continued ...

That was the old trick by Randi when he used to say, “you cannot prove the negative.” Since I wised him up he stopped saying it but this crony has not.

I, as the lawyer for the plaintiff, expressly stated some 23 areas of afterlife evidence supporting the evidence with primary and secondary sources. In professional debate, the onus then shifts onto the lawyer for the defendant to state where, when, how and why the evidence cannot be admitted.

Instead these gutter-level skeptics- showing they don't have the intellectual capacity to deal with my evidence explaining where, when, how and why the evidence is not valid- try to throw mud at the person who is frustrating them out of their wits.

No genius scientist, no genius skeptic – no materialist has been able to rebut the evidence for the afterlife in the ten years that I put the evidence on-line - not even for the allurement of ONE MILLION DOLLARS.

Remove the cheap dirty talk, the dirty name calling and seek advice form professional lawyers on how to rebut Victor's empirical evidence. Wake up from your deep sleep skeptics. When you try to attack the person and not the evidence, you show you are losing fast and WE know more than ever that we are on the winning side because you are showing and confirming that the afterlife evidence is objective, repeatable and unrebuttable.