NDEs and OBEs are nothing exceptional, as empirical science has amply demonstrated through observation, experimentation, replication and falsification. In reality, they are nothing more than but brain-caused hallucinations brought on by anything from oxygen deprivation to the brain itself, to in-brain receptors taking in LSD-like substances which induce organic-chemical responses which NDE believers mistakenly interpret as manifestations of life-after-death experiential realities--which they demonstrably are not.
_____


Let's review some basics:

In a previous post, RfM contributor “Jesus Smith” referenced an intriguing and informative science article on the brain activity of dying rats--one which underscored the neuro-biological realities (not spiritual mythologies) of so-called “near-death experiences” (NDEs).

(“NDE in Rats? Think Again, If You're Not Brain Dead,” posted by “Jesus Smith,” on “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, 13 August 2013, at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,988289,988289#msg-988289)


The article, headlined “Near-Death Experiences Are 'Electrical Surge in Dying Brain,'” reports that based on the results of experiments published in the “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sicience,” the brain at the edge of death is, according to the study’s lead author Dr. Jimo Borigin (University of Michigan), "much more active during the dying process than even the waking state."

The article reports that the near-death process of the brain involves a myriad of neurological sensations, as described by those experiencing the NDE, These range "[f]rom bright white lights to out-of-body sensations and feelings of life flashing before their eyes . . . .”

Borigin notes that tests performed on dying rats detected the presence of upper-frequency, electrically-pulsing gamma rays which “were found at even higher levels just after the cardiac arrest than when animals were awake and well”--and which Borigin believes could feasibly “happen in the human brain, and that an elevated level of brain activity and consciousness could give rise to near-death visions.”

The article reports the enthusiastic response of other scientists to the research findings:

“Commenting on the research, Dr. Jason Braithwaite, of the University of Birmingham, said the phenomenon appeared to be the brain's ‘last hurrah.’

"’This is a very neat demonstration of an idea that's been around for a long time: that under certain unfamiliar and confusing circumstances--like near-death--the brain becomes over-stimulated and hyper-excited,’ he said.

"’Like “fire raging through the brain,” activity can surge through brain areas involved in conscious experience, furnishing all resultant perceptions with realer-than-real feelings and emotions.’

“But he added: ‘One limitation is that we do not know when, in time, the near-death experience really occurs. Perhaps it was before patients had anaesthesia, or at some safe point during an operation long before cardiac arrest.

"’However, for those instances where experiences may occur around the time of cardiac arrest --or beyond it --these new findings provide further meat to the bones of the idea that the brain drives these fascinating and striking experiences.’”

(“Near-Death Experiences Are 'Electrical Surge in Dying Brain,'” by Rebecca Morelle, science reporter, “BBC World Service” 12 August 2013, at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23672150)
_____


These findings underscore what mainstream science has known for some time about both the planetary reality and the in-brain neuro-chemistry of “near-death experiences.”

As Matthew Alper, author of “The ‘God’ Part of the Brain: A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God,” writes:

“. . . [[T]he near-death experience has been reported by a cross-section of nearly every population and must therefore constitute an inherent part of the human condition. As with all other cross-cultural behaviors, this would suggest that the near-death experience . . . most likely represents the consequence of a genetically-inherited trait, a biologically-based response to specific stimuli. Though near-death experiences are conventionally interpreted from a spiritual perspective—the consequence of a brief encounter with the afterworld—I assert that, like all other spiritually-conceived experiences, these, too, are STRICTLY NEURO-PHSYIOLOGICAL IN NATURE” (emphasis added).

Alper proceeds to make the case for the NDE as a purely biological, neurological and chemical phenomenon occurring within the brain itself that is NOT connected to, or stemming from, any so-called “out-of-body” or “spiritual” experience. He breaks these organic causes into various categories.
_____


--NDEs and the Depletion of Oxygen/Blood Flow to the Brain

Alper explains that oxygen and blood supplies are nearly always critical factors in the production of NDEs:

“For starts, near-death experiences almost always occur as a result of decreased blood flow to the brain and/or a lack of oxygen, usually from shock induced either fro severe infection (septic shock), from myocardial ischemia (cardiogenic shock), cardiac arrest or the effects of anesthesia. Apparently, the NDS is integrally linked to one’s physical chemistry.”
_____


--Accounts of Intense Bright Lights During NDEs Are Interpreted by Believers as Proof of an Immortal Soul and Afterlife, but Science Has a Sounder Explanation

Alper recounts how Plato, in his “Republic,” tells “the story of Er, the son of Armenius, who allegedly dies and then comes back to tell the story of his existence during his temporary ascension to heaven and consequent return to the living. During Er’s experience with death, he describes a vison he had of a ‘bright and pur column of light, extending right through the whole of heaven.’ Such descriptions of visions of a bright and often dazzling or blind light leading to heave constitutes one of the key symptoms of the NDE and therefore leads many to believe that what Plato was narrating was just that. It is through Er/s tale that Plato goes on to advance the notion of an immortal soul, as well as an afterlife in his work. As a matter of fact, the NDE might very well represent one of the primary means through which humans validate a belief in some form of an afterlife. . . .

