Unfortunately.

Burden of proof is really a difficult concept for her.

(January 10, 2015 at 10:25 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(January 10, 2015 at 8:42 am)Riketto Wrote: Your big problem is that you still believe that the consciousness can not become a witness entity as soon as the brain is off or dead and therefore everything that is perceived during these NDEs are only hallucinations maybe coming from a brain that is not off or dead yet.
Keep on sticking with the Sacks of this material world.
Maybe one day you may get somewhere but i guess not very far in your search for the truth. Good luck to you.

What a surprise. I list the unfounded claims, and you shift the burden of proof. How about you find some foundation for your claims before telling me what I think.

Quote:What this has got to do with my point only God knows.

Counter to your statement that "this clearly prove that the brain was off." You can't claim the person was brain dead, because dying is a process not an instant on off switch.

Quote:It is all about what is important and what it is not.
As your father would teach you or show you what really matter at the same time he wouldn't be interested to show you or give you what it is not important or bad for you.
Is to allow you to see and remember a number would be on any help to you or to those idiots who bet on whether you will see it or not?
As i see God is not in this stupid business.
At the same time in certain circumstances he may allow some individual to see things that will help someone in trouble or other individual to understand that the real McCoy is well outside the power of the brain.

No, you don't get to claim that only the important stuff gets through. Take your dropping baby story just above. How is that important? Does the guy now know not to drop babies? Did he think dropping babies was ok before? Do you know how stupid this sounds? You should actually do some real thinking instead of letting the emoticon do the thinking for you.

Quote:How can you say that these experiences are terrible?
As i said in previous post my understanding is that God will let you believe whatever you like.
For a Christian he may dress or better say be perceived like Jesus and for everybody else he will be perceived in whatever figure they like most.
This however has nothing to do with bad or terrible.
You get what you deserve so the figure has absolutely nothing to do with a bad feeling.

How is "hot, needlelike pierce, excruciatingly painful, for a brief moment on the top of my head" or "black ink had been poured over my eyes" not a terrible experience?

What kind of stupid god is this that he'll let people confirm their delusions? Nevermind the killings done due to religionous differences. But no, god wont even correct someones beliefs. Such a being isn't worthy of the title of God.

Quote:And you have the evidence that what you are talking really relate to a real NDE and not to an hallucination?
I have seen people coming out an LSD trip telling me about having been in the outer space and having ride on top of an angel.

There it goes again, "I can't prove this but you can't prove me wrong, so I'm right." Shifting the burden of proof.

Quote:I believe that an NDE is given to someone in order to learn something.
Not everybody is ready to learn.
Some people are not.
I know one in particular but i want tell you his name.

The bullshit is strong in this one.

Quote:By the way, there is an interesting article about your "friend" Mr Shermer written by Pim van Lommel.
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/Research/vonl...sponse.htm

I find the article amusing on how it argues a strawman on what Sherman has criticised. Not to mention, they show that the BRAIN IS NOT DEAD. You should read the article yourself.

To make it shorter let us see what Pim van Lommel say.
It say...........The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven....... it also say..............In our study all patients had a cardiac arrest, they were clinically dead, unconscious, caused by insufficient blood supply to the brain because of inadequate blood circulation, breathing, or both. ...........
Uhm, the brain doesn't work whether is dead or not so how it is possible to experience an NDE other than when the consciousness take over?
You still haven't explained this point surgen.

(January 11, 2015 at 9:10 am)Riketto Wrote: To make it shorter let us see what Pim van Lommel say.
It say...........The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven....... it also say..............In our study all patients had a cardiac arrest, they were clinically dead, unconscious, caused by insufficient blood supply to the brain because of inadequate blood circulation, breathing, or both. ...........
Uhm, the brain doesn't work whether is dead or not so how it is possible to experience an NDE other than when the consciousness take over?
You still haven't explained this point surgen.

"The term clinical death had some value. Usually this term referred to the cessation of cardiac function, as might occur during a medical procedure or a heart attack. A physician could make this determination quickly and then try CPR or other techniques in an effort to restore cardiac function. "Clinical death" was therefore a useful term because it acknowledged that one of the basic criteria for determining death applied to the situation, yet it did not stand in the way of resuscitation efforts." Clinically dead doesn't mean brain dead. Lommel assumes the loss of blood to the brain means the brain stops working. This is not the case. Effects due to loss of blood supply to the brain have been studied in fighter pilots who experience high G forces. These pilots experiences are very similiar to NDE if not identical. :mic-drop:

