IMG_2361
Blog powered by Typepad

« The de Vere code | Main | Scammed by the light »

Comments

Exact same subject our minister talked about today in church in his sermon. It was pretty interesting. He mentioned quite a few scientists, physicists, etc. who believe in God and life after death. I guess it's a little synchronicity?

Tonight (Monday night) on Coast-to-Coast AM at 10 pm to 2 am:

"Dr. Sam Parnia of the Weill Cornell Medical Center will discuss the results of his study of near-death experiences which have received widespread coverage in the national and international press and have been published in the medical journal "Resuscitation.""

Thanks for the info, Roger.

The study in question can't be AWARE. Those results aren't anticipated till 2012, I think.

There has been a more recent update on aware at the Horizon Research Website. See link below. It must have been done in the last couple of months.
http://www.horizonresearch.org/main_page.php?cat_id=233

I honestly thought Coast-to-Coast would be the last place Parnia would go for an interview. This is just my opinion, but I feel the association with post-mortem survival studies with conspiracy theories, UFOs, crytoids, etc. is a reason why there has been trouble taking the topic seriously as in the present which from what I've seen Coast-to-Coast seems to deal with at times.

Michael,

I like Smith's "suspended judgment" quote. I think it goes to the root of the problems we are having in the world today. I like the way Dr. Madison Peters put it:

"It is impossible for a thinking person to find true purpose in life without a belief in survival. Limited, restricted, and temporal purpose, perhaps, but not true purpose. This belief must go beyond the blind or pseudo-faith of most religious practitioners. It must take the form of conviction. Too many indeed hold the solemn verities concerning the hereafter in a sort of half consciousness, believing in them, yet nevertheless not fully realizing them. They must flame within us, setting our whole moral and intellectual nature on fire, sending a life current of energy though every part of our being, arousing us to impetuous action and to sustained effort born of strong conviction.”

Yeah it's not that one but another study i think.

I listened to Parnia on Coast to Coast, The thing I struggle with the most with NDE's and why I am not a believer in them being a glimpse into a so called Afterlife, Why do only the 10-20% amount that have cardiac arrest experience them?

If we all have a 'Soul' then surely everyone should recall something during clinical death, It doesn't make any sense to me, His theory of it being to do with the Wiring of the Brain isn't a very good explanation either. Gets me to thinking that they may be just Hallucinations with the dying Brain going into trauma.

Not sure about that Nate. Maybe the brain blocks the memories.

The thing that bothers me about NDEs is how different they are. I mean they are the same in the beginning, but whenever they leave earth it seems like no two NDEs are alike. All of them might not be the same but I think some two would have to be identical at some point.

Ive been watching I Survived Beyond and Back and sometimes people see other people with bodies, sometimes they look like stars but don't have bodies, sometimes they are surrounded with thousands of clapping people and sometimes they see one or two angels. Why are these stories so different? I'd find it easier to believe if the stories matched more.

"Gets me to thinking that they may be just Hallucinations with the dying Brain going into trauma."

That's a common theory, Nate. But couldn't the same objection be applied to it? In other words, why do only 10-20% of people who have cardiac arrest have hallucinations?

Your question is a good one, though, and I don't know the answer.

But the more you listen to people who have NDE's and study their content, the more you realize how little like hallucinations they are. For example, hallucinations don't fill us in on long-forgotten details about our childhoods, nor do they give us accurate information about events happening at other locations, nor do they lead to the kind of positive transformations that NDE'rs consistently experience.

So the question becomes: how and why does ANYONE have such an experience, much less how can we have such an experience at a time when our brain seems incapable of having any kind of lucid experience whatsoever.

Hey Nate

I think the answer to your question can be found in the NDE accounts themselves. If you read the accounts they tend to say the person being there is a mistake and needs to go back. Thus we would not expect 100% of people to have NDEs cause basically it is a afterlife clerical error.

Hallucinations don't corroborate, parallel, or are congruent with the holographic universe theory and quantum physics.

