The problem with NDE's

**Zhavric** · 3rd August 2006, 03:09 PM

NDE is short for Near Death Experience. This is where someone goes unconscious, becomes clinically dead, sees some sort of vision, and is then revived to tell the tale.

Here's why they're bunk.

1) When does an NDE take place?

Did you have a dream last night? Do you know when it occured? Most people who said yes to the first would answer no to the second unless they actually looked to see what time it was (by a clock / seeing the sun or moon / etc).

Those arguing in favor of NDE's always overlook the fact that NO ONE has ever gone from being completely conscious to having an NDE and back to complete consciousness. Most individuals who experience them are in hospitals, not in their right minds and slip out of consciousness... sometimes for hours.

So, to believe all this, you must accept that individuals develop some magical sixth sense that allows them to tell when their experiences take place... an ability they lack while healthy, but which they miraculously gain while DEAD.

Please.

"Nope. It couldn't have been a dream while I was asleep after they got done bringing me back. I know I saw teh god while I was dead. Because... I say so!"

2) Rare occurances.

I have no doubt that there are individuals who see something when they go under (probably while they're unconscious, but still very much alive), but for every person that has an NDE, there are hundreds or even thousands who do not. They are rare occurances and even under near identical conditions some individuals never report having them.

I'm also sure there are a number of people who claim to have them to gain attention.

3) They prove nothing.

You went clinically dead and came back. Your brain worked before. Your brain works after. Even if you flatline, it's far more likely that your brain was semi-working while you were under... (Remember that many hospitals don't attach brain wave monitors to trauma patients.) ... than something mystical happened to a non-existant "soul" you've convinced yourself you have.

If we wanted to, we could spend days imagining supernatural elements for every aspect of our bodies.

NDE's just evidence that we don't know everything about the brain. Calling them anything beyond hallucinations is just a form of god-of-gaps reasoning.

**CliveStaples** · 3rd August 2006, 03:39 PM

NDEs prove nothing to people who don't experience them, imo.

And this is only further proof of Soren Kierkegaard's point about faith--that even if we saw God, we wouldn't automatically become Christians and believe in Him. Dutch Christian Existentialist philosophers FTW.

**Zinkovich** · 3rd August 2006, 03:44 PM

NDE's are merely nonconclusive concerning the existence of the supernatural realm. Beyond that I will say nothing concerning the truth or falsity of their experiences unless they can show how their experiences are uncongruous with the NDE's observed in centrifuges that have shown to be at least in part derived from mental activity.

**Amuse** · 3rd August 2006, 04:31 PM

Quote by: Zhavric

NDE is short for Near Death Experience. This is where someone goes unconscious, becomes clinically dead, sees some sort of vision, and is then revived to tell the tale.

Here's why they're bunk.

1) When does an NDE take place?

Did you have a dream last night? Do you know when it occured? Most people who said yes to the first would answer no to the second unless they actually looked to see what time it was (by a clock / seeing the sun or moon / etc).

Those arguing in favor of NDE's always overlook the fact that NO ONE has ever gone from being completely conscious to having an NDE and back to complete consciousness. Most individuals who experience them are in hospitals, not in their right minds and slip out of consciousness... sometimes for hours.

So, to believe all this, you must accept that individuals develop some magical sixth sense that allows them to tell when their experiences take place... an ability they lack while healthy, but which they miraculously gain while DEAD.

Please.

"Nope. It couldn't have been a dream while I was asleep after they got done bringing me back. I know I saw teh god while I was dead. Because... I say so!"

2) Rare occurances.

I have no doubt that there are individuals who see something when they go under (probably while they're unconscious, but still very much alive), but for every person that has an NDE, there are hundreds or even thousands who do not. They are rare occurances and even under near identical conditions some individuals never report having them.

I'm also sure there are a number of people who claim to have them to gain attention.

3) They prove nothing.

You went clinically dead and came back. Your brain worked before. Your brain works after. Even if you flatline, it's far more likely that your brain was semi-working while you were under... (Remember that many hospitals don't attach brain wave monitors to trauma patients.) ... than something mystical happened to a non-existant "soul" you've convinced yourself you have.

If we wanted to, we could spend days imagining supernatural elements for every aspect of our bodies.

NDE's just evidence that we don't know everything about the brain. Calling them anything beyond hallucinations is just a form of god-of-gaps reasoning.

