Hi Edyln
Thanks for your kind comments. They make the ordeal worth it.
There are at least 4 groups of scientists doing serious research on the profound changes and the recalling of events which could not have been observed. Two have already stated they believe consciousness continues after death.
I would love to hear about your grandson. Maybe you could come over to my site and email me. We could discuss it.
Love
Leroy
—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.—
Ah, the old: people don’t agree with me: therefore, they’re idiots who’ll never learn.
I hope this isn’t the quality of the other enlightenments you’ve found on this board.
So not believing unproven pseudo-scientific rubbish being pushed by someone with an agenda is being close minded?
Btw, the rapture on my 3 year old puppy dog’s face as he lay dying from a car accident was proof that Zeus existed. :rolleyes:
I think I know Lib well enough to know for certain that such sentiment should not be tied to him.
I happen to agree that his assessment of some posters is accurate. I, too, have left from reading a thread with the same impression. Other times I’ve left a thread with the theme from Jaws playing in my head.
Hi Feistymongol
Your post is not only inaccurate, it is very cruel.
The material was backup up by real scientific studies.
The dog comments were totally inappropriate.
I had hoped for more mature responses.
—I had hoped for more mature responses.—
I hope I haven’t been too immature. I think my central point is this: you, and many others, have had an experience. Few people deny this, actually. What people disagree about is what the experience means about what is and is not true about the world and a possible afterlife.
A key distinction to be made is between science that backs up the existence of the experience, and backing up your particular interpretation of what the experience was and meant. As others have noted, NDE’s can be chemically induced without death. Likewise, the definition of “death” is very vauge, especially when it includes people that do not, in fact, ultimately die.
I can actually think of an experiment that might help clarify things, though it would be highly unethical. It would involve destroying a person’s hearing right before the “death” state: destroying the nerves and eardrum. If a person could report what doctors had said after the operation then, we might then have some pretty good evidence that some sort of soul had retained the ability to hear without actually using the body’s capacities to do so (which would undermine the idea that a soul had done so).
The other thing that occurs to me is that even if there is some sort of lingering consciousness right around the moment of death, that doesn’t demonstrate for sure that it will last: perhaps if the person is never revived, it will simply dissapate after a time. Indeed, it seems that no one has considered this idea in conjunction with the idea that whatever consciousness remains after death is hallucinating. How can we be sure that, even there really is a consciousness that remains after death, that the visions of NDE experiencers are actually correct observations of a supposed new reality? After all, this would be a very new world and situation for these nascently freed consciousnesses: for all we know, pure consciousness could simply be inherently wish-fulfilling: whatever it innocently imagines might be happening to it, it convincingly experiences.
The thing is, when all bets are off, and we’re dealing with uncharted territory, so many different possibilities open up: and some are very very different from what you might claim they are.
Since I’m one of those who was a little sarcastic to you, I’d like to apologize. No need to be rude, even if I don’t believe in God. (And your website isn’t so badly written. I found a few mistakes, but I’m an English teacher; it’s hard for me not to nitpick.)
For what it’s worth, I don’t doubt that you had an amazing experience. It does raise fascinating questions. I don’t believe it proves that God exists. I’m not scientific enough to know what it proves physically, and I don’t have access to any information about what it might prove metaphysically. I hope you’ll understand that what seems true to you doesn’t necessarily convince others, and that being unconvinced does not signify a closed mind. Again, I apologize for for any hurt feelings.
I’m sorry you feel you’ve been mistreated. Nevertheless, if, in the future, you wish to debate with skeptics, you’ll find that you actually need some pretty solid evidence, and sound reasonable arguments free of logical fallacies.
I urge you to look into the skeptical debate process inherent in scientific investigation, so you at least know what you’re up against, even if you don’t wish to apply those principals in your own arguments.
Skepticism is not a personal attack. It can feel that way when people don’t immediately accept your pet hypotheses as fact, especially if you’ve constructed an entire metaphysical worldview based on them.
