Isn't what the OP wants to do basically the entire idea being cryogenics? (That's the word right?) The main reason we can't bring us back to life once long dead is due to decomposition. So the idea is that freezing the body(you're technically dead, right?), it stops decomposition, and thus one day in the future, you can be brought back to life again and your ailments healed. I could be mistaken. But I think that's it. IMO, this question isn't really one of a religious nature anyway.
Okay I'm Bipolar so sometimes I get angrry at someone for no reason I can stop it (being angrry at them) I might still be up set or unconformable but then again I had a medical condition that makes it so You can count to 10 and calm down its not "in a blink of an eye" but when you think about it no thought is instant The problem here is your thinking that cause yiu cant cant change in a blink of an eye its Subcon but Subcon means you have no control over it, if you think about god and the bible for a few hours you CAN have control over it Exsample math problem It takes a long time to figure it out (assuming its hard) its not instant but its not sub Religion is way more harder then math so of course it takes time But there are cases where you change in an instant Not quite, why yes that is true by defnition its not what you think it is Here is an Exsample, I'm playing guitar I dont hear my head say "Am, C, F Dm" (last one there is so its not instinct) But I still think about it its not subcon even tough i cant hear my self think I'm not aware of the chords I'm going to pick but i can change them As shuch its not subcon
Why yes it is, the thing you talked about dose not work last I checked there is no way as freezing dmanges parts of couse there is always a change later on we can fix it but as of now its a myth that cant happen When you freeze you die, your heart stops, your brain stops and you die
Well I still stand by what I say but I might have made it more convoluted by mentioning subconscious and conscious. It might have been conscious for you but I don't think it was a choice. Because from your experience the only conclusion that makes sense to you is that god exists. So there's only one option for you so it's not a choice. Feel free to disagree but that's how I see it.
Good, glad we got that out of the way. Now, you're equating an emotion with belief. Wrong again. It's hard to pin down because it is not a scientific term. Freud condemned its use as long ago as 1915.
I think for cryogenics it needs to be in a temperature just below freezing with the subjects on a drip of anesthetic. That wouldn't cause damage (I think.) and would slow down your bodies system. A nutrients drip might also be needed.
An emotion is still how I feel about something as is a belief. It's different but there are parallels. But really I've just said that I'm standing by my opinion on the matter and that you're free to disagree. But I thought it was clear that I've had enough of the argument. I mean have I offended you or something?
The only thing that makes them similar is your use of the term "feelings" - as in, "I feel that..." is your expression of an opinion. But an emotion is a very different mental process than is a belief. However, I think we've taken up enough of this thread with this discussion, and I'm not about to review Psychology 101 to make the point. Have you offended me? No. I've just shown you that a sweeping general statement that you made is wrong, both scientifically and logically. If you choose to cleve to that opinion despite this, that is entirely your own affair.
I just thought I might have offended your religion or something I know people can get touchy about that. But really you haven't disproved my opinion. You've just taken some comments I've said and disproved them. They don't affect my argument as a whole and I'm willing to accept them as mistakes. Only making my side of the debate stronger. But I agree that this has gone on long enough. You're perfectly entitled to your er... different opinion.
