshield.

    As I saw him begin to throw it, I closed my eyes and sat there...there was a HUGE explosion and I was sprayed with a gazillion pieces of glass from head to toe.

    But here's where it gets weird. When I opened my eyes, the big ass cinder block WAS IN MY BACK SEAT. I have NO IDEA how it got through the windshield, past my head and in the back seat without killing me. No idea. It was as if the cinder block went right through my head and landed right behind me in the back seat.

    Two cops were on the next corner and caught the guy. Turns out, the person in charge of running a mental facility went out for coffee and left the door unlocked. Osama-a-like got out and somehow picked me out of the throng of people to try and take out. Well, he TRIED, at least. ;-)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QAXHQTTABZJXAB3JP7A254MT7Y GodmanEnki

    Another 10year old has learned to type

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    lol wait, you believe all this fairy tale nonsense and you have the audacity to call ME a 10 year old?!?!?!

    the irony would be funny if it werent so painful.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    you just typed a lot of words to lie about something that never happened.

    if this is true can you show me any news report about it. im sure if someone in charge of a mental facility (which mental facility by the way?) had left a door unlocked that would have been all over the news.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    Was it the camouflage that gave it away, or that by 2002 Osama had a black beard?

  • freethinker_2012

    Incidences like the one below, are rarely reported on the news, if he had died perhaps it would have.

    Also its very rude to call someone a liar when they are sharing a story, the people on this site, like to share opinions and stories that pertain to the documentaries viewed, if you enjoy character assassinating others for the cheap ego high, you can go to you tube for that.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    its good practice to ask for evidence when something sounds too good to be true.

    if someone had escaped a mental health care facility and attempted to injure someone i PROMISE you it would be on the news somewhere. especially the local news.

  • http://www.facebook.com/che.ribeirodesouza.5 Çhé Ribeiro De Souza

    Wow im so glad i found something on this topic what a coincidence but you critics are mistaken i have felt this mysterious presence before more than once the first time i was a boy when this being held me so tight and all i could feel was so much unconditional and this feeling has never left me even today i feel so much love for everyone i meet and i don't know why its just over flowing all the time, which made me fall into Christianity and i was very religious because i did not know what this presence was. the second time i was in my teens when a voice warned me of my fathers death i dropped religion coz i thought it was turning me into a nut job, the third time was last year when we had 7 burglars trying to break into my home and a powerful voice woke me up and asked me to join him and i said no (not verbally but i think through thought ) coz i wanted to live a long life here and have a family in the future then this voice guided me in my sleep to where these burglars where breaking in and i screamed at them and they all ran off i then awoke and wondered what had just happened, the fourth time was six months ago i dreamed of a fire in my home and i warned my family of it then a voice woke me up and without doubting this voice i ran up stairs and saved my little brother while he was sleeping in the middle of the night 2 minuits later the roof caved in where he was sleeping. so i don't know what this mysterious presence is i question it everyday of my life and im thankful for it i think more like a scientist now coz i need more answers to this but i can honestly tell you that these scientist are off track maybe quantum physics could come close but for me i believe there is an intelligence within us and we are all apart of this intelligence i call it the universe and the reason why some people hear it is because of intuition i meditate allot and the more i do it the more all my senses sharpen try it I don't have the answer to this phenomena but i can assure u it is based on experience and not machines. Your body is highly intelligent and it is able to take care of its self you are now free to believe what ever you wanna believe... Much love everyone ;)

  • rljp

    BizzyM has it. If we are to believe that forces from place X help us in our tragedies or critical moments then what about hte millions of people who die or suffer terrible deaths? And the crowd goes silent. If there was a higher power I think he would be intelligent enough to show his followers that coincidence is no subsitute for believing in him/her.

  • AlfBeta

    you say the truth I believe. Experience is experience. People say what people say, but all they can truly say is "I have experienced this" or "I have not experienced this" If they go to "This is impossible" they reveal their ignorance to one who has experienced, that's all, and that's ok

  • AlfBeta

    I'm male, had a female personage.

  • AlfBeta

    Science does not even know what matter is. Explanations of all things is interesting and useful, but it always remains an attempt at squeezing the mystery of reality into a concept. The religious metaphor and the scientific metaphor are words and concepts, models.

  • AlfBeta

    catch up on physics, parallel universes, same "space"

  • AlfBeta

    It's a good point! this is how things are in fact. But I disagree with your (atheistic?) conclusion to that observed fact. It's clear that anything referred to as "God" cannot be a mastermind dedicated to preventing human suffering! Yes, clearly.

  • AlfBeta

    Experience. Do you KNOW that you posted that comment? Can I disprove it to you by saying maybe someone else did it and drugged you and persuaded you that you did it?, or some other logically just-0plausible scenario? No, because you know, you were there, you experienced it. Some people no doubt imagine plenty. But if a person has experienced something you won't sway them with an alternative. And of course when something outside normalrange is glimpsed, words and concepts (e.g. angel) must serve to even grasp such experience.

  • AlfBeta

    It clearly IS more than chemicals. Like I see a car, and you go in to brain and say "oh no nothing more than rhododopsin rections to light stimulus and associated brain activity."

  • AlfBeta

    I haven't watched the vid

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    nothing about physics suggests the existence of angels.

    if you are going to try and use complicated science to confuse people into believing your silly beliefs you might want to try it on someone who doesnt understand science.

  • AlfBeta

    *Incorrect guess -I'm not trying to confuse anyone. I was too brief. In fact my post was aimed at any of the millions who like me, and you presumably, have read and thought some about "complicated science". No, there's nothing in physics suggesting the existence of angels. But there's enough going on e.g. with mathematics, to caution science groupies against *a priori* rejection of an idea as Officially Silly. Matter is a mystery still, although we know a hundred invisible things about it.
    *

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    so how does that have anything to do with angels?

    angels are a human concept that we created just like unicorns.

    no one rejects an idea a priori, however if it is not supported by any evidence it will be watched with a skeptical eye.