"I literally had the feeling that I was everywhere in the universe simultaneously." - excerpt from Mark Horton's NDE, http://www.mindspring.com/~scottr/nde/markh.html

"The next thing I recall was being shown the universe. I remember thinking, "So, THAT'S how it is! I was in awe. It was like a huge net, or chain link fence, everything in the universe is connected."
- excerpt from Kelly K's NDE, http://www.nderf.org/kelly_k's_nde.htm

"‘If you lived inside a hologram, you could tell by measuring the blurring,’ Hogan says." http://blogs.monografias.com/sistema-limbico-neurociencias/2010/02/19/the-holographic-universe-when-it-pays-to-be-first/
----------

People who have NDE's routinely say that it seemed even more real than this side, or "realer than real." We live live in the holographic projection (hologram) and the other side or "heaven" is the original holographic film.

Kelly K's NDE
"Yes the colors of things were heightened, much better than normal. ... The NDE is very real, more like you went on an amazing trip. You are more aware " http://www.nderf.org/kelly_k's_nde.htm

And the reason they see more colors than normal is because they are seeing the entire light spectrum instead of just a very narrow range like our bodies see here. Once the "soul" leaves the body it is able to connect with or "see" the entire light spectrum, hence "more colors than normal."

Off topic, but is anyone else skeptical of the alleged "scientific" explanation for all these mass bird deaths? I mean, if they're so "common," and caused by fireworks, then why don't we see stories every year about the mass bird death cleanups on July 5th?

"is anyone else skeptical of the alleged 'scientific' explanation for all these mass bird deaths?"

I believe the true explanation may have something to do with this:

http://tinyurl.com/36f48ut

Hahaha. Awful. Just awful.

NewScientist has brought a complete explanation for the near death phenomena, enjoy!

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2011/01/near-death-neurologist-dreams-on-the-border-of-life.html

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2011/01/near-death-neurologist-dreams-on-the-border-of-life.html
----------------------------------------

No mention of the connection between NDEs and the holographic universe theory and quantum physics?

I thought NDEs happened well after all brain activity had ceased? That guy made it sound as simple as a fainting spell.

OT, but are you on Facebook, Mr. Prescott?

I read the scientific american article. I have to say, I've fainted a few times in my life. The I never remember seeing a tunnel. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I've never recalled anything but feeling like I was passing out and waking up on the ground. I would not have thought to say. "Well, I felt faint, and I saw this tunnel, and then I woke up". I simply passed out with no urge to explain what I physically saw. So, I'm not buying it.

And, I still say Parnia would not be stating to the media that it is "the wiring of the brain" or a "trick of the brain", if he was getting any hits. He would know by now if he was having any postive results, surely.

I have to agree with you j9. The change in rhetoric over the years from Parnia suggests that they never have had a hit.

No mention of the connection between NDEs and the holographic universe theory and quantum physics?

That's because that connection does not exists in the realm of science - it's a thought experiment not supported by facts, only wishful thinking.

Re: Parnia not getting hits: I'm not sure about that, j9 - from what it sounds like in the brief update interview he gave, it sounds like so far, they've been collecting subjects but haven't started the interview process. So he might not actually have any data yet. Also, I think Parnia is saying those things to be cautionary, but to me he sounds genuinely undecided. I still don't like the fact that they're calling AWARE the "definitive study" on NDEs, because of course it won't be, but I think Parnia himself is genuinely open to positive results, even if they might surprise him a little.

One thing I think he's commented on, and something that I often think about, is the fact that while NDEs provide very compelling evidence that the mind and the brain are not identical, there is still data from neuroscience in general that *seems* to say mind and brain are the same. I know that this data can also be accounted for by the transmission theory, but I think it would be nice to see someone actually lay out a comprehensive model using transmission theory. If people could see how it actually works, there might be less resistance to it. Incidentally, has this been done? Is there a book on it anywhere?

re
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/jonah_lehrer/search?contributorName=jonah%20lehrer

could not post in correct location

re
The Truth Wears Off
by Jonah Lehrer
Fascinating article
There is a follow up reply to critics by Jonah Lehrer:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/jonah_lehrer/search?contributorName=jonah%20lehrer

Almost all critics assume that there is an underlying "truth" which "regression to the mean" will bring to light.