“ . . . [A] common symptom of the NDE, similar to the one narrated [above]by Plato, is described as a sensation of being led down a dark tunnel and then drawn toward a blinding white light, one that is often interpreted as holding religious significance, such as being representative of heaven’s gates. (Such descriptions as these—of experiencing a ‘piercing’ or ‘blinding’ white light—have been attributed to activity within the brain’s optic nerve which has a tendency to erratically flare when deprived of its normal oxygen supply). It is during this same part of the experience that a person will often express a feeling of being engulfed, not just by ‘the light,’ but also by God’s presence.”
_____


--Endorphins Explain the NDE Ecstasy

Alper offers scientific explanations for NDE good vibrations:

“Though there is no international standard through which to formally define a NDE, studies show vast similarities in description of this phenomenon, ones that cross all cultural boundaries (Fenwick, 1997; Feng and Lin, 1976, Parischa and Stevenson, 1986) . . . [I]n the majority of recorded accounts, the first thing most recall of their experience is a feeling of intense fear and pain that is suddenly replaced by a sense of clam, peace and equanimity (similar to those sensations attributed to more generic spiritual experiences). To offer support of a neuro-physical model to explain this phenomenon, D. B Carr suggested (1981, 1989) that the aforementioned sensations, in so far as they are experienced during a NDE, might come as a result of a flood release of endogenous opiods (endorphins).”
_____


--The NDE Cousin (the Out-of-Body Experience") Is Way More In-the-Brain than Out-of-the-Body

Alper addresses the relationship between OBEs and NDEs:

“[In order of frequency after the ‘sense of calmness or euphoria’ produced in a NDE], the next most often-related symptom to occur during an NDE is that of an OBE, or ‘out-of-body’ experience. Here, the person describes a sensation of rising or floating outside of one’s physical body and, in some cases, even being able to look down at one’s self from above. One hospital, in order to validate claims of ‘out –of-‘body’ experiences, placed an LED marquee above its patients’ beds which displayed a secret message that could only be read if one were looking down from above. To date, not one person who has claimed to have had a NDE or ‘out-of-body’ experience from within this hospital has expressed having seen the message.

“During this part of the [NDE] experience, those undergoing an OBE have expressed a sense that their limbs are ‘moving within their mind,’ though they are actually immobile. This is similar to the type of hallucinations, or ‘confabulations,’ suffered by those who sustain right parietal lesions--yet another indication that such experiences can be traced to one’s neuro-physical activity as opposed to originating from one’s alleged spirit or soul.”
_____


--“Spiritual” Commonalities between NDEs, Epileptic Seizures and Psychedelic Drug Use

Alper explains the shared effects among the three:

“Similar to accounts of those who have had either a temporal lob seizure or experimented with entheogenic [psychedelic] drugs, those who have undergone a NDE will almost invariably interpret the experience as being spiritual in nature:

“’Hallucinogen ingestion and temporolimbic epilepsy produce a near-identical experience as described by persons having a near-death experience. These brain disturbances produce de-personalization, de-realization, ecstasy, a sense of timelessness and spacelessness, and other experiences that foster religious-numinous interpretation.’ (‘Journal of Neuropsychiatry: Clinical Neuroscience,' 1997, Summer 9[3], pp. 498-510)

“Consequently, it is no surprise that a significant number of those who undergo a NDE claim that it strengthens their faith in God, a soul and an afterlife. Regardless of how these experiences are interpreted, we must ask ourselves: ‘Is this type of experience transcendental in nature or, like all other types of spiritual experiences, are we dealing with a serious of strictly neuro-physical events?’”
_____


--NDEs are Facilitated by the Brain’s Chemical-Transmitting Receptors

Alper describes how brain-based chemicals create the NDE experience:

“One key to answering [the above] question comes through the research of a Dr. Karl Jansen who has found that ‘[n]ear-death experiences can be induced by using the dissociative drug ketamine’ (K.I.R. Jansen, M.D., ‘Using Ketamine to Induce the Near-Death Experience,’ p. 64).