  • AlfBeta

    *Sure, a skeptical eye, and even valuable for some beliefs which ARE supported by evidence. For instance the existence of objects a million light years away is supported by evidence. But the evidence remains open to other possible conclusions. And vice versa,you've prob heard of Royal Society's ban on considering further reports of meteorites with "Stones do not fall from the sky, because there ARE no stones IN the sky" (i.e.Finito, don't bother us with this silliness any more.) But on more tenuous subjects like angels, clairvoyance etc etc we have really only one fact, and that is that people experience something, and describe it thus. * That* fact is available to rational scrutiny, but when only one class of explanation is considered, i.e. no phenomenal basis except perceptual malfunction, or deceit, etc., it seems to me an unnecessary blocking of rational thought. People trained in European science have different concepts from indigenous concepts. for instance. I'm not in a position to dismiss all perceptions of native Australians such as 'singing' someone to them. And also there is that dizzying fact that this keyboard, as I know it, is a perception. The within/without deal. I'll spare you any more words now, having not enough nutrition flowing to use language centre finely. Except to say that I've had experiences that don't allow me the explanations offered by the consensus, but nor do they compel me to leap to biblical angels!
    *

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=545476672 Mark Clavelle

    I, too, have had this experience just before getting into a car accident. The presence told me not to be afraid, and that it was necessary, and that I would survive. All time had stopped during this warm and reassuring communication, and although I did not know it at the time, the accident was a great benefit to me. The voice was more intimate to me than my own thinking or feelings. A deeper reality exists inside, which may not be provable by the outside.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1315118941 Kushla Rollinson

    I think we all need to appreciate that we are a very "young" species whose understanding of the universe has barely begun to appreciate or touch the surface of the "reality" of our existence.

    I find it arrogant to assume we can use our limited understanding of science to deny the existence of a higher power - I think it interesting the "3rd man effect" stands to support the Biblical viewpoint that God exists outside our realm/dimensions of "measurability and understanding" - however, when this untouched region of the brain is stimulated, people are able to "see" what is called the spirit world, but could also be called, a higher level of existence.

    The Bible has so many truths, that only know we are beginning to understand and "prove" as truth - it only supports the viewpoint and experience of faith.

  • d-krah

    So your willingness to accept untested claims like the one John Krisfalusci presented is supposed to be better? Besides, John Jacquard didn't say anything about what he believes. That's just another assumption you are making.

    Dr Persinger has been trying to prove his theories for decades without convincing results.Others didn't do better. The question why often heightened awareness and clear thought is reported when the main explanation of scientists is that these hallucinations arise when the brain loosing its functions because of lack of oxygen etc. has never been answered.

  • MsTruNorth

    Videos on YouTuve are just not buffering well these days. This is the worst-so-afflicted video I have seen running on a YT server in sometime. This is going to be the death of YT.

  • MsTruNorth

    I think the scientists featured in this video would be interested in research that has been done to indicate that the parts of the brain that hold conciousness and memory operate on a quantum basis, allowing the spirit (or mind) to exist ourside and away from the physical brain) and then to return to the physical brain. It seems likely that during crises the mind reaches out for more knowledge and sees and senses what is always there (the angel or God) but which the brain is not wired to perceive without aid of the mind.

  • http://www.wix.com/seakicreativeservice/designnow seaki ache'

    i was going to make a comment to this effect, thanks , this is EXACTLY what I was thinking

  • http://www.wix.com/seakicreativeservice/designnow seaki ache'

    As a spiritualist, there is MUCH in this universe, dimension that CAN NOT be scientifically explained simly because we DO NOT have the advanced technology as of yet to understand the universe as it exist spiritually. I find man's arrogance laughable when he attempts to "quantify God", this can not be done, until we actually began to take spiritual phenomena seriously, and create technologies that can ACTUALLY answer some of the BIG questions concerning this wonderful universe. As a conjurer of spiritual entities for their assistance to help others, I can assure you, these beings are real. No brain trick, or neuron re-wiring can cause the change that I have witnessed in these peoples lives, as they began to accept that their is a supreme being, as well as a host of other benevolent spirits, angels, and intelligences that are out there to assist us when we simply ask. In the universal scheme of things, we are infants concerning our evolution as rational / spiritual beings, and our technologies reflect as such. I predict that when and if we as humans began to acknowledge the spiritual realm of our world, when our scientist ACTUALLY began to explore the "realm of the unseen" our world is going to explode with information and true universal wisdom, until then,......I guess that helmet "doo-hicky thing" that one scientist created will have to do.

  • http://www.wix.com/seakicreativeservice/designnow seaki ache'

    i have encountered many skeptics in my line of work, and I always pose the same question so they will understand. Have you ever seen a dead body, or witness the second a person passes on. There was a spirit, something inside that body, inside your body, that animated that skin suit,.....but its gone, the person is gone, that consciousness is there no more, that body is now nothing but a slab of meat.

    where did the "consciousness" go? thats "thing" that makes your arms move and your heart beat is no longer in that dead body,....what was it?

    Just because you cant see,taste,or smell something with the most primitive of your human senses for survival, does not mean it does not exist.

  • over the edge

    seaki ache'
    you state " As a conjurer of spiritual entities for their assistance to help others, I can assure you, these beings are real" then i suggest you contact James Randi and collect your million dollars after that demonstrate it to the scientific community and collect your Nobel prize. use that money and fame to help even more people. until then you are making claims that you cannot back up with hard facts. if you are asking science to investigate supernatural claims that is not going to happen.

  • over the edge

    seaki ache
    can this consciousness be damaged? does it manifest itself in the physical world?

  • tomregit

    Epicurus stated that claims should be supported by evidence. From this you make the leap to say that the evidence must be palpable (see, smell, taste,etc.) Science provides strong evidence for many things that cannot be "sensed". It's very difficult, and pretty much pointless to attempt a dialog with the scientifically illiterate and be constantly led off topic in order to point out logical fallacies.
    To answer your question about the consciousness you saw ebb away at the point of death. It died. It died when the brain died. It went nowhere. It is dead. Our inability to completely understand conciousness in no way provides evidence of angels. May your childlike beliefs continue to bring comfort to you.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    starting a speech with "As a spiritualist...." makes any thinking person stop listening/reading you.

  • Achems_Razor

    If your spirits are real "The amazing Randi" would be broke by now, but he still is hanging on to his money.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chima-Michael/1782728975 Chima Michael

    i am amazed how most of you here trying to explain spiritual things with physical explainations, the body -soul relatioship is still not properly eloborated by ur so called scientific explaination, how about evolution i thought by now so of you so called thinking scientist must have evolved to something greater but non still.please can anyone tell me something new that a human being has created if not from the existing ones. how about the theory of big bang, why have no one repeated or manufactured a living thing from a non living thing. the so called cloning cannot work unless a stem cell for a living thing is used. chemical reactions make u think the way u do hahha i laugh i laugh your tiny knowledge to scorn but so u socalled scientist have not mixed the right chemicals or performed the right experiment to make a robot feel pain ,hunger or sex. if after studying anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, geography and physics you have not come to the conclusion that the world is put together b ya more brillant, intelligent, pressicious, accurate and ever knowing GOD then you are living in denial. one thing is certain wether you believe it or not. one day you will die and your soul will stand befor God and give account of your deeds here on earth so the best thing to do if i were you is to believe in JESUS as ur Lord and personal savour. all that we are doing on earth is his command that says '' go and subdue the earth, increase and multiply''

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/2K5JO3ZZEDAAIK7NOAUDZO7G54 mark

    i also have direct evidence of a presence which steered from almost certain death

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/2K5JO3ZZEDAAIK7NOAUDZO7G54 mark

    correction :
    evidence may confuse the phd's i will call it personal experience

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/IXF5P6EGPO7QLJATQM6ELFU6SI aaron

    The biggest load of bollox, i have ever seen!!