Surgenator Wrote: "The term clinical death had some value. Usually this term referred to the cessation of cardiac function, as might occur during a medical procedure or a heart attack. A physician could make this determination quickly and then try CPR or other techniques in an effort to restore cardiac function. "Clinical death" was therefore a useful term because it acknowledged that one of the basic criteria for determining death applied to the situation, yet it did not stand in the way of resuscitation efforts." [/url] Clinically dead doesn't mean brain dead. Lommel assumes the loss of blood to the brain means the brain stops working. This is not the case. Effects due to loss of blood supply to the brain have been studied in fighter pilots who experience high G forces. These pilots experiences are very similiar to NDE if not identical. :mic-drop:

And these facts make you believe you that the brain is still working and conscious?
There are few things to consider.
1) There are differences between a natural loss of blood supply to the brain and one induced loss. It is like the difference between making love and masturbate,
2) It is important to consider the quantity of loss blood to the brain.
Does the loss of blood supply to the brain in high G forces experiences equal to the loss of blood in a natural situation of flat-lined" EEG state?
As Lommel say......The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven.......
But again it is clear that some of these NDEs experiences can not be the result of the brain like in the case where it was witness places or people that could not be witness with the mind.
The brain can not do this so the conclusion is that the consciousness can not possibly be the product of the brain as the brain is not able to see behind closed doors. Cheers.

(January 10, 2015 at 10:48 pm)Surgenator Wrote: Unfortunately.

Burden of proof is really a difficult concept for her.

Rik's just more persistent, but his argument is one we see pretty often. In short, there is this whole other dimension of existence that we cannot detect and therefore neither prove nor disprove. But it's there, it really is! And that is where God A lives and where he operates from. And if you just pick up on the proper spiritual (or metaphysical, etc) cues, you will get to know him.

Mind you, if anyone uses those cues to find some other god then they did it WRONG and they'd better get their shit together pronto. And don't start with the excuses! Just because you did exactly what I did does not mean your results count! Only if they are exactly like mine, dammit!!!

(January 12, 2015 at 9:12 am)Tonus Wrote: Rik's just more persistent, but his argument is one we see pretty often. In short, there is this whole other dimension of existence that we cannot detect and therefore neither prove nor disprove. But it's there, it really is! And that is where God A lives and where he operates from. And if you just pick up on the proper spiritual (or metaphysical, etc) cues, you will get to know him.
Mind you, if anyone uses those cues to find some other god then they did it WRONG and they'd better get their shit together pronto. And don't start with the excuses! Just because you did exactly what I did does not mean your results count! Only if they are exactly like mine, dammit!!!

There is one thing that people successful in business and people successful in spirituality have in common and that is that both of them take the plunge in the unknown.
But while taking the plunge in the material world may be risky there is not risk in the spiritual world.
Atheists on the other hand wait.
Wait and wait hoping that one day physical science will solve this and that problem.
The problem however is that physical science is only related to the physical part of ourselves and there is where it stop leaving how to give us peace of mind an unresolved problem.

(January 12, 2015 at 10:46 am)Riketto Wrote: Atheists on the other hand wait.

Not at all. Atheists realize that there is nothing there to wait for, and we generally go about our lives, unburdened by woo.

(January 12, 2015 at 9:05 am)Riketto Wrote:

Surgenator Wrote: "The term clinical death had some value. Usually this term referred to the cessation of cardiac function, as might occur during a medical procedure or a heart attack. A physician could make this determination quickly and then try CPR or other techniques in an effort to restore cardiac function. "Clinical death" was therefore a useful term because it acknowledged that one of the basic criteria for determining death applied to the situation, yet it did not stand in the way of resuscitation efforts." [/url] Clinically dead doesn't mean brain dead. Lommel assumes the loss of blood to the brain means the brain stops working. This is not the case. Effects due to loss of blood supply to the brain have been studied in fighter pilots who experience high G forces. These pilots experiences are very similiar to NDE if not identical. :mic-drop:

And these facts make you believe you that the brain is still working and conscious?
There are few things to consider.
1) There are differences between a natural loss of blood supply to the brain and one induced loss.

As far as the brain in concerned, it doesn't know the difference. So it response is the same.

Quote:2) It is important to consider the quantity of loss blood to the brain.
Does the loss of blood supply to the brain in high G forces experiences equal to the loss of blood in a natural situation of flat-lined" EEG state?

Good question. Lommel doesn't give numbers on how much blood is lost. So I can't do a comparison. I did find this. "At some point, intracranial perfusion cannot be maintained and significant cerebral hypoxia (no blood = no oxygen) follows. The end result is unconsciousness. ... most significant physiologic effect from G-forces are related to tissue ischemia (insufficient blood flow), specifically intracerebral (brain) ischemia." Do NDE patients suffer from tissue ischemia?

