|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 16, 2016 17:00:06 GMT -5
Not quite sure which one you mean.
Never-the-less, Your answer reveals what I figured was your problem with my posts from the start, that it was not with my information but rather because that I am an atheist.
Therefore, you were attacking me as a person instead of what I was posting.
In the past when I had read your posts, I had considered your posts to be thoughtful and gracious; therefore, I was rather taken aback by your immediate personal attacks on everything I was posting.
Now that I realize the reason for your attacks, I can size up the problem in that light of that and understand where you are coming from.
It doesn't excuse your actions but at least it explains them. I am use to that kind of reaction to my being an 'out-of-the-closet' atheist.
There are always some religious folk who when they can not answer an atheist in a rational manner resort to attacking the person rather than the issue at hand.
Now, -you are wrong in saying that I haven't read the scholarly papers you have posted on the topic of NDE's (better termed ADE's). I have, -but when articles come from a paranormal sites like The Windbridge Institute whose research topics are "telepathy, precognition, clairvoyance, mind-matter interactions, complementary healing methods, afterlife communication, and mediums." Mediums! -I would have thought that humans had out-grown that idea a long time ago. Mediums! who have been trying to call up the dead & present their findings as true periodically though out the history of mankind! Yet, Those kinds of things have never been proved to exist.
As for anyplace where I have ever said, "Only idiots believe in God, so if you believe in God, anything you say can be dismissed as coming from an idiot" I want YOU to post that quote here right, right now, on this thread.
Now -I am now going to shout again, -so prepare your ears.
I am accusing YOU of deception!
I once "believed in a god," and I did not consider myself an "idiot" then and I do not consider anyone an "idiot" who believes in a god now.
Post a quote where I ever said such a thing, -RIGHT NOW OR SHUT UP!
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jan 16, 2016 18:51:41 GMT -5
If I objected to you being an atheist, I would object to rational. If you think I am "coming from" the place of a believer, you're more clueless than I thought. My problem with you is that you have never posted anything at all on this thread of substance and continue to do nothing but shout.
Continue your shouting game on this thread if you want...I've given up on it...but stay off all the others on the Searching For God board.
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Jan 16, 2016 20:56:56 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) responded " Dubious Disciple, -I read your researchers and I do NOT see any of them being as "quick to point out that the subjects they are studying have truly died...at least a clinical death," as you claim." -dmmichgood
What further evidence do you need that she knows nothing about the topic? Yet she continues to make bold assertions, including the most comical one of all...that the old label of "near death experience" somehow means the subjects under study today did not die even a clinical death.
I like DM, but repeating her misguided opinion louder and louder doesn't impress anyone".Why did you use the term "NDE" in the title of this thread if you consider it dated? It appears you are confused about the term "clinically dead" and this is understandable as the lines between death as a final, non-recoverable event and presenting as if dead are blurred. What is your definition of "clinically dead"? Do you believe humans have the potential for life after death? Please ignore these questions if they have already been answered and I will then read this thread more thoroughly.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 16, 2016 21:33:04 GMT -5
If I objected to you being an atheist, I would object to rational. If you think I am "coming from" the place of a believer, you're more clueless than I thought. My problem with you is that you have never posted anything at all on this thread "of substance and continue to do nothing but shout. Continue your shouting game on this thread if you want...I've given up on it...but stay off all the others on the Searching For God board. As I thought, -no place can you find a post where I ever intimated; hinted or implied, that "Only idiots believe in God, so if you believe in God, anything you say can be dismissed as coming from an idiot."
I do know one place you are "coming from," -I know ridicule when I see it and I know that your problem was NOT because I wasn't "posting anything of substance."
