Reincarnation

[Age]

Did you even COMPREHEND the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed here and ASKED you?

Air can be made visible to the naked eye using instruments.

Considering the ACTUAL WORD that I USED, compared to what you SAY here, it appears that you did NOT COMPREHEND here.

Everyone knows this,

LOL
LOL
LOL 'Everyone KNOWS 'this'.

your question wasn't even relevant to the issue of mental phenomena.

'your' responses were NOT even relevant to what I was ACTUALLY talking ABOUT and MEANING either. So, so what?

[Age]

Will you provide an ACTUAL link to this CLAIMED technology, which CAN ALREADY reconstruct images from dreams?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?

I would say usually no, it's not my job to fill the many gaps in your knowledge. I'll make an exception

https://news.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/

WHEN one WANTS to MAKE CLAIMS, then I will suggest that it is 'that one's JOB' to back up and support THEIR CLAIMS.

Continue MAKING CLAIMS that there ARE MANY GAPS in 'my knowledge'. I Truly ENJOY 'this'.

Also, talking ABOUT 'gaps in knowledge' just within the topic title, in that link, the term 'our mind' IS USED, which is Truly LAUGHABLE considering that there is NO 'our mind'.

THEN to make 'your' link even MORE USELESS to YOUR CLAIM here, within that link it STATES:
As yet, the technology can only reconstruct movie clips people have already viewed, from hollywood movie trailers. However, the breakthrough paves the way for reproducing the movies inside our heads that no one else sees, such as dreams and memories, according to researchers.

Which TOTALLY CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM that, technology can ALREADY reconstruct images FROM DREAMS.

I think 'you' REALLY DO NEED to BOLSTER 'your' READING SKILLS here "atla".

[Atla]

Did you even COMPREHEND the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed here and ASKED you?

Air can be made visible to the naked eye using instruments.

Considering the ACTUAL WORD that I USED, compared to what you SAY here, it appears that you did NOT COMPREHEND here.

Everyone knows this,

LOL
LOL
LOL 'Everyone KNOWS 'this'.

your question wasn't even relevant to the issue of mental phenomena.

'your' responses were NOT even relevant to what I was ACTUALLY talking ABOUT and MEANING either. So, so what?

Your comments were not even relevant. Simple invisibility of otherwise measurable things is irrelevant.

[Age]

You rejected magical thinking such as: the universe began, space appeared out of nothing.
But you didn't reject the magical thinking of change: the past disappears into nothing, the future appears out of nothing.

What are you even on about here?

I said that, your entire claim about creation and evolution being central reasons for why we are here, can be as easily shown to be based on magical thinking, as the claim that the universe must have began. And then we didn't even look at the other magical claim of yours, that the future and the past should form an asymmetric world.

But 'this' is, OBVIOUSLY, JUST 'your' OWN so-called 'magical thinking' and magically BELIEVING is true "atla".

Will 'you' provide ANY 'thing', which would back up and support YOUR CLAIMS here?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?

Past evolution is just a necessary route between a simpler state like a Big Bang, and humans.

The WHOLE Universe IS in A Truly VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY 'state' ALWAYS, HERE-NOW.

AND, 'this' STATE IS, ALSO, VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY to COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND.

Contrary to popular BELIEF, by SOME, in the days when this was being written, 'those human beings' were NOT MORE COMPLEX than any IMAGINED state like 'the big bang'.

You've given no actual reason to think that evolution will be relevant anymore, nor any actual reason to think that there's anything to "creation".

Were you UNDER some sort of ASSUMPTION that I CARE?

AND LOL this one here BELIEVES that since, through evolution, 'it' has COME-INTO-BEING, 'evolution is NOT 'relevant' ANYMORE. Which is MORE LAUGHABLE each time I envision 'this human being' BELIEVING 'this' to be true.

