Posts by DavePerez

95

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

by cedars in

jw
friends

i've been doing quite a bit of research into books recently, and i've noticed that the book "proof of heaven" is selling very strongly at the moment.

it's currently no.1 in the new york times bestseller list for nonfiction paperbacks.. the book is by a qualified neurosurgeon who converted to religious faith after going into a coma and having what he later described as an experience of heaven, which he elaborates on in great detail in the book.

he argues that the experience must have been supernatural, because his cerebral cortex was "offline" for the duration of his vision.. .

DavePerez

GromitSK said:

I hear ya Dave. You might find the research by the people I mention of interest. I am not saying it will convince you beyond all doubt but its food for thought. If you never look at it you'll never know :) Fontana is a good place to start for a summary.

Funny, as Fontana seemed to be the whackiest of the bunch, a psychologist writing pseudo-scientific babble to sell books to an unsuspecting public who doesn't know the scientific method (which the field of psychology, his discipline, is criticized for not following), but are looking for excuses to believe what they do. Did you NOT read his list of works?

The Meditator's Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Eastern and Western Meditation Techniques (1992)
Meditation: An Introductory Guide to Relaxation for Mind and Body (1999)
Discover Zen: A Practical Guide to Personal Serenity (2001)
Learn to Meditate: A Practical Guide to Self-Discovery and Fulfillment
The Secret Language of Symbols: A Visual Key to Symbols and Their Meanings (2003)
Psychology, Religion and Spirituality (2003)
Learn to Dream: Interpret Dream Symbolism, Enhance Inner Life, Remember Your Dreams (2004)
Is There An Afterlife?: A Comprehensive Overview of the Evidence (2005)
Life Beyond Death: What Should We Expect? (2009)
Creative Meditation & Visualization (2007)

That's highly suggestive of a snake-oil salesman, but using pseudo-science instead of theology (L Ron Hubbard's Scientology comes to mind). Same goes for the MD neurologist who violates a basic principle of the scientific method, relying on his own personal testimony as his evidence offered to others.

BTW, some may find it beneficial to make sure they properly understand WHAT the scientific method actually is, before offering their opinions on it. Here's a good review which is easy to understand:

http://arachnoid.com/what_is_science/

Here's an excerpt:

Evidence

Scientific evidence must meet a very high standard of objectivity and repeatability, compared to which legal evidence seems like gossip. For example, the standard of legal evidence sufficient to put someone to death — "beyond a reasonable doubt" — isn't remotely suitable for a scientific investigation.

Among other things, scientific evidence must be objective (it must appear the same to two similarly equipped observers), it must be repeatable, and it cannot be susceptible to more than one interpretation. If I see a bright light in the sky, it might be a UFO, but it might also be Venus — and because of a scientific precept called Occam's Razor (the simplest explanation is usually correct), it probably is Venus. This wouldn't make very good scientific evidence, though it's plenty good enough for the Discovery Channel's next UFO special.

Sab said:

The sheep represent the many times in history when an explaned event is resolved as an unsolved mystery. I am speaking about mysteries that remained mysterties even until today.

Really?

Even though you claimed "many times" this has happened, can you give just ONE example of that situation, where an unexplained but reliably-documented (i.e. with many observers who independently provide the same account) event is reported by ancient men, which HASN'T been resolved by modern men?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of ANY, zilch.

6

Petitions urge White House to classify Westboro church as hate group and . . .

by ABibleStudent in

fyi the westboro baptist church is in the news again: westboro baptist church article .

according to the article there are 5 white house petitions to either label the westboro baptist church a hate group, ban organizations from holding demonstrating near funerals, and revoking the westboro church's tax-exempt status.

the following white house petitions could spark public debate that might affect the westboro baptist church and other organzations like the watchtower:.

DavePerez

Not all petitions are valid, as the people's right to pass laws isn't unlimited. There's checks and balances.

