A GENUINE SKEPTIC MUST KNOW AND DO BEFORE OBJECTING TO THE
EVIDENCE FOR THE
I have to concede
that these days the objections I receive from skeptics to
the evidence for the afterlife are very few. In fact I estimate
only hear from one skeptic in some 10,000 responses- that's
.01% But because I try to answer all emails, I find that
uninformed skeptics waste my precious time raising invalid
objections. So, if you are a skeptic, before you email me
to argue about the afterlife evidence, please show you know
what you are talking about and that have gone through these:
1. Actually read the evidence as set out
in my book A Lawyer
Presents the Case for the Afterlife and my multimedia
section The Evidence for
the Afterlife. It is very common for people to make
objections without first reading the evidence.
Consult your lawyer asking him to explain
to you what
technically consititutes admissible evidence. I can't deal
with amateurs trying to debate law with me. Scientists are
experts in science, lawyers are experts in the admissibility
of evidence. In any inconsistence between law and science,
as to the admissibility of evidence, law prevails and will
always prevail over science.
3 . Ask your lawyer to explain in clear
terms the meaning of 'hearsay' evidence.
Over the years I found skeptical dummies unable to understand
what how 'hearsay' evidence differes from 'direct evidence'.
4 . Ask
your lawyer about who is a credibile authority on
the performance of psychics in helping police solve crimes.
He/she will tell you that when senior police officers
around the United States confirm that mediums and psychics
are real they do have credibility. Otherwise the skeptic
has to show these senior police officers do not have credibility.
5 . Find out the true meaning of 'anecdotal'
6 . Find out the difference between
objective and subjective evidence,
Go to a scientist to explain what is Scientific
Method. There are those skeptics whose minds will know allow
them to accept that certain evidence for the afterlife has
been produced using Scientific Method.
8 . Go to a psychologist
and ask him or her to explain the meaning of 'rationalization
through cognitive dissonance' - a most common problem
with skeptics who keep on stubbornly rationalizing their
irrational skeptical beliefs notwithstanding repeatable
and objective afterlife evidence.
9 . Go and see an expert in Neurolinguistic
Programming to explain the defence of 'deletion'
when without you knowing it you mind deletes evidence which
shows that the afterlife is valid.
10 . Go to a statistician
to explain mathematical probabilities - that when the odds
against chance of certain afterlife evidence is a million
to one or even great that cannot be chance - it means that
the event really happened.
Otherwise please do not waste my time complaining
and raising objections about things you show you do not