If 'you' STILL can NOT YET SEE absolutely ANY reason for WHY 'you', ANY "OTHER" human being, nor ANY 'thing' WAS ACTUALLY CREATED, then JUST KEEP BELIEVING that there is NOTHING to 'CREATION'.

By doing so 'you' are HELPING 'me' ACHIEVE 'the goal' here, PERFECTLY.

[Atla]

Will you provide an ACTUAL link to this CLAIMED technology, which CAN ALREADY reconstruct images from dreams?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?

I would say usually no, it's not my job to fill the many gaps in your knowledge. I'll make an exception

https://news.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/

WHEN one WANTS to MAKE CLAIMS, then I will suggest that it is 'that one's JOB' to back up and support THEIR CLAIMS.

Continue MAKING CLAIMS that there ARE MANY GAPS in 'my knowledge'. I Truly ENJOY 'this'.

Also, talking ABOUT 'gaps in knowledge' just within the topic title, in that link, the term 'our mind' IS USED, which is Truly LAUGHABLE considering that there is NO 'our mind'.

THEN to make 'your' link even MORE USELESS to YOUR CLAIM here, within that link it STATES:
As yet, the technology can only reconstruct movie clips people have already viewed, from hollywood movie trailers. However, the breakthrough paves the way for reproducing the movies inside our heads that no one else sees, such as dreams and memories, according to researchers.

Which TOTALLY CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM that, technology can ALREADY reconstruct images FROM DREAMS.

I think 'you' REALLY DO NEED to BOLSTER 'your' READING SKILLS here "atla".

Ok awake then, not dreams. Point is, your claim about the invisible 'being part' is pretty much refuted at this point.

[Atla]

What are you even on about here?

I said that, your entire claim about creation and evolution being central reasons for why we are here, can be as easily shown to be based on magical thinking, as the claim that the universe must have began. And then we didn't even look at the other magical claim of yours, that the future and the past should form an asymmetric world.

But 'this' is, OBVIOUSLY, JUST 'your' OWN so-called 'magical thinking' and magically BELIEVING is true "atla".

Will 'you' provide ANY 'thing', which would back up and support YOUR CLAIMS here?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?

Past evolution is just a necessary route between a simpler state like a Big Bang, and humans.

The WHOLE Universe IS in A Truly VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY 'state' ALWAYS, HERE-NOW.

AND, 'this' STATE IS, ALSO, VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY to COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND.

Contrary to popular BELIEF, by SOME, in the days when this was being written, 'those human beings' were NOT MORE COMPLEX than any IMAGINED state like 'the big bang'.

You've given no actual reason to think that evolution will be relevant anymore, nor any actual reason to think that there's anything to "creation".

Were you UNDER some sort of ASSUMPTION that I CARE?

AND LOL this one here BELIEVES that since, through evolution, 'it' has COME-INTO-BEING, 'evolution is NOT 'relevant' ANYMORE. Which is MORE LAUGHABLE each time I envision 'this human being' BELIEVING 'this' to be true.

If 'you' STILL can NOT YET SEE absolutely ANY reason for WHY 'you', ANY "OTHER" human being, nor ANY 'thing' WAS ACTUALLY CREATED, then JUST KEEP BELIEVING that there is NOTHING to 'CREATION'.

By doing so 'you' are HELPING 'me' ACHIEVE 'the goal' here, PERFECTLY.

I've shown that you are the one who believes. Prove your claims about creation and evolution, if you are able.

[Age]

Air can be made visible to the naked eye using instruments.

Considering the ACTUAL WORD that I USED, compared to what you SAY here, it appears that you did NOT COMPREHEND here.

Everyone knows this,

LOL
LOL
LOL 'Everyone KNOWS 'this'.

your question wasn't even relevant to the issue of mental phenomena.

'your' responses were NOT even relevant to what I was ACTUALLY talking ABOUT and MEANING either. So, so what?

Your comments were not even relevant.

