Dr. Long proves life after death or no?

[Amarok]

Yeah Interesting how he's  scientifically demonstrated it .But won't put his findings  through peer review but goes for a pop book instead . Oh and he straight up BS the awareness is rare it's not .

---

Here fix  this

No amount of none evidence , However gullibly believed  exaggerated or  creamed  or littered with no critical thinking or decent methodology to draw out fraud   combined with a paranoid fear of subjecting it to peer review and instead  making a pop book about it , will convince rational people  that NDE's pose a challenge to their Scientifically shown beyond reasonable doubt  conclusion  of physical causal closure.

[CapnAwesome]

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

There has never been any sort of 'carefully controlled' evidence for out of body experiences associated with NDE. Actually that's not true, there has been evidence where subjects were asked to identify what was an out of sight object on a bookshelf. Not shockingly 100% failure rate. All the evidence I've ever seen is based solely on the word of people going trauma, not on a set up experiment.

[brewer]

OP: What do I think, not much. He proves people have NDE's, not god(s). 

I think you can find most of our positions by using the magic god like "search" function.

[Manga]

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

There has never been any sort of 'carefully controlled' evidence for out of body experiences associated with NDE. Actually that's not true, there has been evidence where subjects were asked to identify what was an out of sight object on a bookshelf. Not shockingly 100% failure rate. All the evidence I've ever seen is based solely on the word of people going trauma, not on a set up experiment.

but wouldn't you say that the amount of people who were able to accurately report what happened in the hospitals while they were in trouble counts as carefully controlled evidence?

---

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

But the trouble is, there is no evidence supporting the metaphysical contention that NDEs have anything other than a physical cause.

Boru

what about where people have the ability to confirm things they could not have known without an OBE? and why do they see things so clearly if their brain is malfunctioning?

[CapnAwesome]

There has never been any sort of 'carefully controlled' evidence for out of body experiences associated with NDE. Actually that's not true, there has been evidence where subjects were asked to identify what was an out of sight object on a bookshelf. Not shockingly 100% failure rate. All the evidence I've ever seen is based solely on the word of people going trauma, not on a set up experiment.

but wouldn't you say that the amount of people who were able to accurately report what happened in the hospitals while they were in trouble counts as carefully controlled evidence?

---

Of course not, a controlled experiment is set up beforehand, not based on what someone said afterwards. How do we know that person didn't see a pink cloth before (or after) surgery was performed on them? We have nobodies word but their own. That's not controlled. Being able to pick 1 out of 3 doctors? Not exactly amazing, maybe they knew which one was the surgeon or maybe we don't hear about the 2 out of 3 people who were wrong in their pick. None of that is controlled. They are like the worlds shittiest magic tricks that you use on a small child. A controlled experiment is set up before hand with circumstances that we know the subject isn't privy to. This has been done before with NDEs. It was called the AWARE project and they placed easy to identify images on top of high shelves that would only be visible to an out of body experience. Surprise surprise, not a single one of the NDE people identified the images. You can read about it here: http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/10/aw...ter-death/
What's most likely happening with NDE is a release of DMT in the brain, known to cause vivid hallucinations and be released during times of extreme trauma. It's certainly more plausible then something supernatural, especially when the proof is saying that there is a pink cloth or picking 1 out of 3 correctly.

[Manga]

but wouldn't you say that the amount of people who were able to accurately report what happened in the hospitals while they were in trouble counts as carefully controlled evidence?

---

Of course not, a controlled experiment is set up beforehand, not based on what someone said afterwards. How do we know that person didn't see a pink cloth before (or after) surgery was performed on them? We have nobodies word but their own. That's not controlled. Being able to pick 1 out of 3 doctors? Not exactly amazing, maybe they knew which one was the surgeon or maybe we don't hear about the 2 out of 3 people who were wrong in their pick. None of that is controlled. They are like the worlds shittiest magic tricks that you use on a small child. A controlled experiment is set up before hand with circumstances that we know the subject isn't privy to. This has been done before with NDEs. It was called the AWARE project and they placed easy to identify images on top of high shelves that would only be visible to an out of body experience. Surprise surprise, not a single one of the NDE people identified the images. You can read about it here: http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/10/aw...ter-death/
What's most likely happening with NDE is a release of DMT in the brain, known to cause vivid hallucinations and be released during times of extreme trauma. It's certainly more plausible then something supernatural, especially when the proof is saying that there is a pink cloth or picking 1 out of 3 correctly.

I have to say, that is an interesting article. Interesting how out of over 2000 potential experiences, Dr. Parnia only found one that could have potentially pointed to anything. That was the one experience I was actually talking about in my question. I wonder how Dr. Long got so many cases then, and how Dr. Van Lommel got so many, from fewer patients. I think that from this it would make sense that OBEs are in the mind, I'm just wondering how on earth some of these patients can recall certain things with such accuracy. I have read many cases, many seem so compelling. I wonder, is it possible in your opinion that Dr. Long could be wrong that waking from anesthesia during an NDE would be painful? Maybe many people do and then they can still pick things up around them through sound, where their brain generates it into a picture? I'm not sure exactly.

[Anomalocaris]

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

Right, the notion that you won't exist to bother the undead after you die is just not romantic, to you, and as we all know, what is romantic to you, must be reality.

