Yeah, me too.
To me it feels so much more satisfying to be able to take in facts--even new and strange facts--than to have to beat them away in order to maintain one's little world.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do Realistic Interpretations of NDEs Imply Violation of the Laws of Physics?
- Thread starter Nous
- Start date
To me it feels so much more satisfying to be able to take in facts--even new and strange facts--than to have to beat them away in order to maintain one's little world.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I already have: brain capabilities.
If we assume the reports to be true, they were not involved. And that's of no relevance to my point.
You are asking me to explain the mechanism.
I will have to repeat myself:
"...you criticize my position because I can't explain the mechanism that would allow those events to take place. I am not sure whether you understand that the same criticism can be done to any other explanation ( that accepts those reports as true ). This includes any explanation that you can come up with. It is also worth to note that the possibility I am pointing includes the capacity to pull off incredible feats such as those that you mention. In other words, you keep repeating the same things as if they were a counter-argument to my position when they are not."
Depends on what you mean by 'explain'.
What do you mean by that? Cite your source that documents whatever "brain capabilities" you are referring to. .
Quote whatever it is you are referring to that I said.
It doesn't seem to me that you have articulated a "position" that is coherent enough for me to critique. I have repeatedly asked you to state how some kind of theorized electrical activity in Reynolds' brain stem could possibly explain her veridical perception when her eyes were taped closed, but you haven't given any coherent answer. Why don't you try to do so now?
I assume your brain has plenty of electrical activity. What are you able to see from a position outside of your body when your eyes are taped closed?
Koldo
Outstanding Member
You asked me to "Quote whatever it is you are referring to that I said. ".
I quote this in response: "I have repeatedly asked you to state how some kind of theorized electrical activity in Reynolds' brain stem could possibly explain her veridical perception when her eyes were taped closed, but you haven't given any coherent answer. Why don't you try to do so now?".
That's literally what you wrote in the next paragraph. I didn't even have to quote some other post.
As long as you keep asking me to explain the mechanism involved I will keep repeating myself: ""...you criticize my position because I can't explain the mechanism that would allow those events to take place. I am not sure whether you understand that the same criticism can be done to any other explanation ( that accepts those reports as true ). This includes any explanation that you can come up with. It is also worth to note that the possibility I am pointing includes the capacity to pull off incredible feats such as those that you mention. In other words, you keep repeating the same things as if they were a counter-argument to my position when they are not."
The fact that I am not able to do something at this moment doesn't mean that under different circumstances I wouldn't be able to do that very thing. Now, can you explain how one can reach the conclusion that the electrical activity in the brain wasn't responsible for those events ?
Yes!!!! A constant supply of oxygen to neurons is necessary for their electrochemical functioning, or else there is a buildup of calcium ions which results in the depolarization of the cell. That obviously happens very quickly, as Dr. van Lommel explains (and as I have quoted numerous times already), “ . . .with prolongation of the cerebral ischemia always progression to isoelectricity occurs within 10 to 20 (mean 15) seconds.”
And even in cases where there might be residual electrical activity somewhere in the brain for a short while during clinical death, this doesn't explain the having of complex, coherent experiences, forming of memories, or logical thought processes that NDErs have and are able to report. Such residual electrical activity doesn't account for these phenomena because “when the brain is so dysfunctional that the patient is deeply comatose, the cerebral structures, which underpin subjective experience and memory, must be severely impaired. Complex experiences such as are reported in the NDE should not arise or be retained in memory. Such patients would be expected to have no subjective experience, as was the case in the vast majority of patients who survive cardiac arrest, or at best a confusional state if some brain function is retained.” That is, “complex experiences such as are reported in the NDE should not arise or be retained in memory,” if “consciousness is localized exclusively in the brain” (quoting his previous sentence).
