No, we have as good a grasp of this thread as it ever was. You came in to try to convince us that your opinion was fact and we met that assertion with requests for proof. The “proof” you have provided is something that you yourself deny as a valid source. You deny the scientific method’s effectiveness in evaluating NDEs on your site. http://ndeweb.com/FAQz09.htm
You see Science as a set of beliefs instead of a process by which facts are determined. This is simply wrong. A real Scientist sets aside their paradigms of “belief” and pre-concieved notions of truth when they start to look at something. Yours is a poor definition of Science, but since it is the one you work from we are pretty much at an impasse from the beginning.
This is just funny. You have said, over and over, that the page you reference above has “scientific” proof that NDEs prove consiousness is non-corporeal. Of course you also dismiss “science” as some ancient set of dogma which can’t handle unknowns. The really interesting thing is, you don’t have evidence which fits either your definition of science, or mine, on the page you mention above. There is one citation on that page. http://www.ndeweb.com/wildcard/
This is certianly an interesting datapoint. Clinical death, but seemingly awareness remains. Now let’s look at your scientific studies that prove this means consiousness is non-corporeal. At the bottom of that page is a link called “collaborating research.” and it leads to this page. http://ndeweb.com/FAQz19.htm
Emphasis Added
This is evidence if you’re already convinced. When man first went to the moon, scientists were excited about lunar rocks. What new elements would we be able to add to the periodic table, what new isotopes might exist in non-Terran soils? This was an exciting time, but the evidence, once all the dust settled, simply proved that we had gotten worked up over nothing. The moon was made of the same exact stuff the Earth is. The state of consiousness experienced during a NDE is certainly exciting, and the possibility exists that we’re about to discover a major truth about ourselves(perhaps non-corporeal consiousness). But right now we’re waiting on the NDE-equivelant of the Apollo program. The evidence is out, and so, for the thinking person, is the jury.
Oh wait, there is another link on the bottom of the page where this “scientific study” which was really just something you “heard in the media” which purports to link to more evidence. It leads to this page. http://ndeweb.com/FAQz19a.htm
Emphasis Added
The “tools” the good doctor is referring to are undoubtedly the repeatable experimental processes which can be observed to result in the same experiences. This is how Science(the real definition, not yours) works. Your “proof” is no proof at all, as the scientists who have “proven” your case use phrases like “human consciousness may work independently of the brain”. I don’t see these as compelling statements of evidence. I don’t think very many other people do either.
I would question why you are allowed to use personal anecdotes and news articles as “evidence” when they somewhat support your assertions, but you counsel people “If all you know is what you heard in the media or skeptical science books”. Can you please tell us, oh wise one, which books should be considered canon and which things we hear in the media are accurate?
You’ve been heard. We’re willing to listen to evidence, but so far you haven’t presented anything aproaching Scientific evidence.
Enjoy,
Steven
PS Doc, I’m sorry. Are we still on for our game of EtherBall next plenum?
hmmm, why didn’t the post count, last poster or thread position change when I posted the above message? You guys can see that right? I’m not just looking at some funky caching that only I can see? Please tell me this post made it through, I’d hate to have to try to re-type it.
Enjoy,
Steven
PS. Doc, no word yet, send reply by NCCFEEM Please.
Drastic-
I appreciate the compliment. But I was only part of a team. The net-spider was my idea, but others helped develop and implement it. As for the Heisenberg compensator, I was wholly uninvolved in its creation.
At present, the main thrust of my research is investigation of the brain/NCCF connection. I’ve established that damaging one wil damage the other, and that repairing one will repair the other. But there still remain many chicken and egg issues.
You post is confirmation of what I said about science being a closed belief system. How would the physical tools ever measure the non-physical. They never will.
Science does not accept anything that doesn’t fall under their system, as religion doesn’t accept anything not in the bible or under their system. In order to understand NDEs thinking out-of=the-box must take place.
Religion and science are flip-sides of the same coin.
Near Death Experiences are real spiritual experiences, the proof of which is already in existence. More proof is being added daily.
It will take years for science to catch up and religion to wake up, but it will happen.
One would like to think our professionals are motivated only by love of truth, integrity, honesty, etc. However, most often it is self-interest and money, that sways the vote.
Time will tell what the truth really is. I am confident.
Your post is confirmation that you do not understand Science. Please refrain from posting anything about Science or claiming “scientific evidence” supports your assertions until you learn something about Science and how it works.
Incidentally, the 9/21/02 issue of the Economist had an article on Out of Body Experiences.
Applying electrical impulses to appropriate parts of the brain can apparently lead to the sensation that the subject is traveling out of her own body. (This was discovered during an ultimately successful treatment for someone who suffered from epilepsy).
Ref: Olaf Blanke of the University Hospital of Geneva. Published article in Nature, a NonActualized Scientific Publication (NaSP).
This story was on more than one news service and received world wide coverage. There was one patient involved and she was very much alive when it happened. The article went on to say it could be a explanation of NDEs, OBEs and other spiritual phenomenon. Every skeptic who knew me pointed it out.
Now, millions of people will believe science has discovered the cause of spiritual experiences.