Goodbye, DD.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Jan 16, 2016 21:40:32 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) maybe I'm missing the point entirely but it seems to me that a brain capable of encoding anything including a NDE is a brain that is still functioning. If it was a true brain dead NDE then the person would have no memory of the NDE. They wouldn't have had enough neural activation to encode the experience and later report on it.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jan 16, 2016 21:48:15 GMT -5
Why did you use the term "NDE" in the title of this thread if you consider it dated? It's actually just the opposite of dated. The term NDE was coined by Moody 40 years or so ago to refer to experiences people had while they were clinically dead. Since then, it has become passe among some to call anything similar to such experiences NDE's in order to marginalize the original idea, but that totally misses the Moody's emphasis, and for the most part, researchers focus on those who are brain-dead to study continued consciousness after brain-death. I use the standard definition of clinically dead, and the same definition used in the study of NDE's: no heartbeat, no breathing, no brain activity. Clearly, life is possible after being clinically dead. Clearly, life after death is not possible according to definitions like DM, who simply define death as that state beyond which you no longer live. But to answer your question: I suck at believing stuff. I'd rather withhold opinion until we know more.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jan 16, 2016 21:51:36 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) maybe I'm missing the point entirely but it seems to me that a brain capable of encoding anything including a NDE is a brain that is still functioning. If it was a true brain dead NDE then the person would have no memory of the NDE. They wouldn't have had enough neural activation to encode the experience and later report on it. That is true if it turns out that consciousness is merely a product of the brain. The claims of such patients is that they remember experiences while their brain is not working, including the usual near-death stuff and watching the operation from above. The excitement in the field is precisely because we don't understand how this can be.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Jan 16, 2016 21:57:36 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) maybe I'm missing the point entirely but it seems to me that a brain capable of encoding anything including a NDE is a brain that is still functioning. If it was a true brain dead NDE then the person would have no memory of the NDE. They wouldn't have had enough neural activation to encode the experience and later report on it. That is true if it turns out that consciousness is merely a product of the brain. The claims of such patients is that they remember experiences while their brain is not working, including the usual near-death stuff and watching the operation from above. The excitement in the field is precisely because we don't understand how this can be. It's the memory part that is getting me. If the brain is dead not only consciousness but the encoding of the memory must also be happening outside of the brain. I find that hard to imagine.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 17, 2016 9:41:59 GMT -5
I can point you to dozens of scholarly papers on the topic of NDE's (better termed ADE's) but will you read them? Of course not, they are all written by quacks, so it doesn't matter what peer-reviewed research they contribute. I would welcome any peer reviewed papers on NDEs. I will also need a definition of ADE unless you are trying to tie in aerodynamic eroticism to the discussion (which might be an interesting way to look at what some people think!). I think you will find that the papers claimed to be written by 'quacks' may not have the best underlying research to support their claims. There are papers from Answers in Genesis or the various entities associated with The Institute for Creation Research that claim to be peer reviewed but the definition of 'peer' seems to be people who work for entities. It takes a fair amount of time to read and then track down the various sources and reviewers of articles. As a result when some writers, supporters, reviewers, show up in articles presented to support a point of view the cost of verifying them is too high for the information that they might contain. I was called to task for summarily rejecting information endorsed by Deepak Chopra regarding quantum physics and trying to relate it to everyday life. Experience has shown that as good as an endocrinologist as Chopra might have been when it comes to quantum physics it is soon apparent that he is out of touch.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 17, 2016 9:53:34 GMT -5
That is true if it turns out that consciousness is merely a product of the brain. The claims of such patients is that they remember experiences while their brain is not working, including the usual near-death stuff and watching the operation from above. The excitement in the field is precisely because we don't understand how this can be. I would counter and say the excitement in the field on the part of some is because it provides a glimmer into the possibility that there is something around after people die, something that is the person outside of the body. This has great appeal to many. It is a gold mine for those who claim to communicate with the dead. But with all of the claims of the 'floating' people there is little than is revealed that could not be obtained from alternative sources. The general observation that "I saw myself in the operating table." does not require a lot of imagination. And hearing what people are saying and remembering it does not mean there was an OBE. And still, no one has mentioned the opjects/signs placed so as to be only visible to those floating above the rest in the room. It is probably safe to sat that everyone reading here has experienced a 'floating' feeling when drifting through states of consciousness whether induced by sleep or medication or perhaps some relaxation technique.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 17, 2016 9:55:21 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) maybe I'm missing the point entirely but it seems to me that a brain capable of encoding anything including a NDE is a brain that is still functioning. If it was a true brain dead NDE then the person would have no memory of the NDE. They wouldn't have had enough neural activation to encode the experience and later report on it. Follows a certain line of comforting logic (Well, for a female!).
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 17, 2016 9:57:52 GMT -5
Rational, I welcome your comments because they are logical. Your approach is "maybe the brain isn't as inactive as we think it is" or "maybe the patient is confused". This conversation has helped me form opinions because you're here. DM's approach, on the other hand, is to holler "dead people are DEAD" or "NDE stands for near-death-experience, so we know people aren't really dying, it's just near death." Everybody here can see the difference. Her persistent shouting contributes nothing. For myself, I couldn't care less what the definition of death is, I care only that the brain appears to not be functioning. People communicate in different ways. I choose to say only accurate and things that are 100% true. The rest of you..... well, I just read along!