Thus, from the fact that (a) electrical activity in the brain ceases in less than one minute after cerebral ischemia (when there is insufficient oxygen in the brain to meet metabolic demand), we can only conclude that (b) there was no electrical activity among the neurons in the brain of Dr. Rudy's patient when he had not had a heartbeat or blood pressure for 20 minutes, at which time Dr. Rudy had given up trying to resuscitate him, declared him dead, and went and stood in the doorway talking with Dr. Amado-Cattaneo with his arms folded, which the patient observed from an out-of-body position (from above) and subsequently reported. Please note that (b) is a conclusion deduced from the fact (a), whereas your idea that electrical activity in the brain somehow accounts for the phenomena of NDEs and veridical perception from out-of-body positions is not a conclusion deduced from any fact.
Let's be clear about that difference: My conclusion that the veridical perception of Dr. Rudy's patient is not accounted for by electrical activity of his brain is a deduction from a fact--namely the fact (a) . In contrast, your idea or proposal that electrical activity in the brain of Dr. Rudy's patient does account for his veridical perception is not deduced from any fact.
In the case of the Parnia 2014 patient who was hooked up to the AED, the automated voice instructs “Shock the patient!” 3-5 minutes after onset of ventricular fibrillation, when the heart is not pumping blood to the brain. Yet this patient reported hearing this automated voice (and reported seeing, from above, and correctly described a particular person involved in the resuscitation, whom he had not seen prior). Dr. Fenwick provides Parnia's graph of this process, which shows why Parnia states in his paper that the patient had “a verifiable period of conscious awareness during which time cerebral function was not expected.” Begin about 8:00 for Fenwick's explanation of why residual electrical activity in the brain does not explain the coherent experiences, logical thought processes or veridical perceptions during NDEs; he provides Parnia's graph a few minutes later:
In the case of Pam Reynolds, we know that her eyes were taped shut when she was put under general anesthesia, so her ability to see and later accurately describe the surgical saw and the tray of interchangeable blade was obviously not like the process by which you are able to see your computer at the moment, where photos are reflecting from the machine's surface, entering your eyeballs and initiating a chain of electrical activity through your optic nerve and into the visual cortex,and onto other sections of your brain where apparently you somehow interpret those electrical signals. It doesn't matter what electrical activity might have been happening in her anesthetized brain at the time because she wasn't seeing the surgical saw and the tray of interchangeable blades by taking in photons through her eyes.
Frankly it seems to me that everything I've just said here was adequately explained in the OP--at least if one has clicked on the links provided and assimilated that information. Yet, after 140 posts now, I am trying to explain to you why neurons are not functioning after not having oxygen for 20 minutes. In order to understand why electrical activity in a brain does not account for Pam Reynolds' veridical perception, all you would need to do, if all explanations fail to clarify it for you, is tape your own eyes closed and tell us what you are able to see in the world external to your brain. If you were just try that experiment, I can't imagine how you could fail to understand why the electrical activity in you brain does not provide you with perceptions of the external world when your eyes are taped shut.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
As far as I have looked into the case, Dr. Rudy's patient NDE experience might have happened as soon as his heartbeat resumed, which means you can't say an electrical activity wasn't present ( particularly because the patient was able to recover ). Regarding the Parnia patient, I don't see why you would assume that electrical activity wasn't present either. CPR can make one briefly regain consciousness, for instance.
So, how many cases do you actually have where the electrical activity wasn't present ?
Regarding not being to explain how electrical activity would possibly explain those events, please don't make repeat myself once again: "...you criticize my position because I can't explain the mechanism that would allow those events to take place. I am not sure whether you understand that the same criticism can be done to any other explanation ( that accepts those reports as true ). This includes any explanation that you can come up with. It is also worth to note that the possibility I am pointing includes the capacity to pull off incredible feats such as those that you mention. In other words, you keep repeating the same things as if they were a counter-argument to my position when they are not."
In fact, I now see that I did overlook some of the details of Rudy's and Amado-Cattaneo's accounts. Dr. Rudy says:
I don’t know this exact time sequence, but it was close to 20–25 minutes, that this man recorded no heartbeat, no blood pressure [gestures to indicate the monitoring machine’s continuous paper readout], and the echo showing no movement of the heart, just sitting.
