Evidence Of Life After Death

[mrdannyg 274]

I love this thread. Just to state the obvious, there is no possible way to prove life after death.

nuh-uh, it happened to...this guy i know...edit - LLY is my hero

[zzz 0]

post has been edited, though to call this study 'scientific' is a stretch."bad" is questionable, but there is no doubt it is immoral. it is both superficial and manipulative.do you really think manipulating people is ok? i'm pretty sure machiavelli would be considered 'immoral' by most people.and as LLY pointed out, your original point was life after death, not the existence of NDE's. so far the only link that has been made between the two was one editorial comment in a wikipedia article.

lol, the existence of NDEs is proof of life after death.Manipulating people to feel happy ok? Of course.

I love this thread. Just to state the obvious, there is no possible way to prove life after death. For the sake of argument though, why don't we go Flatliners and give it a shot? Do we have any doctors on this board that could give us a hand? Or maybe just a guy with some jumper cables? I'm down.

Can't prove it, but there is mountains of evidence showing it is more than likely.

[mrdannyg 274]

lol, the existence of NDEs is proof of life after death.

no, the existence of NDEs would be proof of life during near-death. as i said, the only link between the two is a one-sentence opinion in a wikipedia article.

[zzz 0]

Let's go through what this article actually states as fact and see if any of it supports life after death:There are many theories about exactly what causes NDEResults of the research preformed. It gives some numbers and some coorelations and lack of coorelations. Again, no life after death. Plain, boring numbers.Survivers are more likely to believe in the supernatural and their personalities are altered in several ways. Remember, just because people go through something that makes them believe in the afterlife doesn't mean that the afterlife actually exists. I hope this is obvious, but you never know.We did not find a common factor that leads to NDE.It must be related to neuroscience because many other experiences (not assocaited with life after death) lead to similar, though not identical, experiences.And here's where he states what I'm assuming is why you posted the article. He states that we must consider the possability that consciousness and memories aren't localized in the brain. Notice first how he says that this idea has never been scietifically proven (so right off the bat he shoots down your claims that there is unquestionable evidence for what you claim). Notice also that he is not claiming anything about life after death. Also, notice that this segment doesn't involve any of the evidence that was aquired as a part of his research (which came in the form of survey data concerning patients who experienced a NDE). This segment isn't even a part of his conclusion. It's more of the speculation section of his paper, and it doesn't say anything of any value. His claim is that the brain may only be one part of the overall human consciousness (a claim I disagree with). So, at no point was the concept of a soul or life after death brought up, and at no point was any evidence for these things even alluded to (probably because there is none anywhere). Also, if you wanted to post this, you should have posted the actual paper version: LinkySo, if you'd like to post another paper that actually have evidence for life after death instead of shaky conclusions not about life after death that are only based on the lack of a working theory, be my guest.

He came to the conclusion as the result of the study that it was more likely than not that the NDEs happened with an extremely unfunctional brain.

no, the existence of NDEs would be proof of life during near-death. as i said, the only link between the two is a one-sentence opinion in a wikipedia article.

Exactly. Try reading the study again.

[zzz 0]

Scientists claim life after death exists...Later in December 2001 three Dutch scientists under the supervision of Pim van Lommel conducted the biggest research involving people who had experienced clinical death. The results were published in the medical journal Lancet and were similar to those of the British scientists.Van Lommel and his colleagues claimed that the visions came at the very moment when the central neural system stopped functioning. This means that the consciousness is separate from the brain's activity. Van Lommel provides a fascinating example of the Near Death Experience. A patient in coma was delivered to the resuscitation ward. All the attempts to reanimate him proved unsuccessful. His brain stopped functioning and the encephalogram showed a straight line. Doctors decided to try intubation (that is insertion of a tube into larynx and trachea for ventilation and airway management). The patient had a denture that was taken away by the doctor. In an hour the patient's heart started beating again and his blood pressure came back to normal. In a week, the resurrected patient asked the nurse: “You know, where my denture is! You took away my teeth and put them into a drawer of a trolley!” He said that he was observing himself from above at the moment of his own death. He described in a detail the ward and the doctors' actions. The man was really afraid that doctors would stop reanimating him and tried to show them he was alive.

