PROOF OF LIFE AFTER DEATH (Re: Moderation)
edconrad at prolog.net
Fri Jul 12 07:37:32 EST 1996
chris brochu <gator at mail.utexas.edu> posted on talk.origins:
>. . . Posts about "life after death" are pointless in
>sci.bio.paleontology. If I wanted to read something
>about this subject, there are newsgroups specifically for it.
Naturally, you are entitled to your opinion. But, in this particular
case, your opinion is all wet.
No previous posts about ``life after death'' to any newsgroup
in the entire history of the Internet can hold a candle to
``PROOF OF LIFE AFTER DEATH,'' recently posted here
There's nothing hoaky about this one, Chris.
ANY scientist in any field -- or, for that matter, anyone with an
inquiring mind interested in the honest pursuit of scientific truth
-- is a charlatan if neither interested nor intrigued by what well
may be the breakthrough evidence that SEEMS to confirm
the possibility of an existence past our physical death.
The arsenal of evidence includes:
-- Documented lengthy in-depth interviews with the two persons who
experienced it, conducted independently the DAY of their rescue (not
weeks or months afterwards) and, rather importantly, by a respected
unbiased investigative unit such as the U.S. Navy Survival Team . . .
-- An additional documented joint interview by a prestigious
scholarly investigative team representing The Institute of the
University of Pennsylvania . . .
-- The favorable opinions of Dr. Elisabeth Kuber-Ross and Bruce
Greyson, both deeply involved in the study of death and dying for
many, many years. . .
-- Hank Throne's admission on ``Spirit of Survival'' that some
damn strange things DID INDEED HAPPEN while he and fellow
coal miner David Fellin were entombed for 14 days . . .
-- The most favorable results of David Fellin's two separate
polygraphy tests concerning the entombment (not yet revealed
in detail anywhere] . . .
Chris, I want you to know that you're not the first to complain that
PROOF OF LIFE AFTER DEATH should not have been posted
to their particular newsgroup.
Frank Skulason (frisk2complex.is) called it ``totally inappropriate''
for most of the newsgroups it had reached.
Eric Pelletier of the Pasteur Institute in Paris labeled it ``a
misplaced crosspost'' and emphasized that, in his opinion, it has
``nothing to do with mol.bio.evolution.''
Eric l. Cabot (cabot at gcg.com) sent an E-mail to emphatically
inform me that ``the topic has little to do with either mol.bio
And Kurt Zeller (k.zeller at plantpath.pp.ksu.edu) also wrote to say he
felt it was inappropriate to post on bionet.molbio.evolution but was
kind enough to add:
''If you can come up with an acceptable reason for posting this here,
I will acknowledge and apologize.''
Dear Mr. Zeller:
I have the greatest respect for your keen interest in molecular
biological evolution and the benefits to mankind that you and your
colleagues' efforts hopefully will continue to deliver somewhere down
Unfortunately, the way I see it, mankind's problem is not somewhere
down the road but current and very, very real.
Pope John XXIII, who after his physical death had played the central
role in this remarkable unprecedented heartwarming story of survival,
had proven during his brief pontificate that the only real solution to
reversing man's animosity toward his fellow man comes from the heart
-- when it is opened wide in a sincere gesture of brotherhood.
Those of us who were contemporaries of Pope John -- from a multitude
of religious persuasions and many from none -- greatly admired and
respected this very special person because he was so down to earth and
so much a man of the people.
In response to your puzzlement concerning a possible link between the
dramatic mine rescue and your bionet.molbio.evolution newsgroup,
perhaps Pope John's loving, caring, compassionate nature was the
direct result of his fantastic molecular makeup.
Quite frankly, that's about the only honest answer I can offer as my
reason for wanting to share this wonderful story with your newsgroup
-- and with everyone else I can possibly reach.
More information about the Mol-evol