And all of a sudden, we looked up, and this surgical assistant had just finished closing him, and we saw some electrical activity. And pretty soon, the electrical activity turned into a heartbeat. Very slow, 30, 40-a-minute, and we thought, “Well, that’s kind of anagonal thing,” and we see that, occasionally, that the heart will continue to beat even though the patient can’t generate a blood pressure or pump any blood. Well, pretty soon we look, and he’s actually generating a pressure. Now, we are not doing anything; I mean,the machines are all shut off. And we’d stopped all the medicines, and all that.
So I started yelling, “Get anesthesia back in here!”and, “Get the nurses!” To make a very long story short,without putting him back on cardiopulmonary by-pass or heart-lung machine and stuff, we started giving him some medicines, and anesthesia started giving him oxygen. [. . .]
He recovered and had no neurologic deficit. And for the next 10 days [to] two weeks, all of us went in and were talking to him about what he experienced, if anything. And he talked about the bright light at the end of the tunnel, as I recall, and so on. But the thing that astounded me was that he described that operating room floating around and saying, “I saw you and Dr. Cattaneo standing in the doorway with your arms folded, talking. I saw the -- I didn’t know where the anesthesiologist was, but he came running back in. And I saw all of these Post-its [Post-it notes] sitting on this TV screen. [. . .]
MILLIGAN: And he’s sitting, he’s lying on the [gestures to indicate surgical table] -- so he must have been floating?
RUDY: He was up there. He described the scene, things that there is no way he knew. I mean, he didn’t wake up in the operating room and see all this.
And all of a sudden, we looked up, and this surgical assistant had just finished closing him, and we saw some electrical activity. And pretty soon, the electrical activity turned into a heartbeat. Very slow, 30, 40-a-minute, and we thought, “Well, that’s kind of anagonal thing,” and we see that, occasionally, that the heart will continue to beat even though the patient can’t generate a blood pressure or pump any blood. Well, pretty soon we look, and he’s actually generating a pressure. Now, we are not doing anything; I mean,the machines are all shut off. And we’d stopped all the medicines, and all that.
So I started yelling, “Get anesthesia back in here!”and, “Get the nurses!” To make a very long story short,without putting him back on cardiopulmonary by-pass or heart-lung machine and stuff, we started giving him some medicines, and anesthesia started giving him oxygen. [. . .]
He recovered and had no neurologic deficit. And for the next 10 days [to] two weeks, all of us went in and were talking to him about what he experienced, if anything. And he talked about the bright light at the end of the tunnel, as I recall, and so on. But the thing that astounded me was that he described that operating room floating around and saying, “I saw you and Dr. Cattaneo standing in the doorway with your arms folded, talking. I saw the -- I didn’t know where the anesthesiologist was, but he came running back in. And I saw all of these Post-its [Post-it notes] sitting on this TV screen. [. . .]
MILLIGAN: And he’s sitting, he’s lying on the [gestures to indicate surgical table] -- so he must have been floating?
RUDY: He was up there. He described the scene, things that there is no way he knew. I mean, he didn’t wake up in the operating room and see all this.
Dr. Amado-Cattaneo confirms Dr. Rudy's account, and provides the additional details that “[p]atients’ eyes are always shut during surgery, most of the time they are taped so they do not open since this can cause injury to the corneas”. And regarding the monitor on which the string of Post-It notes hung, he says that such monitors “are close range so surgeons can 'monitor different parameters through the case,'” and that particular one “sits close to the end of the operating table, up in the air”.
Thus, it isn't consistent with Drs. Rudy's and Amado-Cattaneo's statements to suggest that at some point while they were talking in the doorway with their arms folded, the patient became conscious, had his eyes open (had removed the tape, unless he was unlike most patients whose eyes are taped closed), raised his head off the surgical table to see the doctors chatting in the doorway, turned his head around to see the monitor that was at “the end of the operating table, up in the air,” noticed that the anesthesiologist was no longer in the room. In the first place, Dr. Rudy says the patient “described the scene, things that there is no way he knew,” from above, while "floating". This is consistent with hundreds or thousands of other reports of peoples' out-of-body perspective during an NDE. If the patient had opened his eyes (most likely requiring him to pull the tape off) and lifted his head to look around, certainly the doctors wouldn't have been standing in doorway chatting with their arms folded. Neither Dr. Rudy nor Amado-Cattaneo say anything about the patient opening his eyes and looking in their direction while they were standing in the doorway talking.
