# Lekatt, if one could sell ignorance, you'd be Walmart **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 25, 2003, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587 "2003-08-25T20:10:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2003, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/61 "2003-08-27T23:23:24Z")
A brief history of the beginnings of **Lekatt** I’d like to invite the witness to the stand. **Nosferatu** , who is currently known as **Cheswolf** first brought this seemingly innocuous post to SDMB via GQ: [Web site that says it’s absolute proof of life after death](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109225) > [@](#): > > Web site that says it’s absolute proof of life after death Wanted you all to check out this site and give me your opinion of it [http://www.ndeweb.com](http://www.ndeweb.com). The guy who runs the site says it’s absolute proof that there is life after death… I was wondering what the doppers thought. and then the thread frighteningly evolves to include this: > [@](#): > > Well, I work with the guy who runs the site and he says that if you read the brain thing (I did) and also the FAQ’s (once again I did) that there is no way you can say that life does not go on after death. I have wondered around the site for a long time and I see what you mean my double speak and also logical fallacies in my opinion. After a while IM going to send him the link to this thread so anything you all can add is helpful. I’m thinking this is how we all got infected. It wasn’t the monkey, the vial that fell off the scientist’s shelf, or the barrel of toxins dropped off by the aliens over Chicago. This is where **Lekatt** introduces himself and a noteworthy quote (this is in reference to a Near Death Experience and info on his website): > [@](#): > > This information is even collaborated by other groups of scientists. I think he meant to say “scientician” but I can’t corroborate that for sure. The thread dies down after some posts by **Doc Cathode** and **DMC**. A peace is felt around SDMB. Ignorance has been vanquished and there was frollocking (and yes, much rejoicing). Then the clouds started to come, darkness rained down and a thread in GD was started. We should have seen the signs. This thread starts with a HUGE presumption to say the least. [Life continues beyond physical death. Is this proof of God’s existance](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131095). **Lekatt** , doesn’t give an option or a basis to assume that NDEs are true for the reasoning of his arguement. This trainwreck is at best amusing and at worst completely frustrating. 8 days later, the first of many **Lekatt** [BBQ threads](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=132420) is founded (and ironically, this thread was started exactly a year to the day later). One of my favorite **Lekattisms** from the “Life Continues beyond physical death” thread is: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*I see you have not read the material. > [http://ndeweb.com/FAQz19.htm](http://ndeweb.com/FAQz19.htm) > (snip) > Speaking of cites, studies, proof, and so forth, Where the hell are yours. Not one proof has been offered, only your personal opinions and as you say they are worthless in the field of science. > > Love > Leroy \*\* Monkey see once, monkey do thousand times. Of course it ends in amazing fashion: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\* (snip) > I declare this debate ended by the one who started it. > The preponderance of proof has not been refuted. > Leroy \*\* **Lekatt** then hops on his horse and trots off into the sunset as the debate is over. But it isn’t. Not really. In fact he keeps posting to this debate. **Lekatt** enjoys his smug “victory” and posts the following: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*Mangetout > > NDEers are relating their experiences. Not trying to prove anything. It is the skeptic that requires proof. > > What I am saying is that it’s not appropriate to call someone’s personal experience wrong without hard proof. > > NDEs are numerous, studies say millions have had them. > I don’t know if this is true or not. \*\* I didn’t snip anything out of this one because I wanted y’all to see it without any editing. So according to **Lekatt** , it’s up to the skeptic to prove that things didn’t happen and not the person that claims that had the NDE. Still in the same thread: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*(snip) > I don’t think there’s a debate here. I wonder if there ever was. > (snip) \*\* Finally, on page [6](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131095&perpage=50&pagenumber=6) it gets really interesting with the following quote. Read it and then scroll up to the top of this post and see something. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*Please refrain from belittling and criticizing NDEs until you learn something about them. > > Science has no proof. \*\* Yup, the information collaborated by other scientists to prove the NDEs actually isn’t proof. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*Yes, science has no proof that NDEs are anything other than what the experiencer describes them to be. > Quoting out of context is not nice. > It doesn’t change truth. \*\* **Lekatt** takes time out to call someone something (something that I thought was an offense worthy of being banned): > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*What’s matter Doc, can’t read. > Go bother some other thread, troll. \*\* Then you wonder if this is his motto in life: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lekatt \* > \*\*If you don’t understand it, explaining wouldn’t help. \*\* This here is the 6th thread in the BBQ with **Lekatt’s** name in the title:[Lekatt kindly piss off](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=132420&highlight=lekatt) [Milum, let’s talk Lekatt](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=186912&highlight=lekatt) [To Lekatt something or pull a Lekatt means](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=169316&highlight=lekatt) [I apologize to Lekatt](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=187033&highlight=lekatt) [lekatt:le posterior](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=185517&highlight=lekatt) The apology thread wasn’t really meant to be a flame against him per the OP, but that did quickly change. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2003, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/62 "2003-08-27T23:25:33Z")