  • http://twitter.com/DaveSinewave Dave Sinewave

    Are you serious!? This has been aired on NatGeo??! It's ridiculous and utterly stupid!

  • http://twitter.com/DaveSinewave Dave Sinewave

    What do you expect? The dead body to start dancing like in a "Thriller" video? It's *DEAD*

  • helena zlno

    everything was okay untill you started to preach about jesus as our personal savior. there are other religions, show some respect!

  • Alethes

    The ancients demonstrated technological and scientific understanding greater than this generation, and yet possessed greater understanding of spiritual truths. They were not as concerned with burning the rock and sediment of the earth to power their vehicles, as with how to pull unseen physical magnetic force and frequencies from the earth to counter gravity, aiding in significantly reducing the weight of, and lifting, a 200 tonne piece of granite, machined to an 1000th of an inch, hundreds of feet in the air, in perfect geographical alignment with similar structures hundreds and thousands of miles away. They were thinking people, highly intelligent, and they spoke frequently, and intimately, of the unseen foundation and fabric of existence that is the spiritual realm. Many of our scientists, with their experiments, are like little children jumping to premature, and truly misled, conclusions; and ignoring what our predecessors have clearly spoken to us from the beginning of time. They are like children pointing into a television screen and saying "Look! A man is in there, he is really in that TV!"

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "The ancients demonstrated technological and scientific understanding greater than this generation,"

    no they did not.

    "and yet possessed greater understanding of spiritual truths."

    what is a "spiritual truth"? that means absolutely nothing.

    "They were not as concerned with burning the rock and sediment of the earth to power their vehicles, as with how to pull unseen physical magnetic force and frequencies from the earth to counter gravity"

    no they did not.

    "aiding in significantly reducing the weight of, and lifting, a 200 tonne piece of granite, machined to an 1000th of an inch, hundreds of feet in the air, in perfect geographical alignment with similar structures hundreds and thousands of miles away. "

    no they did not

    you are making more baseless claims that are made by ancient aliens people. get a grip. almost everything you said is wrong. either you are lying or you are an id**t.

  • whatsuragenda

    in neuroscience you learn that you can produce false perceptions of sight, sound, taste, smell or touch. Does this mean that when you smell a banana and it smells a banana that you are wrong? Interesting fact i saw a documentary for ghosts, the same doctor with is helmet whas in it so the helmet is it to replicate a ghost or an angel ha ha!

  • Shadowblur

    ...This is real, on 2 separate occasions, some presence of whatever interacted with me, because I was in a very high state of worry, in both of those scenarios, I had to solve something, I couldn't, I tried extremely hard to solve, then out of the blue, it got solved. I became aware that something had changed something in my immediate vicinity, the problem became instantly solved, and this brought shock to me on the realization. Extreme states of stress, causes something (guarding angel maybe) to appear. Believe me people, this is real!

  • traxxi

    One thing they fail, these scientists, to explain, that if it were a hallucination of the brain, then ALL of those people in the burning tower would have experienced the SAME thing, but didn't. That just shows, it was not triggered by the brain, since every brain would be scientifically the same. Sometimes people can hallucinate, but most of the time, there is a spiritual explanation. They can't explain the fact that when something spiritual happens when witnessed by MORE than one person (i.e. a multitude see the same thing for example). They can't explain when supernatural occurrences happen, i.e. a cross might appear in something for example...did the brain do that? No. Scientists are very biased, only looking at what they want to look at. They CANNOT understand spiritual matters.

  • docoman

    Is it a guardian angel in the Biblical sense, or some other intelligent extraterrestrial life form? A different life form could be mistakenly identified as a 'biblical Angel' possibly?

  • http://www.facebook.com/nirvana.buramdoyal Nirvana Buramdoyal

    Why does everyone always seem to be putting each other's opinions down just for the sake of proving one theory right? That's what they are right? Evidence or not...T.H.E.O.R.I.E.S - hence by default questionable. I never get it when I see supporters of one theory or another at each other's throats (Why are there supporters even?? - oh well, personal choice) for a point to be proven. The quest of knowledge borders on such a thin line; Quest neither to prove a theory nor to disprove it...Whatever theories we come up with, Truth will still be elusive. The best we can do is gather as much understanding as objective research allows us to get a grasp of 'that explainable experience that happened to me' thing. Be objective people...What's the good shunning a "confirmed idiocy" when we're creating our own all the way? What good is defending 'a truth' you can't even be 100% sure of so you have something to hold on to, so your world won't collapse? OBJECTIVITY. That's what we need. Whatever you do with your filtered information afterwards is purely your business.

  • http://www.facebook.com/boywithstick Otoniel Calderon

    It's annoying that this documentary tries to discredit all possibility that angels do in fact exist and keeps bringing up various theories about how the brain conjures up these experiences to help aid our survival. That is pure BS.
    How did I hear a loving female voice whisper into my mind the thoughts "Be careful, traffic will slow down quickly" about 5 seconds before the pick up truck in front of me went from 60 to 0 in a few seconds. Come to find out what happened was that an 18 wheeler had jackknifed blocking the lower part of the highway. Without the information I heard from the female voice I would have probably crashed into the pick up truck and either been seriously injured or killed. How did my mind predict that? That's ridiculous. I couldn't have known that traffic would slow before it actually happened.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Oluwaseun-Kehinde-Fasugbe/793168017 Oluwaseun Kehinde Fasugbe

    3 commercials in 15 minutes of video play? I guess it is time to find another site that is not too commercial, guys!

  • Achems_Razor

    Get yourself an ad blocker for your PC

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    and it wasnt this site, it was the site the video is hosted on. we just link their stream.

  • Rose

    Without angels I'd be dead. God protects me every day.

