Have you ever had a Near Death Experience?

[Einstein]

I know science tries to explain them away but I believe them. There are hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of people who describe their NDE's.

 

Here is one to get you started, if your new to them:

 

 

 

[teef]

i wonder if she lets guys do stuff to the messed up part of her head.

[WhoTom]

The clip above is an example of anecdotal evidence. As you said, many people have had NDEs which are very real to them, but don't meet the criteria for empirical evidence and serious scientific consideration. That's why I'd always attributed NDEs to random brain activity that continues after the heart stops. But last year, I saw an article in Discover magazine that briefly discussed the book "After: A Doctor Explores What Near-Death Experiences Reveal About Life and Beyond." The article piqued my interest, so I read the book.

 

The physician who wrote it has done extensive scientific research on the subject. He was raised in a secular environment with no discussion of an afterlife, so he has no preconceived notions that would bias him toward believing that there's anything beyond the here and now. Yet, he offers some empirical evidence that there may, indeed, be more to it.

 

If nothing else, he convinced me that the subject warrants further scientific research.

 

 

[Fleezoid]

Every year at the end of the Bills season!

 

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, teef said:

i wonder if she lets guys do stuff to the messed up part of her head.

 

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

The clip above is an example of anecdotal evidence. As you said, many people have had NDEs which are very real to them, but don't meet the criteria for empirical evidence and serious scientific consideration. That's why I'd always attributed NDEs to random brain activity that continues after the heart stops. But last year, I saw an article in Discover magazine that briefly discussed the book "After: A Doctor Explores What Near-Death Experiences Reveal About Life and Beyond." The article piqued my interest, so I read the book.

 

The physician who wrote it has done extensive scientific research on the subject. He was raised in a secular environment with no discussion of an afterlife, so he has no preconceived notions that would bias him toward believing that there's anything beyond the here and now. Yet, he offers some empirical evidence that there may, indeed, be more to it.

 

If nothing else, he convinced me that the subject warrants further scientific research.

 

 

 

Great post. I too don't think the example I gave proves anything. But I do believe regardless.

 

Speaking of people without preconceived notions, I just saw a video the other day of an atheist who had an NDE and it shook her to the core. 

 

The ones that really get me are the out-of-body experiences where the person knows something that simply can't be possible within the constraint of a human body. For example, I read one NDE where the person was in the operating room, coded, floated above their body and throughout the hospital into the waiting room and saw their family members talking and waiting for the surgery to be over. A few days after they were brought back to life, they told their family about the conversation she heard them having in that waiting room. And it was accurate. The waiting room was quite far away from the operating room and it would be impossible for them to have heard it.

[Augie]

3 hours ago, WhoTom said:

The clip above is an example of anecdotal evidence. As you said, many people have had NDEs which are very real to them, but don't meet the criteria for empirical evidence and serious scientific consideration. That's why I'd always attributed NDEs to random brain activity that continues after the heart stops. But last year, I saw an article in Discover magazine that briefly discussed the book "After: A Doctor Explores What Near-Death Experiences Reveal About Life and Beyond." The article piqued my interest, so I read the book.

 

The physician who wrote it has done extensive scientific research on the subject. He was raised in a secular environment with no discussion of an afterlife, so he has no preconceived notions that would bias him toward believing that there's anything beyond the here and now. Yet, he offers some empirical evidence that there may, indeed, be more to it.

 

If nothing else, he convinced me that the subject warrants further scientific research.

 

 

 

When I was in high school at St Joe’s they made us read some NDE books by Dr Raymond Moody and Elizabeth Kubler Ross (why do I still remember those names?). It made me curious enough to read countless (dozens, I’m sure) other books and accounts over the years since.

 

I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. I’m just saying it can make you very curious. 

2 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Great post. I too don't think the example I gave proves anything. But I do believe regardless.

 

Speaking of people without preconceived notions, I just saw a video the other day of an atheist who had an NDE and it shook her to the core. 

 

The ones that really get me are the out-of-body experiences where the person knows something that simply can't be possible within the constraint of a human body. For example, I read one NDE where the person was in the operating room, coded, floated above their body and throughout the hospital into the waiting room and saw their family members talking and waiting for the surgery to be over. A few days after they were brought back to life, they told their family about the conversation she heard them having in that waiting room. And it was accurate. The waiting room was quite far away from the operating room and it would be impossible for them to have heard it.

 

I just watched a fairly recent 20 minute YouTube clip with Dr Moody. It’s an interesting watch, IMO. 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwir-pXu16f9AhUFiO4BHfWnCFwQwqsBegQIERAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIy-4QNq4HF4&usg=AOvVaw0uRSFbJbDDuKzHY-05aaXh

 

EDIT: Ooops! But you get the idea. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Augie

[Big Turk]

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

The clip above is an example of anecdotal evidence. As you said, many people have had NDEs which are very real to them, but don't meet the criteria for empirical evidence and serious scientific consideration. That's why I'd always attributed NDEs to random brain activity that continues after the heart stops. But last year, I saw an article in Discover magazine that briefly discussed the book "After: A Doctor Explores What Near-Death Experiences Reveal About Life and Beyond." The article piqued my interest, so I read the book.

