Life continues beyond physical death. Is this proof of God's existance.

Great Debates
141

It seems pretty apparent several people here have read what you’ve presented. Yet are not convinced. Since that’s the case, it would help you if you try to reason how your “evidence” supports your assertion. And dodging every possible point raised against your argument does not help you in the least.

Further, your pages aren’t terribly consistant, neither with themselves or your arguments here. There’s cases of people having "NDE"s because of getting high (And someone who’s wasted to the point of halucinations “realizing” he is dead is hardly a credible source; It’s also possibly a direct counter to your “drugs can’t do this” statement earlier, since the entire thing being an NDE is dependant on a drugged-up halucinating person’s sense that they were dead). There are a couple of those. There are multiple others of people who either just “think” they died, or never mention dying. You also list someone passing out and having an NDE with no death involved (The only difference between my two examples and that one was that listed on your page was that he “feels” it shows God and Jesus are true, while I don’t). There was one that read like some sci-fi movie (Think the trip to Vega in the movie Contact). And there are multiple cases that are not even close to being NDEs. Hardly the 170 “real NDEs” you claim here. I also don’t see any way of finding more information on these, such as doctor’s accounts of what happened to a patient, witnesses, or anything else, which means we have to rely on just the memories (Memories are most certainly not infallible) of people in usually traumatic situations… Including people who were high at the time, in mental hospitals, or who had just suffered major nervous-system damage. Including the description of your own. I’m sure it was quite an event for you, but what reason do we have, reading it, to believe it’s not just a dream? There’s nothing put foreward to even hint that you were dead at the time (Which you insisted earlier is a requirement for an NDE).

So in responce to your OP’s question, no, it has not proven god’s existance.

142

Your assessments of the material are totally inaccurate. You and your friends have no right to assume you know the personal feelings of others. You judge without knowledge, hardly fair or wise.

143

Uhg. You are at it again.

I was hoping at least you would have replied directly to my question as to why you won’t be more open minded (see previous post), but you have once again resorted to your all too familiar rhetoric.

I give up. I’m just hoping that I don’t come across a thread you’ve started on Crop Circles proving the existence of aliens, any time soon.

144

May I try to explain something to you, lekatt?

Just because something happened to you personally does not mean that your experience is the definition of reality for everyone else.

Let me say it again- what makes your experience more valid than somebody elses for defining what is reality? If you want to get down to arguing “It’s real because it happened to me,” then please explain how that is more valid than someone else saying “It never happened to me so I don’t know if it’s real.”

At that point we generally put the evidence on the table. This is the part you keep trying to skip. If you would like for the Dopers to go slower, perhaps use simpler terms, don’t be afraid to say so. This can be done point by point if needed. (And don’t take offense, please, I’m just trying to explain some basics of GD to you.)

There have been repeated requests for knowledge. This has also caused some misunderstanding, so please let me define it more clearly- knowledge is fact, not opinion. Facts are based on knowledge, opinions are based on feelings. Phoenix Dragon’s most recent post was discussing facts about your website- the fact that things on your website contradict what you have previously said here defining what an NDE is. (And it would be great if you could address that point.) Your most recent post is an opinion- because it is an expression of your feelings that you haven’t backed up with FACTS. (Although you could move towards that by pointing out exactly what you think is inaccurate about Phoenix’s assessment point-by-point.)

You can do this by cutting and pasting, by using the quote feature, by choosing one point to discuss and debate about, etc.

Just remember, nobody here wants to debate you about your opinion, they just want to discuss the facts. Debates generally revolve around the facts themselves and interpretations of the facts. They also require that facts accompany those interpretations so that they are not mistaken for opinion.

In this venue “feelings” are generally not considered as debate fodder- they tell so much about the individual, but so little about the world.

145

You were given data obtained by the “scientific method”. Real studies by real scientists, but you denigh the results because they are not what you want to hear. As you judge everything else. Posing to be scientific only when you agree with the data. Is that not a great big contradiction.

Yes, there are 5 or 6 of the postings in the NDE section that are not real NDEs. They are there to illustrate other things which you missed.

I don’t need to be talked down to, I have studied real science most of my life. Can you say the same for spirituality.

