Merged Near Death Experience Study

[Belz...]

Have you really seen them all, these interviews?
Have you seen all parts of the explanation of the patterns of NDE's?
I don't think so.

Do you think all these people lie?

You have NOT read what I told you. You DO NOT KNOW which interviews were left out.

NO ONE is saying that these people are lying. That has nothing to do with it.

 

[Akhenaten]

Have you really seen them all, these interviews?

There's hundreds of the damned things and I have no intention of watching them all.

I doubt that you've watched them all either, quite frankly.

Have you seen all parts of the explanation of the patterns of NDE's?
I don't think so.

I watched the whole of that presentation that you linked, if that's what you mean.

It was bloody terrible.

Do you think all these people lie?

Not all of them, no, but in any case there are heaps of ways to be wrong other than lying.

 

[MaartenVergu]

ok, I will look for more interviews.

 

[Akhenaten]

Here you have a scientist who had an NDE:

So what?

 

[Belz...]

ok, I will look for more interviews.

You are missing the point, again. Finding more interviews that agree with you while ignoring the ones that don't is not convincing.

At least make an effort to understand why we tell you the things that we tell you.

 

[MaartenVergu]

Have you seen all the interviews that were left out?

Are there transcripts?

No, it's on youtube.
But, there is this website with a lot of transcripts.
When i find it, I will post the link here.

 

[Slowvehicle]

ok, I will look for more interviews.

...transcripts?

(I don't do "argumentum ad yoob toob"...)

ETA: Sorry, I did not see your last post. I far prefer being able to read than listen (hearing problems, and a serious speed difference...). TYVM.

 

[steenkh]

I also can understand the resistance against NDE's.

What resistance? There is nothing controversial about NDEs themselves.

Such an experience is laughing with some scientific assumptions. The stories of many people of their NDE's are putting the scientific worldview upsite down.

No, the scientific worldview has no problem with these experiences. It is the unwarranted assumption that NDEs are formed when the patient is dead that is controversial.

Maybe we don't know a lot of things. Maybe some people are too arrogant to think they can explain everything with they reduced materialistic view, while there are things we actually can't explain.

Maybe some people are too arrogant to accept that their cherished notions about the afterlife have no basis in reality.

Here you find some intresting interviews with people who had an NDE.

Before I waste my time listening to these interviews I would like to know what is new about them? Do they somehow show that the experiences are not formed while awakening from near death?

Is it by chance that there are so much similarties?

Similar experiences that are alike, why would that be a problem for anyone? Apparently, these interviews that are most likely cherry-picked, are very much alike, so what?

 

[steenkh]

ok, I will look for more interviews.

Why?

 

[MaartenVergu]

Good question. Why should I show more evidence, when no one here takes it serious.

 

[Belz...]

Good question. Why should I show more evidence, when no one here takes it serious.

Ok, Maartenn. You know what ? Your continued, deliberate misreading of what people tell you, your willful ignorance of science and reason, and your handwaving and overlooking of points made to you, make discussion with you impossible.

I told you: believe whatever you want. Don't come to a skeptics forum to discuss it unless you are willing to either provide real eviedence for your claim or to change your mind when proven wrong.

 

[MaartenVergu]

I can say the same thing about you Belz... You are the victim of confirmation bias.
You only accept evidence when it confirms your assumptions. Otherwise you ignore it or interprete it wrong.

 

[Belz...]

I can say the same thing about you Belz...

No you can't. I change my mind all the time, and in the past I have abandoned supernatural beliefs because the evidence didn't support my beliefs.

You only accept evidence when it confirms your assumptions.

That is a lie. YOU are the one making claims, here. YOU should support those claims. Presenting cherry-picked opinions that agree with what you believe is NOT evidence.

