What is logic?

[Lucanus]

[

Easy Yog.
Those who are not dead yet can not experience an NDE because their consciousness is still stuck in the body-brain.
Only when the consciousness has separate and is free from the bondage of the body-brain then she is able to see the real thing.  

This is an assertion. Is there proof for what you are saying?

I'll reply to the other post later when I have more time

[Little Rik]

[

Easy Yog.
Those who are not dead yet can not experience an NDE because their consciousness is still stuck in the body-brain.
Only when the consciousness has separate and is free from the bondage of the body-brain then she is able to see the real thing.  

This is an assertion. Is there proof for what you are saying?

I'll reply to the other post later when I have more time

Yes there are Luc.

1) Doctor-s declare the chap dead inside the emergency room.
2) The chap consciousness leave his dead body-brain and from above can see doctors and nurses that try to bring him-her back to life.
Sometime with a CPR or through other ways.
After sometime when the doctors are successful in resuscitate the chap he-she tell what the doctors-nurses were doing during his time out the body.
3) Doctors and nurses confirm that what the chap saw was spot on.

You can't go wrong with this Luc.  

[Angrboda]

Got an answer to the question yet, jerkoff?  How do you know there is a qualitative difference between NDEs experienced by people who are clinically dead and experiences by those who are not clinically dead?

Easy Yog.
Those who are not dead yet can not experience an NDE because their consciousness is still stuck in the body-brain.
Only when the consciousness has separate and is free from the bondage of the body-brain then she is able to see the real thing.  

Yes there are Luc.

1) Doctor-s declare the chap dead inside the emergency room.
2) The chap consciousness leave his dead body-brain and from above can see doctors and nurses that try to bring him-her back to life.
Sometime with a CPR or through other ways.
After sometime when the doctors are successful in resuscitate the chap he-she tell what the doctors-nurses were doing during his time out the body.
3) Doctors and nurses confirm that what the chap saw was spot on.

You can't go wrong with this Luc.  

I should have known that you couldn't answer a simple question, "Mr. Detective".   I asked you how you know that there is a difference, not what you infer or believe happens, but how it is that you, yourself, know that there is a difference.  For what it's worth, Pam Reynolds' brain was still fully functional when she had her OBE and described what she saw from above the operating table.   So even your evidence for your assertion is flawed, because Reynolds was not clinically dead when she had her OBE and NDE.

If somebody asks me how I know something, my answer tells how I acquired the information.  Not some cockamamy assertion about the information. If somebody asks me how I know what a beep code in computers means, then I can tell them that I learned it by reading a manual on computer repair. What I don't do is tell some factual assertions about beep codes.

So I'll ask you again, "How do you know that there is a difference (between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so)?" What experience of yours led you to the knowledge* that the NDE of a clinically dead person is different from that of someone not clinically dead?

Do you think you can handle that, "Mr. Detective"?

[Little Rik]

Easy Yog.
Those who are not dead yet can not experience an NDE because their consciousness is still stuck in the body-brain.
Only when the consciousness has separate and is free from the bondage of the body-brain then she is able to see the real thing.  

Yes there are Luc.

1) Doctor-s declare the chap dead inside the emergency room.
2) The chap consciousness leave his dead body-brain and from above can see doctors and nurses that try to bring him-her back to life.
Sometime with a CPR or through other ways.
After sometime when the doctors are successful in resuscitate the chap he-she tell what the doctors-nurses were doing during his time out the body.
3) Doctors and nurses confirm that what the chap saw was spot on.

You can't go wrong with this Luc.  

I should have known that you couldn't answer a simple question, "Mr. Detective".   I asked you how you know that there is a difference, not what you infer or believe happens, but how it is that you, yourself, know that there is a difference.  For what it's worth, Pam Reynolds' brain was still fully functional when she had her OBE and described what she saw from above the operating table.   So even your evidence for your assertion is flawed, because Reynolds was not clinically dead when she had her OBE and NDE.