  • Rose

    My angels are from God. No mistake about that. All my life angels have been near to me.

  • Sebastian

    We hear lots of stories about people being told by invisible "beings" to be careful/watch out/take a different route/wait for a second and because of this they avoid fatal accidents. But has anyone considered the possibility that there is an unknown number of people hearing these voices, being led to imminent death? We never hear about the pedestrian that heard a voice saying "Wait! Don't take another step!" just to be crushed by a falling beam from a nearby construction site. We will never hear those stories, because they died.

  • donna

    Sebastian we don't hear it because they are already dead

  • Sebastian

    I said "We will never hear those stories, because they died". What was the point of your comment?

  • Kateye70

    Possibly it was your subconscious noting your surroundings and whispering to your comfortably oblivious conscious brain that "Oops, it's time to pay attention!" using a voice that would appeal to you and make you aware of the imminent danger.

    I learned to ride a motorcycle fairly late in life. I took several
    safety courses, and even though I no longer ride, I'm a much more consciously aware driver than I was before. A safer one, as well--I scan the road ahead of me and predict what could go wrong. I'm very conscious of when I'm 'distracted driving' and avoid it as much as possible.

    How does that apply to your subconscious? Well, I have severe sleep apnea. Not long before I was diagnosed, I started going through a period of waking up sometimes as often as 10 times a night to pee. But I didn't really have to go. After I was diagnosed, I did some research and discovered the frequent urges were fairly common: After failing to rouse one to breathe, it seems the brain, now in survival mode, will direct the kidneys to release what little urine they accumulate into the bladder, thus waking the sufferer up to breathe.

    The brain is a powerful organ.

    TL;DR, you may not be conscious of the world around you, but your brain is.

  • Krockcfd

    Seriously, give your head a shake... You're making a moral judgement that isn't founded on anything but your opinion, which isn't much...

  • Krockcfd

    Lol.. So do you, the fairy tale that the universe just popped into existence from "Ex Nihilo." Sounds like a wonderful fairy tale... Glad we're on the same page...

  • Krockcfd

    Well said Alfbeta, well said....

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    No I do not think that. it is logically inconsistent.

    I believe that we have no idea and it would be foolish to assume a thinking entity. I ADMIT that we dont know and that enables us to continue looking.

  • Krockcfd

    If we have no idea how the universe came into being then certianly an entity/being outside our understanding would have to remain a possibilty, especially in light of the fact that current science now points to the universe having an absolute beginning... For myself, to ignore any possibility would be foolish...

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    Why not just stick with the position that you dont know and not add any entities into the equation that just add more problems. that is the least logical thing you can do. Occam's razor comes in handy here.

    The universe having a starting point doesnt mean that it was created by a being. The sun has a starting point also, but it formed naturally. The universe expanded at some point and began to cool down, that doesnt mean there was nothing before that. In fact the idea of NOTHING is meaningless except abstractly.

  • Krockcfd

    Well that's fine, but the creation of the universe via a being/entity is a very plausable possibility; more so than the idea of a universe just popping into existence Ex Nihilo! So yes, Occam's razor does come in handy here: The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is
    "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."

    Lol.. The sun had a starting point? Yes, yes it did... And it formed from the vast materials within the universe that preceded it... All you've managed to do here is to try and shift the problem. We're starting with the universe and the material that came with it, not what happened after...

    Never mind the universe expanding, that's stating the obvious, it's what happened before, at the beginning.. And right now, the best answer the naturalist has come up with is the multiverse lol, an untestable theory, a metaphysical one so to speak... So the naturalist is left speculating on something they can never prove, a predicament if you as me, considering the burden of proof has always been on the theist to prove the existence of God...

    You're right, when someone such as yourself (a naturalist) the notion of nothing is meaningless, so are morals, and everything else in the universe, including yourself...

  • Achems_Razor

    Don't play the persecucion card as most religee's are wont to do. And don't do your implied ad homimem as most religee's are wont to do.
    Of course the universe came from absolutely nothing! just ask Stephen Hawking, also in his book, "The Grand Design." I am sure he knows more than you. Your bibles don't even have any math equations.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "more so than the idea of a universe just popping into existence Ex Nihilo!"

    For the second time, that is NOT what physicists or cosmologists believe. You should get up to date rather than referring to ancient philosophy.

    "So yes, Occam's razor does come in handy here: The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is
    "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.""

    The "simpler" theory with fewer (or less onerous) assumptions is probably the most appropriate one. Which one is makes more assumption "everything was created by an eternal being that doesnt need to be created and can create an entire universe" or, "a singularity of energy that existed in a quantum state began to expand for reasons unknown, cooling down and creating more and more elements"? Which of those two has less assumptions and is falsifiable or even supported by evidence???

    "The sun had a starting point? Yes, yes it did... And it formed from the vast materials within the universe that preceded it... All you've managed to do here is to try and shift the problem. We're starting with the universe and the material that came with it, not what happened after..."

    then we get to the infinite regress issue. where did your god thing come from? are you going to start making up rules like "everything needs to be created except for this thing....conveniently"? its amazing you don't see the irony in your own paragraph there.

    "Never mind the universe expanding, that's stating the obvious, it's what happened before, at the beginning.. And right now, the best answer the naturalist has come up with is the multiverse lol, an untestable theory, a metaphysical one so to speak"

    Wrong. that is a lovely straw man. However who is this "naturalist" who is coming up with "best answers" that speaks for everyone? Do you REALLY believe that you are educated enough to actually understand what a learned physicist or cosmologist understands about the formation of our universe? Are you really that pompous?

    "So the naturalist is left speculating on something they can never prove, a predicament if you as me, considering the burden of proof has always been on the theist to prove the existence of God..."

    Do you for some reason think the burden of proof is NOT on the theist to prove there is a god?

    "You're right, when someone such as yourself (a naturalist) the notion of nothing is meaningless, so are morals, and everything else in the universe, including yourself... "

    How does any of this follow? are you just here to make yourself look silly?

  • Krockcfd

    First... You might want to make an honest attempt at learning how to spell correctly. Secondly, Hawking's book, "The Grand Design" isn't being taken to seriously by most scientists, especially under the light that laws of physics have never created a thing... In the words of Dr Lennox: "To use a simple analogy, Isaac Newton's laws of motion in themselves never sent a snooker ball racing across the green baize. That can only be done by people using a snooker cue and the actions of their own arms."

    Thirdly, Hawking makes a serious error when declaring the discipline of philosophy to be all but dead all the while making philosophical statements throughout his book.

