IMG_0569
Blog powered by Typepad

« Persistence of visions | Main | Oh, rats! part deux »

Comments

Very interesting articles! It's great to hear (or read) that some mainstream scientists are no longer afraid to talk about an afterlife!

Even if the brain was still functioning during an NDE (wich sounds unlikely to me after hearing Sam Parnia's interviews) that would not explain the veridical perceptions that NDErs talk about so often. Perceptions that happened while the brain was partially (as the dying rats study suggests) or completely shut down.

I find Huffington's article disappointing; it only exposes opnions of physics in favor of an afterlife or apparently in favor but it not exposes robust cases about a afterlife, or falsifiable hypothesis or reasonable arguments.

I think this misses the forest for the trees. There's no reason to assume the "rat study" has anything to do with NDEs. It's not like they started with a solid understanding of the physiological conditions associated with NDEs and then matched them with the conditions of these poor animals. Consider:

1. NDEs are studied in cardiac arrest for convenience (i.e. well understood medical conditions), but we know they sometimes occur when the brain is not compromised... e.g. plane crash, jump off of bridge.

2. NDEs and the OBEs associated with them are often reported as a continuous, extended experience. Example, experiencers will see their body before, during and after death... e.g. "the car hit the ice and started to go into a spin, but I was seeing everything from outside... and then I went to heaven." These kinda events are reported as a continuous experience.

In general, I think you're giving far too much weight to an explanation that is completely married to an outdated, science-as-we-know-it model of consciousness.

The comments to this entry are closed.