 

[MaartenVergu]

Another argument: veridical perception;

Veridical Perceptions Do Occur
Indeed, a number of cases of veridical perceptions have occurred during cardiac arrest resuscitation and
were verified, at least informally. In the Sartori prospective study, a patient reported seeing the physiotherapist
peeking around the curtains during the resuscitation to check on him, and the researchers verified those
perceptions (Sartori, Badham, & Fenwick, 2006). Kimberly Clark Sharp (1995; 2007) reported that patient
Maria’s perceptions of a tennis shoe on a ledge outside a third story window in the hospital during her
resuscitation were accurate, that Sharp recovered the shoe, and that Maria recounted the story to a number of
hospital workers at the time. Rudolf Smit (2008) reported that a patient later recognized the nurse who had
removed his dentures during resuscitation and accurately described the wooden tray where they were placed and
other features of the hospital room, even though he was completely unconscious. Other cases occurring during
resuscitation include a patient who saw a penny out of normal sight on top of one of the cabinets in the room,
which a nurse later found (Morris & Knafl, 2003, p. 155), a patient who saw a nurse unsafely opening a glass vial
in another room (Moody & Perry, 1988, pp. 19–20), and three cases that Kenneth Ring and Madelaine Lawrence
(1993) reported: a red shoe on the roof of the hospital that a patient saw and a doctor later recovered, plaid
shoelaces that a patient saw and that the nurse who had worn them later confirmed, and a yellow smock that a
patient saw and that the nurse who had worn it later confirmed.

The fact that a patient can accurately describe in detail the unique sequence of events
during their resuscitation is evidence of veridical perception.

source: On the Scope of Analysis for the AWARE Study

 

[MaartenVergu]

Here is a website with a lot of information about NDE's and scientific research.
http://iands.org/news/news/research...-nde-memories-are-not-of-imagined-events.html

 

[Belz...]

Indeed, a number of cases of veridical perceptions have occurred during cardiac arrest resuscitation

During resuscitation ? So again they weren't dead.

In the Sartori prospective study, a patient reported seeing the physiotherapist peeking around the curtains during the resuscitation to check on him

What's surprising about that ?

Kimberly Clark Sharp (1995; 2007) reported that patient Maria’s perceptions of a tennis shoe on a ledge outside a third story window in the hospital during her resuscitation were accurate, that Sharp recovered the shoe

OK, first those are things that a person can see. Second, how did "Sharp" recover the shoe, presumably days or months layer ?

Rudolf Smit (2008) reported that a patient later recognized the nurse who had removed his dentures during resuscitation and accurately described the wooden tray where they were placed and other features of the hospital room, even though he was completely unconscious.

Which raises a question: how can they be said to be unconscious, if they recall the events ? How did they determine they were unconscious ? Don't tell me what you think. Look it up.

Other than that, those are very interesting, but where's the actual data ? Again, those are anecdotes, and human memory isn't a recording, so it's difficult to know if it actually happened that way or if the participants are misremembering, etc. I know of this process because of first-hand experience with it.

The fact that a patient can accurately describe in detail the unique sequence of events during their resuscitation is evidence of veridical perception.

Which, in turn, is evidence that they were not unconscious.

 

[Little 10 Toes]

I'm convinced that there is no evidence. And I also admit that I'm biased: I really hope NDE's are true. That this light really exists. But 'to hope' is no evidence and not a good position to investigate something.
I'm waiting for more research, like the Aware study.

Why do you keep trying to believe something that does not have evidence supporting it?

If anything, you're the one that is not open minded.

 

[Donn]

Why should I show more evidence, when no one here takes it serious.

Evidently it's not evidence. Evidunce, perhaps.

 

[steenkh]

Good question. Why should I show more evidence, when no one here takes it serious.

You certainly do not take our replies seriously. We have asked time and again why these experiences cannot be formed while awakening, and you just ignore it and bring more of the same. We have taken you seriously, but you are deaf to anything that does not support your fantasy.

 

[MaartenVergu]

I don't believe in it, but I have some reasonable doubts. Interviews, IANDS-website information etc. make me think. And we can discuss it here without being convinced. Only discussing pro and contra arguments. Nothing wrong with that.