An interesting article on scientific explanations of near-death / out-of-body experiences

by cedars 95 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  snare&racket

  He is simply quite incorrect concerning the activity of a brain during a coma. Simply google papers on the brain activity during comas. This man claims the brain was not functioning, not only is this impossible to state in his scenario, it is wrong. Also this is NOT science, it is not even anecdotal evidence as the person was lacking capacity, it is just 'pub talk' or its weaker younger brother 'church talk'.

  for those that struggle hunting for real science and identifying bias bumcum, here is a good article

  http://www.nature.com/news/neuroscience-the-mind-reader-1.10816

  if you really are interested in the TRUTH of this topic. Please explore published papers by Dr Adrian Owen and the very active human brain during comas and even vegitive states.

  Snare
• 

  scotoma

  The fact that such a book is a best seller confirms that a lot of people WANT to believe in life after death. So what's new about that?

  I took a quick look at the book and found that it wasn't at all convincing in a scientific sense. I certainly wouldn't take the time to read it thoroughly.

  Personally, I haven't had enough "in-body" experiences to satisfy me.

  Flat lining while my body continues to function must be paradise. Don't unplug me.
• 

  Anony Mous

  I can't speak for NDE but the feeling of an OOBE is easy to get to and scientifically explain. I willingly and regularly get to that stage.

  NDE is harder to explain scientifically but generally neurologists lump it with OOBE and TBI and form theories around that. The problem is you can't keep people at an NDE stage and perform let's say a 30min MRI. There are a variety of other ethical problems surrounding NDE and the label of being clinically dead.

  The author of that book is a crock of shit, just another evangelical trying to spread the 'word' by making up a story. Any self-respecting scientist would've done at least some research and presented both sides of the discussion.
• 

  Wrath of Jehu

  Sounds like a neurosurgeon relating his experience. "Crock of shit"? I don't know. Atheists get so angry that people dare to believe that an organizing intelligence exists, yet they think it makes perfect sense that everything just...."happened" due to an explosion of matter and there is no creative influence precipitating it.

  Makes total sense.

  Everything just "happened".

  Sounds more stupid than anything any whacked out religious leader ever said.
• 

  Anony Mous

  Well, I suggest you read up on evolution then before spewing incredibly uneducated nonsense about what you think (or have been told by the evangelical media) evolution is.

  There are JW's that are "scientists" as well, does that mean that the JW's have the right religion? As has been said above, the claims in the book have already been disproved simply by showing the scientific studies and theories that are already done that do explain his 'experience'. Also, doing anything based solely on your own memory is at best an autobiography, it's not scientific at all, that stuff wouldn't even pass a publication's review board.

  I work in neuroscience, the number of believers especially in that field is incredibly small, 1-2% believe in a deity according to a recent poll because the proof for evolution is right in front of your nose when you compare even far-away siblings in the hominidae family (which is a field of study that partially had an influence in breaking me from the belief the JW's have). In fact, if you don't show images of an MRI and simply enumerate activation patterns while the subject is doing a simple trained task such as simple math, no neuroscientist can tell the difference between a human and non-human primate.
• 

  GromitSK

  @sab you may be correct that asking for veridical evidence is, for some, simply a device to allow them to adopt an opposing position to the existence of a 'spiritual realm'. I don't think that is the case for others, possibly the majority. People simply need to see something for themselves rather than have a stranger, no matter how elevated, tell them it is so.

  in such cases, your or my own subjective experience does not have much, if any, evidential value for those who do not know us. If a person simply wants to describe their experience to others that's fine but they ought to expect some form of deconstruction from others who are not convinced it is possible and look for alternative explanations. I think that's perfectly sensible tbh.

  From my own perspective, I agree there is a great deal of evidence of various forms that suggest we may survive physical death. I also think it is insufficient to prove that this is the case, at least not beyond reasonable doubt.
• 

  cofty

  Atheists get so angry that people dare to believe that an organizing intelligence exists - Wrath of Jehu

  The canard that atheists are angry is very tiresome.
• 

  unstopableravens

  cofy: i know your happy
• 

  skiforever

  Although the nature of NDEs are controversial, the effect of them is profound. Most of the individual who've had an NDE believe it was the most significant event in their lives. Often those who expericence one make big changes in their world view. This includes a greatly increased belief in an afterlife.
• 

  Anony Mous

  The great "there are no atheists in foxholes" argument. Even though that's only slightly true, researchers have found the opposite is likewise true. Yes, during a time of great stress more atheists are prone to believing in "something" but at the same time religionists are prone to believe less in their god(s).