If somebody asks me how I know something, my answer tells how I acquired the information.  Not some cockamamy assertion about the information.  If somebody asks me how I know what a beep code in computers means, then I can tell them that I learned it by reading a manual on computer repair.  What I don't do is  tell some factual assertions about beep codes.

So I'll ask you again, "How do you know that there is a difference (between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so)?"  What experience of yours led you to the knowledge* that the NDE of a clinically dead person is different from that of someone not clinically dead?

Do you think you can handle that, "Mr. Detective"?

Wrong, wrong and more wrong.  
Fail, fail and more failing.

But first let us see what this Pan Reynolds said........... The brain is like a computer that runs our body but the soul directs energy when we have a body. .......and then............. I wish everyone could experience this. So that no more questions would arise, everyone would know. I think this is beyond science..........and then..............I know I was dead because someone (doctor) told me that I was dead......

http://neardth.com/pam-reynolds-interview.php

and then let us see about her operation.

Dr. Robert F. Spetzler, of the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona, who had pioneered a daring surgical procedure known as deep hypothermic cardiac arrest carry out the operation which required that Pam's body temperature be lowered to 60 degrees, her heartbeat and breathing stopped, her brain waves flattened, and the blood drained from her head. In everyday terms, she was put to death.

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

So let us put all this in the correct perspective.
First you say that Pam was not dead during her operation because her brain was still active.

This is crap Yog because she was declared dead.
A brain can still be active for a short while even when the consciousness has left the brain and in this regard I already show how a grasshopper can jump around for a while with her head chopped off.

Secondly you assume that a person that is not clinically dead can have and NDE.
This again is crap.  
You as usually make statements that are lacking any evidence that is why your questions don't make any sense.

When you will have any intelligent questions that make sense come back to me and I will be obliged to answer you.  

[Angrboda]

First you say that Pam was not dead during her operation because her brain was still active.

Did I say that?

For what it's worth, Pam Reynolds' brain was still fully functional when she had her OBE and described what she saw from above the operating table.

No, I did not.

It's this type of sloppiness which is why you have such a distorted view of the evidence. You have no head for detail. With you, it's all sloppy generalities and "someone said." That's why you attributed visions of God to "All others" who had NDEs when it was only 56% of them. This is why your evidence to Lucanus is no more specific than 'some chap' had such and such experiences. You're sloppy with the evidence through and through. This is why you erred in attributing to me something that I didn't say. And it's why your conclusions fail.

---

Wrong, wrong and more wrong.  
Fail, fail and more failing.

But first let us see what this Pan Reynolds said........... The brain is like a computer that runs our body but the soul directs energy when we have a body. .......and then............. I wish everyone could experience this. So that no more questions would arise, everyone would know. I think this is beyond science..........and then..............I know I was dead because someone (doctor) told me that I was dead......

http://neardth.com/pam-reynolds-interview.php

and then let us see about her operation.

Dr. Robert F. Spetzler, of the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona, who had pioneered a daring surgical procedure known as deep hypothermic cardiac arrest carry out the operation which required that Pam's body temperature be lowered to 60 degrees, her heartbeat and breathing stopped, her brain waves flattened, and the blood drained from her head. In everyday terms, she was put to death.

You're fucking screwed up on the facts, as usual.

The fact that she was clinically dead during part of her operation says nothing about whether she was clinically dead at the time she had her NDE.  Because she accurately overheard comments about her arteries being too small, we can accurately time when she had her NDE and it was before the blood was drained and such. (It would have to be.  How could she overhear comments detailing the difficulty with the arteries if at the same time those arteries had already been intubated and drained?  Your claims about when her OBE/NDE occurred make no sense.)  The question is not was she clinically dead during her procedure, she was, but was she clinically dead when she had her OBE and NDE; no, she wasn't.  

Of course, the issue of whether Pam was "really" dead within standstill is an extraordinarily misleading red herring in this context. And it is blatantly irresponsible for Sabom to explicitly state that her NDE occurred "while in this state." As Sabom's own account reveals, her standstill condition had absolutely nothing to do with the time when we know that her near-death OBE began: A full two hours and five minutes before the medical staff even began to cool her blood, during perfectly normal body temperature![19] (Again, see Figure 1.)