"Dr. Jansen’s report goes on to state that ‘[i]t is now clear that NDEs are due to the blockade of brain receptors (drug-binding sites) for the neurotransmitter glutamate. These binding sites are called the N-methly-D-asparate (NMDA) receptors. Conditions which precipitate NDEs (low oxygen, low blood flow, low blood sugar, temporal lobe epilepsy, etc.) have been shown to release a flood of glutamate, over-activating NMDA receptors. Conditions which trigger a glutamate flood may also trigger a flood of ketamine-like brain chemicals, leading to an altered state of consciousness,’ (ibid., p. 73)

“It was also found than an intravenous injection of 50-100mg of ketamine reproduces all of the features commonly associated with the near-death experience. (Sputz, 1989; Jansen, 1995, 1996). Even Timothy Leary, the notorious psychedelic drug advocate of the 1960s, described his experiences with ketamine as an ‘experiment in voluntary death’ (Leary, 1983).

“Similar to the manner in which entheogenic drugs trigger the symptoms of a ‘spiritual’ experience, the drug ketamine can be used to synthetically trigger the symptoms of a near-death experience. “
_____


--Neuro-Chemistry, Not Spirituality, is the Source of NDEs

Alper lays out the scientific foundations of NDEs:

“What [the above] suggests is that, as with any other type of spiritual experience, near-death experiences are rooted in our neuro-chemistry. Apparently, the NDE represents the consequence of a physiological mechanism that enables our species to cope with the overwhelming pain and anxiety associated with the experience of death and dying.

“Once again, though such evidence can never prove there is not spiritual reality, it is certainly indicative that this might very well be the case. “

(Matthew Alper, “The God Part of the Brain: A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God” [New York, New York: Rogue Press, 2000], Chapter 8, “Near-Death Experiences,” pp. 140-43, and “Endnotes,” #79-81, p. 177)

**********


For those who might still want to believe in the alleged "spiritual/religious/godly/immortal" reality of NDEs, you're in a sense right:

It's all in your head. Enjoy the ride.

:)

Thanks for quantifying the NDE, Steve. My two NDE experiences only confirm what you said:

1. I hyperventilated in a high school chemistry class and blacked out. I had used a good bit of herb earlier, and I figured that didn't help my nerves. After going unconscious, I felt myself floating in pitch black space. I was drifting toward a very faint light that resembled ultraviolet. Then I came to, and I felt nauseous. My verdict: hallucination due to oxygen poisoning and intoxication.

2. I overdosed on mushrooms at a Grateful Dead concert (yes, cliches do happen) and hit the floor lights out. I found myself lying in an open grave with hooded monks chanting over my body at night in a cemetery. My friend shook me back into consciousness and said I'd looked possessed while under. My verdict: hallucination caused by psilocybin poisoning.

These are just anecdotal, I know, but experience shapes our thinking. It's all in how you interpret the events.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2014 09:31PM by donbagley.

Only the missionary zeal in me wants to say what I believe but cannot prove. So I will say it without arguing with anyone. I haven't had an obe however I believe many remote viewing experiences. Based on study and experiences I believe in a after life where we will be spirits/energy (no need for physical bodies). We are eternal. A God but sorry no hell or Christ (no original sin) but may be some penalties for living rotten lives.

For the last 2 months (on and off) I have been studying psychic, medium, meditation, and reincarnation type books. I became interested in it because I have had a number of psychic and after death communications in the past. I did quite a few of the 'exercises' to test my psychic potential and although many seemed not to work others worked and amazed me. I have had around 80 premonitions that occurred the same day and have been maybe 10% at most didn't occur or occurred on the next day or at least I didn't notice them. Sometimes I asked to see accidents that will be on the news and sometimes got back some impressions. I got 4 of them some resulted in deaths (4) that made me feel sad that I should have tried to get more info than I did, others loss of property and the last made me feel I had time to warn someone but was not confident enough to drive up and verify the situation then put up a warning sign (Sardine canyon rock slide).

Anyway I have proved to myself I/others can get future
information and can be warned by spirits on the other side of danger. I also believed I have remote viewed areas and had adequate proof I have communicated with spirit(s). At least 2 instances really sure (got specific info that was validated) the others less sure but strong feelings accompanied each discussion (agree feelings can be deceiving). Will try to get info from spirit in the future to validate the communication existed. Also, need to have someone put a note at a location so I can remote view it to see if I can read it.