If you are trying to say that all NDE's result in the person having a "religious" experience you haven't done a whole lot of research in this area and are just generalizing. I suppose your absolute statment about NED's is one more facet of being an athiest in order to explain your "faith". Each of us fears death and to what degree is something personal but it is tied to our basic ego self that controls our most primitive animal instincts. A suicidal person craves death, a warrior thinks about death, an enlightend one accepts death, an athiest ignors death and a christian fears death.

Before you make up your mind about what happens during NED's I suggest you read Michael Newtons book Journey of Souls and Destiny Of Souls. He is a psycotherapist who has spent most of his years in practice researching what happens to us after death. Of coarse, if you don't believe in hypnosis then you would be wasting your time but I assure you it in no way has anything to do with religion or God or anything like it. If it did I wouldn't recommend it because I don't by into that ideology at all.

**Lullaby Chainer** · 3rd August 2006, 04:58 PM

Quote by: Zhavric

NDE is short for Near Death Experience. This is where someone goes unconscious, becomes clinically dead, sees some sort of vision, and is then revived to tell the tale.

Here's why they're bunk.

1) When does an NDE take place?

Did you have a dream last night? Do you know when it occured? Most people who said yes to the first would answer no to the second unless they actually looked to see what time it was (by a clock / seeing the sun or moon / etc).

Those arguing in favor of NDE's always overlook the fact that NO ONE has ever gone from being completely conscious to having an NDE and back to complete consciousness. Most individuals who experience them are in hospitals, not in their right minds and slip out of consciousness... sometimes for hours.

So, to believe all this, you must accept that individuals develop some magical sixth sense that allows them to tell when their experiences take place... an ability they lack while healthy, but which they miraculously gain while DEAD.

Please.

"Nope. It couldn't have been a dream while I was asleep after they got done bringing me back. I know I saw teh god while I was dead. Because... I say so!"

2) Rare occurances.

I have no doubt that there are individuals who see something when they go under (probably while they're unconscious, but still very much alive), but for every person that has an NDE, there are hundreds or even thousands who do not. They are rare occurances and even under near identical conditions some individuals never report having them.

I'm also sure there are a number of people who claim to have them to gain attention.

3) They prove nothing.

You went clinically dead and came back. Your brain worked before. Your brain works after. Even if you flatline, it's far more likely that your brain was semi-working while you were under... (Remember that many hospitals don't attach brain wave monitors to trauma patients.) ... than something mystical happened to a non-existant "soul" you've convinced yourself you have.

If we wanted to, we could spend days imagining supernatural elements for every aspect of our bodies.

NDE's just evidence that we don't know everything about the brain. Calling them anything beyond hallucinations is just a form of god-of-gaps reasoning.

I'd like to add to this. Below is a great page on NDEs, compliments of the Skeptic's Dictionary.

http://www.control-z.com/pages/czbar...c.com/nde.html

You can find more information on funny beliefs and why people believe them here.

http://www.control-z.com/pages/bbr.html

**Captain Chaos** · 3rd August 2006, 05:00 PM

For anyone who cares to read more seriously about this topic, here is a good start:

http://iands.org/research/vanLommel/vanLommel.php

This is a paper written by the lead investigator of a prospective study of NDEs. Among other things, he relates the case of a man who, while in cardiac arrest and by all appearances dead, was floating out of his body and watched while an orderly removed his dentures. Later, he recognized the orderly and asked to have his dentures returned.

This is an example of veridical information gathering.

The skeptic explanation is that resuscitation efforts are supporting a limited consciousness and the person is piecing together auditory cues in order to form a mental picture.

The skeptic explanation assumes that a brain undergoing this degree of trauma and oxygen denial is capable of supporting very lucid consciousness. The brain researchers who study NDEs do not buy this argument.

In the Pam Reynolds case, for example, the skeptic who attempted to debunk that particular case had to resort to claiming that the EEG device conveninetly stopped working, rather than admit to the possibility that she was experiencing consciousness while her brain was non-functional:

Here is what the skeptic in question said:

Quote by: G.M.Woerlee

Why was her awareness not signaled by the VEP monitoring, or her electroencephalogram at the time she was able to observe what was happening in the operating room, or during her out of body experience? After all, both the awareness and the out of body experience are conscious experiences, and can only occur in a conscious brain. The embarrassing and humbling truth is that these monitors of consciousness are not 100% reliable. Measurements such as these, and other measurements are generally very reliable, but due to a variety of reasons, are simply not 100% reliable. This is certainly my experience, as well as that of other anesthesiologists. I have occasionally heard a patient tell me after an operation during which their clinical signs convinced me that they were asleep, that they were awake during part of the operation. These are humbling experiences, and ones which show that even careful monitoring is not always accurate. For example, recently a woman to who I administered general anesthesia for a varicose vein operation was quite evidently awake during her operation, (she felt no pain, but did respond to command to lift her head and grasp the hand of the anesthetic nurse), remembered absolutely nothing of her period of awareness after awakening.