I was JUST CLARIFYING, and thus ANSWERING, a VERY SIMPLE and EASY CLARIFYING QUESTION posed, and ASKED to 'me'.

See, what happened WAS 'one person' ASKED me to CLARIFY:

what is your personal explanation for "how and why" we and the universe exist?

So, out of COURTESY I OBLIGED their REQUEST.

Therefore, MY COMMENTS were ACTUALLY VERY RELEVANT to that particular QUESTION ASKED to 'me'.

Simple invisibility of otherwise measurable things is irrelevant.

LOL
LOL
LOL

If 'that' WAS IRRELEVANT, then WHY was 'that' about the ONLY REAL 'thing', which 'you' found CONTENTION WITH, EXACTLY?

'you' are, ONCE AGAIN, LOOKING MORE SILLY and FOOLISH the MORE 'you' TALK, RESPOND, and 'TRY TO' COUNTER here,

[Atla]

Considering the ACTUAL WORD that I USED, compared to what you SAY here, it appears that you did NOT COMPREHEND here.


LOL
LOL
LOL 'Everyone KNOWS 'this'.


'your' responses were NOT even relevant to what I was ACTUALLY talking ABOUT and MEANING either. So, so what?

Your comments were not even relevant.

I was JUST CLARIFYING, and thus ANSWERING, a VERY SIMPLE and EASY CLARIFYING QUESTION posed, and ASKED to 'me'.

See, what happened WAS 'one person' ASKED me to CLARIFY:

what is your personal explanation for "how and why" we and the universe exist?

So, out of COURTESY I OBLIGED their REQUEST.

Therefore, MY COMMENTS were ACTUALLY VERY RELEVANT to that particular QUESTION ASKED to 'me'.

Simple invisibility of otherwise measurable things is irrelevant.

LOL
LOL
LOL

If 'that' WAS IRRELEVANT, then WHY was 'that' about the ONLY REAL 'thing', which 'you' found CONTENTION WITH, EXACTLY?

'you' are, ONCE AGAIN, LOOKING MORE SILLY and FOOLISH the MORE 'you' TALK, RESPOND, and 'TRY TO' COUNTER here,

I wasn't talking about that, and neither were you originally. You just changed the topic.

[Age]

I would say usually no, it's not my job to fill the many gaps in your knowledge. I'll make an exception

https://news.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/

WHEN one WANTS to MAKE CLAIMS, then I will suggest that it is 'that one's JOB' to back up and support THEIR CLAIMS.

Continue MAKING CLAIMS that there ARE MANY GAPS in 'my knowledge'. I Truly ENJOY 'this'.

Also, talking ABOUT 'gaps in knowledge' just within the topic title, in that link, the term 'our mind' IS USED, which is Truly LAUGHABLE considering that there is NO 'our mind'.

THEN to make 'your' link even MORE USELESS to YOUR CLAIM here, within that link it STATES:
As yet, the technology can only reconstruct movie clips people have already viewed, from hollywood movie trailers. However, the breakthrough paves the way for reproducing the movies inside our heads that no one else sees, such as dreams and memories, according to researchers.

Which TOTALLY CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM that, technology can ALREADY reconstruct images FROM DREAMS.

I think 'you' REALLY DO NEED to BOLSTER 'your' READING SKILLS here "atla".

Ok awake then, not dreams. Point is, your claim about the invisible 'being part' is pretty much refuted at this point.

WHO CARES?

'It' WAS and IS PRETTY MUCH IRRELEVANT to the ACTUAL POINT I WAS MAKING in regards to the ACTUAL QUESTION posed and ASKED TO 'me'.

But what STILL STANDS IS; Has ANY one ACTUALLY SEEN 'thoughts', 'emotions', themselves, or even the 'Mind', Itself, WITH physical eyes?

If yes, then WHO, EXACTLY?

Then, I CAN DISCUSS 'this issue' WITH 'them', DIRECTLY, and then 'we' CAN, and WILL, SEE 'what' IS ACTUALLY REFUTED here and 'what' IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE here.