Bottom line if it is all in my head ----- great lets all work on being able to look into the future and hopefully help save someone from harm and learn the truth about God. Does seem to work better when I request help from God during meditation/meditative moment. These types of abilities are available to anyone with some time to study and a little faith to give it a try. My public library had numerous books on Psychic/medium stuff ---- look for a book with exercises to test or develop your abilities. Try it yourself before agreeing with 'science'.

P.S. Don't tell psychology and parapsychology students that science has proved that this is all hogwash they get college educations in this. One college I read about (Athens State University in Alabama) has classes on these areas and infer all students experience these types of abilities and experiences in their 'psychology lab' classes. The book I have includes many of the procedures/meditations/visualizations they use in their classes for their psychology students.

After picking up on this stuff(lets call it spiritualism) the urge to argue with naysayers and id research/support for it is just not consistent with what I am learning/feeling/getting out of it. Therefore, I totally agree with you, but I am not trying to get anyone to pay for any religion. Everyone has a right to be skeptical until they try it for themselves. I was certainly skeptical by just saying well that was just a coincidence but after 20 or so coincidences it gets tougher and tougher. Hopefully, I can verify these things and I will write a book or at least make a post here to show how I verified them with some independent people.

Like I said I have called at least 4 news stories and many other non reportable viewings in advance that were right on, I am not sure I am 100% always as I can remember seeing an incident at one location that either wasn't that sever to make the news or an incident there occurred a few days later and was reported. I think a number of larger cities have psychics help in police investigations. Also, popular mediums abound on TV ----- a lot of past shows are on the internet. John Edward and the long island medium I believe are pretty convincing ----- notice how the people getting the readings react to the evidence (items mentioned that were not the real message but items to convince them that the medium is really communicating with a relative). The message is normally, that there is an afterlife and infants that died are being raised there by relatives, etc.

Concerning John Edwards, from wiki:

"Critics of Edward assert he performs the mentalist techniques of hot reading and cold reading, in which one respectively uses prior knowledge or a wide array of quick and sometimes general guesses to create the impression of psychic ability.[13][14][15][16] Choosing the first reading from a two hour tape of edited shows as a sample, magician and skeptic James Randi found that just three of 23 statements made by Edward were confirmed as correct by the audience member being read, and the three statements that were correct were also trivial and nondescript.[17] In another incident, Edward was said to have used foreknowledge to hot read in an interview on the television show Dateline.[18] James Underdown of the Independent Investigative Group (IIG) attended a Crossing Over show in November 2002 and said "there were no indications of anyone I saw collecting information... none of his readings contained the kind of specific information that would raise an eyebrow of suspicion. ... John Edward was a bad cold reader. He, too, struggled to get hits, and in one attempt shot off nearly 40 guesses before finding any significant targets."[19]

Another criticism has been that Edward's apparent accuracy on television may be inflated by the editing process.[14] After watching the broadcast version of the show he had attended and recorded, Underdown attributed a great deal of Edward's accuracy on television to editing and wrote, "Edward's editor fine-tuned many of the dead-ends out of a reading riddled with misses."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edward

Concerning The Long Island Medium, from wiki:

"Some observers have expressed doubts as to the veracity of Caputo's abilities and suggested that the show's seemingly paranormal performances could simply be the result of age-old exploits like the Forer effect, cold reading, selective editing, and her subjects' eagerness to believe.[1][2][68]

In 2012, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Caputo a Pigasus Award for being, in its view, the "psychic" performer who fooled the greatest number of people with the least effort in the preceding year. A Pigasus award was also given to TLC for continuing to air the show.[69] In an article published by Wired Magazine the organization's founder James Randi explained why he believed shows like Long Island Medium were deceptive and potentially harmful to its participants:

Why do these pseudo-psychic spectacles bother those of us at the James Randi Educational Foundation? First, and foremost: They are not true. [...] But much more importantly to us, such performances seem to prey on people at their most vulnerable moments — those who have suffered the loss of loved ones — and these mediums use such grief to make a buck. Psychologists tell us this keeps the grieving stuck in their grief, rather than going through the natural stages of acceptance that are healthy.
—James Randi"



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Island_Medium

Appreciate the quick response. I would rather have someone that actually was in the audience, got the reading, etc. that would say something given all the readings. I have seen Randi's mode of operation. He is just not fair at all. He will not let the psychics work in the environment they normally work in ---- he changes it. If they read palms --- they get pics of palms and have to match them to faces. Unfortunately that is not what palm readers do. so I automatically discount many of Randi's claims. I agree TV editing could occur. If I can't validate my medium experiences soon and even if I can I will probably pay to have a reading from a local medium to see for myself how good or bad they are. One of my intents is to try to ask Spirit religious questions and get some evidence for my TBM family members what religion really is all about. Of course I have asked the questions and have got what I consider answers using a number of psychic/medium techniques.