    Your bibles don't have math equations? First, its "bible" not bibles, and secondly, the bible isnt at science text book, so why would it?

  • Krockcfd

    “For the second time, that is NOT what physicists or cosmologists believe. You should get up to date rather than referring to ancient philosophy.”

    Of course they don’t believe that, as that would imply a miracle wouldn’t it? But the fact of the matter is, the universe began to exist and this road is much different road to
    have to travel down then the previous assumption that the universe was static
    and eternal. It’s now a road of speculation, a world of theories that aren’t testable, such as the multiverse… so please, you’ll have to do better than making false accusations that I’m merely referring to ancient philosophy…

    “The "simpler" theory with fewer (or less onerous) assumptions is probably the most appropriate one. Which one is makes more
    assumption "everything was created by an eternal being that doesnt need to
    be created and can create an entire universe" or, "a singularity of
    energy that existed in a quantum state began to expand for reasons unknown,
    cooling down and creating more and more elements"? Which of those two has
    less assumptions and is falsifiable or even supported by evidence???”

    Lol… Right away you’ve moved the goal post with your “singularity of energy at a quantum state began to expand for reasons unknown, cooling down and creating more and more elements"… you said it yourself, you have absolutely no idea what caused the singularity to expand in the first place, let alone how your energy at a quantum level began to exist out of
    nothing… This road your on is philosophically bankrupt. I’ll also not that you have absolutely zero evidence to back your claim up that the universe, from a
    singularity of energy that existed at a quantum level, began to exist out of
    nothing… Its called speculation, not evidence… Until then, I'll speculate that the finley tuned universe we live in was created by a higher being..

    “then we get to the infinite regress issue. where did your god thing come from? are you going to start making up rules like "everything needs to be created except for this thing....conveniently"? its amazing
    you don't see the irony in your own paragraph there.”

    There is no irony here. As a matter of fact, I am always amazed that atheists are so quick to assume that causation presupposes space and time…

    “Wrong. that is a lovely straw man. However who is this "naturalist" who is coming up with "best answers" that speaks for everyone? Do you REALLY believe
    that you are educated enough to actually understand what a learned physicist or
    cosmologist understands about the formation of our universe? Are you really
    that pompous?”

    Lol.. They are the best answers to this conundrum that the scientist who adheres to a naturalistic worldview finds himself in. Try to refrain from using ad hominem’…

    “Do you for some reason think the burden of proof is NOT on the theist to prove there is a god?”

    No, no I don’t… if its that important to you, which it obviously is judging by the fact you’ve posted comments on a documentary that lies outside the framework of your worldview, educate yourself on the matter. As a matter of fact, I find it bizarre you’d waste precious time commenting on the miraculous, something that doesn’t exist within your worldview.

    “How does any of this follow? are you just here to make yourself look silly?”

    Another ad hominem… If you don’t understand the framework of your own worldview that you’re so adamantly defending, me explaining these things to you isn’t going to help you… May I suggest that you take a good hard look at your worldview and the questions you must ask yourself and determine for yourself if they’re logically coherent both externally and internally…

  • Achems_Razor

    Yes, Hawking was a typo, No, bibles are proper spelling, means more than one, of which there are many. By the way, your "to seriously" should be (too seriously) I know that all BIBLES are not science text books, which makes them and any reference of inclusion meaningless to the subject in question re: cosmology, multiverse, expansion/inflation of the Universe. etc:

    Your Dr. Lennox apparently is a fundy christian, Read John Lennox and a sad divide by (Ken Ham) Ham, whom I consider a loonytoon.

    Stephen Hawking not taken seriously by most scientists? I doubt it.

  • Krockcfd

    Who's referencing the bible in this discussion.. You're the only one who's brought it up... He's also a fundy Christian who just happens to be a brilliant mathematician and highly regarded professor at Oxford... So name calling won't get you any where... His theor(ies) behind the co-authored book the "The Grand Design," aren't being taking literally, as I have said, the laws of physics don't create things, nor do they create themselves...

    Religee's? Seriously, do you just make words up for fun...?

  • Achems_Razor

    Well any way, so much of your "god of the gaps" scenarios. You keep referencing the "laws of physics" what precisely do you know of the law of physics?

    Funny Religee's.

  • Krockcfd

    It's actually, "so much for your God of the gaps," not of... What do I know about the laws of physics? I know they don't create themselves from nothing, because that would, as far as I'm concerned, be logically incoherent... Speaking of gaps, science seems to be heading down that same road when postulating unfalsifiable claims such as the multiverse(s) and cosmic inflation...

    Lol... You know what is so ironic about you Atheists? You’re always talking about God and religion, the very thing you don't believe in!

  • Achems_Razor

    Quit nit-picking on proper usage of the English language, are you an editor also?
    I do not know what you mean by "I know that they don't create themselves from nothing," elaborate! You also put in a CLAIM that science seems to be heading down the same road when postulating unfalsifiable claims such as the multiverse(s) and cosmic inflation...since you have made a claim, now you have to show PROOF, no ifs and no buts.

    You have the makings of a Creationist, a proponent of the young earth theory, am I wrong?

    By the way, I made no claims that I do not believe in any of the 28,000,000 million gods in recorded history, there is no proof one way or the other, but yes, I do not believe in any man-made religions.

    god of the gaps

    rationalwiki.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

  • Krockcfd

    “Quit nit-picking on proper usage of the English language, are you an editor also?
I do not know what you mean by "I know that they don't create themselves from nothing," elaborate! You also put in a CLAIM that science seems to be heading down the same road when postulating unfalsifiable claims such as the multiverse(s) and cosmic inflation...since you have made a claim, now you have to show PROOF, no ifs and no buts.”

    Honestly, I shouldn’t have to correct your grammar; although I’ll admit, I’m not perfect with my own grammar. The laws of physics did not create themselves! I’m not sure how else to explain that to you! That is unless you have evidence to the contrary? The laws of physics are descriptive and
    predictive but not creative. Thus as Dr Hawking has claimed in his book, that because we have the law of gravity, we have the universe. But he presupposes x before y. With out the universe, we don’t have the laws of physics. He made a philosophical blunder in his claim, while claiming the discipline of Philosophy to be all but dead, which if you ask me, is incredibly ironic. Although when he
    was asked where the law of gravity came from, he has claimed M Theory. I agree that the laws of physics are discovered but I do not think they are laws that have always existed, as there is absolutely NO proof of this, none what so ever.