From this site: http://www.mortalminds.org/reynolds.html

Now, notice that this author says this:

After all, both the awareness and the out of body experience are conscious experiences, and can only occur in a conscious brain.

He is attempting to establish that awareness can only occur in a conscious brain. He argues his point, in part, by making the claim that awareness can only occur in a conscious brain. This is known as begging the question.

These sorts of rationalizations are what skeptics have to resort to in order to explain away NDEs. There have been multiple NDEs in which veridical information has been presented. You can believe ad hoc explanations for every one of them, or you can believe that they are actually experiences what they perceive they are experiencings. The latter requires much less rationalization.

Another crucial component of NDEs is the life review. This occurs as a consistent process. A guide meets you, shows you the highlights of your life, comments on the things you did well and the things you did badly, and sometimes even shows you how your actions affected others, from their point of view.

I have never seen a reasonable skeptic explanations for why this process occurs consistently across cultures.

**Zhavric** · 3rd August 2006, 07:01 PM

Another crucial component of NDEs is the life review. This occurs as a consistent process. A guide meets you, shows you the highlights of your life, comments on the things you did well and the things you did badly, and sometimes even shows you how your actions affected others, from their point of view.

Ever seen any of the old 50's films of people who would gather in the dessert to meet up with UFO's?

**Zinkovich** · 3rd August 2006, 07:11 PM

Captain Chaos can you give me some in depth books, from both the skeptical and non-skeptical sides, covering NDE's without all the, well, prostelytizing? You know what I mean.

What is your take on the centrifuge tests by the airforce that shows NDE's can be consistently triggered under high gravitic conditions after passing out?

I must admit I have more to read. If anyone has more material, I will take it into consideration. However, so far I find it likely that the cause is NOT supernatural.

It probably is similar accross cultures because NDE's may involve the same sort of hallucinigenic state in the brain. For an example of symptoms being the same amongst cultures in the NDE sense, read up on some of the studies collected on hallucinegenic drugs such as LSD. The state triggered by LSD is also the same across cultures, so it would make for an interesting comparison, to say the least. If you wait a while I will find some relevant studies.

**Rainbow** · 3rd August 2006, 07:37 PM

Quote by: Zhavric

NDE's just evidence that we don't know everything about the brain. Calling them anything beyond hallucinations is just a form of god-of-gaps reasoning.

Syllogism.
Since we do not know everything about the brain (despite that Medicine is the most progressive and advanced discipline - thanks to computer technology, mostly), there are no valid and/or scientificaly supported means, in order to verify it.

**Amuse** · 3rd August 2006, 09:03 PM

People- the brain is not a depository of information, it is only a processor of information and a poor one at that. The proscessing that takes place is also influenced by the ego which more times than not is false and highly positional with regards to self preservation and determined by scocietal position, status and soul evolution.

There are three levels of consiousness- 1) consciousness = physical awareness which is corporeal, 2) subconsciousness = dream/ out of body state, the bridge between conscious and supraconscious, 3) supraconsciousness = connection to all that is/ the Self/God consciousness.

**Zinkovich** · 3rd August 2006, 09:38 PM

Quote by: Amuse

People- the brain is not a depository of information, it is only a processor of information and a poor one at that. The proscessing that takes place is also influenced by the ego which more times than not is false and highly positional with regards to self preservation and determined by scocietal position, status and soul evolution.

There are three levels of consiousness- 1) consciousness = physical awareness which is corporeal, 2) subconsciousness = dream/ out of body state, the bridge between conscious and supraconscious, 3) supraconsciousness = connection to all that is/ the Self/God consciousness.

These three levels, of course, are the result of pure speculation I take it?

Please, post your proofs that NDE is a bridge to a higher conciousness and not a hallucination.

A further quesiton: Have you ever done hallucingenic drugs? You'll be amazed at the sort of stuff you see, that is a result of purely your own ego and not real.