“Lekatt, what is the frequency?” ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/63 "2003-08-28T01:12:37Z")
> [@](#): > > He also claims that athiests want to destroy all Bibles and churches-the same Bible he says is dogmatic and useless and the same churches he says exist to keep people from actually finding God. You don’t have to be a Christian to oppose certain government actions. If people really wanted to destroy all Bibles and churches, I’d oppose that too. lekatts problem is that he’s willing to indulge in the fantasy that anything like that is happening. ---
**Author:** ![Ilsa\_Lund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a6a055/32.png) [@Ilsa\_Lund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ilsa_Lund)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/64 "2003-08-28T01:44:35Z")
Is Aldebaran the lovechild of lekatt and His4Ever? I was going to pit him, but the mods did it for me. If we locked the three in a room, would they form strangelet of ignorance, or would they self destruct?😃 ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/65 "2003-08-28T07:25:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ilsa\_Lund \* > \*\*Is Aldebaran the lovechild of lekatt and His4Ever? > > I was going to pit him, but the mods did it for me.\*\* link? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/66 "2003-08-28T07:34:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > \*\*The one that Steven cited in the post I responded to. > > Emphasis mine. With the way you snip quotes, I’d recommend you don’t become a Moyel. \*\* Sorry Lib I wasn’t really trying to make a serious point, I was just being flippant. Should’ve used a smiley. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/67 "2003-08-28T07:45:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by E-Sabbath \* > \*\*He also seems not to want to reply to an argument once he is put in a difficult place and nailed down for a response. I’m disappointed. \*\* Yep. Myself and SimonX (I think it was) once kept at him for probably 7 or 8 pages demanding that he answer a particular question. Needless to say he never answered. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/68 "2003-08-28T09:47:59Z")
Steven > [@](#): > > If you want to argue against the conclusion you are welcome to do so. I am in fact free to argue against whatever I wish — but as it happens, I have argued against one thing only; i.e., I have argued against the cite you gave having value as an idictment against Lekatt. If ever you care to debate the actual point I’ve made, feel free. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/69 "2003-08-28T09:49:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Princhester \* > \*\*Sorry Lib I wasn’t really trying to make a serious point, I was just being flippant. Should’ve used a smiley. \*\* No problem. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/70 "2003-08-28T10:36:51Z")
St. Pauler Excellent. * * * Lekatt If you’re still around, I call to your attention something you said in the thread analysed by St. Pauler: > [@](#): > > I would like to say that Near Death Experiences are important to me because they help those who feel hopeless and unloved to find some real truth in their lives. Your feelings in that regard are admirable, and were you to hold to that particular assertion only, no one would dispute you. After all, only you know what is important to you. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, you have bought into the notion that science is some sort of uber-epistemology and is necessary to validate near death experience as a correspondence truth. It isn’t. As a philosophy, science may be defined this way: Metaphysic: the material universe Epistemology: observation Ethic: falsification Aesthetic: fascimilation All science can do is tell you is what is recorded on certain measuring devices as you come near death, make a prediction about what might register on the next test subject, and determine whether some statement about the observation or prediction is false. That which it cannot observe — your subjective experience — is outside its purview. That which it cannot falsify — including its own validity — is non-scientific. And that which it cannot repeat — including its own metadata — is not a part of its domain. What I am saying is that the scientific evidence about near death experiences does not refute the experiences themselves, nor does it reveal any truth about them, correspondence or otherwise. It merely establishes that among a number of hypotheses, some are not falsifiable. Thus, says science, your near death experience could be the result of certain neurological activity that resembles activity in other observed circumstances. What it does NOT say is that your near death experience is non-spiritual in nature. It does not because it can not. Whether it is the brain that **sim** ulates the spirit or the spirit that **stim** ulates the brain is unknown