[Manga]

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

Right, the notion that you won't exist to bother the undead after you die is just not romantic, to you, and as we all know, what is romantic to you, must be reality.

haha I'm actually hoping that NDEs are not real, I fear afterlife so I hope it doesn't exist.

[Ravenshire]

I'm just wondering how on earth some of these patients can recall certain things with such accuracy.

The mind is a funny thing. I've used this example before, but you probably haven't seen it since you're new.

I have very vivid memories of watching Jackie Joyner-Kersee win gold at the Summer Olympic games in New York City, 1998. There are two HUGE problems with this. First, there were no Summer Games in 1998. 1996 and 2000, yes. Not 1998. Second, New York City has never hosted the Olympic games. Lake Placid, yes. Not New York City, ever. So, how did I get such vivid memories of the event, and mind you, before I did the research I would have sworn under oath that Jackie Joyner-Kersee did indeed win at least one gold medal in the New York Summer Olympics in 1998, where they've never been held, in a year they weren't held.

Memory is fluid, not fixed and the stronger a memory is, the more likely you are to accept it as fact and report it as fact if questioned about the events. It gets even worse if you're given a bunch of leading questions (was the cloth pink, magenta or fuchsia [all shades of pink]).

Jackie Joyner-Kersee did indeed win gold in New York, in 1998, in an Olympic style event, the Goodwill Games. But, she was not competing in the Olympics no matter how much my brain was insisting she was, despite contrary evidence and I didn't even have to be near death to fuck that memory up.

So, how do "some of these patients can recall certain things with such accuracy"? Fuzzy memories and impressions sorted through after the fact by a brain that wants to make sense of the input would be my guess.

Have you ever seen one of the post-NDE interviews? The interviewer (in every case I've seen) asks leading question after leading question, directing the interviewee to all the details. There has been at least one legitimate scientific study of NDEs, but guess what, it's nothing proponents if NDEs being proof of the afterlife want to read.

NDE's have, it would seem, a variety of potential causes and sources, but there is, to date, no evidence that they are in any way evidence (let alone proof) of any soul or other spiritual medium.

[Whateverist]

Dr Long has the largest database of 1600 NDEs, and he claims that all of the OBEs he has tested yield 97.5% accuracy. One example is a man who had cardiac arrest, was able to see a nurse clean his mouth with specifically a pink cloth, he was able to identify which doctor out of 3 was shining a light in his eyes, and he saw a nervous looking woman staring from behind curtains at the procedure. He was able to identify the woman was blonde, and that was all true. Dr. Long also states that only 1 in 1000 report any awareness during anesthesia. How then, did he have 20 out of 200 cases where people under anesthesia were able to have OBEs? Dr. Penny Sartori, another researcher and medical doctor, says that she has had cases of hallucinations which are fragmented, and they are confusing, while NDErs and OBErs have clearer than normal perceptions and visions. According to Dr. Long, 76% of experiencers claimed that they had more vivid visions than real life. 
How could people make so many of these accurate out of body claims at a time that their brain flat lined, which by the way, according to neurosciences, is proof the brain can no longer create clear imagery to people who have little to no brain activity? Do you think these claims prove there is afterlife?

an interesting quote by Dr. Long during an interview about a debate he had with another doctor who claimed people can have these experiences under anesthesia: As an overview, let me say that these anesthetic-awareness experiences are so very, very rare that I hope this never dissuades anybody from having medically appropriate general anesthesia. Please don’t let any of the discussion here be an issue in preventing appropriate medical care.
As I say in the book, and this is a direct quote, “Rather than the type of coherent NDEs you read here, anesthetic-awareness results in a totally different experience.” And I provide a number of references on that, by the way, for interested listeners.
I go on to say, “Those who experience anesthetic-awareness often report very unpleasant, painful and frightening experiences. Unlike NDEs which are predominately visual experiences, this partial awakening during anesthesia more often involves brief and fragmented experiences that may involve hearing but usually not vision.” Again, I emphasize that anesthetic-awareness is very rare under anesthesia.
By the way, I’m not aware of any near-death experiences that occurred under general anesthesia on the NDERF website that described the typical content of anesthetic-awareness experiences. Dr. Woerlee brings up a few anecdotal discussions about anesthetic-awareness but I have a number of references. These are the scholarly people that have actually studied a number of anesthetic-awareness experiences and published them in peer-reviewed journals in the past. That’s my source of that.
As all of your listeners can easily see, you just don’t have near-death experiences that are predominately hearing but no vision. You don’t essentially ever have near-death experiences that involve brief, fragmented experiences that are painful or frightening. In fact, none of the general anesthesia near-death experiences that I reviewed had any of those components of them. Really, there’s no doubt about that.
These are completely different experiences. That being anesthetic-awareness and near-death experiences. I don’t think Dr. Woerlee quite got that point how clear that was; how crystal clear the distinction between those two types of experiences is.

What do you think of this?

The existence of an afterlife isn't the sort of thing one proves.  Math, logic and vodka.  That's it.

Probably you mean he offers some sort of argument/justification for thinking there is life after death.  And of course there is life after your death, it simply no longer includes you.