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jan 17, 2016 10:53:06 GMT -5
That is true if it turns out that consciousness is merely a product of the brain. The claims of such patients is that they remember experiences while their brain is not working, including the usual near-death stuff and watching the operation from above. The excitement in the field is precisely because we don't understand how this can be. It's the memory part that is getting me. If the brain is dead not only consciousness but the encoding of the memory must also be happening outside of the brain. I find that hard to imagine. Me too, Ellie. But to be fair, while NDEs are very common, verifiable experiences are rare. It's just a hard topic to study...nobody seems to be volunteering as a subject, haha. I'll dig up the first AWARE study from a few years ago, which I actually considered an unmitigated flop, but which had to be presented in a positive light in order to obtain funding for a second study. I'll post again in about a half hour.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jan 17, 2016 11:28:51 GMT -5
The AWARE study found 15 hospitals to participate, and ran for 5 years, ending in 2012. 2,060 cardiac arrests were recorded with a 16% survival rate. 142 of the survivors were interviewed. Of these 142, none of them showed external signs of consciousness during cardiac arrest, and yet 38% responded positively to the question "Do you remember anything from the time during your unconsciousness?"
8.9% of the 142 had classical NDE's. But the disappointing part was that only two patients reported an out-of-body experience--which is the only way we can corroborate that the NDE experience occurred during clinical death, instead of before or after--and 1 of these 2 declined to be interviewed (poor health). So, of 2,060 clinical deaths, the AWARE study got only one interview which could help prove consciousness during death. I read over the interview, and while he does describe what he saw (from a ceiling corner of the room), it was uninspiring to me.
This is the study where they hid stuff on the top of bookshelves to see if anybody in an OOB would see and report on them. Unfortunately, neither of the two OOBs were in any of the rooms with hidden stuff. Sigh, lol.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jan 17, 2016 18:16:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Jan 18, 2016 7:40:44 GMT -5
It's the memory part that is getting me. If the brain is dead not only consciousness but the encoding of the memory must also be happening outside of the brain. I find that hard to imagine. Me too, Ellie. But to be fair, while NDEs are very common, verifiable experiences are rare. It's just a hard topic to study...nobody seems to be volunteering as a subject, haha. I'll dig up the first AWARE study from a few years ago, which I actually considered an unmitigated flop, but which had to be presented in a positive light in order to obtain funding for a second study. I'll post again in about a half hour. ... but I hear a wonderful reward is offered to all participants.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Jan 18, 2016 7:45:16 GMT -5
Dubious Disciple (xdc) maybe I'm missing the point entirely but it seems to me that a brain capable of encoding anything including a NDE is a brain that is still functioning. If it was a true brain dead NDE then the person would have no memory of the NDE. They wouldn't have had enough neural activation to encode the experience and later report on it. Follows a certain line of comforting logic (Well, for a female!). &I choose to say only accurate and things that are 100% true. The rest of you..... well, I just read along! Really? Um - om nom nom gulp
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 12, 2016 13:48:50 GMT -5
I think it is interesting that many types of peak, transpersonal, hyper-real experiences are frequently associated with undeniably low (potentially absent?) brain activity. (NDE’s are just one example where these kinds of experiences can occur.) Many of these experiences are highly-structured, coherent, complex, palpable and many fully-functional brains would probably be challenged to imagine such vivid scenarios. This is not a problem if you are of the view/ opinion/belief that consciousness exists outside of the brain and the function of the brain is to localize consciousness. It is somewhat more problematic if you are of the view/opinion/belief that that there is nothing to the mind – to the world of subjective inner experience – that cannot be explained by the physical brain and the electrochemical processes unfolding in it. There have been some new observations regarding memories and how they are formed. The research shows that when a new memory is created the neuron releases messenger RNA (mRNA) that then travels along the neuron and at some point stimulates the growth of dendrites. Tagged mRNA can be observed moving along the cell and causing the growth of dendrites. It is believed that this is where memory is located. When a memory is recalled it is rewritten. If a drug that inhibits mRNA is introduced when the memory is recalled it is often the case that the memory, or parts of it, is lost. Experiments have shown that if a memory is recalled while additional information is being presented that the resulting memory will incorporate the new information with the original memory and a new memory is created. To the subject the new memory becomes the 'true' memory. A lot of this new work is presented in a PBS episode of NOVA Watch it here.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Feb 12, 2016 15:09:41 GMT -5
