Near Death experiences and the scientific method.

[tas8831]

Well it is assumed that what observes while the body is dead is the spirit.

Only by those that WANT this to be the case.

Now you can call it the soul, the vitality, the spirit, of any other name you choose. Remember a rose by any other name smells as sweet. It means that we humans are greater than our bodies and will live after the body is dead. Simple assumption my friend.

Yes, assumptions.
No evidence.

 

[tas8831]

To claim 'he is witnessing' is not a supportive point even if the overall tone of the review is supportive.

Sabom is an evangelical. He takes every NDE anecdote as 'evidence' for his beliefs, and spreads those beliefs. He is witnessing. The review was supportive of Sabom and praised his Christianishness.
Why is this so hard for you to wrap your head around?

And the NDE as presented by people like Sabom is not something that supports any narrow religious view so the point doesn't seem to be important.

Yet that is why Sabom does it.

 

[KWED]

OK, my web site is aleroy.com and there are many other sites with even more NDEs.
You can find it on the contents page under a large number of ....

First one, "Diving into the Shallow End of the Ocean."
Person has an accident that they were able to walk away from. Whilst unconscious/concussed/panicking they claim to have had an OBE.
Person also claims to have been having OBEs, etc all their life.
No evidence for any of their claims. Best explanation is hallucination/dream or fabrication.

I suspect all the others are similar, but if you have any examples that contain more than unsupported anecdote, feel free to present them.

I will post a message from a spirit, Emmanuel, that says everything about our lives.
"Your intuitive heart is the doorway that stands between the two worlds.
In your willingness to go against all reason, all defenses,
all habits, all patterns, all superstitions, and many teachings, to say,
“I will love,” you walk in the Light.
You honor the illusion but you will never become lost in it."

Anyone could have written that. What evidence do you have that it was a "spirit"?

 

[tas8831]

Open up the PDF in my link and search for the word controlled.

OK... the 2 instances in which the term "controlled" is used:

1. "Accordingly, we conducted analyses in a subset of data consisting of “solved” cases where the details provided by the child on the PP are rich and sufficient to identify a particular deceased person who corresponds to the description. Some such cases may also include controlled tests of recognition in which the child is presented with multiple-choice options of objects or individuals from the PP’s life that were previously unknown to the child."​

Ah - multiple choice tests. Totally "controlled". So controlled, in fact, that the results of such quizzes were not provided.

2. "Likewise, the association with the child being from the same family as the previous personality did not remain significant when other factors were controlled for in the multivariate analysis."​

Irrelevant to the concept of 'controlled.'

The word 'control' shows up many times, but typically in reference to their statistical analyses, not actual controlled conditions.

HINT: just doing a search for a specific keyword is not a guarantee that the keyword will be used in a manner supportive of your position or claim.

 

[Lekatt]

"Reading the Near Death Experiences material herein could change your perspective of life and your personality."

Didn't work on me. Then, I've had years of graduate level scientific training and experience and 2 decades of teaching and research in biology-related fields, to include neuroscience.

It is not for everyone, those that seek truth are more likely to understand than those who know truth.

Please explain how the brain of this Savant could play flawless Beethoven on the first time he sat down at a piano.

 

[HonestJoe]

Please explain how the brain of this Savant could play flawless Beethoven on the first time he sat down at a piano.

It wasn't the first time he'd sat at a piano nor the first time he played any music. He ability to recall and replay all sorts of music was (and remains, I believe) amazing and remains not fully understood or explained. That doesn't mean there is any reason at all to assume that there is anything other than the workings of his brain involved. We know that other people are similarly capable of playing beautiful music from memory after all and it could well be that the limitations of his damaged brain happened to allow this particular skill without the distractions and conflicts within a fully healthy brain.

There is certainly absolute zero evidence to even propose the involvement of anything outside his brain being involved. This doesn't help your case in any way what-so-ever. If anything, it just supports the idea that the human brain alone is capable of much more than we might imagine (ironically ).

 

[KWED]

Please explain how the brain of this Savant could play flawless Beethoven on the first time he sat down at a piano.

More confirmation bias on your part again. You really should try looking beyond your existing prejudice.
His foster mother had been teaching him piano for 7 years before he played Tchaikovsky's piano concerto. Also, his playing may be remarkable for someone with his disabilities, but it is some way from "flawless".
People can memorise extremely complex pieces. Some people can play pieces after hearing them only once.
What is it that makes you think a person playing a complex piece from memory after hearing once (again, this is merely anecdotal in this instance) is only possible with supernatural assistance?

 

[SkepticThinker]

That got to be the funnest statement I have heard all week. And she described what was happening in the room, remember. Good luck

So what? She was physically in the room, correct?

 

[SkepticThinker]

If you really want to know what happens during NDEs I suggest you read a bunch of them. There are over 300 on my web site. I hope that you do want to know.
Yes, I was really out of my body and fully alert and alive. You were not there.

I've read a bunch of them already.
Can we continue the conversation now?