In the second place, the idea that someone who has not had a heart beat or blood pressure for 20 minutes would suddenly wake up and the portions of his brain relating to subjective experience, vision, and logical thought process are adequately functional so that he is aware of his surroundings, is able to form memories, is making correct deductions (e.g., about an anesthesiologist being absent from the room and not knowing where he is), etc., is not consistent with the evidence of cerebral functioning during resuscitation or recovery from cardiac arrest (my underlining):
Thus while Dr. Rudy's patient may have had a spark of electricity in his brainstem (or even elsewhere) at the time he observed from above the doctors standing in the doorway, it doesn't account for what he saw and was able to report. Not only would such an explanation be inconsistent with the above noted evidence of cerebral functioning during cardiac arrest and immediately upon resuscitation, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the patient's eyes were open, that his head was raised in order to see the doctors and turned around in order to see the monitor, that he was transmitting signals through his optic nerve to his visual cortex and on to other sections of his brain to interpret such signals and forming detailed memories of such scenes.
Many critically ill patients have recalled lucid, well-structured thought processes together with reasoning and memory formation as well as consciousness from their period of cardiac arrest resuscitation. These vary from images of bright lights and tunnels to the very interesting recollection of actual verified events from their period of resuscitation in which people describe a feeling of separation from their bodies and being able to ‘watch’ themselves, as if from a vantage point above (out of body experience). Although initially largely anecdotal, recently four studies in cardiac arrest survivors have been carried out which have confirmed that 11–20% of cardiac arrest survivors report these experiences [21–24]. Out of body experiences have been reported in approximately 25% of patients who report mental states from during their period of cardiac arrest [22]. These experiences do not appear to be due to changes in serum electrolytes, PaO2 and PaCO2 [21,22]. The consensus of opinion raised by the authors of these studies has been that the occurrence of lucid well-structured thought processes together with reasoning and memory formation as well as an ability to recall detailed accounts of events from the period of resuscitation is a scientific paradox [21–24]. This is due to the fact that the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest have indicated that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function are severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost.
The use of vasopressors such as epinephrine has been shown to increase blood pressure, as well as cardiac and cerebral perfusion pressures [26], but since coronary and cerebral perfusion rely on adequate diastolic pressures the pressures generated during advanced life support, although better than no intervention, are still too low for adequate cerebral perfusion. [. . . ] It has also been shown that during a prolonged cardiac arrest, the intracranial pressure rises and hence a higher mean arterial pressure is needed to maintain cerebral perfusion [27]. These relatively low mean arterial blood pressures are maintained during advanced life support until the resumption of cardiac output [26,27]. In one study of cardiac arrest in cats treated using advanced life support, mean arterial pressure (MAP), intracranial pressure (ICP) and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) were measured. It was found that MAP fell from 107 ± 26 to 65 ± 18 after 4 minutes of resuscitation. At the same time, ICP increased from 4 ± 2 to 15 ± 6, while CPP reduced from 101 ± 26 to 31 ± 20 and cerebral blood flow reduced to 39% of baseline [27]. In another study in humans, it was concluded that during the cardiac arrest there was an average of 50% reduction in cerebral blood flow compared to control levels and in some areas of the brain this was reduced further to less than 20% [28]. The EEG is often used to assess cerebral ischaemia during procedures such as cardiac and neurosurgery. Concurrent EEG monitoring during a cardiac arrest has shown an initial slowing of the EEG waves which then progress to an isoelectric line within approximately 10–20 s and remain flat during the cardiac arrest until the resumption of cardiac output [27,30]. In cases of prolonged cardiac arrest, however EEG activity may not return for many tens of minutes after cardiac output has been returned. [29]. Therefore, during cardiac arrest impaired cerebral blood flow leads to a lack of electrophysiological activity in the cortex, which is made worse, as the time from the initial period of ischaemia to adequate resuscitation is increased. A reduction in cerebral blood flow in humans is associated with a deterioration in sustained attention [30].