Yes, I think you are right, XNA. Believers want to make sure we emphasize that the experiencers are dead. Skeptics want to make sure we use a definition of death that emphasizes the experiencers are still alive. To me, neither is important; I don't care whether they're dead or alive. The important thing is cessation of activity of the body, because that is where the mystery comes in. How are people forming memories and experiencing events when their brain isn't working? Let's drop the word "death" from all conversation and just discuss the mystery like adults. I think it is interesting that many types of peak, transpersonal, hyper-real experiences are frequently associated with undeniably low (potentially absent?) brain activity. (NDE’s are just one example where these kinds of experiences can occur.) Many of these experiences are highly-structured, coherent, complex, palpable and many fully-functional brains would probably be challenged to imagine such vivid scenarios. This is not a problem if you are of the view/ opinion/belief that consciousness exists outside of the brain and the function of the brain is to localize consciousness. It is somewhat more problematic if you are of the view/opinion/belief that that there is nothing to the mind – to the world of subjective inner experience – that cannot be explained by the physical brain and the electrochemical processes unfolding in it. It's not clear to me that the "memory" of the experience is created during the period of low/absent brain activity.
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Feb 12, 2016 21:46:20 GMT -5
I think it is interesting that many types of peak, transpersonal, hyper-real experiences are frequently associated with undeniably low (potentially absent?) brain activity. (NDE’s are just one example where these kinds of experiences can occur.) Many of these experiences are highly-structured, coherent, complex, palpable and many fully-functional brains would probably be challenged to imagine such vivid scenarios. This is not a problem if you are of the view/ opinion/belief that consciousness exists outside of the brain and the function of the brain is to localize consciousness. It is somewhat more problematic if you are of the view/opinion/belief that that there is nothing to the mind – to the world of subjective inner experience – that cannot be explained by the physical brain and the electrochemical processes unfolding in it. It's not clear to me that the "memory" of the experience is created during the period of low/absent brain activity. I would be surprised if the "memory" was created during the period of low brain activity. But the "experience" would have occurred then. Not long ago, I was administered propofol during the reduction of a broken arm. My nurse told me that most people go right out when administered this drug. I didn't. She said it was a little unnerving because my eyes were following everything during the procedure, and going from person as they spoke. From my perspective, I felt no pain, and no awareness of anything to do with my arm. I remember 3 people gathered around my bed, and to my recollection, it was the most interesting conversation I had ever heard. (Why not, the conversation would have been about me! ). When the effects were wearing off, I was desperately trying to recall what was said. And I was mad because I couldn't. It was not unlike waking up from a dream, and trying to retrieve the details before they are gone. The "memory" part occurs after, not during.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Feb 12, 2016 23:11:06 GMT -5
It's not clear to me that the "memory" of the experience is created during the period of low/absent brain activity. I would be surprised if the "memory" was created during the period of low brain activity. But the "experience" would have occurred then. Not long ago, I was administered propofol during the reduction of a broken arm. My nurse told me that most people go right out when administered this drug. I didn't. She said it was a little unnerving because my eyes were following everything during the procedure, and going from person as they spoke. From my perspective, I felt no pain, and no awareness of anything to do with my arm. I remember 3 people gathered around my bed, and to my recollection, it was the most interesting conversation I had ever heard. (Why not, the conversation would have been about me! :) ). When the effects were wearing off, I was desperately trying to recall what was said. And I was mad because I couldn't. It was not unlike waking up from a dream, and trying to retrieve the details before they are gone. The "memory" part occurs after, not during. From: The British Journal of Anaesthesia Volume 96, Issue 3 Pp. 289-291
The use of propofol as an amnesic drug has become possible because it can be given as a controlled i.v. infusion. Amnesia is present, as long as the pump functions correctly. Otherwise, it redistributes so quickly that periods of low drug concentration can easily occur, and then memory of events is possible.
