You do realize that all that’s at best unproven, and at worse utter baloney, right?
I’m not a doctor, but it seems to me if you’re walking and talking, you were never dead. If you weren’t dead how could a near-death experience indicate existence beyond death. As Yogi Berra might say, “You’re not dead until you’re dead.”
Okay, your heart stopped beating and your oxygen starved brain began to experience some unusual visions and sensations common to altered states of conciousness. Once blood flow to the brain resumed, you returned to “normal” brain function. What is the mystery here?
By the way, it seems the OP answered his own post in the last line.
The eyes are glazed, blinders in place. The path is straight as the doctrine dictates. The shout goes up “cite, cite. cite” for we can no longer trust ourselves to understand, others must tell us what to believe, our gods are true, they keep us confirmed in the group. We are safe in the group, must not allow independent thinking, it is dangerous. Burn the books.
Are you hinting that believing in the afterlife and in god is an evidence of independant thinking?
That’s not bad. Disjointed enough to sound like it might be inspired, or channeled, or something. Vaguely poetic. Vaguely imperious. Most importantly, vague. You should try writing some scripture sometime. A lot of what some call scripture was probably written by people a lot like you.
Straight Dope Great Debates has opened my eyes and changed my mind about a lot of things with respect to theism and atheism, most of them very positive and enlightening, like the fact that a perfectly tenable moral code can be developed independently of a belief in God.
Another thing that has changed is my long-held naive belief that a compelling argument, proof, or experience could change the atheist’s mind. After all, I reasoned, it happened to me. But I’ve become convinced that that is not the case. Neither a booming voice from the sky, nor evidence of things spiritual, nor even a deductive proof makes any difference whatsoever. It all will be dismissed: the voice is from an alien; after-death experience is a brain fart; and even the possibility of God’s existence is not allowable — especially since the possibility leads to the conclusion of actuality.
Actually, I think a compelling argument would do it for me, and proof certainly would. An experience too, if it were compelling. Haven’t seen any of them, and I’ve looked.
and
Jeepers, what pomposity. Where is the compelling argument in this case? Neither the OP nor any of those replying has spoken of “booming voices in the sky”, and no one here has said that NDE’s can only be “brain farts”. Several posters, at least one of whom is a medical professional, have simply stated that they find the OP’s position unsupported by the link provided. Most have supplied logical reasons why they they are unconvinced by the “proof”.
As others have asked: if, for the sake of argument, NDE’s proved that conciousness can exist independent of the body (and this is manifestly NOT proven by the link provided), how does that prove the existence of the Judeo-Christian God?
I am not a doctor, but something about the description of the brain surgery from the cite in the OP doesn’t ring true:
and later this statement:
This all sounds patently false, and until Qadgop or another physician can verify that this is common procedure in brain surgery, I will conlude that this whole cite is a fabrication, a forgery created to support a position that is otherwise without merit.
A small bit of science is alleged to be open to question. Therefore my wildest fantasies are clearly true. A mind must either be closed or gaping.
Fear Itself,
It’s called a hypothermic cardiac arrest with induced barbiturate coma and many believe it was perfected by a Dr. Spetzler in Arizona. He is indeed the doctor who operated on Pam Reynolds, but you won’t find him anywhere near her or Dr. Sabom when they are touting their claims, nor will he back them up in any way, other than to say, “Yes, I performed an operation on her.”
lekatt needs to clear up the glazed eyes and lose the blinders, but that’s not likely to happen. He did a pretty quick disappearing act when challenged and asked for evidence in the last thread, and I’m sure this one will follow suit.
I guess we can wait another four months for him to resurrect it again, hoping that we will have forgotten.
Yes, that description seemed strange to me as well. I’ve never heard of a surgery draining all the blood from one’s body and stopping circulation for two hours. Why all the blood? How is it put back without damaging the system? How is the heart muscle kept alive? 60F is not very cold at all (unless they meant -60F), so I’m not sure that things indeed are being described very accurately. I’ve heard of “cold” surgery, but not with these elements.
But suffice to say that the mere fact that this proceedure is increasingly commonplace and that patients can be expected to survive it casts some serious doubt on these particular claims. The brain may have shown a low level of activity: but no higher activity at all? How could that even be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt?
Further, if Pam’s doctors are not in on confirming her experience of knowing conversations, then it becomes pretty hard to confirm whether her claim . There is absolutely no reason at all why she couldn’t have simply had a vivid, oxygen-deprivation dream about the surgery before or after it, and the details simply be a conglomeration of what she already knew about the surgery, as well as things her mind simply invented (though the neatest part of about a dreaming mind is that it doesn’t really have to invent every detail to convince the dreamer of a coherent world: it only has to present the experience of thinking that its coherent: ex. I hear some great songs in my dreams, but there are, upon relfection, no sensible notes or melodies to be taken from them, because all I had was the experience of thinking I was hearing great music, without actually having to author any).
Most scientists who have studied NDE’s think that they are real experiences that are worth trying to understand and explain. But most also don’t think the exorbitant claims of afterlife can possibly be supported by the evidence available.
Before you go and nail yourself to a big wooden cross to complete your martyrdom, could you please explain why asking for a cite implies that we do not allow “independent thinking” and we want to burn books?
Heck, pal, even Jesus quoted the Torah.
[Insert comment on lekatt’s prose argument here]
Well, Libby, if an atheist is converted, they aren’t an atheist anymore. What level of evidence would you require to stop believing?
How exactly do you remove all the blood from someone’s brain? Wouldn’t you have to sort of wring it like a washcloth? Modern medicine sure is something.
If it’s proven that consciousness continues beyond physical death (I’ll actually buy that for religious/aesthetic reasons–but not really in the form I suspect our fleeing martyr is), that’s proof of nothing except consciousness continuing beyond physical death. Now, if you’re defining “God” as “conscious continuing beyond physical death,” then you’ve certainly proved it.
The more usual metaphysical and supernatural traits applied to the Big G, you haven’t. Indeed, whatever eschatology you happen to believe in (or favor the idea of) doesn’t have any bearing at all on what formulation of the divine you’re emotionally vested in. One can be a theist, and believe in one life followed by heaven/hell, one deposit, no return. One can be a theist, and believe in reincarnation. One can be a theist and not believe in an afterlife at all, in which consciousness snuffs out like a candle when the brain is no longer capable of operating again.
Alternately, one can be a non-theist and believe any of the nature-of-death-and-life ideas above. It works in any combination.
There’s a sort of delicious irony about this post; you seem to accuse the other people posting of unthinkingly accepting and clinging to the ‘norm’ view and yet at the same time you want us to swallow what you say, whole without chewing? Bah! double standard!
Mr. lekatt is being disingenious. He is the author of that entire Near-Death Experience website.
Shame on you, lekatt, for not identifying that website as your own words while you try to use it as an authoritative source. Did you really think the Dopers would be fooled? Did you really think we’d roll over so easily?
You have a lot to learn, troll.
Well ** God** Bless the whois system :p
Ah, so this is just spam?
And besides all of the excellent criticisms of the citation in the OP in other posts, even if all of lekatt’s claims were true it still doesn’t prove that the God that lekatt doubtless refers to is behind it. Maybe Santa’s elves are really the responsible parties.