As far as mediums and the after life I agree I do not have sufficient proof to validate my experiences. Even though, I was told (telepathically) of danger/problems 2 times in my life (validated the danger/problem) and the impression on one was that it came from my dead mom --- so (to me I have proof of help from the unseen) I am getting helped just unsure the source. If it is from my brain, which is possible, our brains are amazing being able to predict the future (my on-going experiences above of seeing the future) and warn us of things we do not see, and talk to us to wake us up to things.

I consider myself a truth seeker and a validator. That requires taking a risk by studying something that most people say is hogwash but some believe in it and proving it or trying to disprove it. Having many successes/coincidences makes that thing hard to give up on and agree with the majority that it is hogwash. Understanding it and fine tuning it is another challenge that I think is well worth the effort if it appears to work a vast majority of the time.

They are real to the people who experienced them, and there are an awful lot, so what difference does it make to rest of us.

Besides, when you pursue quantum physics you eventually arrive at SPIRIT, no matter how much certain experts try to fight it lol.

I'm just glad Mormonism hold no power in the great beyond.

So is the Holy Ghost to Mormons who experience it in their own irrational, uninformed ways.

The question is not that people don't have what they feel are real experiences. The question is whether they are accurately interpreting what they are experiencing based on real evidence.

Welcome to the world of testable, demonstrable science, where observable, proveable explanations--based on quantifiable evidence--is proving hard for religious believers to digest. As much as true believers want to hope and insist otherwise, the overwhelming evidence is that NDEs and OBEs are creations of the brain and that they do not represent, in the least, proof of an afterlife, a soul or any other supernatural, magical constructions (which, by the way, are also trackable creations of the imagination centers of the human brain's temporal lobes).

I can understand the strong resistance that some have to evidence which undermines and ultimately falsifies their sincere, but inaccurate, explanations of what they are feeling. It's hard to let go of fantasy when the fantasy makes one feel good. And that includes your own fanciful ideas of "SPIRIT" and "the great beyond." That great beyond of yours does not extend beyond your cranial cap and that spirit of yours is neurochemical operations at work inside your head.

I know that's hard for you to swallow but, in days gone by, so was the concept of a round Earth.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 01:34PM by steve benson.

steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The question is
> whether they are accurately interpreting what the
> are experiencing.
>


Hmmmmm..... Are you, Steve Benson, "accurately interpreting what [you] are experiencing" right now? How do you know? How would you know?


By the way, what more has been done to the study that Jesus Smith linked to vis-a-vis gamma rays? Was the study replicated? If so, where and by whom? Thank you.

. . . methodological scientific process of discovery, through the clinical examination of evidence, of what can be reasonably be concluded as representing the factual lay of the land at a given moment. Please note that the article regarding the study in question is viewed by the scientific community as a promising empirical approach to a better understanding of NDEs, based on accessible, testable evidence.

On the other hand, spiritual woo-wooism that relies on personal, non-testable anecdotes as "proof" of NDEs/OBEs is nothing but an unreliable, undisciplined, unconstructed and uncontrolled fuzz ball of feeling put together by yearning humans afraid of death who construct an imaginary world based on fancy, not fact. On that score, the evidence is in.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 02:02PM by steve benson.

"The question is not that people don't have what they feel are real experiences. The question is whether they are accurately interpreting what they are experiencing based on real evidence."

No. The REAL question is "W H O" get's to interpret MY experience and then presume to TELL ME whether it was real or an hallucination?--some PHD that has test tubes sticking out of every orifice?

How many of these "induced" hallucinations resulted in positive life and attitude changes in the test subjects?

If the hallucinations DO produce positive personality changes we need to isolate those chemical combinations, bottle that shlT and start spraying the world with those chems out the tailpipes of jetliners as a replacement spray for aluminum and barium being used currently.

"Are your interpretive devices effective in proving claims for NDEs/OBEs as evidence of an afterlife and disembodied spirits with personalities?"

You can interpret all you want. Just back it up with quantifiable, falsifiable, observable, replicatable evidence.

Is that too much to ask?

If it is, then stay in Sunday School. Whatever you do, don't call what you're doing science, because the evidentiary proof to the contrary is eating you alive.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 02:12PM by steve benson.

LOL!!