    Yes, Achems Razor, the mulitverse is not detectable. In other words, the scientist is free to claim it exists, but at the same time, never able to verify its nonexistence. That is an unfalsifiable claim. The Online
    Merriam-Webster defines unfalsifiable as: “Not capable of being proved false.”

    “You have the makings of a Creationist, a proponent of the young earth theory, am I wrong?”

    Do I think the universe was created from an outside agency, such as God? Absolutely! As there is not a shred of evidence to suggest otherwise! So why can’t it remain a reasonable or plausible possibility? Do I think the earth was created 7000 years ago? There is a lot of evidence to suggest the earth is indeed billions of years old, so I would tend to lean towards an old earth and universe. That being said, I don’t think science and human knowledge is remotely close in its understanding of how the earth was
    created. I would be more of an intelligent design proponent if anything. But at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter… So to answer your question, yes, you’re wrong!

    “By the way, I made no claims that I do not believe in any of the 28,000,000 million gods in recorded history, there is no proof one way or the other, but yes, I do not believe in any man-made religions.”

    You didn’t have to make any claims, your atheism was already self evident!

    Cheers!

  • Achems_Razor

    You have again made a claim that you believe the universe was made by an outside agency such as a God, whose God? your God of course. The burden of proof now rests on your shoulders to substantate that claim with empirical evidence, otherwise all your rantings are Moot points.

  • Krockcfd

    I don't have to substantiate any of my claims with empirically verifiable evidence. I only need to provide good arguments for why I believe what I believe. If you think science is the sole arbitrator of truth, how in the world can you substantiate claims such as, she is beautiful, blue is a color and so on? In the words of Philip Carlson: “How can something claimed to be the sole arbitrator of truth; the only source of knowledge, depend on anything else?”

    So if your claim that a belief in
    something requires the burden of proof, than the same must hold true for your atheism, as the word it self means a belief in no God or denial of God. Thus, by your own reasoning, your rants, without empirically verifiable evidence, in which you’ve provided nothing, are mute points. May I suggest you take a course in logic and reasoning before you post anything else, I would also suggest you take a good long hard look at your worldview and the questions any worldview must ask; such as why we are here? Where are we going? What are morals, etc. And ask yourself if the answers you find can rationally and coherently fit within the framework of your worldview, both internally and externally… Good day…

  • Achems_Razor

    Well yes, if you make a claim it must be substantiated, otherwise you are blowing in the wind. Yes, science is the soul arbitrator of truth,
    Beautiful, Love etc: are neurochemical feelings.
    Colours, such as blue are from the visible spectrum.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum

    instead of only your bibles I suggest you crack open some science books.

    I presume your "mute" was a typo?

  • Krockcfd

    So exactly what is your definition of nothing? You say; “before that, we don’t know.” If you don’t know, then on what basis can your claim that there is no such thing as nothing, actually stand? All you’ve managed to do is reason in circles and it absolutely amazes me how blind you are in your own logic. You say, “I don’t have faith, I admit what I don’t know, you use faith.” Really? So you have no confidence or trust in the sciences? It’s funny, because you keep appealing to it all the time and I’m baffled as to why you would make that statement. You see, faith isn’t restricted to just the believer; that’s a typical mistake atheists make all the time when debating theists.

    “What made god?”

    You’re assuming God is subject to time and space as we know it,
    but the dimensions of time, etc, began with the universe. The Law of Causality does not say that everything needs a cause; it only says that the things that
    come to be need a cause. God has always existed. In other words, God is in essence, existence, he never had a beginning, thus, God doesn’t need a cause.

    “Yes...very funny. Makes people intellectually dishonest with
    themselves. Makes them ignore their own social psychology.”

    Lol.. Pot meet kettle!

    “It Is not my goal to give you reasons to doubt it. You have faith, and belief in a being that can defy logic. Nothing I say will make you doubt that.”

    What logic is God defying? You’re right; I have both trust and confidence in the God of my worldview and at the end of the day when the game goes back in the box, it’ll actually matter.

    “No your christian apologist mathematician did not put anything Hawking has done to rest. All Lennox did was sell some books and do some more public speeches....also sold them. Where is his peer reviewed paper that refutes anything Stephen Hawking has done or said?

    Dr Lennox doesn’t have to refute Hawking’s book, all he has to
    do is offer a rebuttal, which is exactly what he did. As a matter of fact, he
    has done an amazing Job in calling into question Hawking’s line of thinking. You see, the Laws of Physics don’t create things, there as I mentioned, descriptive. I would think a scientist, as you claim to be, would know that. And I’ll assume
    that Hawking wasn’t out to sell books, but was purely writing this book in the name of science and not the all mighty dollar. Give your head a shake.

    "Hawking is a scientist who is guilty of disparaging philosophy. This is true. As a scientist myself who did a minor of philosophy in University I know this is the case with many scientists. But this doesnt dismiss their work in science. What you have committed by including that phrase in while talking about Hawking's work being wrong is ACTUALLY an ad hominem."

    No, in order to determine the validity of science as method of gaining accurate knowledge, one must engage in philosophy, and someone who is claiming to be a scientist should probably know this.

    “Im so glad you included your source for that long list of nonsense. Everyone can not only see that your sources are unacademic but also a simple search will show countless pages refuting each of those points. However I will just say this.”

    Really? This coming from someone who cuts and pastes from wikipedia… Seriously, if you’re going to cite sources, try and refrain from using wikipedia.. lol… You’re a gem… I’m sorry, is talk reason an academic site? Doesn’t look like it to me…

    “The issue was where did everything come from. I gave the honest answer as far back as we can know with any actual evidence. YOU have faith. saying you dont know is the very opposite of what you are doing.”

    Once again, I’ll reiterate for you that faith is merely trust and confidence in something that proof cannot be given for. It works both ways. “Many are stubborn in pursuit of the of the path they have chosen, few in
    pursuit of the goal.” ­­– Friedrich Nietzsche

    “No one said anything about irrefutable. How about evidence? How about not adding entities that have no evidence to explain things you dont know. That's why we had things like rain gods and thunder gods. Now we dont know how the universe began so you people have a creator god. Lovely. You can provide good argumentation for why you believe but that just tells me your psychological state. it doesnt tell me anything about the validity of that belief. That being said there is not a single piece of evidence to suggest that a theistic worldview is "reasonable".

