You misunderstand me Summerlander, and seem to have taken what I've said personally. I have no agenda here or axe to grind. I was simply offering some counter points to your points, which in the name of healthy debate I saw is a highly limited view of the potential of the afterlife riddled with subjective bias regarding time and how you think it
must play out.
Keep dreaming ... or stop dreaming. 
Neuroscientists have observed there are a great many similarities between dreaming consciousness and one's waking consciousness...one's waking consciousness is, from the dream's perspective, a stable objective dream. So yes thanks I shall keep on dreaming, aka living. And no I'm no arguing that dreams are therefore real, or physical reality isn't real.
Face facts. Life is limited. Your imagination clearly isn't. But it's far divorced from realism. 
I made it very clear I was speaking hypothetically when I made my points, and again you seem to take what I am saying personally! I'm not sure why there is the need to get all riled up over nothing.
Sure ... you would know. You are so sure that you've lived forever. A kind of God complex really. 
When did I make such a claim? And when I have ever mentioned God? Seems like you are projecting here.
Didn't I refute this in the other thread? NDEs are living experiences. The brain is not dead when you have them. Well actually there are numerous reports of NDE's occurring in the medical literature when an EEG has flat lined, and while there is very likely residual consciousness in the brain, it should not be feasible for people to have highly lucid experiences of consciousness with no measurable EEG readings. Also, this is not really the point. If you listen to the reports of NDE'rs, and mystics, and shamans and other people who have experience with anomalous states of consciousness, reports of transcending time, or linear time at least appear to be a very common, if fundamental component of these experiences.
No passage of time. This makes no sense whatsoever unless you are dead (no experience) and certainly not counting minutes. 
This only makes no sense to you from an embodied human perspective (see previous point as well)...as has been stated, time is relative and there is scientific debate over what degree it is a human produced concept, rather than a truly objective physical law.
On what grounds do you make the conviction that reincarnation is true? Pseudoscientific? 
When did I claim reincarnation was true? I was simply stating there could be other hypothetical afterlife possibilities to what you state, I'm simply calling you out on how limited your view is. Remember you started this discussion in the first place, not I!
Ignoring the subjective experiences of Buddhist monks mentioned (which is fair enough), the work of Ian Stevenson is relevant to this.
Great article for you to read, Summerlander..."Are We Skeptics Really Just Cynics?"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/ian-stevensone28099s-case-for-the-afterlife-are-we-e28098skepticse28099-really-just-cynics/
Of course it's against a deeper plan or purpose. What universe are you living in? Certainly not this one---the impersonal one that's indifferent to all lifeforms. 
Huh? You are the one postulating about the afterlife. I simply stated, that
if there is an afterlife...and yes that's a big if...then does it not follow by extension that there must be some deeper plan or purpose to life (and death). Do you not understand my point? So, following on from this...if there is an afterlife (and thus very likely some deeper life plan or purpose), then I feel it very unlikely that the afterlife will comprise one inhabiting a purgatory state of non-existence for all time.
Not if ... there is no afterlife. 
I think you mean there *probably* is no afterlife. You certainly do not and cannot know that with indisputable certainty, and to claim otherwise is arrogant.
And you naively believe those claims without ever considering the possibility---and likelihood--- that they are either lying or deluded in interpreting their visions. Sure some Buddhist monks and others may be lying or deluded...but to immediately consider them all lying and deluded automatically because their views challenge your world view strikes me as arrogant and lazy.
You don't have access to past lives because you were not your ancestors. People reporting past life experiences aren't experiencing the perspective of their ncestors as far as I know, so what is your point here?
Why should you return? According to NDE'rs, OBE'rs, mystics and other, the point of returning to physical life is to learn and experience and grow in knowledge and understanding. Many of these people subscribe to a multidimensional view of the universe, and state the physical reality we inhabit allows consciousness at different levels of evolution to mix and learn from experience. Again, before I'm attacked for this, this is not my belief, I'm just providing an answer other people feel is a valid response to the question you posed.
Why should the universe care about you? You are nothing but a conglomerate of mostly bacteria. You are nothing but carbon atoms mostly. That's all you are and once it decays, the information that creates your user illusion is destroyed. 
This is the materialist perspective. The idealist perspective states the mind/consciousness comes before matter, so it follows that it cannot be destroyed on the death of the body. Again, not my views, ut important to note others have different perspectives on such matters to you.
You don't believe it because you have no evidence. You just want to believe it so badly. Desperate in a Freudian way ...
No, I really don't. I'm very happy and content to live a life and then be gone, it makes my/our time here all the more precious. Once more, you are projecting.
Why should that be? If you hypothetically consider the possibility of an afterlife, then it follows you have to consider should such a thing exist, you likely know very little about it, or life's deeper purpose.
Again, likely I will be attacked in a personal manner for these points, but these are not necessarily my personal views by any stretch, I'm just presenting some counter points in the manner of friendly debate.
