Afterlife

[RozKek]

Pascal's wager? No thanks, I don't fear nonsense and don't waste my time on nonsense.

After listening to a few serious believers, I cant say that their attempts to live their life in a more caring or loving manner is stupid, even if its under the guidance of imaginary sky daddy who "motivates" them trough holy scripture.

If I find out someone is a kind person because of a sky daddy and his/her intention is to please that skydaddy and does so by being that kind person, I will take that person less seriously. 

They're stupid if they can't be a morally good person without a god and they're selfish if they need to be rewarded in order to be morally good.

[Arkilogue]

How do you know that it was *while in this state* that she had this experience?

Ark, why did you avoid this question?

I didn't see it and this was directly after what I posted from the link:

But during "standstill", Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants.

Further reading: http://www.near-death.com/science/eviden...-dead.html

Some scientists theorize that NDEs are produced by brain chemistry. But, Dr. Peter Fenwick, a neuropsychiatrist and the leading authority in Britain concerning NDEs, believes that these theories fall far short of the facts. In the documentary, "Into the Unknown: Strange But True," Dr. Fenwick describes the state of the brain during an NDE:


"The brain isn't functioning. It's not there. It's destroyed. It's abnormal. But, yet, it can produce these very clear experiences ... an unconscious state is when the brain ceases to function. For example, if you faint, you fall to the floor, you don't know what's happening and the brain isn't working. The memory systems are particularly sensitive to unconsciousness. So, you won't remember anything. But, yet, after one of these experiences [an NDE], you come out with clear, lucid memories ... This is a real puzzle for science. I have not yet seen any good scientific explanation which can explain that fact."

---

Ark, why did you avoid this question?

Because he's not really here to have a conversation. He's here to dance around and throw glitter that he calls gold. I may like a good joke, but this is just disruptive nonsense.

No because I had to go sleep at 1:30 in the morning.

And you're acting the coward, putting me on ignore but still tossing trash from your self imposed safe space. Sad really.

---

I'm not asking you for respect, but I do hope you can come up with more creative ad hominems while we get to know each other  

Sciency-word salad will not fly here.  Do you know one of the members you have been trying to debate with in this thread is an actual physicist, and could probably eat you for breakfast?

Good. Then I'm in the right place!

[Faith No More]

"This is a real puzzle for science."

Must be magic then, huh?

[Alex K]

@Arkilogue, you didn't really answer the question - how do you know these experiences were formed/took place while the patient's brain was shut down?

[Arkilogue]

@Arkilogue, you didn't really answer the question - how do you know these experiences were formed/took place while the patient's brain was shut down?

Because she reported the procedures, conversations and instruments used on her during that time.

[Alex K]

@Arkilogue, you didn't really answer the question - how do you know these experiences were formed/took place while the patient's brain was shut down?

Because she reported the procedures, conversations and instruments used on her during that time.

That could have been coincidence, without knowing what exactly she reported, whether she had seen these things or could have guessed, and how many misses she had in her report, all this is crucial. The question whether people with NDE experiences can really tell what is going on in the room has been studied systematically and came out negative.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I took it upon myself to do a little research on Pam Reynolds' case.

1. She was intubated for a considerable time after regaining consciousness, and did not begin to relate her experience for some time after that.

2. Her surgical team discussed/described the procedure to her before the surgery.

3. When she regained consciousness (remember - still intubated and so could not speak), her surgeon reviewed the surgery with her again.

4. More than one anesthesiologist has reviewed the case and concluded that her experience was something called 'anesthesia awareness', which, while not exactly commonplace, isn't frightfully rare, either.

While I don't doubt Ms. Reynolds' sincerity (meaning I don't think she was deliberately lying), I don't really see the need for a non-prosaic explanation of what happened to her.

Boru

[Alex K]

That's what I'm talking about...

[Gemini]

According to the standard model of particle physics, there are 3 densities of quark pairs (renderend stable by the universe) plus their anti-quarks (antimatter) for a total of six types.  The atoms we are made of and find in this universe are of the matter charge orientation (center of atom is positive charge and peripheral is negative) and of the lightest of quarks pairs.  

I'm saying that the other types are interdependent realms/creations entangled with the creation/suspension of our type.  None of the single types can exist without the other like we do not get a single color when we send white lite through a prism.

The unification of matter before the inflation of the universe works similarly. In this life we find ourselves in one "color". The "afterlife" takes place in the other color bands.

For purely emotional reasons, I sometimes find it difficult to resist believing in an afterlife. Until I read the arguments in favor of an afterlife. I would rather be annihilated than live forever in a quantum bafflegab universe.

[PETE_ROSE]

Care to expound on some of the arguments you've read in favor of an afterlife?