from the same source: In fact, anaesthesia practice crucially depends on the production of a state of awareness and ability to follow commands without recollection of potentially traumatic situations later. This strange state of affairs is induced for procedures such as awake intubation and intra-operative ‘wake-up’ tests. Many practitioners remember an experience of a patient opening their eyes and looking at them when they should have been fully asleep! A typical response in such a situation is to give a sizeable dose of a readily available sedative/hypnotic drug. The nervous practitioner was then reassured when no memory of this event was present at the post-operative visit. Such experiences may lead to the false impression that a large dose of an amnesic drug will wipe out memory before the drug is given—the much sought after retrograde memory effect. Such an effect has never been demonstrated in humans. In reality, ongoing anterograde amnesia was present as the declining amount of anaesthetic drug had reached a sedative concentration. In fact, if anything, sleep after an experience will improve memory of it. This indicates that the memories are being formed/stored in real time. I believe propofol interferes with the action of messenger RNA (mRNA) which prevents the storage of the events as memories but does not prevent the immediate experience of the events. These accounts seem to mirror what you have described - an accepted and expected reaction to a widely used drug whose actions are well understood. Experiments have been preformed where a person recalls a memory and is given propofol. Propofol prevents the rewriting of the memory and the subject is no longer able to recall the memory.
|
|
|
Post by Yes on Nov 30, 2017 14:06:16 GMT -5
Hey, it's 2016, let's wake up and get back to work on this. We've discussed NDE's in these forums before so a rehash may not be necessary, but does this study help us in this topic? We are undergoing a flurry of NDE's now because of the advance of medical knowledge. Where we used to have trouble resuscitating after 10 minutes, the window is extending to 3-4 hours or longer. Some of us here have had NDE's (I haven't). The organs may quit working--including the brain, as indicated by dilated eyes--but until the cells of these organs die from oxygen deprivation (which takes hours) the organs can be revived. Again, including the brain. If I say something stupid, any of you medical guys and gals out there please correct me! So with this much-longer window, more and more people are coming back from the dead. The stories keep accumulating. Bright lights, mysterious beings welcoming us, and of course, the experience of much the same for nonbelievers/agnostics/believers-of-all-kinds, so it doesn't matter whether you call the welcoming light "Jesus" or "Allah" some other name. But the experiences are profoundly life-changing, enriching the feeling of universal connectedness. So are we learning anything that will help in the search for God? [ Thinking about these issues 🙂
|
|
|
Post by Hmmm ❤️ on Nov 30, 2017 14:10:07 GMT -5
Rational, I welcome your comments because they are logical. Your approach is "maybe the brain isn't as inactive as we think it is" or "maybe the patient is confused". This conversation has helped me form opinions because you're here. DM's approach, on the other hand, is to holler "dead people are DEAD" or "NDE stands for near-death-experience, so we know people aren't really dying, it's just near death." Everybody here can see the difference. Her persistent shouting contributes nothing. For myself, I couldn't care less what the definition of death is, I care only that the brain appears to not be functioning. People communicate in different ways. [ br]I choose to say only accurate and things that are 100% true. The rest of you..... well, I just read along! Then, There still is hope? ? ....and You might learn something, yet ....🙂 😉
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 18:08:37 GMT -5
Reminded here of something said long ago at the beginning of a complex seminar, “in answer to all your questions in advance: ‘it depends!’”
With regard to the OP: it depends upon one’s initial mind set.
For myself, though not exactly a NDE, my experience did give me a glimpse into what I believe was His realm, “eternity.”
|
|
|
Post by Commonman on Nov 30, 2017 19:11:15 GMT -5
Reminded here of something said long ago at the beginning of a complex seminar, “in answer to all your questions in advance: ‘it depends!’”
With regard to the OP: it depends upon one’s initial mind set.
For myself, though not exactly a NDE, my experience did give me a glimpse into what I believe was His realm, “eternity.” Hmmm, yes , it would be an advanced paradigm. Almost like a dream state, where “time” is held in Suspension.. ( i heard that most dreams occur in less time than we think they do?)
|
|
|
Post by So then on Oct 13, 2021 14:48:14 GMT -5
Recovery sourcing…..
Whatever you choose just remember to go to an antibody clinic to fight pneumonial COVID , if treated within the initial stages. (1-6 days?)
Great thanks to those paving the way for these procedures!
🙂✅
|
|
|
Post by So then on Nov 10, 2021 17:12:44 GMT -5
Given the world population of just under 8 billion
And the average life span of approx 80 years
Shouldn’t normal mortality fall in the range of
100 million deaths per year ….
So if we have 101 million deaths per year currently, should we
Consider if we really have a pandemic, ??
Do we think we should shut down activity until we get people to Surpassing the average of 80 years of life ?
JMT
|
|