 

The physician who wrote it has done extensive scientific research on the subject. He was raised in a secular environment with no discussion of an afterlife, so he has no preconceived notions that would bias him toward believing that there's anything beyond the here and now. Yet, he offers some empirical evidence that there may, indeed, be more to it.

 

If nothing else, he convinced me that the subject warrants further scientific research.

 

 

 

The problem is science will never be able to explain everything and fit it in the nice, neat little box we want it to.

 

Additionally, some of the foundational scientific laws are either likely wrong or flawed in some ways meaning everything built on top of those needs to come into question.

 

Humans think we know so much but we know virtually nothing in the grand scheme of things. Quantum physics calls a lot of what we "know" to be fundamentally true into question.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/a-new-quantum-paradox-throws-the-foundations-of-observed-reality-into-question

Edited February 21, 2023 by Big Turk

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

The problem is science will never be able to explain everything and fit it in the nice, neat little box we want it to.

 

Additionally, some of the foundational scientific laws are either likely wrong or flawed in some ways meaning everything built on top of those needs to come into question.

 

I don’t think we are nearly as smart as we think we are. Forget answers, we don’t even know the questions. 

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, Big Turk said:

The problem is science will never be able to explain everything and fit it in the nice, neat little box we want it to.

 

True. There are some questions that science will never be able to answer, which is why science makes some people uncomfortable - they want everything to fit into those neat little boxes, so they gravitate toward systems that claim to know absolute truths.

 

Scientists accept uncertainties - it goes with the territory. I don't deal in absolutes, I deal in degrees of confidence. The more empirical evidence there is to support an idea, the more confidence I have in its veracity. I don't necessarily rule out things that can't be supported by evidence - as long as they're not flat-out refuted by overwhelming evidence - but I don't base my life choices on the assumption that those things are true.

 

[Augie]

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

 

True. There are some questions that science will never be able to answer, which is why science makes some people uncomfortable - they want everything to fit into those neat little boxes, so they gravitate toward systems that claim to know absolute truths.

 

Scientists accept uncertainties - it goes with the territory. I don't deal in absolutes, I deal in degrees of confidence. The more empirical evidence there is to support an idea, the more confidence I have in its veracity. I don't necessarily rule out things that can't be supported by evidence - as long as they're not flat-out refuted by overwhelming evidence - but I don't base my life choices on the assumption that those things are true.

 

 

I think you know I respect your opinions, so please take this as it is meant: Can you explain dark energy and dark matter to me? And why does it make up for about 95% of the universe, while things we “know” as in can see or touch is reportedly a tiny part of what we think is out there. 

 

I don’t want to go near any gray areas here, but the universe never revolved around the Earth. To think they knew enough to declare that is pure hubris in my mind. I’m wide open to any and all opinions. I can’t say I know enough to even have an opinion. 

 

EDIT: To be fair, many sources say dark energy/matter are 96%, while others say it’s “only” 68-72%, which goes to further support the point, which is…..I dunno!  And I don’t think they do either. 

 

. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Augie

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

 

[Toomstone.Part.Duex]

I was always fascinated with NDE.  I watched this doc on netflix and it's pretty good.  Some of the episodes are questionable.  The best one is with the hospice doctor who did a study on patients end of life experiences and seeing loved ones who already passed moments before their death.   

 

 

 

[WhoTom]

13 hours ago, Augie said:

 

I think you know I respect your opinions, so please take this as it is meant: Can you explain dark energy and dark matter to me? And why does it make up for about 95% of the universe, while things we “know” as in can see or touch is reportedly a tiny part of what we think is out there. 

 

I don’t want to go near any gray areas here, but the universe never revolved around the Earth. To think they knew enough to declare that is pure hubris in my mind. I’m wide open to any and all opinions. I can’t say I know enough to even have an opinion. 

 

EDIT: To be fair, many sources say dark energy/matter are 96%, while others say it’s “only” 68-72%, which goes to further support the point, which is…..I dunno!  And I don’t think they do either. 

 

. 

 

I don't know if anyone can explain dark matter or dark energy. The "dark" part of the name implies "unseen," as in, we can't detect it directly but we can see its effects on the universe.

 

It would be naive to think that reality is limited to what we can observe and measure. There are creatures that live in caves or deep undersea—places where sunlight never penetrates. Those animals have no eyes and no concept of light. They evolved—or God designed them, if you prefer—to survive in an environment devoid of optical stimuli. Nonetheless, we know light (or more generically, electromagnetic energy) exists because we have sensors that they lack. So I'm open to the possibility that another type of energy exists—one that we have no way of sensing. If there's an eternal soul, perhaps it exists in a form of energy we simply can't detect.

 

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by WhoTom