My post was perhaps a bit harsher than was strictly necessary, but, trust me, most of us have seen these arguments many times, and your original statements and follow-ups did not do very much to persuade anyone who wasn’t already convinced of the existence of God and life-after-death. I hesitate to say it, since you’ve already shown your hypersensitivity to criticism, but your website is pretty close to a textbook example of how not frame an argument for presentation to a skeptical audience.
This is where I have a problem. I’ve read your site and didn’t find any link to these scientific studies. I found a quote by a physicist which was not in reference to NDEs, and an anecdotal story about Pam Reynolds. As I noted in the last thread we were involved in, she can’t even get any corroboration from the doctor who performed the surgery (other than a “Yes, I performed an operation on her”), so we just have to take her word for it. While I truly believe that many experience what they consider to be NDEs, I don’t see how that proves anything beyond that they had a dream, hallucination, etc., either before, during, or after the fact. My wife dreamt the other night that she was leaving me to run away with Michael J. Fox, who had just invented a water powered automobile (no, I’m not making this up). The dream was very real to her, so real that it actually scared her. Needless to say, my wife is still here, and Michael J. Fox hasn’t completed work in his invention.
Would you care to share evidence of these real scientific studies?
At the bottom of the article
are links to two studies by scientific groups indicating a belief that consciousness continues after death. I can’t remember the exact wording. There are many on-going studies by other groups.
This is a real subject now. Pam Reynolds’ surgery was well documented and well attended by doctors. There was a TV presentation of it on A&E.
If you ever left your body and watched it from a distance of 20 feet or more, it would be something you would never forget. No one would be able to tell you it didn’t happen.
I suggest reading about 100 NDEs before deciding about them.
All the scientists that believe did not start out that way.
Hope this helps some, and maybe we can get to the original question of God after a bit.
The doctor who performed the operation was on the TV show telling about it. I can understand now why he would want to distance himself due to peer pressure.
—If you ever left your body and watched it from a distance of 20 feet or more, it would be something you would never forget. No one would be able to tell you it didn’t happen.—
Again: sure, if all you meant was “the experience didn’t happen.” Almost everyone agrees that the experience was experienced as reported. But the point is getting from an experience to truth, and this path is certainly not as simple as you make it out to be.
I don’t think anyone doubts that these people had the experiences they claim to have had. I’m sure the things they report were real. The question is whether they reflect an external reality or an internal reality.
Medical science has not yet completely unraveled the nature of conciousness, that much is true. However that is not sufficient cause to posit the existence of a non-material entity capable of surviving bodily death, or exiting the physical body and existing independently of it. As any other question in science, this could only be established by positive results from repeatable, well-documented, properly conducted experiments published in an unbiased peer-reviewed medical publication.
Considering the fact that there are a wide range of altered states of conciousness that the mind is capable of experiencing, in numerous circumstances including sleep and sensory deprivation, extreme hunger, anoxia, high body temperature, pharmacological effects, lucid dreaming, and even spontaneous hallucinations with no readily apparent cause, it seems logical to reach a preliminary conclusion that NDE’s are the result of an altered state of conciousness experienced in the highly unusual and unfamiliar situation of total body shutdown, and are based on material phenomenon consistent with currently accepted theories of mental functioning. Positing the existence of a non-physical entity capable of existing outside the body and surviving it’s physical death on no credible, repeatable, falsifiable, peer-reviewed evidence is not in accordance with the principle of parsimony, which states that with two competing hypotheses that explain the data equally well, the simplest is logically the most likely (Occam’s Razor).
Actually, the more descriptions of NDEs I read, the less real they seem. In all the accounts, the thing that is given the most emphasis is the emotions of the person having the NDE - things like “I felt a great sense of peace” or “I knew I was with God”. The most common vision described is either going through a tunnel or seeing a bright light, and I see very little detail about actual events that went on in the room during these experiences. But this vision is given a very logical explanation in the article you linked to:
And the emotions can be explained as well:
So the strong emotions and visual sensations could easily be the result of oxygen deprivation. Here’s where most of us disagree with you, lekatt - you believe that your “feelings” make your experience more real, while the skeptic would see them as evidence that your experience was a hallucination.
