A: The ones who call themselves «skeptics» are actually pseudo-skeptics who will NEVER change their minds and will NEVER be convinced that there is any such thing as Psi. You are COMPLETELY WASTING «time» for even TRYING. See http://www.SkepticalAboutSkeptics.Org/

B: Veridical-Evidence DOES exist for physical-evidence of events reported by NDEs; see Pam Reynolds

C: Evidence DOES exist for the «Karmic-System» and is a very GOOD REASON for you NOT to go about killing others or waging wars or any of the other «atrocities» that are associated with «religious» history (and you are ignoring the fact that «government» itself IS a religion). DO you follow ANYTHING from the government or fund or support it in ANY way that is complicit to ANY form of the Military Industrial Complex, Prison-Industrial-Complex, Propaganda-Industrial-Complex, etc. ? If you are then who are you to talk about the «morality» of others when you yourself are complicit to causing suffering upon others ?

D : The references I had asked as to whether you had actually read through all of the materials or not DO add to the discussion because familiarity with all of it would already answer ALL of the questions you have posed; you tell me that I am «making excuses not to provide evidence» but you are behaving precisely like those pseudo-skeptics who say «I already know that that stuff is irrelevant» and making excuses not to even bother looking at any evidence.

You may as well just read all of Joe Nickell's publications and adopt that particular view about the world and existence and reality itself; a guy who pretends that he would LOVE to see at least SOME «evidence» or even ANY «evidence» for Psi whilst simultaneously pretending to look for it yet intentionally ignoring anything that is genuinely scientific whilst then declaring by the time you've gotten to the end of any of his books that there has never been any evidence for the existence of the para-normal, not one bit, not one iota, even though he claims that he would LOVE to «see evidence» for the para-normal and would be the FIRST to even «accept any evidence» that exists if it even exists at all (Note : He'd actually be the LAST person to even «accept evidence» for anything that «proves» the existence of the para-normal which is actually also true for EVERY extremist-materialist). This is called Nickell-Plating (a term used by The Ethical Skeptic for the aforementioned reasons).

A) please don't belittle those people who are truly sceptical, nor suggest that because they don't automatically accept your premises it makes them a non-sceptic. A real sceptic weighs up the evidence presented, and will compare and contrast with existing evidence, to come to a conclusion. That will mean it will be a LOT harder to convince them of things for which there is ample counter-evidence and the ability to make predictions (and replications of studies and obtain the same results - so far, none of what you have discussed (except maybe RV itself) has had this happen effectively)..

B, C & D - you seem to be under the impression that anecdotes = good evidence..

They don't.

If they did, this world would be vastly different (in some ways) albeit terribly similar as it is. Religion is based on anecdotes, and it was the scientific method that is and has been used to counter the negative (and positive) impacts of that. The evidence so far is fairly dubious and questionable.

But, I will grant you - anecdotal evidence is still a form of evidence.

So, do you have anything other than anecdotes??? Can you even think of a way to set up an experiment that can use the scientific protocols (double-blinds, random selections, determination of appropriate statistics of probability to determine chance, etc) to provide evidence for any of the above??? (Other than RV - that's actually been fairly well done!) Can you even think of an experiment that would prove the existence of a soul???? (NB: the RV experiments show something happens that's beyond current physical sciences - however, not even the best of them know how this works!)

This relates to the first point - you seem to think that because you can point to something and say "see, that's paranormal", you expect everyone else to not only agree, but they should also completely ignore any other possibilities.

To which I need to ask you... Since you so want such people to just accept your view of the world (ie, evidence) and change their positions - what would it take for you to change YOUR view of the world and accept that it's only a materialistic one??? After all, neuroscience provides good answers for NDE stuff - why don't you accept that? We that certain drugs and other stimuli can produce certain 'spiritual' experiences. Hypnosis can implant false memories.

(In relation to B - there is some evidence that some people have been able to describe seeing and hearing things to give information that they shouldn't have access to.... one *theory* is about it being from a soul.... however, again, relying on anecdotes)

(I'll just add that in relation to C, there are a lot of paranormal practitioners who absolutely don't believe in such a concept- and they too have their 'evidence'.... what makes yours any better than theirs???)

I can already predict that the only responses I am going to get will be along the lines of «you write a lot of words in order to not say anything» (DID you EXPECT «science» to be only a ONE day or even only one week or even only one month or even only one year process ?) and for all of this asking for proof and evidence that a soul/spirit cannot be destroyed how about showing some evidence that it CAN be destroyed ?

Here are my responses, the first being a link to what Dr. Dean Radin has written about the skeptics or the so-called skeptics, and, the state of skepticism today and its «evolution» into how it is why it is now.

https://skepticalaboutskeptics.org/examining-skeptics/dean-radin-the-limitations-and-failings-of-dogmatic-criticism/2/

https://quantum-note.com/open-responses/target-importance-response-002.html

Unless you can demonstrate to me that you have ACTUALLY «done your homework» this is going to be my LAST response to your «queries» for reasons I've already explained therein...