Blog powered by Typepad

« Don't blog angry | Main | Cool »


Michael I don't know if you read Michael E Tymn lastest post on his blog it's case that is stronger then the Pam Reyold's nde

I'm sorry for going off the opening post's topic here but that particular NDE amazed me. It was also addressed recently in Dean Radin's blog in his post "Flat line memories".

That's a very nice piece of research, Michael. It's fascinating to wonder how much of what we regard as history is in fact myth or story. The same applies even to Jesus Christ, of course, for whom there is no reliable "hard" historical evidence.

The Shipton stuff isn't even in the English of the period it's supposed to come from. There would be no need to change it as it would still be comprehensible and it would have a greater ring of authenticity to it in its original form, if that ever existed.

Michael, I saw you quote a mainstream biography on Lincoln's attitudes towards spiritism and seances. Thre is a specialized biography dealing with just that:
The Psychic Life of Abraham Lincoln by Susan B. Martinez.

Quote from Michael E. Tymn's review at amazon: "A number of people who knew Lincoln or came in contact with him are quoted attesting to his association with "spiritualists" and the influence they had on him and his important decisions during the Civil War. Others who knew him denied such an association. Martinez dissects the testimony and leaves the reader with evidence strongly favoring spirit communication and influence. She says that Lincoln moved from being an agnostic to a believer. But a believer in what? "No earthly power, no organized religion, no man-made God," she concludes, "but faith - a new faith - in the outworkings of the Unseen world of intelligent design." "

Re: the NDE referenced by Tymn and Radin...if you check out the addendum on Tymn's blog, you'll see that in contacting Dr. Hamilton, whose book the story comes from, he found that the Gideon NDE was not a single case but a hybrid constructed from at least two cases, one of which may have been Pam Reynolds. Having just ghostwritten a book with two physicians, I can attest that they do this often for reasons of complying with the legal obligation to protect patient confidentiality.

This doesn't change the amazing nature of Hamilton's story, nor make it untrue, but it does make it less skeptic-proof if the details are not all from a single case. There would be no way to know unless you could somehow sign an NDA and get access to the confidential medical files and conduct a thorough investigation.

“The Psychic Life of Abraham Lincoln by Susan B. Martinez.”

Speaking of Lincoln has anyone every done any research into the similarities between Lincoln and John F Kennedy? It is fascinating to read how much their lives seem to be parallel in the names of the people and incidents in their lives.

One being both were shot in the back of the head. Of course unless you believe in the shots coming from the grassy knolls.

Of course, there is this famous Mother Shipton prophecy:
When the web spans the world,
banner of truth shall be unfurled,
writings of the one Prescott,
knowledge true and very hot,
but doubters there shall always be,
ignoring what all plainly see.

Well, at least that prophecy must be genuine!

Tim, I noticed that too, and emailed Hamilton just to make sure if these events happened. Here's his reply:

"It is a fusion of more than two patients who experienced recall despite
documentation of EEG-proven electrocerebral silence. As such, none of them
qualify as NDEs. They are illustrations of how memory storage can occur in a
brain without electrical activity and raises the question of how the
perception of auditory signals and understanding the spoken word can happen
without electrical activity in the cortex. These are not NDEs in my opinion."

I guess Dr. Hamilton does not classify these events as NDEs because there was no tunnel, life review, meeting with departed loved ones, encounter with a being of light, etc?

And yet the Pam Reynolds case, which is part of the blended case, does contain these features.

So I'm confused.

In any event, if the patients are unidentified and their case histories are scrambled together to create an entirely new story, then I don't see that this material has much (if any) evidential value.

Regardless of the blended state of the cases, if the individual cases show the signs of memory and possibly conscious experience despite a brain dead state, regardless of the "blend," it can be taken as evidence that these things occur. Proper records would have to be shown rather than relying on the popular story, though.

Yes, you're right. I just meant that the account in its present form is not very valuable. We would need to know the details - including whether the patients' brains were actually flat-lining when the recollected events took place. (In the Pam Reynolds case, she was anesthetized but not flat-lining when the veridical part of her NDE occurred. This crucial detail is often glossed over in accounts of the case.)

Dr. Allan talks about the case here in a short video

apparently she had no electrical activity in her brain but was able to hear the conversation of the nurses talking to eachother one of nurses mention that she was getting engaged and where she got her engagement ring during her successful operation he says as we are talking to the patient she talks about the conversation but word for word right down to the jewelry store where they bought this ring.

A woman who was "dead" by every clinical criterion used in medicine - her was heart stopped and brain waves disappeared. Yet, she later related conversations that went on among the operating room personnel while she was clinically dead. It is much like the famous "Pam Reynolds" case, but in some respects more evidential of a separation of mind from brain. "In fact, this particular patient's consciousness seemed to thrive despite substantial evidence that her brain was concurrently dead, incapable of generating a single electrical impulse," Hamilton states.

I wonder who the "Sir Newton Pitcairn" is that Michael Tymn mentions. Maybe a pseudonym, since the other stuff is. It almost sounds like he's describing Stuart Hameroff, doesn't it?

Might I add that the reason I say that is because a Google search for "Newton Pitcairn" comes up just Tymn's blog post and something criticizing said blog post. As I said though, Hameroff isn't British but he is an anaesthesiologist and interested in quantum consciousness.

Or maybe it's just a made up story, which would be unfortunate.

Michael: "Flournoy determined that the alleged Martian words spoken by Helene Smith were derived from French, probably unconsciously, and that her channeling was primarily a psychological phenomenon."

When is channelling not a "psychological phenomenon?"

This doesn't mean that it has no validity, ever, while of course some channelling is superior, just as some paintings are; clarity will vary tremendously from one channeller to another and also from one moment to another with the same person.

Nearly anyone can easily enter a mild trance and play with some form of this; they might use their computer keyboard instead of their voice -- no deep trance or extensive training is required.

(This activity isn't recommended for those who hold fearful beliefs about it, however, as "you get what you concentrate on.")

There's nothing quite like obtaining firsthand, personal data when it comes to such explorations, while relatively few are conscious of that which (or those who) lurk in their psyche, often very close to their surface mind, but here's one way to find out.

Is it only imagination? Artful creation? A blend of these and something more genuine?

The answers to this often aren't quite as simple -- or as logical -- as we would prefer, as the greater reality of our psyche lies within an expanded region possessing ground rules quite distinct from those of the waking world and our waking selves.

Bill I.

The comments to this entry are closed.