Unlike the other elements of her NDE, we can precisely time when Pam's OBE began because she did accurately describe an operating room conversation. Namely, she accurately recalled comments made by her cardiothoracic surgeon, Dr. Murray, about her "veins and arteries being very small" (Pam's words) (Sabom, "Light" 42). Two operative reports allow us to time this observation. First, in the head surgeon's report, Dr. Robert Spetzler noted that when he was cutting open Pam's skull, "Dr. Murray performed bilateral femoral cut-downs for cannulation for cardiac bypass" (185). So at about the same time that Dr. Spetzler was opening Pam's skull, Dr. Murray began accessing Pam's blood vessels so that they could be hooked up to the bypass machine which would cool her blood and ultimately bring her to standstill. Second, Dr. Murray's operative report noted that "the right common femoral artery was quite small" and thus could not be hooked up to the bypass machine. Consequently, Murray's report continues, "bilateral groin cannulation would be necessary: This was discussed with Neurosurgery, as it would affect angio access postoperatively for arteriography" (185). And although Pam's mother was given a copy of the head surgeon's operative report (which she said Pam did not read), the report did not say anything about any of Pam's arteries being too small (Sabom, "Shadow" 7).

https://infidels.org/library/modern/keit...s.html#pam [emphasis mine]

She was not on cardiac bypass at the time of her out of body experience, because the cardiothoracic surgeon was having trouble introducing the cardiac bypass machine tubing into the blood vessels of her right groin - they were too small for the size of the tubing and the blood flow needed for cardiac bypass.

http://neardth.com/pam-reynolds-near-dea...hp#cardiac [emphasis mine]

I knew you'd duck the question of how you know there is a qualitative difference between NDEs of the clinically dead and of those not clinically dead.  

Well I made sense of your mess of generalities.  Care to answer the question?

---

The International Association for Near-Death Studies sent out a questionnaire in 1992 inquiring about those who considered themselves to be near-death experiencers.  How close had they been to physical death when their episode occurred? ... 37 percent had theirs in a setting unrelated to anything that could be construed as life threatening. ... The 37 percenters claimed to have experiences every bit as real, involved, and life-changing as those that happened to people during death or close-brush-with-death crises; and their reports duplicate or parallel the same spread of scenario types and a pattern of psychological and physiological aftereffects.

— P.M.H. Atwater, The Big Book of Near-Death Experiences

(emphasis mine)

---

So I'll ask you again, "How do you know that there is a difference (between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so)?"  What experience of yours led you to the knowledge* that the NDE of a clinically dead person is different from that of someone not clinically dead?

[Little Rik]

So I'll ask you again, "How do you know that there is a difference (between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so)?"  What experience of yours led you to the knowledge* that the NDE of a clinically dead person is different from that of someone not clinically dead?

I got good news for you Yog.  

I decided to nominated you for the Nobel price for imbecility for asking a question like this.  

Are you excited about that?  

When I have ever said that those who are NOT dead can have an NDE?
I rather said that only those who are dead can have an NDE but you as usual mix everything up and you came up with the story that I said this and that so now you expect me that I tell you this and that.

Seek medical help Yog because you are getting worse by the day.  

But let me made it clear once again.
For death I mean when the consciousness leave the body-brain.
There may well be still activity in the brain.
That however doesn't mean that the brain is alive.
Once the consciousness is gone the brain is like a vehicle without the driver.
It may be still warm and for few more minutes there may be activity but at that stage is dead.
Without the consciousness is dead.
Now your stupid question ask me what is the difference ........... between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so..........
Once again I said dead not clinically or biologic or any other form of death and I also said that only when you are dead you can have an NDE.
Who suppose to be your ....those not so?
Are they alive are they dead are they clinically dead are they biologic dead?
You don't say who they are those not so.
If you are not clear is like asking me why the birds don't live inside the water or why the fishes don't live on land or on air.
Stupid questions from stupid fool.  