[ShakeZuma 585]

so is John Edward not the biggest douche in the Universe? Seriously, this is bugging me...

[zzz 0]

so is John Edward not the biggest douche in the Universe? Seriously, this is bugging me...

Most people think he is a good person.

[Flack_attack 0]

Don't insult the term Bokonist by associating it with him.

Apologies, Yorke.

[mrdannyg 274]

Most people think he is a good person.

debatable. most people think he is manipulative, and most people with respect for their own intelligence or that of others consider manipulation (especially purposeful) immoral.i had more to reply to earlier stuff, but my internet went out last night. and i'm too lazy to say it now.cheerio!

[WrongWay 0]

About the Continuity of Our Consciousness

OH NO YOU DON'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!When I quoted this study as evidence that an NDE is more likely to happen if you are younger, you said that a study in which only 62 patients had NDE's was WAY too small to be used as evidence.So, you already disallowed this study as being too small. You can't turn around and use it as your source when you figure out that its flawed conclusion supports your opinion.

[WrongWay 0]

So, my now-ex-wife and I were at this party where this lady was doing palm reading. My ex had her palm read and said how great the lady was.I say she was just cold reading you... ex disagreed.So, she demanded I have my palm read. So, the lady takes my hand and starts making some ambigious statements... Typical cold reading stuff. "I see family is important to you..." I just stare blankly at the cold reader."You have a daughter." Which I'm sure my wife mentioned to you."You're very closed. Did you come from a broken home?" Nope."Is there someone close to you with a name starting with a J?" Sure, but who doesn't have a Jim or John or Jeff or Jennifer of Julie?Continued like this.... She'd make an open ended comment waiting for me to fill in the details. I'd not provide any.She gave up after about 5 minutes.Ex had to admit that palm reader couldn't really provide details, just lead you into giving details.

[solderz 0]

You may be a really happy person, but you would be even happier if you believed in an afterlife of endless choices. You are ignoring the fact that millions of peoples reality is they have experienced consciousness without a physical body. Who are you to say their realities aren't real?

Are you aware that there is a major world religion that believes in "an afterlife of endless choices" whose sole goal is to end their addiction to ego and hence end their existence as an individual? It is called buddhism if you've never heard of it. Just a little cult that exists primarily in the eastern hemisphere. So, just because it is your perception that everyone would be happier believing in an afterlife, does not make it so. Living for eternity would not make me happier; far from it. zzz: What happens in your head does not happen in others, so quit putting your opinions on the planets populace please.

[DonkSlayer 1]

Let's think about it another way.Say in a country that doesn't exist, they have a criminal court system where every jury makes the correct decision based on the burden of proof.A man is murdered. At least 6 people, all of whom are unrelated and do not know each other, testify that they witnessed the murder and that John Doe was the killer. Although John does not have an alibi, there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime: no DNA, fingerprints,footprints, etc. Thing is, none of it exists at all.Should he be convicted?

[solderz 0]

Let's think about it another way.Say in a country that doesn't exist, they have a criminal court system where every jury makes the correct decision based on the burden of proof.A man is murdered. At least 6 people, all of whom are unrelated and do not know each other, testify that they witnessed the murder and that John Doe was the killer. Although John does not have an alibi, there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime: no DNA, fingerprints,footprints, etc. Thing is, none of it exists at all.Should he be convicted?

No. Eyewitness testimony is unreliable. People look alike.

[crowTrobot 2]

Let's think about it another way.Say in a country that doesn't exist, they have a criminal court system where every jury makes the correct decision based on the burden of proof.A man is murdered. At least 6 people, all of whom are unrelated and do not know each other, testify that they witnessed the murder and that John Doe was the killer. Although John does not have an alibi, there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime: no DNA, fingerprints,footprints, etc. Thing is, none of it exists at all.Should he be convicted?

yes if the defense can prove motive, otherwise no.

[WrongWay 0]

A man is murdered. At least 6 people, all of whom are unrelated and do not know each other, testify that they witnessed the murder and that John Doe was the killer. Although John does not have an alibi, there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime: no DNA, fingerprints,footprints, etc. Thing is, none of it exists at all.Should he be convicted?

