Miracles from Heaven

[ippy]

juJu Skymethod?

Isn't he in Star Wars?

Probably and there's olso plenty of other daft ideas equally as daft as any religion you would like to chose, I'm sure, but not in Star Trek.

ippy

[ippy]

The story of Ganesha certainly does not explain any natural "happenings" and probably was not intended to. I fail to see the relevance of dragging it in here, or the great "Ju Ju", either as no-one has suggested either have anything to do with NDEs or "miracle cures".

I didn't think my previous post to which I assume this is a response to, was that obtuse?

ippy

[Sriram]

I know they are real experiences and I know that sometimes people get better unexpectably, it's the superstitious 'explanations' that you admit you can't think of any way to test, that is in dispute.

LOL!  I don't know what 'superstitious ' explanations I have given for these experiences, in your understanding! I haven't.

I have just taken the patients and their own personal account of their experiences very seriously, that is all (as have Sam Parnia, Raymond Moody and many others). I have not added any 'superstitious' beliefs.   

There are millions of patients giving virtually the same account. Very impressive IMO!  Why should I add anything?!

I have also stated that science needs to investigate these experiences seriously. Nothing wrong with that either.

Now....the  issue where you get all churned up is when I say that the scientific investigations should be relevant and suitable for the exotic phenomena and should not be standard stuff (like measuring blood pressure with a foot rule).  That is what probably makes you and others pretty furious.

So....get furious....no problem!

Cheers.  Have fun!   

PS: You people are probably scared stiff that any genuine, relevant and focused research might prove the existence of an after-life. Now...that is something you have to learn to live with. What can be done? Reality is reality! 

[ippy]

LOL!  I don't know what 'superstitious ' explanations I have given for these experiences, in your understanding! I haven't.

I have just taken the patients and their own personal account of their experiences very seriously, that is all (as have Sam Parnia, Raymond Moody and many others). I have not added any 'superstitious' beliefs.   

There are millions of patients giving virtually the same account. Very impressive IMO!  Why should I add anything?!

I have also stated that science needs to investigate these experiences seriously. Nothing wrong with that either.

Now....the  issue where you get all churned up is when I say that the scientific investigations should be relevant and suitable for the exotic phenomena and should not be standard stuff (like measuring blood pressure with a foot rule).  That is what probably makes you and others pretty furious.

So....get furious....no problem!

Cheers.  Have fun!   

PS: You people are probably scared stiff that any genuine, relevant and focused research might prove the existence of an after-life. Now...that is something you have to learn to live with. What can be done? Reality is reality! 

You people that don't believe in people with the head of a blue elephant are probably scared stiff that any genuine, relevant and focused research might prove the existence of an after-life. Now...that is something you have to learn to live with. What can be done? Reality is reality! 

ippy

[torridon]

No...I never claimed that I know how to test these phenomena. I told you I cannot provide it on a platter.

But I certainly do know that holding on to old  methodologies and using some standard methods to test  exotic phenomena is rubbish. That is for sure.

I also know that beginning the process by assuming that the experiences of millions of people are imaginary/hallucinatory and their explanations as 'wooly thinking'..... is NOT the way to develop suitable methodology to test such phenomena.

People should begin by making positive assumptions of the new and exotic experiences instead of continuing to wallow in what they already know (fear to venture into new territory).  This is the way forward and the only way by which new ideas will surface and new methods will develop.

That's a lot of words to bury your own admission that you cannot test your ideas scientifically.  It's no good moaning about positive assumptions; if we can build a test regime to test out those assumptions then all well and good, that is the nature and remit of a scientific hypothesis, but what we don't do is just assume all ideas are correct until falsified, thataway would lead to gross confusion. We need to be more discerning than that, and as far as I can see you cannot even define exactly what it is you would need to test for.

Generally speaking, a question might have one correct answer and an infinite number of incorrect ones so we need sharp tools to eliminate all the incorrect ones, especially, as the vast majority of grand ideas developed by humans over the millenia have turned out to have no objective basis, and their real provenance lies in the human psyche, our need and readiness to build belief systems that are essentially self-serving rather than objective in nature.  To eliminate those can be painful, such as when Copernicus demolished the long cherished notion of a geocentric universe it was massively controversial at the time; good people were often tortured and murdered for less.  The same tendencies are still present in modern humans, we are naturally attracted to ideas that console us or flatter us, but objective truth usually carries no inherent emotional payload.

[Stranger]

LOL!  I don't know what 'superstitious ' explanations I have given for these experiences, in your understanding! I haven't.

...

PS: You people are probably scared stiff that any genuine, relevant and focused research might prove the existence of an after-life. Now...that is something you have to learn to live with. What can be done? Reality is reality! 

QED

I have no idea why you would think similar experiences in near death would point to anything extraordinary and it is a pathetically inadequate basis to need to invent something like an afterlife - which isn't even a testable hypothesis - it's just giving up and saying "I dunno, it must be magic".