Immediately after resuscitation there is a period of multifocal no-reflow, a phenomenon observed following recovery from cardiac arrest, in which, despite the restoration of adequate blood pressure multiple areas of the brain have been shown to develop perfusion defects that range from a pin hole, up to 95% of the brain [31]. This is thought to occur due to insufficient restoration of nutritive blood flow due to a combination of increased blood viscosity and perivascular oedema and is related to the initial period of ischaemia. This is followed by a period of transient global hyperaemia lasting 15–30 min, thereafter, cerebral blood flow becomes severely reduced while cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen gradually recovers. This is termed the delayed hypoperfusion phase and is thought to occur due to a disturbed coupling between brain function, metabolism and blood flow [31]. Clinically, these observations are supported by the loss of brainstem reflexes such as the gag reflex that indicate a loss of brainstem function, which normally activates the cortical areas via the thalamus.
Discovering the nature of human consciousness
The occurrence of lucid, well-structured thought processes together with reasoning, attention and memory recall of specific events during a cardiac arrest raise a number of interesting and perplexing questions regarding how such experiences could arise. As seen these experiences appear to be occurring at a time when global cerebral function can at best be described as severely impaired, and at worse non-functional. However, cerebral localisation studies have indicated that the thought processes are mediated through the activation of a number of different cortical areas, rather than single areas of the brain and therefore a globally disordered brain would not be expected to lead to lucid thought processes or the ability to ‘see’ and recall details. This consistent yet paradoxical observation needs to be considered in the search for understanding the relationship between mind, consciousness and the brain. In addition, from a clinical point of view any acute alteration in cerebral physiology such as occurs with a reduction in cerebral blood flow leads to impaired attention and impairment of higher cerebral function [30]. The experiences reported from cardiac arrest are clearly not confusional and in fact indicate heightened awareness, attention, thought processes and consciousness at a time when consciousness and memory formation are not expected to occur.
[. . . ]
Any cerebral insult leads to a period of both anterograde and retrograde amnesia In fact memory is a very sensitive indicator of brain injury and the length of amnesia before and after unconsciousness is a way of determining the severity of the injury. Therefore, events that occur just prior to or just after the loss of consciousness would not be expected to be recalled. At any rate recovery following a cerebral insult is confusional and cerebral function as measured by EEG has in many cases been shown not to return until many tens of minutes or even a few hours after successful resuscitation.
The use of vasopressors such as epinephrine has been shown to increase blood pressure, as well as cardiac and cerebral perfusion pressures [26], but since coronary and cerebral perfusion rely on adequate diastolic pressures the pressures generated during advanced life support, although better than no intervention, are still too low for adequate cerebral perfusion. [. . . ] It has also been shown that during a prolonged cardiac arrest, the intracranial pressure rises and hence a higher mean arterial pressure is needed to maintain cerebral perfusion [27]. These relatively low mean arterial blood pressures are maintained during advanced life support until the resumption of cardiac output [26,27]. In one study of cardiac arrest in cats treated using advanced life support, mean arterial pressure (MAP), intracranial pressure (ICP) and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) were measured. It was found that MAP fell from 107 ± 26 to 65 ± 18 after 4 minutes of resuscitation. At the same time, ICP increased from 4 ± 2 to 15 ± 6, while CPP reduced from 101 ± 26 to 31 ± 20 and cerebral blood flow reduced to 39% of baseline [27]. In another study in humans, it was concluded that during the cardiac arrest there was an average of 50% reduction in cerebral blood flow compared to control levels and in some areas of the brain this was reduced further to less than 20% [28]. The EEG is often used to assess cerebral ischaemia during procedures such as cardiac and neurosurgery. Concurrent EEG monitoring during a cardiac arrest has shown an initial slowing of the EEG waves which then progress to an isoelectric line within approximately 10–20 s and remain flat during the cardiac arrest until the resumption of cardiac output [27,30]. In cases of prolonged cardiac arrest, however EEG activity may not return for many tens of minutes after cardiac output has been returned. [29]. Therefore, during cardiac arrest impaired cerebral blood flow leads to a lack of electrophysiological activity in the cortex, which is made worse, as the time from the initial period of ischaemia to adequate resuscitation is increased. A reduction in cerebral blood flow in humans is associated with a deterioration in sustained attention [30].