and untestable. As one prominent neurosurgeon and prodigious publisher on brain research has stated: “Why is the revealed truth of such transcendent [religious] experiences in any way “inferior” to the more mundane tuths that we scientists dabble in? Indeed, if you are ever tempted to jump to this conclusion, just bear in mind that one could use exactly the same evidence — the involvement of the temporal lobes in religion — to argue for, rather than against, the existence of God.” — V.S. Ramachandran, M.D., Ph. D., _Phantoms in the Brain_, God and the Limbic System Don’t make the mistake of pretending that scientific studies do not say what they say. You’ll just look foolish. Instead, make sure that you understand what they in fact do say, and what exactly is their sphere of sovereignty. It is with love and understanding that I tell you, making a laughing-stock of yourself does not further your cause. ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/71 "2003-08-28T14:51:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > \*\*I have argued against one thing only; i.e., I have argued against the cite you gave having value as an idictment against Lekatt. If ever you care to debate the actual point I’ve made, feel free. \*\* Your arguement doesn’t hold water because you apparently don’t understand what a net.kook title means. It doesn’t occur in a vacuum. There was an implicit history behind the pronouncement of **lekatt** as a net.kook, as there is behind virtually all such pronouncements on usenet. The giving of the net.kook title is a relatively formal process. It was based on his own behavior in the group which kooked him. If you wish to continue to ignore that history and pretend the judgement stands with no supporting evidence other than the author’s authority then I have no interest in your assertion. It was never offered as evidence in and of itself. It was offered as documentary evidence that among other groups he had displayed the same type of behavior he has displayed here. “NDE’s prove god. Disagreement is illogical and insulting.” Quite frankly I’m annoyed with your whole line of arguementation. As I said earlier it seems nothing more than arguing for the sake of arguing. Someone from talk.athiesm said “lekatt is a kook” and you took up the banner against talk.athiesm. Didn’t give a shit about the statement itself, repeatedly refused to argue for or against the statement, just wanted to get your two cents in about the athiesm group and the credibility of persons therein. Didn’t try to assert the statement was false, just that the person advancing it had no credibility. Despicable. I can’t find the thread right now(may have been lost in the server crash), but I distinctly remember you starting a thread in the Pit a few months or a year ago crying for people to PLEASE, PLEASE address the actual ARGUEMENT instead of lobbing genetic fallacies all over the place(if anyone can find it I’d appreciate a link). Of course you were referring to people using genetic fallacies to discredit the arguements of creationists and thiests, so I guess the same standard may not apply to athiests advancing arguements. Apparently they can say something as obviously true as “ **lekatt** is a kook” and even back it up with his posting history in a specific group and still have no credibility and no weight in a discussion about that individual. Because that’s exactly what they did. It is exactly what a net.kooks list IS, that’s why they give the kooks email addresses along with their posting names, so people without enough history to understand why the person got the title kook can look up their posting history and see the evidence if they wish, kind of a built-in cite. Yet still you continue to say the cite carries no weight. The assertion does carry weight. It carries no weight with YOU because of your own prejudice against talk.athiesm and its members. To other people, people who can see the assertion is true, earned by his history in their group and corraborated on this board and elsewhere, it carries plenty of weight. Truth always does. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/72 "2003-08-28T16:37:57Z")
One of my most favorite Kattein quotes so far [Not only has the brain been proven to have nothing to do with any thinking…](http://groups.google.com/groups?q=lekatt+brain+thinking&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=22vomt8m6i1jajccrbb43duknldl90g7tg%404ax.com&rnum=5) ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/73 "2003-08-28T17:57:32Z")
Oh for f\*ck’s sake: If what **Lekatt** hasn’t said on SDMB isn’t enough… [alt.atheism](http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&th=9c81d4ab38ad7f67&rnum=2) has this post by him (my bolding): > [@](#): > > There will never be enough proof for a skeptic. I have direct > experience and I know that God and the spirit world exist. So do > thousands of others. I don’t care if others believe or not. It is not > my job to convince anyone. > > You may have read the FAQs pages of my site. But I doubt it. On the > 4th one is a skeptic that gets real interested when it happens close > to him. I was a skeptic before my NDE also. For you or anyone to say > this is a chemical or illusion caused event is nonsense. Mainly > because you haven’t had the experience you think it not possible. **If > science could reproduce a NDE they could empty the prisons and turn > the world into utopia in 6 months.