Oh but wait - you didn't invent the afterlife idea - it's part of many, many religions and other superstitions. That will be why you don't like other baseless guesses...

It was us - signed The Purple Aliens form Andromeda

[Leonard James]

Unfortunately, it is perfectly natural for those of us who are enjoying life to want it not to end, and for those of us who are having a terrible life to wish for something better.

A happy 'other' life would be the answer to both, and in truth it would be amazing if nobody had dreamed it up.

Sadly, there is no evidence that such is the case.

[Sriram]

QED

I have no idea why you would think similar experiences in near death would point to anything extraordinary and it is a pathetically inadequate basis to need to invent something like an afterlife - which isn't even a testable hypothesis - it's just giving up and saying "I dunno, it must be magic".

Oh but wait - you didn't invent the afterlife idea - it's part of many, many religions and other superstitions. That will be why you don't like other baseless guesses...

 

Again......the after-life is what the NDE people actually experience...remember?! Its's not something 'invented' by me or anyone.

YOU are making it 'magic' by saying its not a testable hypothesis and it is supernatural and all that. YOU and people like you are constantly keeping it out of the realm of science.

I am saying that.... find a way of testing it. The current methods are inadequate......and brushing it off as hallucinatory is rubbish That is all I am saying.

Do you get it......?!!   

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Again......the after-life is what the NDE people actually experience...remember?! Its's not something 'invented' by me or anyone.

YOU are making it 'magic' by saying its not a testable hypothesis and it is supernatural and all that. YOU and people like you are constantly keeping it out of the realm of science.

I am saying that.... find a way of testing it. The current methods are inadequate......and brushing it off as hallucinatory is rubbish That is all I am saying.

Do you get it......?!!

Is there any chance you could answer the questions I asked in msg. 145?

Cheers

[Stranger]

Again......the after-life is what the NDE people actually experience...remember?! Its's not something 'invented' by me or anyone.

No - they have experiences which some of them and you interpret as an afterlife.

YOU are making it 'magic' by saying its not a testable hypothesis and it is supernatural and all that. YOU and people like you are constantly keeping it out of the realm of science.

The idea is not based on any known science, there is no evidence for it and it is not testable. Science can't do anything with wild guesses unless they are testable.

If it just accepted them, it would lose all its usefulness.

I am saying that.... find a way of testing it. The current methods are inadequate......and brushing it off as hallucinatory is rubbish That is all I am saying.

Do you get it......?!!

Of course I get it - you (and others) would love for science to take your wishful thinking and wild guesses seriously.

[torridon]

Again......the after-life is what the NDE people actually experience...remember?! Its's not something 'invented' by me or anyone.

Whooa slow down there.

You talk as if we had found a way to test the idea that NDEs are actual other life experiences, when all along you have been saying that you admit there is no way to test the idea.

So, truthfully, your interpretation is only a conjecture, at best, hardly a done deal.

YOU are making it 'magic' by saying its not a testable hypothesis and it is supernatural and all that. YOU and people like you are constantly keeping it out of the realm of science.

I am saying that.... find a way of testing it. The current methods are inadequate......and brushing it off as hallucinatory is rubbish That is all I am saying.

Observing that a dying brain might routinely produce such phenomenology is hardly 'rubbish'.  Even a healthy brain produces bizarre phenomenology at times, have you never had a nightmare, for instance ? It would be strange if a brain severely compromised and hypoxic with numerous constituent organs going into shutdown did not produce some strange experiences, memories of which might be recoverable should the patient recover.

[Udayana]

I didn't think my previous post to which I assume this is a response to, was that obtuse?

ippy

It wasn't. It was clearly a snide remark intended to offend.

[Maeght]

Again......the after-life is what the NDE people actually experience...remember?! Its's not something 'invented' by me or anyone.

They experience something - everyone accepts that. It is the interpretation that it is an afterlife which is where the belief comes in.

[SqueakyVoice]

Here's an interesting article on NDEs, with comparisons of the experiences of those near death and similar experiences of those no where near death.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_woerlee/NDE-questions.html

As well as finding that near death experiences owe far more to starving the brain of oxygen than being near death, there's also this finding.

At the time of the study medical practitioners recounting patients' oral reports of deathbed visions in India recalled that their dying patients mainly reported apparitions of unidentified deceased persons and relatives who greeted them and guided them into the transcendental world of the dead. By contrast, the recounted reports of dying patients in the United States mainly featured apparitions of deceased spouses or mothers who performed the same functions (p < 0.001). (See Figure 2.) Does this mean that when a person from India dies, random souls are conscripted to guide that person into the afterlife, while a dying American is privileged to be guided by deceased mothers or spouses?

Which gives lie to the idea that there isn't a cultural element to these experiences a sri's tried to claim.

[ekim]

This often puzzles me how do you know when the experience took place? You often hear that so and so was dead for 3 minutes and that is when they had the experience. How could you know?