[Angrboda]

So I'll ask you again, "How do you know that there is a difference (between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so)?"  What experience of yours led you to the knowledge* that the NDE of a clinically dead person is different from that of someone not clinically dead?

I got good news for you Yog.  

I decided to nominated you for the Nobel price for imbecility for asking a question like this.  

Are you excited about that?  

When I have ever said that those who are NOT dead can have an NDE?
I rather said that only those who are dead can have an NDE but you as usual mix everything up and you came up with the story that I said this and that so now you expect me that I tell you this and that.

Seek medical help Yog because you are getting worse by the day.  

But let me made it clear once again.
For death I mean when the consciousness leave the body-brain.
There may well be still activity in the brain.
That however doesn't mean that the brain is alive.
Once the consciousness is gone the brain is like a vehicle without the driver.
It may be still warm and for few more minutes there may be activity but at that stage is dead.
Without the consciousness is dead.
Now your stupid question ask me what is the difference ........... between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so..........
Once again I said dead not clinically or biologic or any other form of death and I also said that only when you are dead you can have an NDE.
Who suppose to be your ....those not so?
Are they alive are they dead are they clinically dead are they biologic dead?
You don't say who they are those not so.
If you are not clear is like asking me why the birds don't live inside the water or why the fishes don't live on land or on air.
Stupid questions from stupid fool.  

Wow.  Look at all that sauce.  And still not an answer to the question.

There are people who have had experiences they identify as an NDE, despite the fact that they never were "dead" in whatever terms you consider dead.  You have implied that there is a difference between what those people experience and a "real NDE" experience.  How do you know there is a difference in the clarity, vividness and sharpness of their experiences, between their NDE-like experiences, and the "real NDE" of someone who died?

Is that clear enough for you, asshole?

First of all, about 50% of the subjects who report NDEs are not clinically dead - in fact, they aren't even close to dying.

That is not true.
If you read the NDEs experiences you will find that people really die physically speaking.

Second of all, it is not at all clear *when* an NDE actually happens! And you cannot rule out the (very mundane, and boring, I get it) possibility that it happens right before the "flat EEG" (if that even happens) or during the patient's recovery from it.

Wrong again Luc.
If you read the NDEs experiences you will see that most people die all of a sudden many times due to serious accidents.
In these cases the EEG get flat immediately and before that these people where fully conscious.

Besides, many typical features of NDEs (such as seeing light, being at peace and feeling clear of mind) can actually be attributed to malfunctions in specific areas of the brain such as the locus coeruleus or more generally to hypoxia. And all of this is the results of validated observations and studies, not just guesswork and pats on the back (as this is how you seem to think the scientific community works.

So... No. NDEs do not prove that consciousness exists independently from the brain. Try again.

Wrong again Luc.
When you have a malfunction in the brain you can not build up a clear, sharp and vivid experience.

(emphasis mine)

[Little Rik]

I got good news for you Yog.  

I decided to nominated you for the Nobel price for imbecility for asking a question like this.  

Are you excited about that?  

When I have ever said that those who are NOT dead can have an NDE?
I rather said that only those who are dead can have an NDE but you as usual mix everything up and you came up with the story that I said this and that so now you expect me that I tell you this and that.

Seek medical help Yog because you are getting worse by the day.  

But let me made it clear once again.
For death I mean when the consciousness leave the body-brain.
There may well be still activity in the brain.
That however doesn't mean that the brain is alive.
Once the consciousness is gone the brain is like a vehicle without the driver.
It may be still warm and for few more minutes there may be activity but at that stage is dead.
Without the consciousness is dead.
Now your stupid question ask me what is the difference ........... between NDEs of the clinically dead and those not so..........
Once again I said dead not clinically or biologic or any other form of death and I also said that only when you are dead you can have an NDE.
Who suppose to be your ....those not so?
Are they alive are they dead are they clinically dead are they biologic dead?
You don't say who they are those not so.
If you are not clear is like asking me why the birds don't live inside the water or why the fishes don't live on land or on air.
Stupid questions from stupid fool.  

