Article ignores NDE evidence completely (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, June 24, 2017, 11:45 (2711 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Michael Shermer is a famous skeptic. His article is totally biased by ignoring the subject:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-ldquo-you-rdquo-in-an-afterlife-woul...
DAVID's comment: Shermer knows Susan Blackmore from the skeptic society. She has discussed NDE's and denies them. Shermer ignores them.
dhw: Having attended a lecture by Susan Blackmore, I am not in the least surprised by the head-in-the-sand approach of diehard atheists. It perfectly matches the head-in-the-sand approach of diehard theists, and is put to shame by the open-mindedness of diehard agnostics, except that diehard agnostics have got it wrong one way or the other, so they/we have nothing to be proud of either.

DAVID: No one has proof, but I have an opinion based on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
dhw: That is tantamount to saying that anyone else’s opinion is unreasonable, and if this were a court of law (“beyond a reasonable doubt” being the legal criterion for proof of guilt) you would send all atheists and agnostics to jail. Ts, ts.
DAVID: We are not in court. Stop feeling guilty about your lack of faith.

If you have proved your case “beyond a reasonable doubt”, it means your adversary has lost. Lucky for us agnostics that you are only the lawyer and not the judge and jury!