** NDEs change people profoundly, all > of them. The only thing I dislike about your kind of post is that it > stops people from learning, by thinking they all ready know. > > Good luck > > In Love, > > Leroy Kattein Hmm, yes, that’s what criminals all need, a near death experience. Next off we have quote of another article that refutes what Cecil himself has said on the topic: [NDE’s & Ketamine](http://www.death.net/articles/article.php/artID/293?PHPSESSID=8cebe552f7f34e798bfc5b4e66af337a) > [@](#): > > I have read that research scientists are inducing NDEs in their subjects by using a dissociative drug called Ketamine. Is this true?I have read that research scientists are inducing NDEs in their subjects by using a dissociative drug called Ketamine. Is this true? > > No. There is a theory held by some scientists that a NDE is caused by a flood of brain chemicals at the time of death. Endorphins and associated chemicals are triggered, at this time, by a lack of oxygen causing the subject to see light, feel loved, and experience other NDE-like events. After the subject returns to life, the brain chemical flood is remembered as a NDE. Since the drug Ketamine also seems to cause subjects to see light, feel loved, and experience other NDE-like events, they believe it mimics or causes a similiar brain chemical reaction as death. So, to their thinking, they are inducing NDEs in subjects with the drug Ketamine. I’d love to post the rest but you can click on the link above and read the short article yourself. I will throw this final quote from the article in here though: > [@](#): > > it is logical to assume that brain chemicals did not cause them either Suddenly **Lekatt** has used something he never has before. Logic. If only he could apply it to all of his claims. Of course, logic is pushed out the window for this next online sample of mental deficiency: [http://neil.franklin.ch/Usenet/alt.conscious.near-death-exp/19980315\_What\_do\_I\_believe](http://neil.franklin.ch/Usenet/alt.conscious.near-death-exp/19980315_What_do_I_believe) > [@](#): > > \>Your watching and listening is experience. > \>Your watching and listening is experience. > > Up to now I agree, actually “is” -\> “gives”. > \> When one experiences an > \>event then the belief turns into knowledge and becomes “knowing” > \>instead of just belief. > > Just the other way round. Knowledge is the direct thing (see previous > post), belief follows when trying to explain what one knows. > \> There can be a blurring of the perimeters of > \>belief and knowing, however. > > More likely: belief is blurry (because speculative) while knowledge is > focused (becuase experienced). > \> One can believe in a Creator without > \>experiencing the Creator. > > Of course, the same as one can believe in atoms without ever having > experienced them (have you ever?). That is the normal case with > beliefs, else you would have knowledge. > \> But, as in a NDE where one experiences a > \>Creator, then that experience turns into knowing, at least for the > \>experiencer it does. > > And then you commit the error. > > One does not experience “a/the creator”. One experiences (and such > knows about) an great light of love (or did you see the light doing > creation?). > One may or may not then speculate a belief that this light has > something to do with an equally speculative being/intelligence > responsible for creating the universe. But that is belief, not > knowledge, not even after NDE. > > One can: > > 1. grab the first belief that one likes (the method of religion) > 2. become aware of multiple beliefs and systematically find arguments > for and against them (the method of science) > 3. become aware if the undecidability and drop the futile search for > the “real belief” (the method of buddhist and cartesian philosophy) > \>Others looking only at the story the experiencer has to tell may only > \>believe, not believe, or withhold judgement of it, whatever their > \>choice may be. > > They can: > a) decide to believe or not believe the story of the experience (this > is believe in the sense of “truth/lieing(1)”, not “liking/disliking > speculation(1)” > b) decide to follow or reject the experiencers choice of speculation > to believe. > > As an example: I believe(1) the story of NDE happening, but I do not > believe(2) the speculation of the light being a/the creator. > \> But they don’t have the right to criticize another’s > \>experience. > > The experience not, but they do have the right to criticise > chosen beliefs being peddled as the proven truth. > \>Our language is far from being precise. Words are ambiguous and > \>different people hold different meanings to them. It is the idea or > \>concept that is important. Not picking at every word of a post. > > Word picking may be not optimal, but it does demonstrate to the writer > that he may have been misunderstood. That will hopefully lead to > clarifications, to an agreement what the word should mean (at least > temporally for this discussion) and then one can discuss whether the > ideas convayed are right or wrong. Of course the zenith of stupidity is found here: [Lekatt relays his “Near Death Experience”](http://beachangeljbslovandligh2.homestead.com/NearDeathExperiences.html) > [@](#): > > My Near Death Experience > My Near Death Experience > by Leroy Kattein > I had a bad day. I was depressed about my health, business and everything else that came to mind so I went to bed early, thinking the sleep would help me forget. I was wrong. > > About 2:00 a.m. I awoke feeling very strange. I couldn’t see anything, but felt an energy or electric-like current running through me. Also felt someone close to my right shoulder. I thought this was my wife, but soon determined the bed, with my wife, was far below me, to my left. Wanting to find out who this was at my shoulder I tried to turn around. A voice said: “Please go back to sleep.” It was a male voice that seemed to originate within my thoughts or mind. > > I wasn’t afraid, and I still wanted to know what was happening, so, I tried to turn again. The