After all the 'one' link that 'you' provided here "atla" only ended up ACTUALLY REFUTING 'your' OWN CLAIM. So, I will NOT ASK 'you' for ANY MORE 'links'. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' would like to OFFER UP some MORE. If so, then PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO SO.

[Age]

I said that, your entire claim about creation and evolution being central reasons for why we are here, can be as easily shown to be based on magical thinking, as the claim that the universe must have began. And then we didn't even look at the other magical claim of yours, that the future and the past should form an asymmetric world.

But 'this' is, OBVIOUSLY, JUST 'your' OWN so-called 'magical thinking' and magically BELIEVING is true "atla".

Will 'you' provide ANY 'thing', which would back up and support YOUR CLAIMS here?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?

Past evolution is just a necessary route between a simpler state like a Big Bang, and humans.

The WHOLE Universe IS in A Truly VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY 'state' ALWAYS, HERE-NOW.

AND, 'this' STATE IS, ALSO, VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY to COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND.

Contrary to popular BELIEF, by SOME, in the days when this was being written, 'those human beings' were NOT MORE COMPLEX than any IMAGINED state like 'the big bang'.

You've given no actual reason to think that evolution will be relevant anymore, nor any actual reason to think that there's anything to "creation".

Were you UNDER some sort of ASSUMPTION that I CARE?

AND LOL this one here BELIEVES that since, through evolution, 'it' has COME-INTO-BEING, 'evolution is NOT 'relevant' ANYMORE. Which is MORE LAUGHABLE each time I envision 'this human being' BELIEVING 'this' to be true.

If 'you' STILL can NOT YET SEE absolutely ANY reason for WHY 'you', ANY "OTHER" human being, nor ANY 'thing' WAS ACTUALLY CREATED, then JUST KEEP BELIEVING that there is NOTHING to 'CREATION'.

By doing so 'you' are HELPING 'me' ACHIEVE 'the goal' here, PERFECTLY.

I've shown that you are the one who believes.

LOL
LOL
LOL

WHEN and WHERE have 'you', SUPPOSEDLY, EVERY SHOWN ANY such 'thing' as 'this' here?

'you' REALLY MAKE 'me' LAUGH "atla".

And, for the readers here, what WILL OCCUR, AGAIN, is that 'this CLAIM' here now will NEVER be backed up NOR supported with ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' AT ALL.

'This one' LITERALLY BELIEVES what 'it' STATES and CLAIMS is SO TRUE that 'it' can NOT even SEE that a LOT of what 'it' STATES and CLAIMS is true here is ACTUALLY ALL of 'its' OWN MAKING, and exists SOLELY in the IMAGINATION WITHIN 'that body'.

Prove your claims about creation and evolution, if you are able.

I DEFINITELY WILL, AFTER 'you' PROVIDE 'us' WITH what 'my' ACTUAL CLAIMS about 'creation and evolution' ARE, EXACTLY.

Doing 'this' WILL SHOW 'us' that 'you' do have SOME COMPREHENSION of what I have been SAYING and CLAIMING here.

So, 'we' now WAIT for 'you', ONCE AGAIN, "atla".

Do 'you' even KNOW WHAT 'my CLAIMS' ARE about 'creation and evolution'?

We will WAIT, to SEE.

[Age]

Your comments were not even relevant.

I was JUST CLARIFYING, and thus ANSWERING, a VERY SIMPLE and EASY CLARIFYING QUESTION posed, and ASKED to 'me'.

See, what happened WAS 'one person' ASKED me to CLARIFY:

what is your personal explanation for "how and why" we and the universe exist?

So, out of COURTESY I OBLIGED their REQUEST.

Therefore, MY COMMENTS were ACTUALLY VERY RELEVANT to that particular QUESTION ASKED to 'me'.