The SCOTUS recently ruled that WBC protesting funerals is an exercise of their right of free speech and freedom of worship, so good luck to anyone with trying to limit them via petition, as THAT would clearly be unconstitutional.

I'm all for stripping ALL religious groups of their tax-exempt status: what logical argument can be made for them having that? We have a massive deficit, and cannot afford to allow all of these loopholes to remain open any longer.

14

Richard Dawkins FUNNY mistake

by Christ Alone in

this happened almost a year ago, but i thought it was funny.

here's the article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/for-once-richard-dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html.

during this particular radio broadcast, dawkins claimed that most christians did not know what the first book of the new testament is.

DavePerez

Fact is, it's an unimportant point and a false equivalency: 'Origin of Species' IS the name of Darwin's revolutionary and ground-breaking book (which actually was based on other trends in science: it's not THAT out of left field, as phylogeny was even a common man's hobby in the day), and no one but a true trivia wanker is worried about what the FULL sub-title is (vs one word: Matthew).

While Origins is Darwin's seminal work, it's not like Darwin or Dawkins are the cornerstones upon which the theory of evolution rests, as its the SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS upon which the theory is built that counts. While people can try to dismiss evolution based on a trivial mental fart of Dawkins, you cannot erase or dismiss all the overwhelming mountains of biological evidence (fossils, DNA, microbiology, molecular biology, etc).

Unlike the Bible, Origins is not a work of fiction, but a THEORY, which means it's always open to modification as evidence arises; in fact, Darwin's theory HAS been modified since when it was written, based on subsequent real-world verifiable evidence that you and I can touch and see, and is thus available for independent confirmation. That's the point of a theory: to offer an explanation for findings.

The silly journalist who wrote the article in the British press acted like the priest had delivered a knock-out punch to evolution, when he did no such thing.

95

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

by cedars in

jw
friends

i've been doing quite a bit of research into books recently, and i've noticed that the book "proof of heaven" is selling very strongly at the moment.

it's currently no.1 in the new york times bestseller list for nonfiction paperbacks.. the book is by a qualified neurosurgeon who converted to religious faith after going into a coma and having what he later described as an experience of heaven, which he elaborates on in great detail in the book.

he argues that the experience must have been supernatural, because his cerebral cortex was "offline" for the duration of his vision.. .

DavePerez

Sorry GromitSK, but all I'm seeing is a bunch of people with science backgrounds who heard a voice inside their head telling them to author books to laymen as a means to increase their fame and fortunes (there's that nasty Occam's razor again).

If any of these people HAD actual evidence (including the MD neurologist who recently wrote a book that is selling to those who desparately WANT to believe in the after-life), and they were truly interested in the advancement of science, then they'd present the evidence where it could be studied in a controlled environment (one that would allow skeptics to study, examine, and verify their claims).

As you well know, they'd also be rich AND famous, as well: debunker James Randi has a standing offer to the first person who can present verifiable existence of ANY paranormal phenomena, but no one has taken him up on the offer (EP made a similar offer a few weeks ago for these people to prove their claims of hearing God, but no one took his bait).

95

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

by cedars in

jw
friends

i've been doing quite a bit of research into books recently, and i've noticed that the book "proof of heaven" is selling very strongly at the moment.

it's currently no.1 in the new york times bestseller list for nonfiction paperbacks.. the book is by a qualified neurosurgeon who converted to religious faith after going into a coma and having what he later described as an experience of heaven, which he elaborates on in great detail in the book.

he argues that the experience must have been supernatural, because his cerebral cortex was "offline" for the duration of his vision.. .

DavePerez

Sab said:

This is how atheists view unexplainable phenomenon.

Nope: that's sheep analogy is a fail, as you haven't proven the existence of any unexplained phenomenon that requires an explanation. So there's no need to find an answer to what's happening to the sheep, since there's not even a hint of sheep carcasses, or missing sheep, etc.

