As you do to the supermodels? No thanks.
I have given you numerous posts that show a non-local consciousness. For me they are good science and honest reporting. I know, I have been there.
But, alas, for you they are only anecodotal material that is not scientific. So I give up, you win. I just can’t logically think thousands of people are lying or too stupid to know what they experienced. So again, you win.
I see no reason to agree with that assumption. Without personal experience we couldn’t drive cars, find our home or work place, stay out of danger, and numerous other every-day things that personal experience helps us through. Every book you read is someone’s personal experience, every scientific study is someone’s personal experience. To doubt personal experiences is to doubt self and all of mankind. I see that as a mental problem.
Millions of people are completely convinced that other people with different skin tones, differently shaped eyes, or other differing features are inferior to themselves. In the case of every person who has made that claim to me, they have cited their own experiences to support their beliefs. They do not have to be lying or stupid. They merely need to have experienced a chemical reaction in the brain (or a negative experience with another person) that leaves them with that belief. That is why we look to science to settle the issue, since it puts controls on the observations and evaluations of experience.
And I see this as another deliberate insult when you have been told to refrain from such behavior.
This is a Warning that if you cannot control yourself, we will take the necessary actions to help you control your behavior.
[ /Moderating ]
I was referring to negative thinking, didn’t know a concept could be insulted.
To address your specific point: what science does is provide ways for persons who have not shared the experience to observe and evaluate the claimed experience. If you claim to have read a book, (or a scientific paper 
), I can ask you questions about it ajnd compare your answers to the text in the book. If you drive a car, I can observber whether you stay on the correct side of the road, inside the lane lines, follow traffic signals, and generally not wreak havoc on pedestrians and other cars.
And we CAN provide ways to test for the accuracy of NDEs, (or, at least, OBEs), such as with the protocol I proposed that has actually been attempted by the group DiggitCamara cited in Post #481.
Your analogy is not the same as a personal experience involving only the person experiencing. A person whose life is totally changed by that experience so they are never the same again. Just doesn’t work. As for science, it was designed by humans and humans are falible, so I believe it is science that is mistaken and not thousands of people from all walks of life, countries and cultures. Religious people believe their religions are the only truth. Scientists believe their scientific method is the only truth and the list goes on and on. No one has any proof that consciousness is local to the brain, that is only a theory. You can not prove near death experiences are wrong with a theory. At least not honestly.
Science uses that ‘negative thinking’ positively. An absolutely fundamental part of the scientific method is that assumptions are to be actively doubted - ideas are to be assailed by any and every honest means available - that’s how science achieves meaningful results - by winnowing away the rest.
(emphasis mine)
Aren’t you just saying here that the term ‘science’ means something different to you than it does to everybody else?
So you admit that Goddess has conclusively debunked all of your claims?
I can’t see how your post clears anything up. Scientist have falsified data in the past and will continue to do so. There is no way someone reading a book knows whether the data is accurate or not. They are relying on the honesty of the author. Why is it so hard to see that personal experience is all we have to measure the world?
As for the test.
http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a2
Couldn’t find the one where an out of body patent read the numbers the doctors had place near the ceiling and accurately read them back after recovery, I will keep looking. Hundreds of studies.
No, I am saying I am not a devotee of science, nor religion for that matter. I see them as belief systems, and all belief systems are faulted. You can not pass the unique and varied events of this world through any fixed filter, some events will defy passage.
Evidently this isn’t death, as doctors normally don’t kill people to help them, do they?
I agree that personal experience is all we have. Reading a scientific study is an experience and we decide if we accept what we’re reading. If we’re smart we don’t embrace it too eagerly until we experience other evidence such as reading further studies by others or seeing the scientific principle implemented in our daily lives.
Yes scientists can falsify data or , without intent to deceive, they interpret the data in a way to support the conclusion they want to be true. Their own pet theory. Humans do this on a regular basis about a variety of things.
We have personal experiences and we interpret their meaning. That’s how life works for everyone. We should be able to recognize that our interpretations can be wrong because our understanding is limited. Some experiences like gravity, hot and cold are pretty consistent and reliable. Others such as NDE and other things in the spiritual realm are less certain. The problem with much of the religious world both structured and non structured is people deciding that what is true for them must also be true for everyone else without the proper recognition that their understanding may be valid but is still imperfect and limited. It reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant
They wouldn’t have argued so much had they stopped to consider the limitations of their blindness or the fact that each had something to contribute.
Science is not a fixed filter or belief system. It’s a method, and an incredibly simple one.
If you’re not keen on science, why have you tried so very hard to present your case as scientific?
Classic expositions of woo, and dead wrong.
The scientific method is not a “belief system”; it’s a tool for rational analysis.
It’s quite common for exponents of woo to assert that their beliefs and claims are not amenable to scientific study. Given that these claims tend to fall apart under rigorous scrutiny, such an attitude is understandable.
Perhaps the promoters of NDEs should study the methods of homeopaths, and invent complex untestable theories to explain these “experiences”. Here’s an interesting paper on quantum theory in homeopathy to get lekatt started.
Well, naturally, I would think-you’re less stressed out, more likely to have lower blood pressure, etc.
Look, lekatt, it’s not so much your beliefs-hell, you very well could have had a spiritual experience. I think it’s more your attitude, and your insistance that science has proven that they exist-and yet, when experiments disagree with your beliefs, you claim science is stupid, etc.
But, when it agrees with you, then science is indeed useful.
And while you might not mean to do so, you come off as very smug and condescending.
I appreciate your logic. What you say is true. However, near death experiencers have not pushed their values onto others. I doubt any on this board know the values of those who have experienced. The experiencers bring something back from their experience that can be measured. The argument here is are these valid experiences, yes, say the experiencers, no, say the non-experiencers. Then the non-experiencers usually insult and belittle the experiencers. That is how I came to this board in the first place. You just get tired of people laughing at you that don’t know what they are talking about.
I have never claimed to know everything or I have never said others must believe, I have said others should respect and study the experiencers of others.
A method is a series of beliefs, thus a belief system. Unchangable therefor fixed.
The experiments don’t disagree with my belief, there are about a dozen Universities here and abroad where scientists are engaged in near death research. This research has shown consciousness lives on after the death of the brain and body. I see nothing wrong with the research coming from these sources, and I don’t think other scientists would either if the subject was not so controversal.