Quote:As Lommel say......The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven.......

True it has never been proven, but there is a strong correlation between the two. Also, just because it wasn't proven, doesn't mean Lommel hypothesis is equally or more valid.

Quote:But again it is clear that some of these NDEs experiences can not be the result of the brain like in the case where it was witness places or people that could not be witness with the mind.

Bullshit. How do you know these people haven't seen pictures, heard stories, or their memory was altered afterwards? This is the huge problem with testinomials, and why they're not considered scientific evidence.

Quote:The brain can not do this so the conclusion is that the consciousness can not possibly be the product of the brain as the brain is not able to see behind closed doors. Cheers.

You know what the brain can't do and what it can? Are you a neuroscientist? Are you possibly forgetting that people also have ears? Are you aware that rooms in the hospital are designed the same? Not seeing room 105 doesn't mean you didn't see room 355.

(January 12, 2015 at 1:48 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(January 12, 2015 at 9:05 am)Riketto Wrote: And these facts make you believe you that the brain is still working and conscious?
There are few things to consider.
1) There are differences between a natural loss of blood supply to the brain and one induced loss.

As far as the brain in concerned, it doesn't know the difference. So it response is the same.

Here we go again.
As usual you judge from a physical point of view alone but humans are not made of physicality only.
Mind and spirit are also part of ourselves.
Every single part of ourselves require a response.
No wonder that physical science has yet to find out where peace of mind may come from.
It is only when you guys take in consideration all parts of the human being that you will be able to understand how the system works.
It remind me the meat.
Animals before they get closer to the abattoir have no toxins in their body but as they enter the abattoir and smell the blood and the tragic situation they build up these toxins so their flesh become toxic.
In the same way our consciousness knows what is a natural occurrence and what is not and from there we will have a different response so no.
Every action will have a particular reaction based on the circumstances and the motives.

Quote:2) It is important to consider the quantity of loss blood to the brain.
Does the loss of blood supply to the brain in high G forces experiences equal to the loss of blood in a natural situation of flat-lined" EEG state?

Quote:Good question. Lommel doesn't give numbers on how much blood is lost. So I can't do a comparison. I did find this. "At some point, intracranial perfusion cannot be maintained and significant cerebral hypoxia (no blood = no oxygen) follows. The end result is unconsciousness. ... most significant physiologic effect from G-forces are related to tissue ischemia (insufficient blood flow), specifically intracerebral (brain) ischemia." Do NDE patients suffer from tissue ischemia?

I wish i had all the medical knowledge of Lommel.
What i know is that every single case is different.
Different people before their NDE die for different reasons so their PHYSICAL reactions will be different.
In these pages you can see more interesting things from Lommel.


https://books.google.com.au/books?id=FMZ...ia&f=false

Quote:As Lommel say......The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven.......

Quote:True it has never been proven, but there is a strong correlation between the two. Also, just because it wasn't proven, doesn't mean Lommel hypothesis is equally or more valid.

The pituary gland that control the mind is below the pineal gland.
In the same way the general is ranking below the field marshal so how it is possible that the lower gland can control the higher?
Consciousness is well above the mind so the mind can not produce the consciousness.

Quote:But again it is clear that some of these NDEs experiences can not be the result of the brain like in the case where it was witness places or people that could not be witness with the mind.

Quote:Bullshit. How do you know these people haven't seen pictures, heard stories, or their memory was altered afterwards? This is the huge problem with testinomials, and why they're not considered scientific evidence.

In the case in which the NDE saw the nurse dropping a baby the event happen during the NDE not before and his testimonial lead to the evidence that this incident really happen and as i said happen during the NDE so no this has nothing to do with an altered mind.

Quote:The brain can not do this so the conclusion is that the consciousness can not possibly be the product of the brain as the brain is not able to see behind closed doors. Cheers.

Quote:You know what the brain can't do and what it can? Are you a neuroscientist? Are you possibly forgetting that people also have ears? Are you aware that rooms in the hospital are designed the same? Not seeing room 105 doesn't mean you didn't see room 355.

Sorry surgen but the report say that the guy that had an NDE was in the emergency room while the next room was not an emergency room.
Beside he described what was in the room so no again.
You try your best to be a good detective but you are not clever enough.
You probably need a good NDE to get clever.

(January 13, 2015 at 10:08 am)Riketto Wrote: land.
In the same way the general is ranking below the field marshal so how it is possible that the lower gland can control the higher?
Consciousness is well above the mind so the mind can not produce the consciousness.

So, basically, you're saying consciousness cannot be a product of the mind/brain because it out ranks them? I am speechless.