voice said: “Do you wish to continue here or would you like to go on?” After considering this question only a few seconds, I replied: “I want to continue, of course”. My reply was given as a thought. > > As soon as I had answered, the energy surrounding me began to grow in intensity. The stronger it became the more I felt loved and supported by it. I became aware of (or remembered) my spiritual nature, and also, my purpose for being here. (I felt as if I had always known these things, but had somehow forgotten them.) I further knew that all people share this love and support. That everyone is held safe and secure and loved unconditionally by the Creator. > > The intense energy lasted about 15 minutes (estimate). During this time, I felt total love, support, belonging, and an expanded knowledge of many things. I never wanted to leave this beautiful state of being; but finally the energy subsided and the voice said: “Please go back to sleep.” In the next moment, I was back in bed, with my wife next to me. The adventure, however, was far from over. > > In the months following, the energy remained, though not as intense. I had many lucid/out-of-body dreams (dreams where you are aware of, and active in, the dream state) teaching me how to overcome my limitations and fears. My health improved, in about 18 months I was released from all medical care. In another 18 months, my business was sold and I found employment. Life was looking good again. > > Currently, the story continues. I can still feel the energy. I am still learning about, and improving myself daily. I can’t remember every detail the intense energy allowed me to understand, but I know the most important thing is to teach, practice and live in Love. Sure, most of us have had dreams or nightmares. But who goes around and calls them a NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE? **Lekatt**. 😕 Next thing you know, he’ll have a bowel movement and see an invisible pink unicorn. **Lekatt,** once again, shut the f\*ck up, you kook. ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/74 "2003-08-28T18:13:42Z")
I did forget to put in the link that is what Cecil said: [Do near-death experiences prove there is life after death?](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_030.html) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/75 "2003-08-28T18:25:11Z")
Shit! I didn’t realize it, but I’ve had Near-Death Experiences, too. Since a young age, I’ve had about one dream every couple years in which I die; generally, I experience the death in a detached, dismayed fashion, coldly contemplating the feel of bullets as they plow through my brain, thinking calmly about how I’m drowning, and so on. NDE, apparently! But I’m still a cynical atheist bastard. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/76 "2003-08-28T20:11:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Sure, most of us have had dreams or nightmares. But who goes around and calls them a NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE?Lekatt. So basically, he had one amazing dream back in the eighties, it wasn’t a near death experience because he wasn’t near death, and decided to make a crusade out of it and he transformed from a skeptic into a true believer, impervious to any attempts to explain his experience in any other way. ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/77 "2003-08-28T20:34:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Blalron \* > \*\*So basically, he had one amazing dream back in the eighties, it wasn’t a near death experience because he wasn’t near death, and decided to make a crusade out of it and he transformed from a skeptic into a true believer, impervious to any attempts to explain his experience in any other way. \*\* Yup, that’s our **Lekatt**. I think given that, [Merriam Webster’s](http://www.m-w.com) definition of kook applies: > [@](#): > > one whose ideas or actions are eccentric, fantastic, or insane : ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/78 "2003-08-28T20:59:12Z")
Yea, everyone on the planet can agree the guy is a kook, but as soon as those hand-stabbing athiests start saying it, well they’re just full of shit. Their findings have absolutely no weight. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/79 "2003-08-28T22:07:17Z")
Lekatt is a perfect example of what the skeptics dictionary calls [True Believer](http://skepdic.com/truebeliever.html) syndrome: > [@](#): > > True-believer syndrome is an expression coined by M. Lamar Keene to describe an apparent cognitive disorder characterized by believing in the reality of paranormal or supernatural events after one has been presented overwhelming evidence that the event was fraudulently staged. He also displays [Wishfull thinking](http://skepdic.com/wishfulthinking.html) : interpreting facts, reports, events, perceptions, etc., according to what one would like to be the case rather than according to the actual evidence. And [Selective Thinking](http://skepdic.com/selectiv.html) : The process whereby one selects out favorable evidence for remembrance and focus, while ignoring unfavorable evidence for a belief. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2003, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587/80 "2003-08-29T09:53:26Z")
Steven > [@](#): > > Quite frankly I’m annoyed with your whole line of arguementation. As I said earlier it seems nothing more than arguing for the sake of arguing. As opposed to what you’re doing, no doubt. You’re annoyed that I do not accept the atheist newsgroup you cited as the world’s authority for assigning kook status. You’ll just have to be annoyed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatt-if-one-could-sell-ignorance-youd-be-walmart/197587.md?page=5)