The other note that people who have studied NDE’s have found is that people’s experiences correlate with their belief systems: whether it be Christian heaven, Muslim afterlife, other lives, etc. Those that don’t believe in afterlives seem to have various experiences many of which don’t seem to have any common thread other than good feelings.
This seems to map pretty well to the “mystical experience,” which has recently become a popular study. Again, people seem to interpret it in terms of their beliefs, feeling that it re-inforces whatever mystical truths they already held, or in the abscence of any, simply bringing a sense of peace and comfort.
It would be interesting to know: do any people who have experienced NDE’s had experiences of going to hell?
Whether anyone believes that NDEs are real or not doesn’t matter to me. I get no extra points either way. My site is informational. Those who wish to read experiences straight from their authors can do so there. I have run a spell checker on them.
Now, there is no way to prove a personal experience, but that doesn’t make it false. You can total up the number of individuals coming back to life with information not held previous to dying and find substantial proof of survival.
I find myself going over material better written on my site, so please check out the FAQs, all of them.
The information is there basically to help NDEers overcome the intimidation they receive from the medical, science, and religious folks.
Apos, I believe I remember hearing a story about at least one negative NDE a few years ago, unfortunately I don’t have any other information on that, I just remember the guy saying it seemed as if he were in a dark place, and surrounded by malevolent entities (presumably demons, I suppose).
I also have heard about the rather large variance in details amongst NDE experiencers. It seems many, or most of them conflict substantially on the details, and a great deal of them conflict directly with accepted religious doctrine. For example, I recall one where a lady claimed to have met and spoke with Jesus. He told her that everyone goes to heaven, which is demonstrably not accepted doctrine of any mainstream Christian denomination.
This indicates to me that either the experience is generated by atypical mental processes occurring with the extreme conditions of total body shutdown, or if NDE’s do indicate the existence of an afterlife, “heaven” is highly subjective, and based on a persons pre-conceived notions from life.
NDEs are personal experiences. They are each unique to the individual having them. There is no conflict, because the experiences are unique.
The only way anyone will ever understand anything about NDEs is to read as many as possible.
The negative experiences are few, and usually depict cold, dark places. Preachers seem to have all the hellish ones.
Fear draws people to the negative.
If you are happy, satisfied and comfortable with your life, there is nothing to be learned from them. Otherwise there is a great deal.
The bottom line is that everyone is responsible for their own life, to make it as they wish. The decisions you made yesterday are the realities of today.
I hope this thread has been of some importance.
Love
Leroy
—NDEs are personal experiences. They are each unique to the individual having them. There is no conflict, because the experiences are unique.—
But that’s exactly the point. Were there an actual alternate reality that these people were experiencing, then we would expect that it would be consistent. That it instead reflects whatever beliefs people have suggests more strongly that the experience is an artifact of the mind.
—The only way anyone will ever understand anything about NDEs is to read as many as possible.—
It’s certianly important to do so. But that does not end the discussion. No amount of people relating these sorts of NDE experiences is sufficient to demonstrate that the experiences actually demonstrate a life beyond death. The simple fact that these people remain to impart their experiences opens the door to the possibility that it was a very intense and emotional mental event, not a journey out of body to an astral realm.
I’m curious how this thread ever ended up in Great Debates. You really don’t seem interested in debating the subject; you seem more like you are looking for a support group. I have no doubt that you had an incredible experience. I once had a dream that affected me emotionally for a couple days even after waking - I can imagine that your experience was probably like that times a thousand or so. In other words, having not been through the experience, most of us cannot imagine how you feel. That’s great for you, but YOUR feelings do not constitute objective truth for the rest of us. People have taken LSD and thought they saw God, but it doesn’t convince me. I don’t understand why you wanted to start a debate, and then get upset when people don’t agree with you.