That's exactly the point, and why you're simply spinning your wheels *yet again*, going in circles. Scientists have repeatedly asked for any shred of evidence of ANY phenomena that needs explaining, but the response is always the sound of cricket-chirping on your part. You're providing a tentative resolution to a question that isn't even a real question, which violates upon which science is based. It's as much of a waste as arguing about how many angels can sit on the head of a pin, since it's putting the cart ahead of the horse: you need to show any evidence that angels actually exist, before you can start worrying about the surface area of their posteriors when sitting, etc.

11

DC police investigating whether NBC moderator violated law

by Deputy Dog in

jw
friends

.

http://www.wdsu.com/news/politics/dc-police-investigating-whether-nbc-moderator-violated-law/-/9853324/17895308/-/3weogkz/-/index.html.

.

DavePerez

Per this story appearing on Politico, NBC called ATF, who in turned called DC Police and was incorrectly told that it wouldn't be illegal to show an empty magazine.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/12/dc-police-illegal-for-david-gregory-to-show-empty-152829.html?hp=r7

On Wednesday afternoon, TMZ reported that a representative from "Meet the Press" had inquired about the legality with a member of the ATF, who then contacted a member of the D.C. police. Citing "well-informed law enforcement sources," TMZ reported that the D.C. police official informed the ATF official that Gregory could legally show the magazine, provided it was empty. The ATF official then called the staffer from "Meet the Press" to inform them they could use the magazine, TMZ reported.

If true, the D.C. police official's statement would contradict a statement issued by the Metropolitan Police Department earlier today.

I smell a coverup of GregoryGate in the works, no doubt trying to cover-up for Obama!

Hopefully the episode left a paper trail, so a "smoking gun" remains (and maybe the DC Police will charge themselves and ATF as accessories to the crime, for providing bad info).

95

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

by cedars in

jw
friends

i've been doing quite a bit of research into books recently, and i've noticed that the book "proof of heaven" is selling very strongly at the moment.

it's currently no.1 in the new york times bestseller list for nonfiction paperbacks.. the book is by a qualified neurosurgeon who converted to religious faith after going into a coma and having what he later described as an experience of heaven, which he elaborates on in great detail in the book.

he argues that the experience must have been supernatural, because his cerebral cortex was "offline" for the duration of his vision.. .

DavePerez

USR said:

perez : i think thats a cope out, 1john 4:1 tell us to test these things , satan may appear to be light but hes not jesus is the light, satanis going to twist gods word like he did in genesis 3, and matthew 4, etc... so i dont see it as a 50/50 chance if you examine all things by means of gods word

So let me guess: you're the bright boy who can see through the deceptions of Satan, and you can use the principles and hints that Jesus gave everyone else in print (which Satan also knows) to overcome his deception, using your powers of testing and evaluation?

You don't think it's reasonable to assume that Satan knows in complete detail what the Bible says, and even knows what you personally understand it to say, and that his greater command of the facts wouldn't make it relatively easy for a supernatural being to avoid conflicts that he knows you would recognize as falsehood? Or to change up his strategy?

I forgot: you are "special" because the Bible tells you so, as well as everyone else that reads in it that they are special, too. No one can fool you!

So even though God apparently allows imposters to cheat through use of deception and tricks, you don't see a slight problem with that basic premise, that God is both a referree AND a participant in the conflict?

No clue that it just MIGHT be a false dilemma, where the correct answer is neither Satan or God, but none of the above, and that there's no one asking the question?

Look into "appeal to ego", and get back to me after you do. As it stands, many allow their personal thirst for ego gratification to allow themselves to be played like a fiddle by modern men who rely on the books left by ancient clever men who were the REAL deceivers of their contemporaries; belief in invisible beings was/is a successful attempt to control the behavior of others (and usually without needing to resort to physical force).

29

There was no "assault" rifle used in Newtown, CT!!!

by Yohan in

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495.

the bushmaster was left in the car and it was 4 handguns that were used in the massacre!

the media are morons.. .