I just noticed how Smith referenced the fact that if materialism is true, death is essentially a total erasure and not a stop in progression (where he says something along the lines about consciousness being snuffed out as if it never existed). For me, it's hard to fit both consciousness and memories into the materialist model just because of the sheer fact I am experiencing those now, for materialism to be true in my opinion I should not be experiencing any of those right now, after all if death is an absolute end there is no way to access either of those two, which is where I think Smith comes up with the phrase "as if it never existed".

I also noticed Michael Tymm's quote from Dr. Madison Peters and I too agree that it's difficult to find meaning or purpose in life without a belief in survival. I've honestly tried to understand the materialist's views on the purpose of life but I just can't seem to get it. For example, the idea that we live on through offspring or are influences seems a bit shallow to me, there's no guarantee on how long humanity will last and more than likely there will likely be an end to man kind eventually. I've noticed when brought up with this likely possibility, materialists tend to go quiet. I've also heard some materialists say it's through the brevity of life that gives it meaning which is why some of them are against life extension techniques. That is something I can't wrap my head around, I understand there's the argument that you'll just put everything off if you have infinite time available to you but on the flip side I'm not a fan of trying to cram as many experiences into life before our time is up, which ultimately seems futile if you're just going to forget it all in the end.

Then again, I have seen materialists scratch their heads at our outlooks. There's one poster over at the Skeptiko forums who said he's confused by why so many people feel life is meaningless without a belief in survival, so I guess it goes both ways.

Jane, I definitely agree with you about having a model for transmission theory. I think ultimately the only thing that will really break down resistance to it is alongside a model is evidence that can be measured, which given the nature of the theory may not be possible. I've heard from skeptics many times they want to know where these signals being transmitted to the brain are coming from, and what part of the brain receives these signals (I think those questions though maybe too grounded in materialism, from what I recall the transmission theory is more of an analogy than an actual belief that there are real signals being broadcast out there).

"No mention of the connection between NDEs and the holographic universe theory and quantum physics?" - Art
-------------------------------------------
"That's because that connection does not exists in the realm of science - it's a thought experiment not supported by facts, only wishful thinking." - sbu

--------------------------------------------

The connection is obvious for anyone who can read.
***************
The Quantum Mind of the NDE
How the new physics explains consciousness

http://www.near-death.com/quantum.html
--------------------------------------------
'The Holographic Universe.' This book lays a scientific ... that near-death experiences could be explained by the holographic model. Dr. Kenneth Ring, who is president of the International Association for Near-Death Studies, ...
quanta-gaia.org/reviews/books/holoUniverse.html
-----------------------
"Although each of us obviously inhabits a separate physical body, the laboratory data from a hundred years of parapsychology research strongly indicate that there is no separation in consciousness." - Russell Targ, physicist co-founder of Stanford Research Institute's investigation into psychic abilities


Well I see New Scientist has no problem burning a straw man on NDE research. Why bother mentioning those facts that make NDEs so interesting or why bother even using NDE researchers? Why not even use a single NDE study for your paper?

As I tell people this is the correct statement on the status of NDE research

No one physiological or psychological model by itself explains all the common features of NDE. The paradoxical occurrence of heightened, lucid awareness and logical thought processes during a period of impaired cerebral perfusion raises particular perplexing questions for our current understanding of consciousness and its relation to brain function. A clear sensorium and complex perceptual processes during a period of apparent clinical death challenge the concept that consciousness is localized exclusively in the brain."

As for Parnia we will have to see what he gets in the end. If they do not get the hits but still get information that would be impossible to get under normal circumstances then that is still a win for us. Of course this does nothing to invalidate studies that have supported the dualistic views of NDEs.