Immediately after resuscitation there is a period of multifocal no-reflow, a phenomenon observed following recovery from cardiac arrest, in which, despite the restoration of adequate blood pressure multiple areas of the brain have been shown to develop perfusion defects that range from a pin hole, up to 95% of the brain [31]. This is thought to occur due to insufficient restoration of nutritive blood flow due to a combination of increased blood viscosity and perivascular oedema and is related to the initial period of ischaemia. This is followed by a period of transient global hyperaemia lasting 15–30 min, thereafter, cerebral blood flow becomes severely reduced while cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen gradually recovers. This is termed the delayed hypoperfusion phase and is thought to occur due to a disturbed coupling between brain function, metabolism and blood flow [31]. Clinically, these observations are supported by the loss of brainstem reflexes such as the gag reflex that indicate a loss of brainstem function, which normally activates the cortical areas via the thalamus.
Discovering the nature of human consciousness
The occurrence of lucid, well-structured thought processes together with reasoning, attention and memory recall of specific events during a cardiac arrest raise a number of interesting and perplexing questions regarding how such experiences could arise. As seen these experiences appear to be occurring at a time when global cerebral function can at best be described as severely impaired, and at worse non-functional. However, cerebral localisation studies have indicated that the thought processes are mediated through the activation of a number of different cortical areas, rather than single areas of the brain and therefore a globally disordered brain would not be expected to lead to lucid thought processes or the ability to ‘see’ and recall details. This consistent yet paradoxical observation needs to be considered in the search for understanding the relationship between mind, consciousness and the brain. In addition, from a clinical point of view any acute alteration in cerebral physiology such as occurs with a reduction in cerebral blood flow leads to impaired attention and impairment of higher cerebral function [30]. The experiences reported from cardiac arrest are clearly not confusional and in fact indicate heightened awareness, attention, thought processes and consciousness at a time when consciousness and memory formation are not expected to occur.
[. . . ]
Any cerebral insult leads to a period of both anterograde and retrograde amnesia In fact memory is a very sensitive indicator of brain injury and the length of amnesia before and after unconsciousness is a way of determining the severity of the injury. Therefore, events that occur just prior to or just after the loss of consciousness would not be expected to be recalled. At any rate recovery following a cerebral insult is confusional and cerebral function as measured by EEG has in many cases been shown not to return until many tens of minutes or even a few hours after successful resuscitation.
Thus while Dr. Rudy's patient may have had a spark of electricity in his brainstem (or even elsewhere) at the time he observed from above the doctors standing in the doorway, it doesn't account for what he saw and was able to report. Not only would such an explanation be inconsistent with the above noted evidence of cerebral functioning during cardiac arrest and immediately upon resuscitation, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the patient's eyes were open, that his head was raised in order to see the doctors and turned around in order to see the monitor, that he was transmitting signals through his optic nerve to his visual cortex and on to other sections of his brain to interpret such signals and forming detailed memories of such scenes.
When the machine announces "Shock the patient!" it is more than 2 minutes after the patient has not had heart beat.
My deduction that the complex and coherent experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective are not accounted for by any supposed electrical activity in the brain during clinical death or immediately upon resuscitation is merely concluded from the evidence found in the peer-reviewed literature. Indeed, I have merely quoted from and otherwise paraphrased what is stated in the peer-reviewed literature, e.g., “The consensus of opinion raised by the authors of these studies has been that the occurrence of lucid well-structured thought processes together with reasoning and memory formation as well as an ability to recall detailed accounts of events from the period of resuscitation is a scientific paradox [21–24]. This is due to the fact that the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest have indicated that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function are severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost.”
In contrast, your claims or suggestion that the complex and coherent experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective are somehow accounted for by an imagined spark of electricity somewhere in the brain is utter nonsense, is not deduced from any fact, and such an idea or suggestion is not found anywhere in the peer-reviewed literature.
BTW, you didn't mention Pam Reynolds or the seeing of imagery by the congenitally blind NDErs.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
And... ?
Didn't you read the sentence just after that one ?