    Its rather amusing that you keep mentioning evidence as must to explain things, yet you yourself seem to think that evidence doesn’t need to play a factor in your position. You simply plea that “we don’t know yet.” I really wish the high standards that atheists hold to others, would also apply to themselves as well. Reasonable? It’s funny how an atheist, such as your self,
    determines what is reasonable and what is not. This is coming from someone who holds to a worldview that gives NO intrinsic worth to human beings, claims no
    objective morals exist, that no ultimate meaning outside of ones own self exists and that we are merely the product of time + matter + chance, the creation of some magic dirt. Your worth is no more significant than the sand we walk across on a beach, and you’re telling me what is reasonable? You see, it wouldn’t be reasonable to conclude that the unreasonable is not reasonable, because existence it self, is not reasonable.

    “Nothing about others actions affecting me is making a claim about objective morality. PLEASE if you are going to pretend to understand philosophy, at least get it right.”

    Actually, any time someone says, “it affects me and everyone else,” is in fact, making a claim that they are of some moral worth. Are you claiming you have no moral worth? You’ve already admitted that my position affects you, and others, but in a world of no objective morals, should I really care that it affects you?

    “No....and anyone who would waste their time reading this will clearly see that is not the case. You have said many times you have faith. thats lovely. but you dont have any evidence or facts for your position that a god created the universe.”

    According to you, evidence doesn’t matter anyway, you only have to a position of, “we don’t know yet.”

    “If the person responds to your argument and calls you a f**king i diot that is not an ad hominem. they are just letting you know what they think about you.”

    And, with your last example, this conversation is officially over… On an end note, I find it bizarre that you would click the like button for your own posts, as if to give the false impression that people like your stuff, its weird... Cheers...!

  • Guest

    So exactly what is your definition of nothing? You say; “before that, we don’t know.” If you don’t know, then on what basis can your claim that there is no such thing as nothing, actually stand? All you’ve managed to do is reason in circles and it absolutely amazes me how blind you are in your own logic. You say, “I don’t have faith, I admit what I don’t know, you use faith.” Really? So you have no confidence or trust in the sciences? It’s funny, because you keep appealing to it all the time and I’m baffled as to why you would make that statement. You see, faith isn’t restricted to just the believer; that’s a typical mistake atheists make all the time when debating theists.

    “What made god?”

    You’re assuming God is subject to time and space as we know it,
    but the dimensions of time, etc, began with the universe. The Law of Causality does not say that everything needs a cause; it only says that the things that
    come to be need a cause. God has always existed. In other words, God is in essence, existence, he never had a beginning, thus, God doesn’t need a cause.

    “Yes...very funny. Makes people intellectually dishonest with
    themselves. Makes them ignore their own social psychology.”

    Lol.. Pot meet kettle!

    “It Is not my goal to give you reasons to doubt it. You have faith, and belief in a being that can defy logic. Nothing I say will make you doubt that.”

    What logic is God defying? You’re right; I have both trust and confidence in the God of my worldview and at the end of the day when the game goes back in the box, it’ll actually matter.

    “No your christian apologist mathematician did not put anything Hawking has done to rest. All Lennox did was sell some books and do some more public speeches....also sold them. Where is his peer reviewed paper that refutes anything Stephen Hawking has done or said?

    Dr Lennox doesn’t have to refute Hawking’s book, all he has to
    do is offer a rebuttal, which is exactly what he did. As a matter of fact, he
    has done an amazing Job in calling into question Hawking’s line of thinking. You see, the Laws of Physics don’t create things, there as I mentioned, descriptive. I would think a scientist, as you claim to be, would know that. And I’ll assume
    that Hawking wasn’t out to sell books, but was purely writing this book in the name of science and not the all mighty dollar. Give your head a shake.

    "Hawking is a scientist who is guilty of disparaging philosophy. This is true. As a scientist myself who did a minor of philosophy in University I know this is the case with many scientists. But this doesnt dismiss their work in science. What you have committed by including that phrase in while talking about Hawking's work being wrong is ACTUALLY an ad hominem."

    No, in order to determine the validity of science as method of gaining accurate knowledge, one must engage in philosophy, and someone who is claiming to be a scientist should probably know this.

    “Im so glad you included your source for that long list of nonsense. Everyone can not only see that your sources are unacademic but also a simple search will show countless pages refuting each of those points. However I will just say this.”

    Really? This coming from someone who cuts and pastes from wikipedia… Seriously, if you’re going to cite sources, try and refrain from using wikipedia.. lol… You’re a gem… I’m sorry, is talk reason an academic site? Doesn’t look like it to me…

    “The issue was where did everything come from. I gave the honest answer as far back as we can know with any actual evidence. YOU have faith. saying you dont know is the very opposite of what you are doing.”

    Once again, I’ll reiterate for you that faith is merely trust and confidence in something that proof cannot be given for. It works both ways. “Many are stubborn in pursuit of the of the path they have chosen, few in
    pursuit of the goal.” ­­– Friedrich Nietzsche

    “No one said anything about irrefutable. How about evidence? How about not adding entities that have no evidence to explain things you dont know. That's why we had things like rain gods and thunder gods. Now we dont know how the universe began so you people have a creator god. Lovely. You can provide good argumentation for why you believe but that just tells me your psychological state. it doesnt tell me anything about the validity of that belief. That being said there is not a single piece of evidence to suggest that a theistic worldview is "reasonable".

    Its rather amusing that you keep mentioning evidence as must to explain things, yet you yourself seem to think that evidence doesn’t need to play a factor in your position. You simply plea that “we don’t know yet.” I really wish the high standards that atheists hold to others, would also apply to themselves as well. Reasonable? It’s funny how an atheist, such as your self,
    determines what is reasonable and what is not. This is coming from someone who holds to a worldview that gives NO intrinsic worth to human beings, claims no
    objective morals exist, that no ultimate meaning outside of ones own self exists and that we are merely the product of time + matter + chance, the creation of some magic dirt. Your worth is no more significant than the sand we walk across on a beach, and you’re telling me what is reasonable? You see, it wouldn’t be reasonable to conclude that the unreasonable is not reasonable, because existence it self, is not reasonable.

    “Nothing about others actions affecting me is making a claim about objective morality. PLEASE if you are going to pretend to understand philosophy, at least get it right.”

    Actually, any time someone says, “it affects me and everyone else,” is in fact, making a claim that they are of some moral worth. Are you claiming you have no moral worth? You’ve already admitted that my position affects you, and others, but in a world of no objective morals, should I really care that it affects you?

    “No....and anyone who would waste their time reading this will clearly see that is not the case. You have said many times you have faith. thats lovely. but you dont have any evidence or facts for your position that a god created the universe.”

    According to you, evidence doesn’t matter anyway, you only have to a position of, “we don’t know yet.”