Simple invisibility of otherwise measurable things is irrelevant.

LOL
LOL
LOL

If 'that' WAS IRRELEVANT, then WHY was 'that' about the ONLY REAL 'thing', which 'you' found CONTENTION WITH, EXACTLY?

'you' are, ONCE AGAIN, LOOKING MORE SILLY and FOOLISH the MORE 'you' TALK, RESPOND, and 'TRY TO' COUNTER here,

I wasn't talking about that, and neither were you originally. You just changed the topic.

LOL here "atla"

If I WAS to even ASK 'you', 'What does the 'that' word here even REFER TO, EXACTLY, which 'you', SUPPOSEDLY, was NOT talking ABOUT, then considering the Fact that 'you' COULD NOT ANSWER 'this QUESTION, Honestly, WITHOUT CONTRADICTION "your" 'self' here ONCE AGAIN, this means that 'you' WOULD NOT. As 'you' WILL, ONCE AGAIN, PROVE 'me' ABSOLUTELY Right AND Correct here.

ALSO, I CAME to TALK ABOUT 'that' BECAUSE 'that' ENTERED INTO the ANSWER I WAS PROVIDING to the ACTUAL QUESTION posed, and ASKED TO 'me'.

AND, when 'you' said the 'originally' word here, WHEN are 'you' REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?

[Atla]

WHEN one WANTS to MAKE CLAIMS, then I will suggest that it is 'that one's JOB' to back up and support THEIR CLAIMS.

Continue MAKING CLAIMS that there ARE MANY GAPS in 'my knowledge'. I Truly ENJOY 'this'.

Also, talking ABOUT 'gaps in knowledge' just within the topic title, in that link, the term 'our mind' IS USED, which is Truly LAUGHABLE considering that there is NO 'our mind'.

THEN to make 'your' link even MORE USELESS to YOUR CLAIM here, within that link it STATES:
As yet, the technology can only reconstruct movie clips people have already viewed, from hollywood movie trailers. However, the breakthrough paves the way for reproducing the movies inside our heads that no one else sees, such as dreams and memories, according to researchers.

Which TOTALLY CONTRADICTS YOUR CLAIM that, technology can ALREADY reconstruct images FROM DREAMS.

I think 'you' REALLY DO NEED to BOLSTER 'your' READING SKILLS here "atla".

Ok awake then, not dreams. Point is, your claim about the invisible 'being part' is pretty much refuted at this point.

WHO CARES?

'It' WAS and IS PRETTY MUCH IRRELEVANT to the ACTUAL POINT I WAS MAKING in regards to the ACTUAL QUESTION posed and ASKED TO 'me'.

But what STILL STANDS IS; Has ANY one ACTUALLY SEEN 'thoughts', 'emotions', themselves, or even the 'Mind', Itself, WITH physical eyes?

If yes, then WHO, EXACTLY?

Then, I CAN DISCUSS 'this issue' WITH 'them', DIRECTLY, and then 'we' CAN, and WILL, SEE 'what' IS ACTUALLY REFUTED here and 'what' IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE here.

After all the 'one' link that 'you' provided here "atla" only ended up ACTUALLY REFUTING 'your' OWN CLAIM. So, I will NOT ASK 'you' for ANY MORE 'links'. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' would like to OFFER UP some MORE. If so, then PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO SO.

Again, we can see the brain with naked eyes, and we can use instruments to see inside the brain, and it's all physical.
Your claim about the invisible 'being part' was pretty much refuted, as are your usual claims about some universal "I". Unless you can prove otherwise.

[Atla]

But 'this' is, OBVIOUSLY, JUST 'your' OWN so-called 'magical thinking' and magically BELIEVING is true "atla".

Will 'you' provide ANY 'thing', which would back up and support YOUR CLAIMS here?

If yes, then GREAT.

But if no, then WHY NOT?


The WHOLE Universe IS in A Truly VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY 'state' ALWAYS, HERE-NOW.