How did you determine/demonstrate that you were actually out of your body?

 

[SkepticThinker]

OK, my web site is aleroy.com and there are many other sites with even more NDEs.
You can find it on the contents page under a large number of ....
I will post a message from a spirit, Emmanuel, that says everything about our lives.

"Your intuitive heart is the doorway that stands between the two worlds.
In your willingness to go against all reason, all defenses,
all habits, all patterns, all superstitions, and many teachings, to say,
“I will love,” you walk in the Light.
You honor the illusion but you will never become lost in it."

Whoa, whoa. How did you determine that spirits exist and that a spirit communicated something to you?

 

[George-ananda]

Sabom is an evangelical. He takes every NDE anecdote as 'evidence' for his beliefs, and spreads those beliefs. He is witnessing. The review was supportive of Sabom and praised his Christianishness.
Why is this so hard for you to wrap your head around?

Yet that is why Sabom does it.

I still don't see your point. What in the NDE as presented by Sabom supports evangelical Christianity?

 

[tas8831]

It wasn't the first time he'd sat at a piano nor the first time he played any music. He ability to recall and replay all sorts of music was (and remains, I believe) amazing and remains not fully understood or explained. That doesn't mean there is any reason at all to assume that there is anything other than the workings of his brain involved. We know that other people are similarly capable of playing beautiful music from memory after all and it could well be that the limitations of his damaged brain happened to allow this particular skill without the distractions and conflicts within a fully healthy brain.

There is certainly absolute zero evidence to even propose the involvement of anything outside his brain being involved. This doesn't help your case in any way what-so-ever. If anything, it just supports the idea that the human brain alone is capable of much more than we might imagine (ironically ).

I've known 2 people in my life with what I believe is called perfect pitch. 1 of them could hear a piece just once, and then play the entire thing note for note. The other could play songs if you just hummed the tune - likely because at some point, he had heard the actual song on the radio or something.
Neither of them had experienced NDE or OBE. One was in grade school. The other was in his early 20s.
I guess they must have been reincarnated or something, for no human can do such things all on their own...

 

[tas8831]

I still don't see your point. What in the NDE as presented by Sabom supports evangelical Christianity?

Clearly.

 

[George-ananda]

Clearly.

Yeah, clearly you can't support your point.

 

[tas8831]

So what? She was physically in the room, correct?

I don't see why these folks find things like this (describing things around them that they could not see or whatever) to be mystical or magical or whatever.
Maybe everyone cannot do this, but I can 'rotate' things around in my head in 3 dimensions. Even things that I cannot nor have not necessarily seen from every perspective. For example, there is a bookcase behind me right now. I am 6'4", but I cannot see the top of the bookcase (I think it is about 6'6" high). There is a box and a small rolled-up poster poster on top of it. I know because I can see the box (only the front of it) , and a couple of inches of the rolled up poster is hanging off the front of the case, yet I can 'rotate' it around in my head right now and "see" the top of the case. I can 'see' the relationship between the position of the box and the poster - because I can see a bit of the poster and can tell that it is at an angle relative to the box, and I can see the size of the box (so I have 'frames of reference'). Is what I am 'seeing' in my head 100% accurate? Almost certainly not, but from the anecdotes I've read, 100% accuracy is not necessary for 100% acceptance of the anecdote as total proof.
I have used this ability (again - can't everyone do this?) quite a bit in my profession, explaining (for example) the locations of body parts during dissections that I am not taking part in because of my knowledge of anatomy.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is not for everyone, those that seek truth are more likely to understand than those who know truth.

Please explain how the brain of this Savant could play flawless Beethoven on the first time he sat down at a piano.

I'm seeking truth. I'm always seeking truth. I want to believe as many true things as possible and disbelieve as many false things as possible.
I have asked numerous questions of you in my search for truth on this matter. Questions which, I'm sad to say, you haven't answered.
You haven't demonstrated that spirits even exist in the first place, and yet you're attributing all kinds of characteristics and assumptions to them.
You haven't demonstrated that anyone can or has ever "left" their body, you just assert it as a fact of reality.
For someone seeking truth, these "answers" are no where good enough. Some actual explanations are in order, if you want to actually make your case.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is not for everyone, those that seek truth are more likely to understand than those who know truth.

Please explain how the brain of this Savant could play flawless Beethoven on the first time he sat down at a piano.

So what do you think happened there? Did Beethoven's spirit enter his body?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I don't see why these folks find things like this (describing things around them that they could not see or whatever) to be mystical or magical or whatever.
Maybe everyone cannot do this, but I can 'rotate' things around in my head in 3 dimensions. Even things that I cannot nor have not necessarily seen from every perspective. For example, there is a bookcase behind me right now. I am 6'4", but I cannot see the top of the bookcase (I think it is about 6'6" high). There is a box and a small rolled-up poster poster on top of it. I know because I can see the box (only the front of it) , and a couple of inches of the rolled up poster is hanging off the front of the case, yet I can 'rotate' it around in my head right now and "see" the top of the case. I can 'see' the relationship between the position of the box and the poster - because I can see a bit of the poster and can tell that it is at an angle relative to the box, and I can see the size of the box (so I have 'frames of reference'). Is what I am 'seeing' in my head 100% accurate? Almost certainly not, but from the anecdotes I've read, 100% accuracy is not necessary for 100% acceptance of the anecdote as total proof.
I have used this ability (again - can't everyone do this?) quite a bit in my profession, explaining (for example) the locations of body parts during dissections that I am not taking part in because of my knowledge of anatomy.