What DNA evidence has shown in the United States is that eye witness testimony is HORRIDLY unreliable.Between 1990 and Jan 2006 172 people had their convictions overturned based on DNA evidence. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n.../a000655S47.DTLAnd this was testimony of peope who were not unconscious, drugged up, suffering brain damage from anoxia .... probably in a "dream-like" state when the events they were testifying to occurred.The more we can remove subjectivity from human knowledge, the more likely that knowledge is to be true.

[zzz 0]

As shown in the two articles I have presented, Pim Van Lommel and other scientists have concluded from their scientific studies that it is much more likely than not that there is life after death.

[WrongWay 0]

As shown in the two articles I have presented, Pim Van Lommel and other scientists have concluded from their scientific studies that it is much more likely than not that there is life after death.

And, in science, 1 study is insufficient to "prove" anything. Would one study where drugs were used to simulate NDE prove it was false? There have been numerous studies showing this or that is good for you, then another study shows the same thing is bad, than another says it is good. Science requires a preponderance of studies.Besides, I see serious flaws in the Pim Van Lommel study in which life altering effects are used as evidence to conclude NDE is real. There are many beliefs that alter lives, not all of which can be "real". For example, becomeing Christian can be life altering. But so can becoming a Muslim, Buddhist, Daoist, etc. So, if false belief can be life altering, then life altering is not proof that a belief is real and the Van Lommel study is reduced from proof to logical fallacy.

[DonkSlayer 1]

No.

FYP

yes if the defense can prove motive, otherwise no.

Aiii there goes my analogy..

[WrongWay 0]

FYP

???

[DonkSlayer 1]

???

"When fewer words will do..."

[zzz 0]

And, in science, 1 study is insufficient to "prove" anything. Would one study where drugs were used to simulate NDE prove it was false? There have been numerous studies showing this or that is good for you, then another study shows the same thing is bad, than another says it is good. Science requires a preponderance of studies.Besides, I see serious flaws in the Pim Van Lommel study in which life altering effects are used as evidence to conclude NDE is real. There are many beliefs that alter lives, not all of which can be "real". For example, becomeing Christian can be life altering. But so can becoming a Muslim, Buddhist, Daoist, etc. So, if false belief can be life altering, then life altering is not proof that a belief is real and the Van Lommel study is reduced from proof to logical fallacy.

Here is the article again....Later in December 2001 three Dutch scientists under the supervision of Pim van Lommel conducted the biggest research involving people who had experienced clinical death. The results were published in the medical journal Lancet and were similar to those of the British scientists.Van Lommel and his colleagues claimed that the visions came at the very moment when the central neural system stopped functioning. This means that the consciousness is separate from the brain's activity. Van Lommel provides a fascinating example of the Near Death Experience. A patient in coma was delivered to the resuscitation ward. All the attempts to reanimate him proved unsuccessful. His brain stopped functioning and the encephalogram showed a straight line. Doctors decided to try intubation (that is insertion of a tube into larynx and trachea for ventilation and airway management). The patient had a denture that was taken away by the doctor. In an hour the patient's heart started beating again and his blood pressure came back to normal. In a week, the resurrected patient asked the nurse: “You know, where my denture is! You took away my teeth and put them into a drawer of a trolley!” He said that he was observing himself from above at the moment of his own death. He described in a detail the ward and the doctors' actions. The man was really afraid that doctors would stop reanimating him and tried to show them he was alive.

[WrongWay 0]

Van Lommel provides a fascinating example of the Near Death Experience.

Anicdote is not evidence.

[zzz 0]

Anicdote is not evidence.

The bolded part of the article states Lommel's and other scientists views on the studies.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

The bolded part of the article states Lommel's and other scientists views on the studies.

Their studies were not about how the central nervous functioned during cardiac arrest or brain activity during a near death experience or anything like that. Their studies were surveys of people who had NDE's. They gained some statistics. That's all.Their conclusions had nothing to do with their research and therefore are no more meaningful than your or my opinion (well, maybe a little more meaningful than yours since your ability to critically think and analyze matches that of a pop tart).