DavePerez

Interesting point (early news reports said a shotgun was found in the trunk), but actually working against those who don't want to see further regulation of firearms, as most citizens would say, "well if someone with hand guns can inflict that much mayhem, then all the more reason to ban assault weapons with high-capacity clips, which are even more effective mass-murder machines. Why would any responsible gun owner want or need even MORE capability to kill so many"?

So Yohan's point actually makes a stronger case for MORE firearms regulation (eg reinstatement of the assault weapons ban, lower limits on clip capacity for hand-guns and rifles alike, etc).

95

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

by cedars in

jw
friends

i've been doing quite a bit of research into books recently, and i've noticed that the book "proof of heaven" is selling very strongly at the moment.

it's currently no.1 in the new york times bestseller list for nonfiction paperbacks.. the book is by a qualified neurosurgeon who converted to religious faith after going into a coma and having what he later described as an experience of heaven, which he elaborates on in great detail in the book.

he argues that the experience must have been supernatural, because his cerebral cortex was "offline" for the duration of his vision.. .

DavePerez

Sab said:

I have been saying this for quite some time now. The scientific method can be CIRCUMVENTED by entities who have the power and will to do so. We can have valid experience that we cannot demonstate to others. In no way does this make the experience not real or made up. Sure, lots of experiences can be shown to be false, but that doesn't mean that they ALL are and always were.

And you're making a great argument for the pointlessness of even trying to worry about invisible beings, because if God allows the scenario to be so fixed against mere mortals (where Jesus says that 'angels of darkness' will pose as angels of light), then there's a 50/50 chance, at best. SO even those who think they're communicating with the good guys don't stand a chance, as it may be a 'false flag'.

8

Turns out Mitt really didn't want to be elected President anyway, per his son

by DavePerez in

is mitt's son 4 yrs old?

that's the same rationale that kids use when they don't get their binkie, so they pout like they didn't want it anyway.. so naner, naner.... mitt didn't want it anyway, and didn't really care that he lost:.

http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romney-didnt-want-president-son-claims-173907500--abc-news-politics.html.

DavePerez

Moshe, I'm betting that's NOT one of Ann's show horses, is it!

The $44 mil refers to the personal money he spent on his 2008 bid. Here's an article which ran in New Republic on Nov 8th which certainly fits in with what Tagg said:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/109940/should-romney-have-opened-his-wallet#

The third explanation is more speculative, but, I would maintain, not unplausible. It is that Romney simply decided that this campaign was not worth the investment. Yes, he dearly wants to be president--to the extent that his campaign had a larger purpose, it was that, well, he really wanted to be president. But he is also a notorious penny pincher*, one who refuses to pay workmen for home improvements and goes to tremendous lengths to reduce the amount of money he owes the U.S. Treasury. Sinking $42 million into a losing effort last time surely burned him, and perhaps he simply decided that win or lose, he wasn’t going to take the hit this time. After all, he made a similar decision with his tax returns: as much as it may have hurt his election prospects to refuse to release more than two years of tax returns, thereby allowing the Democrats to make all manner of insinuations, he apparently decided that running for president was not reason enough to allow the exposure. So now he returns to private life with a paltry one-for-four batting average in running for office, but with his secrets, and his fortune, still intact.

So while Mitt "wanted" it, he apparently really didn't "want it" enough to go all-in (which is what he told his campaign workers he was doing, stopping at nothing and giving his bid his 110% (which doesn't include using his own $$$, like he did in 2008) I mean, this guy was paid $5k to get the Romney campaign logo on his face, but then flip-flopped after saying it and decided to get it removed. Par for the course?).

Tagg should stop talking, as it's one of those situations where he's not doing his dad favors, whatever he says (the donors must not enjoy having salt rubbed in their wounds). However, it's perfectly in keeping with the family history: like father, like son, like grandfather.