Religion can be taken COMPLETELY OUT of this NDS question.

It's all a matter of which scientist one chooses to listen to.

The science in support of the NDE was conspicuous by it's

absence in your Darwinian based article.(Google for them.)

Again.

How many of these "induced" hallucinations resulted in

positive life and attitude changes in the test subjects?

If the hallucinations DO produce positive personality changes

we need to isolate those chemical combinations, bottle that

shlT and start spraying the world with them...


Of course, testing of these hallucination-inducing chemicals

must also go through the scientific processes of

being "quantifiable, falsifiable, observable, [and]

replicatable".

Is T H A T too much to ask?

One more tidbit...

I do not use the NDE to "prove" any religion based dogma.

Only that it indicates something is happening to the "life

force" or "energy" or "consciousness" that once occupied the

body, as they "come back" and accurately report on things

they would otherwise have no way of knowing.


Is this "proof"?

No. However, it IS EVIDENCE. Admittedly a small piece, but it

IS evidence. (Hey, we're in the process of gathering all the

evidences so that at some point we can claim a "preponderance

of evidence" which may carry the day.)

(For the closed minded, there will NEVER be enough.)


To borrow a line from Tal Bachman (paraphrased): If the NDE

was a proven fact showing a continuation of life after

bodily death, would you want to know?


To dismiss the science that DOES exist for the NDE is

pretty self-serving--AND, by the way, very Mormon (think DNA

science).

. . . other than religion can't prove them. I'll leave it to science to do what is has already done quite handily: namely, disprove the religious arguments made to supposedly prove them.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them think (which, since you brought up Mormonism, is very Book of Mormonosh with regard to the DNA of its equally non-existent horses).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 05:08PM by steve benson.

This is extremely interesting information and I think that everything Alper says here is entirely reasonable. It does seem though that Steve Benson is attributing a certainty to Alper that Alper is not prepared to claim. In citing all these studies, Alper keeps saying this can or this might explain this part of NDEs. Of course, this type of research is very difficult to do because scientists cannot purposefully deprive people of oxygen to the point of death and then ask them what it was like. They can't exactly ask the mice what they were seeing or feeling when their brains were so active. However, the studies certainly support one POV.

Alper sums up with, "Once again, though such evidence can never prove there is not spiritual reality, it is certainly indicative that this might very well be the case." I totally agree with this assessment and it seems this is exactly what his evidence shows.

In my own view, I do have hope that there is something after this life on Earth. I admit the evidence is scant, but to me it seems a terrible waste if the struggle in this life simply ends and means nothing at death. So, I hope, though I have no idea in what form that next "existence" could be. I know that by my standard here, it would mean a lot of views without hard evidence COULD be true, but I feel justified that my slight hope is reasonable because what happens after we die is the ultimate unknown. Afterlife, no afterlife I do not live my life differently. I think that all religious dogmas are provably false precisely because they do they claim know.

I do not believe in ghost sightings or mediums and the like as it is clear to me that those who claim these experiences are not reliable. There is always something that clues me in to another, more earthly, motivation behind any of these claims I have studied. So, this combined with the evidence that NDEs might be explained by biology, cause me believe that it is more likely there is no "afterlife."

The bottom line remains that no one "knows" for certain. To me, it seems a bit like religion's claims of knowledge to say that one is certain there is nothing after death. Especially after sighting a scientist who says his evidence does not rise to proof of that. I think the belief that there is no life after death is perfectly reasonable, definitely more solidly backed with evidence, but why is it so important to claim certainty? I am all for the truth of the matter, even if it makes me sad. To me, it is always better to know the truth because acting on anything else is a waste. But we do not know the truth in this area.

Science, as an evidence-based and -driven discipline, is self-correcting and the best tool available to humankind to distill fact from fiction. Religion is not self-correcting; rather, it is faith-fueled and rooted in superstition and ignorance.

Ironically, as science continues to push back the fantasies of religious belief, desperate religionists are trying to rescue their credibility by seeking to equate the imaginary claims of religion with the empirical findings of science. The fact that religion's advocates are making this effort demonstrates that religion is actually losing out to science.



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 01:44PM by steve benson.

I too used to be a hard core atheist...