    “If the person responds to your argument and calls you a f**king i diot that is not an ad hominem. they are just letting you know what they think about you.”

    And, with your last example, this conversation is officially over… On an end note, I find it bizarre that you would click the like button for your own posts, as if to give the false impression that people like your stuff, its weird... Cheers...!

  • Guest

    So exactly what is your definition of nothing? You say; “before that, we don’t know.” If you don’t know, then on what basis can your claim thatthere is no such thing as nothing, actually stand? All you’ve managed to do is reason in circles and it absolutely amazes me how blind you are in your own logic. You say, “I don’t have faith, I admit what I don’t know, you use faith.” Really? So you have no confidence or trust in the sciences? It’s funny, because you keep appealing to it all the time and I’m baffled as to why you would make that statement. You see, faith isn’t restricted to just the believer; that’s a
    typical mistake atheists make all the time when debating theists.

    “What made god?”

    You’re assuming God is subject to time and space as we know it,
but
    the dimensions of time, etc, began with the universe. The Law of Causality does
    not say that everything needs a cause; it only says that the things that
come
    to be need a cause. God has always existed. In other words, God is in essence,
    existence, he never had a beginning, thus, God doesn’t need a cause.

    “Yes...very funny. Makes people intellectually dishonest with
themselves.
    Makes them ignore their own social psychology.”

    Lol.. Pot meet kettle!

    “It Is not my goal to give you reasons to doubt it. You have faith, and belief in a being that can defy logic. Nothing I say will make you doubt that.”

    What logic is God defying? You’re right; I have both trust and confidence in the God of my worldview and at the end of the day when the game goes back in the box, it’ll actually matter.

    “No your christian apologist mathematician did not put anything Hawking has done to rest. All Lennox did was sell some books and do some more public speeches....also sold them. Where is his peer reviewed paper that refutes anything Stephen Hawking has done or said?

    Dr Lennox doesn’t have to refute Hawking’s book, all he has to
do
    is offer a rebuttal, which is exactly what he did. As a matter of fact, he
has
    done an amazing Job in calling into question Hawking’s line of thinking. You
    see, the Laws of Physics don’t create things, there as I mentioned,
    descriptive. I would think a scientist, as you claim to be, would know that.
    And I’ll assume
that Hawking wasn’t out to sell books, but was purely writing
    this book in the name of science and not the all mighty dollar. Give your head
    a shake.

    "Hawking is a scientist who is guilty of disparaging philosophy. This is true. As a scientist myself who did a minor of philosophy in University I know this is the case with many scientists. But this doesnt
    dismiss their work in science. What you have committed by including that phrase
    in while talking about Hawking's work being wrong is ACTUALLY an ad
    hominem."

    No, in order to determine the validity of science as method of gaining accurate knowledge, one must engage in philosophy, and someone who is
    claiming to be a scientist should probably know this.

    “Im so glad you included your source for that long list of nonsense. Everyone can not only see that your sources are unacademic but also a simple search will show countless pages refuting each of those points. However I will just say this.”

    Really? This coming from someone who cuts and pastes from wikipedia… Seriously, if you’re going to cite sources, try and refrain from using wikipedia.. lol… You’re a gem… I’m sorry, is talk reason an academic site? Doesn’t look like it to me…

    “The issue was where did everything come from. I gave the honest answer as far back as we can know with any actual evidence. YOU have faith saying you dont know is the very opposite of what you are doing.”

    Once again, I’ll reiterate for you that faith is merely trust and confidence in something that proof cannot be given for. It works both ways. “Many are stubborn in pursuit of the of the path they have chosen, few in
pursuit of the goal.” ­­– Friedrich Nietzsche

    “No one said anything about irrefutable. How about evidence? How
    about not adding entities that have no evidence to explain things you dont
    know. That's why we had things like rain gods and thunder gods. Now we dont
    know how the universe began so you people have a creator god. Lovely. You can provide good argumentation for why you believe but that just tells me your
    psychological state. it doesnt tell me anything about the validity of that
    belief. That being said there is not a single piece of evidence to suggest that
    a theistic worldview is "reasonable".

    Its rather amusing that you keep mentioning evidence as must to
    explain things, yet you yourself seem to think that evidence doesn’t need to
    play a factor in your position. You simply plea that “we don’t know yet.” I
    really wish the high standards that atheists hold to others, would also apply
    to themselves as well. Reasonable? It’s funny how an atheist, such as your
    self,
determines what is reasonable and what is not. This is coming from
    someone who holds to a worldview that gives NO intrinsic worth to human beings,
    claims no
objective morals exist, that no ultimate meaning outside of ones own
    self exists and that we are merely the product of time + matter + chance, the
    creation of some magic dirt. Your worth is no more significant than the sand we
    walk across on a beach, and you’re telling me what is reasonable? You see, it
    wouldn’t be reasonable to conclude that the unreasonable is not reasonable,
    because existence it self, is not reasonable.

    “Nothing about others actions affecting me is making a claim about objective morality. PLEASE if you are going to pretend to understand philosophy, at least get it right.”

    Actually, any time someone says, “it affects me and everyone else,” is in fact, making a claim that they are of some moral worth. Are you claiming you have no moral worth? You’ve already admitted that my position affects you, and others, but in a world of no objective morals, should I really
    care that it affects you?

    “No....and anyone who would waste their time reading this will clearly see that is not the case. You have said many times you have faith. thats lovely. but you dont have any evidence or facts for your position that a god created the universe.”

    According to you, evidence doesn’t matter anyway, you only have to a position of, “we don’t know yet.”

    And, with your last example, this conversation is officially over… On an end note, I find it bizarre that you would click the like button on your own posts, as if to give the impression that people like your stuff, its weird... Cheers...!

  • Krockcfd

    Well said seaki... There is plenty of evidence in NDE's to suggest some alternative reality. although the skeptic will consider human experience, anecdotal, and thus useless, human experience can account for much of what we know as humans...

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    clearly going in circles with you is a waste of time,

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    i certainly didnt click the like button on my own posts and if I did it was clearly a mistake. is there a post that says I liked it?

  • Achems_Razor

    Good one!

  • George

    But then again, without death there would be no angels...

  • AlfBeta

    Thank you Krockcfd

  • AlfBeta

    And thus you clearly say there's a power beyond rational thought, intellect etc. that can act with the swiftness and knowingness of a 'guardian angel'. Regular prayer (invocation) to the invisible power of one's brain then may be a very intelligent initiative. It being superior to one's 'personality'. Then we could discuss the idea that there is nothing separate from anything,( scientifically inescapable?).