On the other hand when Pam Reynolds was operated on, brain dead for two hours, extensive medical machinery hookups proved no brain activity for two hours, all the blood was drained from her body at the time also. When she was brought back to life telling everything that happened during the time she had no blood in her body and was brain dead, She repeated what was said, what instruments was used, etc,. We found out about it on a TV special for strange happenings.
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.
—Yes, science has no proof that NDEs are anything other than what the experiencer describes them to be.—
The experiencer describes experiences that take place within their own mind, unobserved by anyone else.
lekatt, you have shown yourself utterly unwilling to discuss the subject of whether or not NDEs are really proof of life after death. You simply avoid the discussion, and blanket state that it cannot be proven that these experiences are anything other than conclusive proof, purely because you feel they are. This alone demonstrates how insular and dogmatic you are about this subject, and how pointless this thread is, aside from the purposes of parody and play. If you would like a discussion, you are going to have to change your ways and address the subject. Otherwise, you are just being a very prolific troll.
Had I ever done such a thing I would certainly be remorseful, however…
I have done one thing in this thread. I have pointed out that what you say is “Scientific proof” is no such thing. If you seem to believe that the clarification of what consititues proof in a scientific framework is an attack upon your person and your experience then you have ego issues. This is not about you. I never dismissed the experiences. I even related one experienced by my mother. I do not question the veracity of the experience, I question your interpretation of it’s cause. Period.
**
I have, however, used experimental techniques to repair the NCCF’s of individuals suffering from some sort of neurological injury. I worked entirely on the NCCF. But, the patients’ recoveries and subsequent CAT, PET, and MRI scans revealed that their brains had been repaired. By taking readings of the NCCF’s of patients who were receiving conventional medical treatments, I was able to prove that repairing the brain will repair the NCCF.
The Technocracy has sent agents to kill me on several occasions. I defended myself by using my field-scanner to transmit energy to their NCCF's. I had an associate take scans of the agents' brains. Damage was extensive.
Re-Scientific Proof
I’ve said several times that I do have proof. Some NDE’s are actually cases of the NCCF leaving the physical body during a brief period of clinical death. However, most NDE’s are purely biological in nature.
Re-Science, Religion, And Lekatt
Science is NOT a set of beliefs. It is a method of thinking. Science has discarded many things accepted as fact (the brain is only an organ to cool the blood, the Earth is the center of the universe, the four humors, etc). It has also accepted many theories based on evidence (tectonic plates, evolution, heavier-than-air-craft, etc).
Religions are sometimes guilty of the close-mindedness you accuse them of.
However, during this thread you have refused to explain your beliefs. When others have given evidence that your view of science is flawed, you have refused to listen. In several of your posts you mention a there-are-demons-attitude of religious fundamentalists. Replace the word demons with NDE’s and you have a remarkable fascimile of your website.
I did not quote you out of context. Here is your entire post:
The sentence I quoted is set apart as a seperate paragraph. Where is this “context” I left out?
The fact is, you claim that your assertions about NDEs are scientifically proven (while refusing to back up your claims in any way), then later claim that science is insufficient to evaluate NDEs. You clearly want it both ways. This is a very real contradiction in your reasoning, not some out-of-context trickery on my part.
What is it that you don’t understand. Scientists do surgery. The patient reports being alive while her body is dead. What don’t you understand about that.
Hundreds of NDEs report the same kind of information. Experiencers say they are spiritual beings. Their consciousnesses leave their bodies and continue to live after they have been declared dead. There is no proof to counter that claim.
What the hell is it that you don’t understand?
Science can’t prove or disprove anything they say.
—The patient reports being alive while her body is dead. What don’t you understand about that.—
Oh, we understand it. But we’re all savvy enough to notice that “dead” is being used as a weasel word.
—What the hell is it that you don’t understand?—
Why entirely internal experiences count as proof of anything. By the exact same logic I could claim that when I dream, my spirit is actually traveling to a different reality where things are more chaotic. For all I know, that could be true. But there’s no at all evidence for it: all that is is an external interpretation of an internal experience.
**
Any non-corporeal-consciousness-field that has left the physical body and traveled to the tertiary or secondary layer of the Ether-field, retains a residual imprint due to the nature of said layers. I have NEVER found a case in which an NCCF has traveled to either layer and not retained an imprint. I have also NEVER found any other way for an NCCF to be given that specific imprint. Thus, if an individual’s NCCF bears that imprint, it has been to the secondary and/or tertiary layers (what laypeople call the spirit world)If an individual’s NCCF does not bear this signature, it has never left the primary layer(the physical universe).
**
Again, if the NCCF has no residual energy signature, it has never left the physical world. Thus, any Actualized Scientist using one of my scanners can quickly and easily determine whether or not an individual has had a true out-of-body or near-death-experience. This constitutes accurate, verifiable, and reproducable evidence.
I have interviewed several hundred individuals who claimed to have had NDE’s. All but a handful, bore no signature. Therefore, the sensations they experienced were NOT caused by their NCCF’s leaving their bodies. Humans are both physical and spiritual in nature. Since I have ruled out a spiritual cause for most NDE’s, the cause must be biological.
Let me ask you the same question, albeit more politely. What about my posts and research do you not understand? I realise that some of my work and the terminology I use to describe it are rather esoteric. If you don’t understand something I’ve said, don’t be afraid to ask about it.
