I shall assume that you are human (which I think is virtually certain) and speaking in good faith (which I shall assume for the sake of the conversation). You say "I don't know if I am human, in the generally accepted sense", but I do not believe you. These being so, evidence that you will die and not live again, and that you did not exist before you were conceived, lies in such observations as these: 1. The tendency of every human body to stop working within a century and then disintegrate. Not merely the observation that people die, which is as old as there have been people, but the extensive knowledge of how and why they die. 2. The absence of any reliable evidence of survival of the mind in any form thereafter. 3. The absence of any reliable evidence of existence of that mind before conception. 4. The absence of any reliable evidence of a mind existing independently of the physical body; the existence of much reliable evidence to the effect that the mind is a physical process of the brain. Further argument against the idea of any sort of intangible mental entity separate from material things, can be found here. Of course, many have argued otherwise. Not merely books, but whole libraries could be collected arguing for the existence of souls independent of the body and their immortality. But even if the matter were seriously contendable, that would not alter the existence of the evidence I have given, merely put up other evidence against it. So there is the evidence that you asked for. I am of course only summarising things here. But what else is possible? If someone who knows no mathematics at all starts babbling to me about the 4-colour theorem, what can I do but advise them to study mathematics for a few years? That being said, however, you might indeed be immortal! There is one slender chance: advances in medicine. We live at the first time in history when we can begin to see the chance of remedying the fragility of the body. Just beginning, and a

I at first assumed (when you had only the first two comments to your name) that you had been a lurker here for some time, had tried to make either a joke or a half-serious point, and might have been blindsided by the downvotes. In the intervening time, I have changed my opinion of you, and I think that Less Wrong is not suitable for you. There are plenty of Internet sites composed of people whose purpose is simply to signal that they are the cleverest person there. Although I do not expect you to be aware of this fact, Less Wrong is not primarily such a place. This community is defined by, among other things, wanting to understand others' objections before dismissing them, even should that require five minutes of reading and pondering. If you look back over your exchange, several of us have replied in good faith to clarify your assertion and expand upon the areas of disagreement. You have not shown the least interest in returning the favor. Your presence here is wasting everyone's time, including yours; you might be much happier, I think, engaging in this behavior on another forum where it is more the norm. Although you may not believe yourself to be a troll, you will almost certainly be regarded as one here.