I dream most nights but in most cases I couldn't really say at what the time the dream took place.

There are a number of issues which need to be resolved.  Near death doesn't seem the same as death.  What is the definition of brain death?  Is it just a cessation of brain activity or is it non recoverable total cellular death of the brain?  What is the difference between a NDE and a dream?  Both experiences rely upon subjective memory and recall during a waking state.  How can this subjective anecdotal evidence and accuracy of memory be validated?

[Udayana]

There are a number of issues which need to be resolved.  Near death doesn't seem the same as death.  What is the definition of brain death?  Is it just a cessation of brain activity or is it non recoverable total cellular death of the brain?  What is the difference between a NDE and a dream?  Both experiences rely upon subjective memory and recall during a waking state.  How can this subjective anecdotal evidence and accuracy of memory be validated?

I don't know what differences there are in brain activity between an NDE/OBE and dreams, but subjectively they seem very different.

Usually when you wake up from a dream, or come to from a coma, you know you have been unconscious. When you have one of these experiences it is much more "intense" than ordinary consciousness, you can feel that it is the real "real world", and that when you "come back" you are getting only a restricted view of the universe.

[Stranger]

I don't know what differences there are in brain activity between an NDE/OBE and dreams, but subjectively they seem very different.

Given the different circumstances, this doesn't seem at all surprising. Dreaming is the brain doing its normal stuff whereas in a NDE it has been subject to a massive trauma.

I think the point is that even normal, healthy brains can produce quite vivid and startling experiences, of which dreaming is the most common, so it's unsurprising that it can generate more intense experiences under extreme stress.

[SweetPea]

I don't know what differences there are in brain activity between an NDE/OBE and dreams, but subjectively they seem very different.

Usually when you wake up from a dream, or come to from a coma, you know you have been unconscious. When you have one of these experiences it is much more "intense" than ordinary consciousness, you can feel that it is the real "real world", and that when you "come back" you are getting only a restricted view of the universe.

Thanks, Udayana, for your input on this thread as, from what I can gather, you are the only person on the forum that has had such an experience.

Am I right in thinking your emphasis would be on 'feel' in your above comment?

[torridon]

Usually when you wake up from a dream, or come to from a coma, you know you have been unconscious. When you have one of these experiences it is much more "intense" than ordinary consciousness, you can feel that it is the real "real world", and that when you "come back" you are getting only a restricted view of the universe.

People often describe these experiences as euphoric, out-of-body, intense.  These terms are also just how Jill Bolte Taylor described her experience of left hemisphere stroke in this fascinating TED talk posted up by ekim yesterday :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU

It seems this is how we would all experience our interaction with the world without the rationalising left hemisphere.

[SweetPea]

From enki, reply #140:

However, so is the idea that there is no such thing as the 'spirit' at all which moves away from the body in an OBE.

Just a one-off comment (and possible reply) aside, if I may.

Enki, I recall you telling us on a couple of occasions that your father was a spiritist, and that he once taught you how to divide a cloud with your thoughts. I'm just curious as to why you seem to have, what seems to be, rejected everything he may have shown you. And any talk of 'spirit'.

I understand if you do not want to comment on my observation.

[floo]

My father was a dowser and I have witnessed the most amazing things he managed to do by means of his diving rod, including being helpful to the UK police. However, I still believe there is a natural explanation for everything.

[ekim]

People often describe these experiences as euphoric, out-of-body, intense.  These terms are also just how Jill Bolte Taylor described her experience of left hemisphere stroke in this fascinating TED talk posted up by ekim yesterday :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU

It seems this is how we would all experience our interaction with the world without the rationalising left hemisphere.

This is what might lie behind meditation where the critical, analysing, conceptualising part of the mind losses its dominance and an intensity arises which is later described as consciously expansive, blissful, powerful, enlivening etc. until the left mind kicks in.  Nobody in their right mind wants this.

[Stranger]

My father was a dowser and I have witnessed the most amazing things he managed to do by means of his diving rod, including being helpful to the UK police. However, I still believe there is a natural explanation for everything.

I'm sure there are multiple explanations but dowsing simply doesn't work under controlled conditions...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VAasVXtCOI

[Udayana]

Thanks, Udayana, for your input on this thread as, from what I can gather, you are the only person on the forum that has had such an experience.

Am I right in thinking your emphasis would be on 'feel' in your above comment?

Indeed, that was how things appeared to me. Even as I experienced it I knew that it couldn't be relied on as any kind of actual evidence - that also seemed very funny. Not sure why, as I was also well aware that I had just smashed into the road headfirst in a motorbike crash

[torridon]

This is what might lie behind meditation where the critical, analysing, conceptualising part of the mind losses its dominance and an intensity arises which is later described as consciously expansive, blissful, powerful, enlivening etc. until the left mind kicks in.  Nobody in their right mind wants this.