I was reading psychiatric journals 40 years ago. They were then claiming maladies like depression would be eradicated in 6 months and shots would be developed to implant knowledge in the human brain. Kinda missed it didn’t they. They were assuming consciousness was biological. Kinda missed that too.

I have seen science grow up and I was a part of it. Very scientifically oriented in those days. But over the last hundred years medical science has made great physical strides, without any real improvement in understanding the consciousness. We do have an assortment of drugs that effect the brain. Nothing that effects the consciousness. When brain drugs are withdrawn the same maladies return, usually stronger than before, that the drugs were given for.

You are free to believe what you wish, but it is not good to laugh at, belittle, and criticise those things you do not understand.

I did the same thing years ago. I agreed with the bumper stickers of the 60’s saying God is dead. It took an experience with feeling like I had never felt before to change my mind. There is nothing wrong with feelings, they can be very accurate when they arise from experience. I doubt you understand any of this, but others will.

When Raymond Moody published his first book on NDEs, He was fired from his job and ostracized. Even though he had obtained permission from his superiors to do the study and write the book.
He was without work for years, but kept trying and succeeded in bringing us important new knowledge.

Dr. Rhine at Duke University was harrassed and critized until he gave up his ESP work. Later the harrassers said his work was flawed, but showed no proof.

Elizabeth Keubler-Ross who wrote the world famous book “Death and Dying” almost quit her work due to harrassment. She had a spiritual experience, she was told her work was very important and that she should continue, she did.

Bernie Siegel, Kenneth King, many others received the same kind of treatment.

More recently, Melvin Morse, writes about children’s NDE, has posted on his web site some indications of his treatment from his peers.

This sort of hypocritical behaviour continues right to the present and this message board. The proof is there and it is scientific and it is clear for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Truth will never lose no matter how many denigh it. Sooner or later it will be common to discuss the great spiritual truths of life.
Things like non-judgement, forgiveness, and compassion.
God, or whatever name you like, is unconditional love.
You are safe and secure whatever you believe.

Love
Leroy

146

In several surgical procures (brain surgery and certain heart surgery), the patient is effectively dead-the body temperature is lowered to below 80 Degrees F, and all the blood is drained from the body. The heart is stopped, and there is no brainwave activity. Is such a patient effectively dead? If so, do such patents report seeing the “tunne of light”? and, do they wind up chatting with long-dead relatives? I recall seeinfg TV show about a woman who had a brain tumor removed during such a procedure-she was in a death-like conditionn for over 2 hours-seems she should have had plenty of time to visit the great beyond.
So, brain surgeons-how many of your patients report having these experiences?

147

What you saw on TV was a tape of the Pam Reynolds surgery.
Yes, she did do the things you mentioned, plus observed her own surgery. It has been a famous Near Death Experience for years.

http://ndeweb.com/wildcard

This article, written by me, uses the surgery to describe the proof of life after death.

It has been the main subject of this thread.

I don’t know if other surgeries of this kind have been done or not.

148

I’m calling bullshit here. The NDE stories you show on your page have no cites to back them up, no studies, nothing whatsoever to allow more in-depth annalysis than what the person themselves says. Including people who are stoned out of their mind, or suffering severe injury, etc. What’s more, it’s what an annonymous person says on an internet message board. I question the “results” strongly because it’s one-sided accounts posted on what seems to be a rather biased web page, and by a person who refuses to offer any clarification other than to point at the same inconclusive pages that spawn the question, and says “it’s all in there.” Well, it’s not “all in there.” A scientist would not take the un-credited word of some annonymous person on an internet message board as being 100%, infallibly true, but you expect us to?

In any case, refusing to offer any clarifications and not countering any points raised in doubt of your possition is not helping your argument in the least. If it was so solid and scientfically-reasoned, surely you could handle them.

First off, it’s more than that. And many more are questionable, because there’s no indication, or even reason to believe, that the person was dead at the time (Especially the ones where the drug-users were halucinating, or the few where people woke up “feeling” like they had died that night).