Well my comment was censored, not surprised. There are days I absolutely hate materialist liars. This is one of them.

The connection is obvious for anyone who can read.

Ridiculous. Here is a easy to read introduction to quantum mechanics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics

which basically sums up to what experimentally has been verified so far. No science fiction or wishful thinking. As you can read no mentioning of neither the holograhic universe or consciousness.

Can't you see that you might actually be manipulating with peoples beliefs when claiming there is hard science to your claims?

One extreme case of scientific abuse is the "The Myth of the Twentieth Century" by Alfred Rosenberg. Rosenberg's well-researched account of ancient history, melded with his racial speculations, proved to be very effective in spreading racialism among German intellectuals in the early twentieth century.

Kris, what was your comment and where was it censored?

Oh I got censored here- http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2011/01/near-death-neurologist-dreams-on-the-border-of-life.html

I took them to task for not using any NDE scholars in their article and ignoring the research that has been done and the conclusions it has made. Their stance that NDEs are medically explainable is 100% outside of the mainstream views of NDE research.

This is the view from IANDS

No one physiological or psychological model by itself explains all the common features of NDE. The paradoxical occurrence of heightened, lucid awareness and logical thought processes during a period of impaired cerebral perfusion raises particular perplexing questions for our current understanding of consciousness and its relation to brain function. A clear sensorium and complex perceptual processes during a period of apparent clinical death challenge the concept that consciousness is localized exclusively in the brain."

Thanks. I saw that Kimberly's very reasonable comment was subsequently attacked by materialists with the same tired insults. Invoking entropy now? "Dead cells can't come to life?" The hell? Then how are any of us here at all?

"Can't you see that you might actually be manipulating with peoples beliefs when claiming there is hard science to your claims?" - sbu
------------------------------

I've told you before it's more like a jury trial with numerous witnesses than some kind of weird scientific experiment. And by the way "science" can be wrong. It often is. What we once believed we no longer believe. The whole idea of a hard materialistic physical reality is now completely out the window with the advent of quantum physics. You have to let go of your old 19th century Newtonian way of thinking.

It's like a puzzle with the outside framed by quantum physics and the holographic universe theory and the inside pieces made up of things like near death experiences, death bed visions, mystical and transcendental experiences, the work of some Mediums, parapsychology experiments, etc. When I stand back and look at the puzzle, like the game show Concentration on TV, the answer is obvious and jumps out me.

We are spiritual beings having a physical experience. You are going to be so surprised after your physical body dies and that voice inside your head still exists. I'll tell you what, if you get scared and are afraid, call out for me and I will come to you and help guide you into the Light.

Yeah the New Scientist will not publish replies from informed people. This should not surprise me as I think their arguments cannot stand up under rational scrutiny and they know it, but still it just makes me so mad.

Kris, don't take this the wrong way but are you sure the reason New Scientist won't post your comment is because of its supposed non-materialistic opinion? I've noticed others with that kind of opinion such as Kimberley get their comments posted. I do notice you tend to be more militant when it comes to these matters (such as when Michael advised you to not push Keith Augustine's buttons once) so I just wonder if you were maybe a little too brash in your wording?

As for the responses to Kimberley, IMO they're really more leveled headed compared to what I've seen in the past. At least no one is swearing at her or cqlling her a wuss that is unable to accept death as a finality.

I've seen the entropy argument brought up a few times before, bit it is my opinion that it is one where "one can't think outside of the box". The thing is that the theory of survival and consciousness maybe something that is immaterial, that is consciousness may potentially not be energy that is emitted by the brain, or maybe it is but the concept of survival is not something that is rooted in the physical world where one can observe and measure it (easily, maybe).

The following is an interesting response to the New Scientist article. Michael, do you—or does anyone else here—care to address it?

"@Kimberly: It has become a staple of NDE legend that NDEs happen when it has been measured that there is "no trace of brain activity" - but this is nothing more than legend. This is easy to show. If it were really true, ask yourself who this happened to. Do any actual names come to mind?

