--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@...> wrote: > > Read the book and get back to me...your research is perhaps not comprehensive > enough......"There are two ways to be fooled. Â One is to believe what isn't > true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." - Soren Kierkegaard
I've no doubt it's a wonderful story but I've read those before. Unless you can *unprove* that people meet relatives who are still alive (remember it was the experiencers who claim this) all you do is add to the mythos. So why would I need to read *another* book about something when the first objective one demonstrated that the experience wasn't what people thought it was? This is how you have to treat claims of the paranormal, first you see if there is a signal above the noise - something you can't account for any other way. In the NDE there isn't. But research is being carried out in hospitals and it's inconclusive to say the least. Most Out of Body Experiences are explainable by taking the timing of anaesthetic withdrawal into account, because people are paying attention to this and collating statements from care staff there is less chance of someone saying "but I was clinically dead so it *can't* be my brain". In several cases things people have spookily witnessed could be accounted for by what was occurring around them when medical procedures were taking place. Obviously people aren't always as out of it as was thought. Maybe that explains why so few have NDE's? Another good study taking place is objects being placed on high shelves so that people who are floating out of their bodies can report what they cannot have seen any other way. The idea for this came about because someone having a claimed OBE allegedly saw a training shoe outside on a window sill that he couldn't have seen from where he was. The plural of anecdote is not data though and no one has yet followed up with a "hit" on whatever these objects are. That's the way with paranormal research, early hope turns into disappointment when data gets stronger. Nail down the variables, like how long it takes to come off anaesthetic, and the amount of undeniably unexplainable experiences diminishes rapidly. It was always thus. I suspect the NDE belief will run and run as peoples desire to have confirmation of life after death is going to be good at papering over any cracks as you demonstrated in dismissing my point about seeing living relatives as well as dead ones. To the objective mind that's a clincher. So please don't assume that my placing NDE's in the "Bollocks" file means it was put there because it simply doesn't fit in with the way I see the world. The way I see things came about because the mystical world failed to make a good enough case for itself. > > > > >________________________________ > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@...> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 11:55 PM > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Michael Shermer rebuts Eben Alexander > > > > > >Â > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > ><anartaxius@> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: > >> > > >> > This is a beautiful picture. ÃÂ Can you believe I just finished this > >> > book? ÃÂ Eben Alexander refutes all this in the later Chapters of this > >> > book - he addresses this supposition of hallucination specifically by > >> > making the very real point that his neocortex was not functioning, > >> > amongst other things. ÃÂ > >> > > >> How would he, in that state, know whether he even had a neocortex? Someone > >> had to feed him this information. Neurologists point out that even in > >> states where the patient seems to be in cardiac arrest, there is some > >> slight activity that keeps a small amount of blood flow to the brain. In > >> these emergency situations, there is no electroencephalographic monitoring > >> of the brain, though that might be introduced as additional controls > >> someday. No one has figured out just when a patient has the NDE in these > >> situations as they cannot point out they are having an experience, so > >> currently there are a lot of unknowns about these experiences. Those that > >> believe in NDEs assume the brain is not functioning, but this is unknown > >> except in the case where the patient does not revive, and then of course > >> they do not report an NDE. These kinds of experiences often occur under > >> very specific circumstances where a patient or a subject is not in a life > >> threatening situation > such as cardiac arrest, which is why scientists very substantially question > whether they have any 'supernatural' component at all. > > > >In the first big study of NDE's it was discovered that of > >the people who meet relatives only two thirds meet the already > >deceased. The rest meet people who are still alive, which underlines > >the wholly subjective nature of the phenomenon. > > > >And there isn't much in it that I haven't experienced from meditation > >let alone hallucinogen experiments. It's all in the mind guys... > > > >_______________________________ > >> > > From: Yifu <yifuxero@> > >> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > >> > >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 7:04 PM > >> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Michael Shermer rebuts Eben Alexander > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >ÃÂ > >> > >"Allegory of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ" by Pat Devonas: > >> > >http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/2/10741.jpg > >> > > > >> > >Dr. Michael Shermer attempts to rebut Dr. Eben Alexander's NDE as being > >> > >genuinely "out of body" and supernatural. (Alexander is a neurosurgeon > >> > >who had an NDE. Claims he traveled out of the body into supernatural > >> > >dimensions in which he met deceased relatives, and listened to the OM.) > >> > >... > >> > >Shermer in Scientific American, Apr 2013, 86, essentially uses a > >> > >"similarity" argument coupled with Occam's Razor. Shermer states: > >> > >"Migraine headaches also produce halluncinations, which Sacks > >> > >[neurologist Oliver Sacks] himself has experienced as a longtime > >> > >sufferer, including a 'shimmering light' that was 'dazzlingly bring'" > >> > >etc, etc, clouds, blah, blah. > >> > >Then Shermer goes on to make the comparison: "Compare Sack's > >> > >experience with that of Alexander's trip to heaven, where he was "in a > >> > >place of clouds. Big, puffy, pink-white ones that showed up sharply > >> > >against the deep blue-black sky. Higher than the clouds - immeasurably > >> > >higher - flocks of transparent, shimmering beings arced across the sky, > >> > >leaving long, streamerlike lines behind them.". > >> > >... > >> > >Then Shermer says "In any case, there is a reason they are called > >> > >'near'-death experiences: the people who have then are not actually > >> > >dead". Also he inquires how Alexander could have a memory of the > >> > >experiences. > >> > >. > >> > >Finally, Dr. Shermer states "To me, this evidence is proof of > >> > >hallucination, not heaven." > >> > >. > >> > >[his arguments on the whole are similar to those of Sam Harris]. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