AND, 'this' STATE IS, ALSO, VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY to COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND.

Contrary to popular BELIEF, by SOME, in the days when this was being written, 'those human beings' were NOT MORE COMPLEX than any IMAGINED state like 'the big bang'.



Were you UNDER some sort of ASSUMPTION that I CARE?

AND LOL this one here BELIEVES that since, through evolution, 'it' has COME-INTO-BEING, 'evolution is NOT 'relevant' ANYMORE. Which is MORE LAUGHABLE each time I envision 'this human being' BELIEVING 'this' to be true.

If 'you' STILL can NOT YET SEE absolutely ANY reason for WHY 'you', ANY "OTHER" human being, nor ANY 'thing' WAS ACTUALLY CREATED, then JUST KEEP BELIEVING that there is NOTHING to 'CREATION'.

By doing so 'you' are HELPING 'me' ACHIEVE 'the goal' here, PERFECTLY.

I've shown that you are the one who believes.

LOL
LOL
LOL

WHEN and WHERE have 'you', SUPPOSEDLY, EVERY SHOWN ANY such 'thing' as 'this' here?

'you' REALLY MAKE 'me' LAUGH "atla".

And, for the readers here, what WILL OCCUR, AGAIN, is that 'this CLAIM' here now will NEVER be backed up NOR supported with ABSOLUTELY ANY 'thing' AT ALL.

'This one' LITERALLY BELIEVES what 'it' STATES and CLAIMS is SO TRUE that 'it' can NOT even SEE that a LOT of what 'it' STATES and CLAIMS is true here is ACTUALLY ALL of 'its' OWN MAKING, and exists SOLELY in the IMAGINATION WITHIN 'that body'.

Prove your claims about creation and evolution, if you are able.

I DEFINITELY WILL, AFTER 'you' PROVIDE 'us' WITH what 'my' ACTUAL CLAIMS about 'creation and evolution' ARE, EXACTLY.

Doing 'this' WILL SHOW 'us' that 'you' do have SOME COMPREHENSION of what I have been SAYING and CLAIMING here.

So, 'we' now WAIT for 'you', ONCE AGAIN, "atla".

Do 'you' even KNOW WHAT 'my CLAIMS' ARE about 'creation and evolution'?

We will WAIT, to SEE.

Stop evading, you said

There is NO OTHER way than 'this way', and WHAT HAPPENS and OCCURS 'this way' IS; 'matter', BECAUSE OF 'space' is ABLE to move about ABSOLUTELY FREELY, and when 'matter' IS MOVING ABOUT 'it' IS INTER-ACTING with itself, and coming together with itself, CAUSING the CREATION of new/er 'things' ALL the time. That IS; thee One 'Thing' here KNOWN AS the Universe, Itself, is just CONTINUALLY CHANGING in shape and form ALWAYS, and in ALL WAYS, some might say or suggest. This CONTINUAL CHANGE, which 'creates' EVERY 'thing' is just 'evolution', itself, by the way. The One Everything IS just CREATING, through EVOLUTION, ALL of the 'things', which are KNOWN, or thought ABOUT, by 'you', human beings.

By the way, it IS the 'friction' CAUSED by 'matter' INTERACTING with itself, which OCCURS BECAUSE of 'space' remember, which is WHAT CAUSES or CREATES 'energy', itself. The friction caused by matter 'bumping' into itself, which HAPPENS ETERNALLY, is WHY 'energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another'.

EVERY action CAUSES a reaction, and it is, literally, this never-beginning and never-ending One REACTION that IS CREATION, Itself. HOW EVERY 'thing' EXISTS IS BECAUSE this is HOW EVERY 'thing' IS CREATED, through a never-ending EVOLUTIONARY process.

Now, WHY does 'you', and the Universe, EXIST, IS to bear witness to WHAT I AM Creating HERE-NOW. AND BECAUSE there just could NOT be ANY OTHER WAY, as, partly, EXPLAINED above here.

