I don't believe anybody's seen proof of the afterlife. What they've seen is things they interpret as evidence in support of that belief, without understanding how lamentably easy it is to fool yourself into believing things you want to believe.
Sounds a lot like science, only science plays around for a while to make it seem like they know what they are talking about.
....things they interpret as evidence in support of that belief.....
That's all life is.... that's everything in which we as humans do. No matter how much you study something, how much you write it down or record it, or test it, what happens in the end and what you write down are your own interpretations of what just occured, or influenced interpretations based from other's own explanations of the surrounding information in which you used..... therefore no matter what you do, it's all the same.
If you don't come to the conclusion based on your own understanding, then someone else will. In the end, you'll just accept their own explination because you determined already that they're more experienced in the topic in question and therefore must be correct.... so long as they present their explination with some scientific jargon.
Personal experience and anecdote are worth nothing in this context, that's why legitimate scientific testing has such elaborate safeguards against things like fraud, error, and coincidence.
And even those "Elaborate Safeguards" are not perfect and have been worked around countless times in many things over the last century alone, so that one person's conclusions or tests are the absolute. Decades later someone decides to retest and finds that something was missed or overlooked which changes the entire outcome of those original conclusions, and then what then?
Oh... Science saved the day did it? Science screwed it up originally and saved itself.... bravo. When science gets something right, then science is the greatest thing to man kind.... when science screws up.... oh.... it was so-n-so's fault for not putting something into calculation/factor, even though so-n-so was following proper proceedures at the time to come to the conclusions everyone agreed apon.... it's never science's fault itself. Science is a perfect system which can explain everything in the universe.
It hasn't yet.
Read
this for instance. A rational skeptic is really just somebody who's learned that memory and perception cannot be trusted.
And yet, science itself is the illusion of thinking you are following proper procedures to come to an unbiased and accurate outcome or answer. The problem is, is that hardly anybody when studying something with just science alone can not account for every possible outcome, solution/answer or conflict, but only the most common based on limited tests and studies they produced over time, or studies which they took from other scientists, trusting themselves that those studies are accurate. This further clouds the overall answer to which one is studying.
And besides all that, you can not tell me there is no level of bias and propaganda at work with the entire Global Warming swindle that's been going on. If there wasn't, then why are some scientists conflicted with others between Global Warming existing, and just plain old fashion Climate Change?
Sorry, but Science isn't the golden religion we're all seeking and science itself, much like past religions, can not answer everything we want to know as humans, and will eventually through a long period of time, will reach its own end based on it's own limitations on study.
Am I all Scientific? Nope.
Am I some Religious guy? Nope.
Am I a believer in a life after this?
Based on the collective scientific studies on the matter, based on historical reports and encounters of various people with various backgrounds of study and education, based on even Einstein's own explinations and beliefs of the afterlife, based on what we as humans understand about energy.... merged with the concepts of a few other things, plus my own experiences, there is more evidence provided and available to back up that there is an afterlife, then not.
Just because science hasn't evolved enough to figure out how to test for certain things, doesn't mean they don't exist. One thing that always pissed me off about science in paticular, is it's leeching of everything in and around it.
For decades, a religion or someone could claim one thing in paticular exists or has happened. For those same decades, science will say it didn't exist or occured because there is no way of studying it or proving that it did. Then eventually science figures itself out, finds a way to study the topic in question, and then claims it did exist or has occured.... therefore it's scientifically proven.... even though buddy has been saying that for decades and knew it did based on common sense and personal experience.
Humans have a brain and an imagination for a reason. We are not robots to think and operate based on rules and proceedures to come to our own conclusions. We are not supposed to just stop thinking or believing something because science claims it can not be tested or proven. Half the damn inventions and things we use today were designed more so by imagination first.
Humanity's mind is Imagination First, and if anything, Science second. If you have no imagination to think of something to test of see how it works, then what's the point of science?
Science itself requires the human imagination to think outside of the normal box of understanding. Human imagination helps people figure out alternative approaches to a problem or situation, beyond tests already done in the past that has not worked. If anything, Science, like Religion, is just a tool for understanding, it is not an answer.
the genie) will order them to vow to Virgin Mary or to Saint Peter in case of Christians or to Prophet Ezekiel, or hakhams etc.in case of Jews. That is 
