Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Members Blogs
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Self Moderated Area
Scholairebochts Blog.
An Open Letter to Atheists
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tiger" data-source="post: 143973" data-attributes="member: 353"><p>I would have responded to this yesterday evening, however I was banned.</p><p></p><p>Tank, the only thing Woerlee proved is that a materialist with no access to the patient, no access to the surgical team, and no access to the records will still write pages of make-believe to defend his faith; and you’ve fallen for it.</p><p></p><p>Woerlee is notorious for this kind of pseudo-debunking; he didn’t have access to anything associated with the study.</p><p></p><p>And Chris Carter dismantled him for it. Carter pointed out that Woerlee’s entire case depends on pure speculation; like “bone conduction,” despite the fact that Pam’s ears were packed and ABR monitoring confirmed her auditory pathways were offline. He also highlighted how Woerlee cherry-picked the weakest details while deliberately ignoring the strongest: Pam’s accurate description of the surgical saw she had never seen before, her knowledge of surgical conversations, and the timing of her awareness during deep anesthesia and hypothermic cardiac arrest. These are not trivialities; they’re the whole case.</p><p></p><p>But instead of facing that, Woerlee weaves just-so stories to preserve materialism. Carter rightly called him out for being driven by ideology, not evidence. <strong>In fact, his “explanations” require us to believe in things that neuroscience itself rules out: perception with no cortical activity, auditory awareness with blocked ears, memory encoding when brain metabolism is near zero. </strong>It’s absurd.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461722/" target="_blank">Response to "Could Pam Reynolds Hear?" [#2] - UNT Digital Library</a></p><p></p><p></p><p>Tank, if you were familiar with this space you wouldn't have tried to refute evidence with the one “expert” who’s already been shredded by serious scholars in the field.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tiger, post: 143973, member: 353"] I would have responded to this yesterday evening, however I was banned. Tank, the only thing Woerlee proved is that a materialist with no access to the patient, no access to the surgical team, and no access to the records will still write pages of make-believe to defend his faith; and you’ve fallen for it. Woerlee is notorious for this kind of pseudo-debunking; he didn’t have access to anything associated with the study. And Chris Carter dismantled him for it. Carter pointed out that Woerlee’s entire case depends on pure speculation; like “bone conduction,” despite the fact that Pam’s ears were packed and ABR monitoring confirmed her auditory pathways were offline. He also highlighted how Woerlee cherry-picked the weakest details while deliberately ignoring the strongest: Pam’s accurate description of the surgical saw she had never seen before, her knowledge of surgical conversations, and the timing of her awareness during deep anesthesia and hypothermic cardiac arrest. These are not trivialities; they’re the whole case. But instead of facing that, Woerlee weaves just-so stories to preserve materialism. Carter rightly called him out for being driven by ideology, not evidence. [B]In fact, his “explanations” require us to believe in things that neuroscience itself rules out: perception with no cortical activity, auditory awareness with blocked ears, memory encoding when brain metabolism is near zero. [/B]It’s absurd. [URL='https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461722/']Response to "Could Pam Reynolds Hear?" [#2] - UNT Digital Library[/URL] Tank, if you were familiar with this space you wouldn't have tried to refute evidence with the one “expert” who’s already been shredded by serious scholars in the field. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
What day comes after Saturday
Post reply
Latest Threads
S
The Digital Prison system being created around you
Started by scolairebocht
Tuesday at 7:55 PM
Replies: 11
Scholairebochts Blog.
B
WE IRISH ARE NOT PROTECTED AGAINST IMMIGRANT DISASES.
Started by BIG FAT HOOR
Monday at 6:21 AM
Replies: 11
Health
Registrations now Open
Started by Declan
Oct 29, 2025
Replies: 6
Public Chat and Announcements
The Co-Op Has Been Formed.
Started by Declan
Oct 28, 2025
Replies: 3
Public Chat and Announcements
Fastway gone bust
Started by Anderson
Oct 28, 2025
Replies: 6
Economy
Popular Threads
Ukraine.
Started by Declan
Feb 21, 2022
Replies: 15K
World at War
US Politics.
Started by jpc
Nov 7, 2022
Replies: 6K
USA
Mass Migration to Ireland & Europe
Started by Anderson
Feb 26, 2023
Replies: 5K
Nationalist Politics
C
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
Started by Charlene
Sep 14, 2021
Replies: 3K
Health
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
Started by Declan
Dec 30, 2024
Replies: 3K
Public Chat and Announcements
The Climate Change scam
Started by Anderson
Jul 29, 2022
Replies: 2K
Climate Change
Forums
Self Moderated Area
Scholairebochts Blog.
An Open Letter to Atheists
Top
Bottom