Wow.  Look at all that sauce.  And still not an answer to the question.

There are people who have had experiences they identify as an NDE, despite the fact that they never were "dead" in whatever terms you consider dead.  You have implied that there is a difference between what those people experience and a "real NDE" experience.  How do you know there is a difference in the clarity, vividness or sharpness of their experiences, between their NDE-like experiences and the "real NDE" of someone who died?

Is that clear enough for you, asshole?

Imbecile.  

There are millions or billion of people who dream or have hallucinations.
Some of these people even think that they had an NDE.
I also can say that I went on the moon so what?
Other people make up a story by inventing the whole experience so how do we know who really had
a genuine and real NDE and those who didn't?
First of all the consciousness must have left the brain in which case we can say that the bloke is dead.
With the consciousness still there in the body-brain you can not have an NDE.
Then by reading hundreds and hundreds of NDEs experience you can see that most of them lead in the same place which is a learning experience that make you dump dogmas in favor of pure spirituality.

Of course there may be people who invent the whole story or that they confuse an hallucination with
a real NDE.
As far as I am concern if someone that is not dead say that they had a clear, sharp and vivid experience
I don't buy it because if the consciousness is still in the brain you can not have anything like that.
The consciousness must be free from the bondage of the brain in order to have a clear, sharp and vivid experience.  

[Rhondazvous]

That's the most hopelessly confused definition of logic I've ever seen.

Logic is what make sense and works in order to bring progress.
All the rest is not logic.
Logic is to understand how the system works too.
To live life after life without understanding how to bring real progress to ourselves is not logic that is why most people keep on struggling in vain ending nowhere.

Believing that I'm a god is your idea of progress?  That's a hard assed sell, Rik.You might make better progress if you head over to some christian forum and tell them they need to "forget about an external God."

[Angrboda]

There are people who have had experiences they identify as an NDE, despite the fact that they never were "dead" in whatever terms you consider dead.  You have implied that there is a difference between what those people experience and a "real NDE" experience.  How do you know there is a difference in the clarity, vividness or sharpness of their experiences, between their NDE-like experiences and the "real NDE" of someone who died?

As far as I am concern if someone that is not dead say that they had a clear, sharp and vivid experience
I don't buy it because if the consciousness is still in the brain you can not have anything like that.
The consciousness must be free from the bondage of the brain in order to have a clear, sharp and vivid experience.  

(emphasis mine)

You keep making this claim, yet I have not seen any evidence for it.  You don't explain how you know this is the case other than saying that you "don't buy it."  This pretty much tells me that your claim is pure bullshit.  An assertion that you pulled from your ass.  You want to make a substantive difference between NDEs and people who have NDE-like experiences, but this difference only occurs in your "theories" about consciousness leaving the body during death.  Your theories are nothing but guesses that are propped up by your religious dogma.  You have no evidence that there is any qualitative difference between these "NDE-like experiences" and the NDE experiences of those who died and were resuscitated.  Moreover, even your own "claimed" evidence of veridical NDEs is against you in the case of Pam Reynolds.  (And then there's your ridiculous assertion that Howard Storm was 'really' dead, even though there's no evidence that he ever was.  No evidence is pretty much standard operating procedure for you.)  As noted in the quote about the IANDS study above, "The 37 percenters [who had NDE-like experiences] claimed to have experiences every bit as real, involved, and life-changing as those that happened to people during death or close-brush-with-death crises; and their reports duplicate or parallel the same spread of scenario types and a pattern of psychological and physiological aftereffects."  You may not "buy it," but you not accepting that they are the same thing is based on nothing but your commitment to a specific set of religiously based assumptions.  The evidence indicates that the NDE-like experiencers have the same vivid, clear and sharp experiences that your supposed "real NDE" experiencers have. In other words, even according to your own term of a "malfunctioning" brain, the evidence is against you; NDE-like experiences, G-LOC, ketamine, anoxia and 'real NDEs' -- all produce clear, vivid, and sharp experiences. So your claim that a "malfunction in the brain" cannot produce such experiences is a total fail.