Just read the part I have I bolded on this quote.
It is self-explanatory.
Please do tell me what sources you have that state that anything in particular is responsible for those experiences.
Anything on this realm is speculative.
The seeing of imagery by the congenitally blind during a NDE is utterly irrelevant as far as my position is concerned. Simply because it is entirely compatible. Regarding Pam Reynolds' case, can you verify whether this NDE happened before, during or after the flat line EEG? It seems she reports events that happened before she got a flat line EEG.
Your next sentence was: “CPR can make one briefly regain consciousness, for instance.”
It is true that some people (a smaller percentage than I realized) regain a heartbeat and blood pressure as a result of CPR and eventually become conscious again. No one denies that.
There are even some case reports in the literature where during CPR people made movements (such as trying to remove the breathing tube, or struggling against those performing CPR). And there is one case report where a person was reportedly “awake and alert” during cardiac arrest, who “consistently followed simple commands while chest compressions were in progress”. He soon died.
Except in those cases of people who subsequently report NDEs and/or veridical perceptions during OBEs, I am unaware of any case report where a person without a heartbeat for at least a minute was able to subsequently give accurate descriptions of what happened or was said during CPR. Except in those cases of people who subsequently report NDEs and/or veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective, I am unaware of any case where a person during cardiac arrest was conscious and those performing CPR did not know that person was conscious.
So what is your point in saying, in regard to the Parnia 2014 patient, that “CPR can make one briefly regain consciousness”? Neither of the persons (initially) performing CPR reported that he was conscious and opened his eyes. And even if due to CPR he had somehow magically gotten enough oxygen to his brain to produce or maintain some degree of electrical activity, it doesn't explain his out-of-body perceptions, his making correct deductions, or his ability to form memories and later accurately recall events, such as:
. . . and the next second, I was up there, looking down at me, the nurse, and another man who had a bald head. . .I couldn’t see his face but I could see the back of his body. He was quite a chunky fella. . . He had blue scrubs on, and he had a blue hat, but I could tell he didn’t have any hair, because of where the hat was.
So what is your point?
You bolded the words “would be expected” in the sentence: “This is due to the fact that the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest have indicated that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function are severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost.”
What are you claiming that those words explain about “the complex and coherent experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective” that NDErs report?
Please do tell me what you're talking about.
If you claim that what I have stated--”that the complex and coherent experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective are not accounted for by any supposed electrical activity in the brain during clinical death or immediately upon resuscitation”--is erroneous or unsupported by the peer-reviewed literature that I have quoted and cited here, then show it.
What is your “position”? State it.
Obviously you haven't given any coherent explanation for the phenomena of NDEs, namely the lucid, complex experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes or veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective. Claiming that there might be some flicker of electrical activity in a person's brain doesn't account for any of those phenomena, much less all of them.
The seeing of imagery by the congenitally blind during NDEs is entirely relevant to the attempt to account for NDEs as “like a dream or hallucination”. NDEs are not like dreams or hallucinations for people who have been blind since birth.
Once again, how do you account for her ability to accurately describe the surgical saw and tray of interchangeable blades?
Koldo
Outstanding Member
My position is that you can't exclude the electrical activity within the brain as being responsible for the claimed experiences.
I have not claimed that during those cases people were hallucinating or dreaming. I won't even comment on anything else you have said until you acknowledge this. What I am saying is that it might be the case that the brain enables incredible feats, such as being able to see things from a literally different perspective, under particular circumstances.
I will repeat once again: I have not claimed that during those cases people were hallucinating or dreaming.
I shall continue once you make it clear that you have understood this point.
(1) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for Reynolds' ability to accurately describe the surgical saw and tray of interchangeable blades?
(2) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the visual imagery that people blind since birth report seeing during NDEs?
(3) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of Dr. Rudy's patient?
(4) And how does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of the Parnia 2014 patient?
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Here we go again: "...you criticize my position because I can't explain the mechanism that would allow those events to take place. I am not sure whether you understand that the same criticism can be done to any other explanation ( that accepts those reports as true ). This includes any explanation that you can come up with."
