If

[Surgenator]

Your becoming so repeatative that this is becoming very boring. So, i'm just gonna list logical/reasoning errors from now on in bold until you want a real discussion.

[quote='Riketto' pid='835887' dateline='1420454627']
And your evidence that they are hallucination is.......? Shifting of the burden of proof.

Fail again surgen
You are the one who back up Sacks for keeping your so called evidence alive.
Sacks and the likes say that NDEs are hallucinations so if you back up someone idea it is you that suppose to come up with the proofs.

character assassination and shifting burden of proof

Oh, sorry i forgot about Sacks. Personal attack

Fail again surgen.
When i see someone who try to change a tyre without using a jack and instead try to lift the car by hand i got the right to laugh.
Sacks do exactly the same thing when he try to understand how the system works during an NDEs.

cart before the horse

He only use the physical-mental approach while the NDEs are not physical-mental according to those who experienced these NDEs.

Irrevelent

Delusions need a lot of mental energy to survive. Unsupported claim
After sometime the strain bring the mind to the brute realty. Unsupported claim
On the contrary the real things do not suck any energy from your mind
and therefore they last for long time. Unsupported claim
But again how would you know what is the difference between the two when your mind is confined to the physical reality only? Shifting of the burden of proof

Fail again surgen.
By backing up Sacks and the likes you claim that we are dealing with delusions.
You are not backing up your so called evidence with real evidence so if you go along this way i also have the right to state the opposite whether the opposite is true or not according to you.

Something note worthy to respond to. You made the claim NDE's are evidence for an afterlife. The default position is to reject any claim until sufficient evidence demonstates the claim to be true. Questioning NDE's evidence is part of the verification processes. Since NDE's can be fully explained by known phenomena, no new process/object/space is needed and should be disregarded. Learn burden of proof.

You are no different from a religious person. Unsupported claim
Both of you are entrenched in dogmas. False equivalence
For you guys the establish truth is the real truth. Strawman
Sometime ago i asked a doctor the meaning of the word CANCER.
He wouldn't know. I had to explain to him. False analogy/small sample size
Do you know where the word MANGO (the fruit) come from? Red herring

You mention the word FAG and i mention other words in order to see how the real meaning change and how to see how people of today falsely think that the establish meaning is the real and original meaning.
Something wrong with this?
You got upset about it?
Mama is still there to console and comfort you surgen.

Personal attack and irrevelent

That is funny especially when this comment is coming from someone who think that this created reality is the ultimate. Strawman/Unsupported claim

Physical science is all an atheist got but this kind of science is not enough to bring peace of mind which is exactly what human being are looking for all the time consciously or unconsciously so physical science can not possibly be the ultimate.
This is an important philosophical point but what would you know about philosophy!

Strawman, unsupported claim, argument form ignorance, personal attack

When the independent analysis is made using all elements necessary to carry on such an analysis i will lift up my hat and praise these people for their work. Been done
Unfortunately these researchers haven't use all elements necessary as their knowledge is confined to this material-physical world only making thus impossible to understand how the system works. Unsupported claim/appeal to special knowledge/hasty conclusion

If my conclusion is unsupported then those researchers that rely only on physical evidence would have already come up with a solution that give people peace of mind.

Non-sequitur

Unfortunately they fail so if they fail it is very likely that it is true that they haven't use the proper tools to see how the system works.

False dicotomy


So many fallacies. Do you wonder why no one takes you seriously?