What is logic?

[Lucanus]

Wrong again Luc.

There are people that look for the hidden treasure and they never found it.
That doesn't mean that is not there.
If so far science has only found that the pineal gland secrete melatonin and nothing else then too bad for them.
On the other hand there are people that found what the physical science hasn't discovered yet.
These people however do not rely on physical science.
They rely on intuitional science.  

So what is this "Intuitional Science"? Because to me it only sounds like a bunch of made up assertions. But bear with me for a second.

If something you say is true, you should be able to make predictions based on it, right?

Then, by testing these predictions, you would be able to ascertain the validity of your statement.

So, returning to your argument, if you say that the pineal gland is the seat of consciousness, what should happen - according to your "Intuitional Science" - if the pineal gland were to be removed or damaged?

Wrong again Luc.
Who told you that if the consciousness is stuck inside the brain as I said the only way to find out is through the scientific means (your physical science)?
Is your view so restricted that must be the only way to find out?

1) To our current scientific understanding, that is simply false. Consciousness does not seem to be "energy" as you put it.

It is obvious that the current scientific understanding need a good kick in the backside.
As far as this science thinks that an abstract entity as the consciousness can be studied only through
a physical approach then they never find anything.

And how should they study it then? Come on, put your money on the table! And again, how do you explain the (undeniable) connections between what is allegedly abstract and the material structures of the organism?

2) No they aren't. Because of the fact that they are -Near- Death Experiences. The body is evidently still alive during those moments, as proven by the fact that people actually recover from those and actually live to tell the tale. At most, what NDEs do is show what people experience in the moments just before death. But they definitely do NOT show what happens after.

That is an other load of garbage Luc.
The fact that the .........body recover ......as you say doesn't mean that the body-brain never die.
Most science can not understand these phenomena yet.
These non believers can not see God so if God doesn't exist according to them then all is related to physical science and because this physical science can not see God and how the system works then
these people who had an NDE experience never really died.
How stupid.  

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

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.

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.

NOTA BENE: I'm not saying that it's impossible for consciousness to exist separately from the brain! All I'm saying is that the evidence you are bringing up is not valid and can be explained by a simpler (in the sense that it does not require to define a whole separate new section of reality) materialistic model! Again, if you don't understand something I've said here, PM me and I'll try to be clearer.

****SOURCES****

https://afanporsaber.com/wp-content/uplo...iences.pdf

Owens, J.E. et al. (1990) Features of near-death experiences in relation to whether or not the patients were near death. Lancet 336, 1175–1177

And as you can see, it's not like neuroscientists are puzzled and stuck in a problem they can't solve - they are working all these issues out! There are problems, sure, but after all it can be said that they are really doing great considering the complexity of the issues at stake!