It's "criticizing your position" to ask you these questions:
(1) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for Reynolds' ability to accurately describe the surgical saw and tray of interchangeable blades?
(2) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the visual imagery that people blind since birth report seeing during NDEs?
(3) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of Dr. Rudy's patient?
(4) And how does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of the Parnia 2014 patient?
(2) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the visual imagery that people blind since birth report seeing during NDEs?
(3) How does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of Dr. Rudy's patient?
(4) And how does "electrical activity within the brain" account for the veridical perceptions of the Parnia 2014 patient?
?
I suspect your frustration is due to your recognition that "electrical activity in the brain" cannot logically account for, e.g., Reynolds' ability to see and accurately describe the surgical saw and tray of interchangeable blades that were brought out while she was anesthetized and her eyes were taped shut. Electricity cannot perform magic, which you need it to perform in order to make your proposal coherent.
Why does one have to plug an electrical appliance into an electrical socket in order for it to function? Why won't the refrigerator run as long as an electrical source is close by? And why won't my laptop run on just an AAA battery?
Again the difference between the conclusion I have deduced and what you have stated or suggested as your "position" is that my conclusion is not incoherent (does not require electricity to do something magical) and merely is deduced from the facts of physiological functioning of the brain. To wit:
My deduction that the complex and coherent experiences, forming of memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions from an out-of-body perspective while the perceiver's eyes were closed are not accounted for by any supposed electrical activity in the brain during clinical death or immediately upon resuscitation is merely concluded from the evidence found in the peer-reviewed literature. Indeed, I have merely quoted from and otherwise paraphrased what is stated in the peer-reviewed literature, e.g., “The consensus of opinion raised by the authors of these studies has been that the occurrence of lucid well-structured thought processes together with reasoning and memory formation as well as an ability to recall detailed accounts of events from the period of resuscitation is a scientific paradox [21–24]. This is due to the fact that the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest have indicated that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function are severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost.”
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Those questions are not a form of criticism in themselves.
It is where you are trying to get at that is the criticism.
Make no mistake. I am not frustrated.
I can safely state that 'electrical activity in the brain' can logically account for that. I am standing on solid grounds.
You can only rule it out if you can prove it is not present during NDE or if you can establish that something else is responsible for those experiences. You haven't done either so far.
If, according to your own standards, the electrical activity in the brain being responsible for those experiences would be labeled as 'magical', then what wouldn't be ?
I think you still don't understand what 'would be expected' means on that quote.
Then cite your evidence and state your argument that concludes that "electrical activity in the brain" accounts for the experiences, memories, logical thought processes and veridical perceptions of Dr. Rudy's patient, the Parnia 2014 patient, Pam Reynolds and the congenitally blind "Vicki" and "Brad".
Please enumerate your premises and conclusion like this:
P1: [. . .]
P2: [. . .]
C: [. . .]
So, consequently, you are indicating that the following statement are erroneous:
“The consensus of opinion raised by the authors of these studies has been that the occurrence of lucid well-structured thought processes together with reasoning and memory formation as well as an ability to recall detailed accounts of events from the period of resuscitation is a scientific paradox [21–24]. This is due to the fact that the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest have indicated that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function are severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost.”
http://www.newdualism.org/nde-papers/Parnia/Parnia-Medical hypotheses_2007-69-933-937.pdf
That is, consequently, you are indicating that "the studies of cerebral physiology during cardiac arrest" do not indicate "that cerebral blood flow and cerebral function" would be "severely impaired and therefore consciousness would be expected to be lost” during clinical death. Be sure to cite your evidence.
Last edited:
Koldo
Outstanding Member
As you wish,
P1: The electrical activity in the brain hasn't been proven to be absent during NDE experiences.
P2: There is no ( proven ) explanation on what could be responsible for NDE experiences.
C: Therefore, the electrical activity in the brain can logically account for the NDE experiences.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
"I think you still don't understand what 'would be expected' means on that quote."
I don't find that statement as being erroneous at all. What that quote is saying is that according to how we understand the human brain, those experiences should not be happening. If they are happening, then that points to some misconception we have. What exactly is the nature of this misconception is anyone's guess.