It was easy when my husband was alive. Since his untimely passing I've begun to do some of my own research - searching... What I have found is that science has no explanation for conciseness. I thought they had it all figured out but they don't. I also found out that atheist activists are actively editing Wikipedia for their own benefit. I watched the Richard Dawkins TED talk last week (I am obviously late to the game) and was surprised that he had only his opinion. He just talked about dogma as if you are either a hard core dogmatic religious person or an atheist. I recently read a book by the esteemed journalist, Patricia Pearson, "Opening Heavens Door". Her book is well researched and full of end notes and references. The link to the podcast about Wikipedia is below. Its interesting...

http://www.skeptiko.com/236-rome-viharo-wikipedia-we-have-a-problem/


Now, I suppose I am agnostic and believe in nothing, really but I am open. I am open to hope.

I have come full circle I guess and now feel as if some activist atheists are no different than dogmatic religious people. They just want to prove their points way too much.

But since you are impatient as to what you see as science's lack of sufficient or rapid progress in that area, you plug in (as driven by your personal searching and yearning based in the pain of death experiences) a "god-of-the-gaps" solution, which for you fills areas not yet satisfactorily explained by science with feel-good fantasies that not only make no scientific sense but which have, in many repsects, already been empirically disproven.

I wish I didn't have to be so blunt, but it's time to wake up.

As astronomer Carl Sagan observed in what proved to be his last book, "Billions and Billions," shortly before dying of cancer:

"The world is so exquisite, with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better, it seems to me, to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides."



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 01:29PM by steve benson.

Small correction: When speaking of brain activity it's gamma waves, not gamma rays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray

I really dont think that I am so special in the grand scheme of the universe that my consciousness needs to continue on in the same form that It now exists. Although I suppose that it is possible that consciousness transcends death and that our personality both the good and bad will be preserved in some similar form, I really hope not. As far as wishfull thinking goes, id much rather assume that my atoms would melt back into the universe and therefore be able to tap into cosmic knowledge and know all things albeit unconsciously haha. Would I need to have my ashes dispersed in space to make that happen or would I need to wait for hail bops return?

For all of you quoting Wikipea, maybe when you have time, check out this pod cast. The guy who is interviewed has no skin in the game so to speak so I tend to believe him. Check it out.

http://www.skeptiko.com/236-rome-viharo-wikipedia-we-have-a-problem/

Nearly missed this thread -- Its like squares on a chess board --you have sixty four, 63 are Steve Benson's pseudo science theories and the last one is ""I don't see it that way ".

What about the hospital patient who died on the table, and when she was bought back explained that she saw from above that there was a running shoe on the roof. (Which was later verified) The only thing is , the roof was inaccessible from 4 floors down . Yep the cranial cavity can do really weird things, like transport a dead patient up to the roof and show her a running shoe, all while she was dead on the operating table !!

JB

When you say "Which was later verified", do you mean the whole thing debunked? Because Yes the running shoe in question was on the roof and was easily visible from a number of vantage points.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/keith_augustine/HNDEs.html#maria

. . . of NDEs/OBEs.

What are you looking, searching and praying for? The Holy Grail? (emphasis on Holy).

You ain't gonna find it, just like you ain't gonna find the Holy Gold Plates, either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 05:03PM by steve benson.

I prefer to think we don't understand everything about the brain, scientifically, and the best we can do is draw conclusions from what we know has a possible influence.

There can be no double blind studies! :-)

Human beings tend to like comforting ideas about their lives and the suggestion of an after life as having some continuity.

I actually reviewed this article and found it interesting.

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/35/14432.full.pdf+html

In this study, a group of academics from the University of Michigan Departments of Molecular and Integrative Physiology induced cardiac arrest in laboratory rats, and analyzed changes in neurological functioning on several levels, which included both density, coherence, directed connectivity, and cross-frequency coupling. What all this means is that the neurological state of the rat undergoing cardiac arrest was EEG monitored, and the brain analyzed and compared against how the brain typically functions under normal conditions. Essentially, the authors found that the rat brain in the context of cardiac arrest goes into an excited state with an apparent high level of coordinated brain functioning, suggesting a correspondingly heighted phenomenological experience, perhaps similar to so-called near death experience (NDE).

The article begins by noting the capacity of the human brain to generate internal states of consciousness that deviate from normal experience, including hallucinations and visions. According to the study, approximately 20 percent of cardiac arrest survivors reported internally generated “visions and perceptions.” This means that such patients had some sort of phenomenal, perceptual, experiences without a corresponding external stimulus; i.e. it was all in their head. The study did not discuss the nature of such experiences, and specifically whether such internal perceptions, as reported by cardiac arrest survivors, were similar to NDE reports.