And to say you have “170 real NDEs to study,” then later start saying that some aren’t really NDEs, they’re just there for examples. But it also casts doubt onto how other of your claims will hold up once further information is found. Unfortunatly, none of your NDEs listed have any sources for further information (At least, not that I could find). I’m not saying this one inconsistancy makes the whole page wrong, but it does show how online statements aren’t always the “absolute truth” someone claims they are. That’s why we like credible cites, to see if they really are true. Not just statements of people who think it’s true.

Out of curiosity, what kinds of “brain drugs” are you talking about here? Like the ones used for treating behavior problems (Depression), or what?

You keep saying I don’t understand. Well, I’ve got news for you; I understand what you’re trying to say perfectly. I don’t agree with you, mainly because it seems the facts don’t agree with you (Further compounded by the lack of credible facts for all those NDEs you have listed, as well as your refusal to address the facts that don’t support your argument or the questions about some of your more debatable “facts”).

Oh, I understand. There are even certain things I “feel” are true without any facts to support them (And, at the same time, none to contradict them, either). But you know what? Unlike you, I recognize that feelings with no facts to support them are completely useless for trying to convince others that you are right. Saying “I feel this is true,” while it might be nice for yourself, does nothing to convince anyone else. That’s what facts are for. And if the facts directly counter your feelings, then it seems something that one might want to reconsider.

Oh yeah, poor martyr you…

Hypocritical? You’re not the first to be asked for credible cites to back up your opinion, and you won’t be the last. Neither are you the first to not give credible cites when asked for them. Nor the first to not have his poorly-supported beliefs blindly followed just because you claim they’re true.
You want to know what would help your case out, at least in my opinion? If you’d address some of the counter-points I’ve raised before (Including the ones that you’ve skipped over twice now). They address several inconsistancies in your argument, that might make your argument more solid if you can actually refute them. And if your possition isn’t solid enough to refute them, then it would seem it’s kind of lacking.

149

I see you have not read the material.

http://ndeweb.com/FAQz19.htm

There are 20 pages of FAQs in this area, some of them backed up by studies.

You will find the studies here. I am sure they will not be to your liking and you will find many faults with them. Write the scientists and tell them they don’t know what they are doing, see what they say.

You might want to read the wildcard also.

As for NDEs, most are anonymous to protect them from people like you.

Why would you use the belittling remarks about being a martyr. If you had read any of the NDE material it would be apparent to you that these people had been harrassed.

I don’t consider myself a martyr because of your constant personal attacks on me. I just wonder why you are so angry at NDEers and why you continue to attack them. What have they done to you?

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

150

The evidence has been on the table all through the thread.

If you missed it

http://ndeweb.com/wildcard

There is real studies done by real scientists here.
It seems no one wants to read it.

151

If a merciful God existed, he would shoot this thread in the head.

152

Neither do I believe in the Easter Bunny, Peter Pan, nor pay psychics or tarot card readers to read my future. I’ve never attended a UFO convention nor wear a copper bracelet.

I must not be terribly irrational in your view. :slight_smile: I do consider you a cynic, however, rather than a sceptic.

Okay, Vertigo, you say you have an open mind. I’m not sure if Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001 has been mentioned yet, but it should. Here is the Press Release and a Summary of Findings. I also found Additional comments and More comments.

I have not finished reading the material from these sources, but I will tonite. I hope you find them interesting as my skimming of them did.

The effects of being brought up in an open-minded non-christian household has not left me, Vertigo. I take seeking Truth quite seriously and always have. It’s still quite possible to not only believe in God, but also be a Christian without abandoning certain values instilled as a child. I have not reach my beliefs casually. My comments concerning this is just FYI, not to chide you.

lekatt If I have duplicated any of your links, I apologize. I haven’t located the books yet that I am looking for. They’re probably stashed in a box under my bed or elsewhere.

153

Thank you for your vital information.

154

For the analogy impaired, I was mentioning these things to make the point that it is irrational to believe without evidence. It was not meant as a complete litmus test of any one individual’s rationality.

Well then you obviously don’t know the difference between the two.

155

Well, blowero, this is the litmus test I used concerning you.

156

Edlyn, Yes that is one of my links, but I love it, go for it.
I think it may have to be displayed numerous times here before it will actually be read.

Thanks for the help, and there are more studies.

