If

[Whateverist]

But off course they are only near dead. Have there been any NDE's reported in people declared dead for over a week? Now a physician can declare someone dead based on the lack of a heart beat but we also know that the heart beat can be restored within a few minutes of the time it stops. That means the subject can have some experiences during the moments after their heart stops and the time it is restored. All this tells us is that there may be a slow fade into death during which the dead person may continue experience something even if he can no longer indicate that in any way. Kind of like some older cars will sometimes continue to sputter after the key is switched off.

Is there some larger point you want to make about this, Rikki?

[JuliaL]

It is obvious that when you are alive consciousness need the body and the brain to be perceived but as thousand of NDEs tell us consciousness doesn't need the brain anymore when the body-brain are no longer there.
If you refuse to believe in these NDEs that is then your problem as it is your problem to believe that NDEs are hallucinations.

Are you a rotten liar!

Look who knows so much. Well it just so happens that your NDE here is only *mostly dead* There's a BIG difference between *mostly dead* and *all dead*... *Mostly dead* is *slightly alive* Now *all dead* there's usually only one thing you can do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X90qKQAM...lpage#t=38

[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.

If you refuse to believe in the non-verifiability of NDEs, then that is your problem to realize they are hallucinations.

And your evidence that they are hallucination is.......? Shifting of the burden of proof.
Oh, sorry i forgot about Sacks. Personal attack

Translation: "There are these mental blocks that prevents to go into a full delusional state. The more you tap into delusions, the smarter, wiser and stronger you will feel. Your delusion and my delusion will not be the same, but that doesn't mean that they are less real. If you never delude yourself, then you will never understand how deluded people think."

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

You thinking that you have special knowledge on what happen "hundred or thousand of years" ago doesn't make you right. Your special knowledge is nonsence until you can prove it. Unless you can prove the "original" meaning, you are wasting my time with this pointless discussion. Not to mention, the meaning of words do change overtime as society changes. For example the word fag. Look up the history of this word. The fact you cannot use modern terms to argue your point shows that your point is wrong.

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

Oh sweet irony. Have you ever heard of Dunning–Kruger effect. Your displaying it here perfectly.

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

Independent confirmations seem to upset you. So your best retort is a strawman argument about smelly soap. EPIC FAIL.

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

The real hallucination emerge when you think that it is the devil that push you to do the wrong thing when in reality is you that choose to give up the fight for freedom.

Thats what the devil wants you to think.

Please surgen, don't give up your mental fight with me.
I just start to enjoy your failings. Hasty conclusion

[Angrboda]

Did somebody mention mangos?

[Surgenator]

Well hello there, how you doin?

[Whateverist]

Pardon me but I'd best see if those melons are ripe. Oh, wonderful. I'll take two.

[Little Rik]

But off course they are only near dead. Have there been any NDE's reported in people declared dead for over a week? Now a physician can declare someone dead based on the lack of a heart beat but we also know that the heart beat can be restored within a few minutes of the time it stops. That means the subject can have some experiences during the moments after their heart stops and the time it is restored. All this tells us is that there may be a slow fade into death during which the dead person may continue experience something even if he can no longer indicate that in any way. Kind of like some older cars will sometimes continue to sputter after the key is switched off.

Is there some larger point you want to make about this, Rikki?

Your MAY say everything.

---

[quote='Riketto' pid='835363' dateline='1420380773']

It is obvious that when you are alive consciousness need the body and the brain to be perceived but as thousand of NDEs tell us consciousness doesn't need the brain anymore when the body-brain are no longer there.
If you refuse to believe in these NDEs that is then your problem as it is your problem to believe that NDEs are hallucinations.

Are you a rotten liar!

Look who knows so much. Well it just so happens that your NDE here is only *mostly dead* There's a BIG difference between *mostly dead* and *all dead*... *Mostly dead* is *slightly alive* Now *all dead* there's usually only one thing you can do:

And your evidence that i am a rotten liar is.......?

---

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.

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

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.

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.

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!

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.
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.

[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?

[JuliaL]

Look who knows so much. Well it just so happens that your NDE here is only *mostly dead* There's a BIG difference between *mostly dead* and *all dead*... *Mostly dead* is *slightly alive* Now *all dead* there's usually only one thing you can do:

And your evidence that i am a rotten liar is.......?

You'd have to watch the video.
It's a quote from a movie.

[Little Rik]

And your evidence that i am a rotten liar is.......?

You'd have to watch the video.
It's a quote from a movie.

Anybody can set up a show in order to try to convince people that what they say it is true.
That is no evidence.

---

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

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

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 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

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

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?

Coming in a forum in which my point of view is the opposite of the majority of those in the forum it was obvious that i couldn't convince people that i am right and that they are wrong so i never expect to be taken seriously and that of course is not the reason why i came here.
The main reason was and is to sharpen and tune up the way i express myself and secondary to improve my English.
Beside it would become boring to go in a forum in which people agree with my philosophy.
Coming back to your post i would say that your desperation in realize your failing is getting worse by the day.
The reason why i claim that NDEs are real evidence as i already explained few times come from the fact that several of these people who had an NDE could describe things that they have seen during these NDEs.
In their lives they never been in the places that they described so how could they describe these places if they never been there before?
It is obvious that as soon as the body-mind is off the consciousness take over so NDEs are real not hallucinations.
I already suggest you to read the site in which people describe these experience but obviously you either didn't bother to read or you keep on thinking that they are all liars.
That is your problem surgen not mine.


http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Archives/NDERF_NDEs.htm