The article proceeds to discuss the frequency ranges of neuronal activity in human subjects during various levels of consciousness, noting gamma-theta range “cross-frequency” coupling effects during normal human activity involving communication, perception, and memory tasks. Overall brain activity is associated with a “power-rating” which measures brain activity during various conscious and attentive states. By inducing cardiac arrest in rats and measuring brain activity, the study sought to associate a high level of brain function in dying rats with a similar phenomenon in humans, potentially creating the NDE experience. The study goes on to discuss in appropriate detail their research methods, and the results.

Here is a verbatim statement of the study’s conclusion:

“These data demonstrate that cardiac arrest stimulates a transcient and global surge of synchronized gamma oscillations, which display high levels of interregional coherence and feedback connectivity as well as cross-frequency coupling with both theta and alpha waves. Each of these properties of gamma oscillations indicates a highly aroused brain, and collectively, the data suggest that the mammalian brain has the potential for high levels of internal information processing during clinical death. The neural correlates of conscious brain activity indentified in this investigation strongly parallel characteristics of human conscious information processing.”

Moreover,

“NDE represents a biological paradox that challenges our understanding of the brain and has been advocated as evidence for life after death and for a noncorporeal basis of human consciousness, based upon the unsupported belief that the brain cannot possibility be the source of highly vivid and lucid conscious experiences during clinical death. By presenting evidence of highly organized brain activity and neurophysiologic features consistent with conscious processing at near-death, we now provide a scientific framework to begin to explain the highly lucid and realer-than-real mental experiences reported by near-death survivors.”

O.K. Time to analyze.

First, on a positive note, this does appear to be a legitimate study, and adds to the evidence as related to NDEs. Moreover, it does provide some support for the neurological basis for NDEs. That said, it is limited in value as shedding light on NDEs for a number of reasons, most importantly the following:

First, it does not address NDEs that are not within the context of cardiac arrest. It makes the following statement in this regard: “Importantly, the essential results of increased gamma power and coherence were confirmed with an alternative mode of death.” Yet, we have no discussion of these alternative modes of death, or even a footnote about such confirmation. The literature confirms that NDE’s occur in a variety of contexts. The present study is specifically limited to an assessment of brain function in the context of cardiac trauma. It seems to me that in this context one would expect that that brain function would be the last vestige before brain death, and thus we might well expect continued brain activity up until death. What about contexts that directly impinge on brain function; for example encephalitis accompanied by coma. This study sheds no light on potential enhanced brain functioning in such contexts where one would reasonable expect that the brain would be more directly compromised, and yet cognitive processes and perceptions still occur.

Second, of course, there is no way to connect what the rats were actually experiencing with what the NDE subject experiences. As the article points out, in humans enhanced brain functioning can occur in a wide variety of internal hallucinatory and visionary contexts, yet few of these are associated with near-death phenomena or near-death reports. In other words, the brain may well exhibit an enhanced state of activation at the time of death, but why might this not correlate with random dream-like experiences, even enhanced dream-like experiences. Why does the NDE experience correlate with specific “core” NDE features that project on to an afterlife, with living relatives, a God figure, tunnel, life review, etc? In other words, enhanced brain function tells us nothing about content!

Third, and related to the second point, the state of brain science is nowhere near the point of correlating specific aspects of an NDE experience with associated brain states, although some progress has been made in this regard. What skeptics often do is isolate specific aspects of an NDE experience, and then canvass all drugs, chemicals, diseases, and other potential causative agents, to find something that correlates with that particular aspect of the NDE. By doing that, and then putting it all together, they then announce that NDEs can be explained by the brain. However, a reductive type explanation like this does not cut it. It is the total experience that has to be explained, not piecemeal aspects of it. Moreover, whatever causative agent(s) is proposed must be shown to be operative during near-death. Finally, the general consistency of NDEs has to be explained. Why do the pet causative agent(s), considered separately or collectively, produce this particular common experience in so many people. We are a very long way from any such explanations.

Finally, I commend the study addressed in this post. Although expectedly materialist in approach, and a bit over-reaching in its conclusions, it represents an interesting contribution to the debate, and, as it admits, only a “framework” for further studies, certainly not definitive conclusions.

Science is still light years ahead of religion when it comes to explaining the demonstrably organic basis of NDEs, and will remain so as science continues to uncover verifiable evidence that spiritualism is simply not equipped, or inclined, to produce.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 05:13PM by steve benson.

I bought a book at the airport, "Proof of Heaven," by Eben Alexander. He claims his cortex was not functioning during his NDE, which proves it wasn't caused by the shutdown process. Great book, but he may be remembering a lot of things from a very short shutdown process.

. . . indeed, his cortex is not functioning.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2014 05:14PM by steve benson.