Love
Leroy

157

And since I have not used any of those words to describe any NDE’er, that would make me NOT a cynic (by your incorrect definition), and make YOU a troll.

Besides that, even if I WERE a cynic, it does not change that fact that there is no evidence for lekatt’s NDE theory. So, fire away with your ad hominem arguments - you’re still wrong.

158

A person having experienced a NDE himself checking in. LeKatt, I hear what you are saying, but you sound like you are convinced that this validates your believe-system. This is fine and all, but I think you are taking a shortcut.

I think it is much more interesting to look at it from the scientific point-of-view. If a NDE is generated by the brain shutting down, this doesn’t necessarily mean it has no value. Why would there be a mechanism in the brain which induces these visions and feelings of peace ? Could it be that God is hardcoded into our brains? Could it be that the first person to encounter a NDE invented religion?

By the way : LeKatt : were you raised in a christian environment? Do you know of any pagans or hindu NDE? Do they have the same visions or are they adapted to their religion?

I am not trying to dismiss your experience. I think NDE do have value, but I am just not sure what they are. Are they there to make peace with God in your time of death, or are they there to make you go quietly into the dark of night?

159

Right. I just made up random quotes that somehow were all accurate about the pages you have. Obviously, I’m psycic :rolleyes:

Well, that’s all nice and good. But I wasn’t talking about the studies, I was talking about your “170 real NDEs” on those pages that have no credible cites. Without credible cites, they’re useless for debating purposes (Especially after some of the posts here pointing out various flaws in some NDEs).

Protect them from me? What kind of idiocy is that?

Asking for credible facts is attacking someone, now? Did I miss a memo? And here I was thinking credible cites were SOP around here.

Come on, point out one time I attacked you, instead of your argument. Yes, I attack your argument. That’s what happens when you present a controvertial argument with insufficient evidence to support it.

Hey, you’re the one who came in here trying to prove an assertion. When someone tries to prove an assertion, it’s up to them to prove it’s true, not the other way around. You don’t go up to them and tell them, for example, “aliens landed in my back yard and gave me super powers.” If he can’t show anything to support it, why should they have to accept it as true just because they can’t “prove” he doesn’t?

Further, your arguments rely strongly on assumption and speculation. For example, the wildcard page that you keep saying nobody has read (And it was the first damn page I read!) says:

…You then go on to assume that means it must come from some supernatural source. Well, more news for you; There’s a lot about this natural world we still don’t know. We’re learning more every day, too. Chances are, we’ll probably find proof of how it works sooner or later, since we already seem to have some evidence supporting it (Especially good is the mention earlier in this thread of a study that showed the brain decides on an action a few milliseconds before you conciously “feel” it; Seems to lend some credence to the brain controlling conciousness). “We don’t know” is not the same as “we can’t know,” and to assume “we don’t know” prooves or disproves anything is a rather stunningly bad leap of logic.

That wildcard page is, honestly, one of the most logically lacking arguments I’ve seen in a while. It first says “the source of consciousness is unknown.” It then says that the reason it’s unknown is because it’s coming from outside the body and we don’t know it (Pure speculation). You then say that it’s the skeptics that have to prove it isn’t true! But you haven’t proven it is true. At best, you have a theory with only the flimsiest of support. If you want to convince anyone, find some solid evidence for that assumption, and address any points brought up in question of it. If the best you can do is typing out the same link I read the first time you posted it and whining that I’m not reading the evidence, while avoiding every single question I have about that “evidence,” you’re not presenting a very persuasive case…

160

Although this study has been available since the beginning of this thread I have not heard any comments on it. It is not the only study available.

If you really believe in the scientific method then read.

The evidence and proof are overwhelming in the favor of life after death.

Dr. Raymond Moody’s book “The Last Laugh” is an angry one. He talks about the fundamental christians and the skeptical scientists being closed minded. He is right.

I think more than enough material has been offered to show that Near Death Experiences are real spiritual experiences.

Skeptics are a very small minority, but very vocal. Over 90 percent of the world understands that they are spiritual in nature.

It may be another generation, but soon the skeptics will be silenced with so much proof it will be impossible to ignore.

Love
Leroy