Prove your above beliefs, if you are able.

[Atla]

I was JUST CLARIFYING, and thus ANSWERING, a VERY SIMPLE and EASY CLARIFYING QUESTION posed, and ASKED to 'me'.

See, what happened WAS 'one person' ASKED me to CLARIFY:

what is your personal explanation for "how and why" we and the universe exist?

So, out of COURTESY I OBLIGED their REQUEST.

Therefore, MY COMMENTS were ACTUALLY VERY RELEVANT to that particular QUESTION ASKED to 'me'.



LOL
LOL
LOL

If 'that' WAS IRRELEVANT, then WHY was 'that' about the ONLY REAL 'thing', which 'you' found CONTENTION WITH, EXACTLY?

'you' are, ONCE AGAIN, LOOKING MORE SILLY and FOOLISH the MORE 'you' TALK, RESPOND, and 'TRY TO' COUNTER here,

I wasn't talking about that, and neither were you originally. You just changed the topic.

LOL here "atla"

If I WAS to even ASK 'you', 'What does the 'that' word here even REFER TO, EXACTLY, which 'you', SUPPOSEDLY, was NOT talking ABOUT, then considering the Fact that 'you' COULD NOT ANSWER 'this QUESTION, Honestly, WITHOUT CONTRADICTION "your" 'self' here ONCE AGAIN, this means that 'you' WOULD NOT. As 'you' WILL, ONCE AGAIN, PROVE 'me' ABSOLUTELY Right AND Correct here.

ALSO, I CAME to TALK ABOUT 'that' BECAUSE 'that' ENTERED INTO the ANSWER I WAS PROVIDING to the ACTUAL QUESTION posed, and ASKED TO 'me'.

AND, when 'you' said the 'originally' word here, WHEN are 'you' REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?

Not my fault if you are incapable of communicating in language. We other humans can understand context just fine.

[Age]

Ok awake then, not dreams. Point is, your claim about the invisible 'being part' is pretty much refuted at this point.

WHO CARES?

'It' WAS and IS PRETTY MUCH IRRELEVANT to the ACTUAL POINT I WAS MAKING in regards to the ACTUAL QUESTION posed and ASKED TO 'me'.

But what STILL STANDS IS; Has ANY one ACTUALLY SEEN 'thoughts', 'emotions', themselves, or even the 'Mind', Itself, WITH physical eyes?

If yes, then WHO, EXACTLY?

Then, I CAN DISCUSS 'this issue' WITH 'them', DIRECTLY, and then 'we' CAN, and WILL, SEE 'what' IS ACTUALLY REFUTED here and 'what' IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLE here.

After all the 'one' link that 'you' provided here "atla" only ended up ACTUALLY REFUTING 'your' OWN CLAIM. So, I will NOT ASK 'you' for ANY MORE 'links'. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' would like to OFFER UP some MORE. If so, then PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO SO.

Again, we can see the brain with naked eyes,

LOL "atla". 'you' REALLY can NOT READ the ACTUAL WORDS and COMPREHEND 'them'.

In my WHOLE LIFE I have NEVER even 'thought' that 'the brain' could NOT be SEEN with so-called 'naked eyes', let alone WROTE 'it' ANYWHERE here. So, WHY even bring up and GO OFF on such A TANGENT as 'this' here?

and we can use instruments to see inside the brain, and it's all physical.

SO WHAT?

Your claim about the invisible 'being part' was pretty much refuted, as are your usual claims about some universal "I".

WHAT DOES 'pretty much' even MEAN here.

Either what I SAY and CLAIM IS REFUTED, ABSOLUTELY and COMPLETELY, OR, 'it' IS NOT.

Unless you can prove otherwise.

WELL CONSIDERING 'I' CAN PROVE OTHERWISE, this then MEANS that what you SAY and CLAIM IS REFUTED, right?