Wow, that is pretty cool. I'm sure you must be getting some supernatural help with that.

But seriously, exactly! The woman was in the room and described things in the room she was in. Also, she was prepped for surgery in the room she was in. I don't know why we have to leap to supernatural explanations to explain something that to me, seems pretty mundane, when you really think about it.

 

[tas8831]

Yeah, clearly you can't support your point.

LOL!
No, you clearly cannot grasp it. I already laid it out for you once.
I guess I can do it again:

1.

YOU: ↑
Michael Sabom, M.D, conducted an excellent study of OBE among experiencers. Dr. Sabom identified a group of thirty-two patients who had a cardiac arrest, experienced an NDE, and visualized their own resuscitation efforts during the OBE stage of their NDE.​

​

ME (quoting and linking to a review of one of his books):
Dr. Michael Sabom
"And he scrutinizes near-death experiences in the light of what the Bible has to say about death and dying, the realities of light and darkness, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Hmmm.... seems like a devoted supernaturalist seeking ways to prop up his spiritual beliefs...​

2. You respond:

Lol. And who pray tell said that about the good doctor?
​

3. I reply:

A person that favorably reviewed one of his books.
Didn't you look into him? Or did you just believe him? Lol!
I mean, Google exists for more than looking for ways to prop up a belief. Like checking on the reliability of sources.​

To sum up so far -
YOU claim Sabom did this 'excellent study' on OBE
I reply with a quote from a review of one of his books, praising him for, in effect, "interpreting" the results through his bible beliefs, which I interpret as tainting his objectivity. Seems obvious.


4. Then, after apparently not clicking the link to the quote, and thus misinterpreting the quote, you wrote:

And further are we to assume that the skeptical quote is that important as opposed to just being skeptical suspicion raising? Next shouldn't we then be 'skeptical of the skeptics' too?
I see, so do you think it is reasonable to expect one to review everything ever said by anyone that reviewed a book of someone who I discuss,
Even individuals from that oft-maligned group called 'Christians' I feel can be competent to do quality NDE studies myself. I'm sure you would agree also that materialist/atheists should also be considered for a wish not to believe.​

Holy lack of comprehension, Batman! Talk about missing the point!

5. I respond:

"Skeptical"? The quote SUPPORTED him!
​

6. You reply - and this is where it gets even better:

Huh, I'm confused. Not that it matters, but the quote I was referring to was intended to cast skeptical doubt on Sabom's ability to be objective.​

So, you admit to being confused, but then you go on to try to 'blame' me for... something...

7. I write:

I guess you are confused. The quote I offered was from a review of his book that was SUPPORTIVE of it , but referred to Sabom's evangelicals beliefs. IOW - he is witnessing.​

Yes, I do not feel that Sabom is being objective, for he puts a bible-spin on it, and it clearly appeals to the evangelical-type. But you can't have that:


8. You reply:

To claim 'he is witnessing' is not a supportive point even if the overall tone of the review is supportive.
And the NDE as presented by people like Sabom is not something that supports any narrow religious view so the point doesn't seem to be important.​

Wow. You really do seem to have an issue with comprehension, and I say that as a conclusion and not an insult. It is as if you think I was still quoting or something. I - ME - I think he is witnessing, not the positive review! Which you could have easily seen if you had just clicked the link if you were uncertain.

Not only that, but you seem to have walled-off from your psyche the fact that your hero Sabom IS, in fact, an Evangelical-type who couches his NDE/OBE "research" in a Christian framework - as acknowledged by the original quote I provided!!!

Absolutely amazing...

And that brings us up to today, wherein you again try to foist your comprehension deficits and misinterpretations onto me.

My case is "documented" well enough - the quote that I provided (as well as the gist of Sabom's book) shows that he presents his NDE/OBE stuff within a pro-bible framework; I infer that this makes his stuff less than objective; you cannot seem to keep quotes and forum posts distinct in your mind and cannot accept your error in interpreting what I wrote.

I'll not respond to you on this specific subject again, as your obtuseness is absurd and sad.

 

[tas8831]

Wow, that is pretty cool. I'm sure you must be getting some supernatural help with that.

But seriously, exactly! The woman was in the room and described things in the room she was in. Also, she was prepped for surgery in the room she was in. I don't know why we have to leap to supernatural explanations to explain something that to me, seems pretty mundane, when you really think about it.

EXACTLY.