I can think of two - Pam Reynolds, who was monitored but actually had her NDE hours before losing brain activity, and Sarah Gideon, who was invented for literary purposes based on the hyped up version of the Pam Reynolds story.

The legend of NDEs when the brain is totally out of commission is just a legend."

He does have a point about Pam Reynolds, though and even Michael here has pointed out that the truth is her NDE did occur before there was no brain activity contrary to what most people insist. Pin Von Lommel admits also in his research that no one was actually really dead, also.

That being said, I think the answer whether or not people have brain activity during an NDE is one I think will take some time to answer if at all. I do recall about a year ago though Skeptiko had a materialistic doctor that said based on experiments with animals, it's unlikely that there is brain activity during an NDE. I think this is also why skeptical explanations have been more suggestive about the NDE occurring prior or after clinical death rather than ones that say there is some currently undetectable brain activity that occurs during clinical death.

exactly. And the article isn't a clear-cut denial that their could be a non-materialist explanation to the phenomena:

People like to say that these experiences are proof that consciousness can exist outside the brain, like a soul that lives after death. I hope that is true, but it is a matter of faith; there is no evidence for that. People who claim otherwise are using false science to engender false hope and I think that is misleading and ultimately cruel.

Working with your quote from the article, sbu I can't really help to think if the "believer" really loses if he is wrong. If he is, upon death it isn't like he will look around his surroundings and say, "Oh crap, looks like I'm forever screwed, there is nothing after!" If you understand the concept of non-survival, you will see how impossible and silly that above scenario is.

I remember a skeptic pointing this out saying that "the funny thing is that if the believers are wrong, they will never know". While that is true, it isn't as if the skeptic will be able to tell the believer, "I can't believe you spent your whole life believing in this only to find out there is nothing, what a fool!" The skeptic is subject to the same conditions as the believer, and he will also never know. I think it is a fallacy to look at one side winning or losing with regards to survival, especially with regards to the materialist model because ultimately it appears no one really loses or wins.

"The skeptic is subject to the same conditions as the believer, and he will also never know."

BUT—he doesn't get to enjoy the advantages that accompany faith, optimism, and experiencing yourself as the protagonist in an infinitely larger, more meaningful story line.

I'm looking forward to seeing my mom again. I have hope that one day I will be reunited with the loved ones I have lost. If you live long enough you will lose those whom you love.

Hope sounds like a good thing to me. Life would be miserable if I believed that I'd lost my loved ones forever.

"I'm looking forward to seeing my mom again."

I think you will, and that's part of the more meaningful story line I was referring to. :o)

@nate
Just a thought about remembering NDEs: I understand we dream every time we sleep. I almost never (99.9%) remember my dreams in any way. Does this mean i don't dream?

All I did was post the mainstream view of NDEs from IANDs and asked why did New Scientist not use NDE experts for their article. That got censored.

However the Reynold's NDE was continuous and it crossed into her flat line stage.

I know there has been many discussions of the Pam Reynolds issue, but this is the way I understand it: the part of her NDE that was veridical - the part that contained observations from the operating room which were later verified - took place before her brain was completely inactive, although they did take place while she was heavily sedated and rendered incapable of hearing or seeing conventionally.

After that, I have read that her NDE progressed into the "core/mystical experience" stage, where she went to the light and saw her deceased grandmother and all that, and she did experience continuous consciousness during the entire event. It was only the OBE in the operating room that took place before her brain completely ceased functioning.

This is what I understand from several of the more reliable versions of the case that I have read; can anyone confirm it?

I remember reading one near death experience of a woman who said to her daughter that dying is as easy as walking through a door. She "died" in a hospital bed and came back about 20 minutes later. The woman was met by her deceased brother and they walked by her daughter who was sitting by her mother's bedside as she died and they walked into the light. It was an incredibly moving NDE.

The comments to this entry are closed.