129 replies to this topic

[Arbitran]

Shabd Mystic, on 10 October 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

Okay, instead of arguing semantics, I will say that the brain has stopped functioning. If you want to claim that the brain is still working after a person has been clinically dead for 20-30 minutes before being revived, then enjoy your beliefs.

Also, if you want to argue with this neurologist and share your opinion as a biologist about what he claims, I'd suggest you take your argument to him. Or to any of the countless scientists who have been studying NDE's.

The only reason they are called "near-death" is because the patients were revived. Death, as a term, stands for a permanent state. So, "technically" it can't be "called" death. But until another word is invented I will use the term "dead." The only thing that changes about their "death" when they are revived is that it was clearly not "permanent."

Death, in the true sense, cannot be reversed. Clinical death, in which the heart stops and breathing ceases and the brain's functions begin to diminish from lack of oxygen, that can be cured, and the patient revived. If the brain has not died, then the person has not died; ergo, nobody has been revived from death, given nobody has ever been cured of brain death. I'm beginning to repeat myself... but it really is that simple. True death = brain death = nobody has ever been revived after brain death = nobody has ever been revived from death. The brain ceases function at the time of brain death (hence... brain death); yes, people have been revived from clinical death (the stopping of the heart and breathing) after 20-30 minutes, as you say (though that's stretching it a bit; after 13-14 minutes or so the odds of successful revival begin to decrease rapidly), but then, that doesn't count as technical, biological death.

[Shabd Mystic]

Arbitran, on 10 October 2012 - 03:53 AM, said:

Death, in the true sense, cannot be reversed. Clinical death, in which the heart stops and breathing ceases and the brain's functions begin to diminish from lack of oxygen, that can be cured, and the patient revived. If the brain has not died, then the person has not died; ergo, nobody has been revived from death, given nobody has ever been cured of brain death. I'm beginning to repeat myself... but it really is that simple. True death = brain death = nobody has ever been revived after brain death = nobody has ever been revived from death. The brain ceases function at the time of brain death (hence... brain death); yes, people have been revived from clinical death (the stopping of the heart and breathing) after 20-30 minutes, as you say (though that's stretching it a bit; after 13-14 minutes or so the odds of successful revival begin to decrease rapidly), but then, that doesn't count as technical, biological death.

Once again we are into semantics and we are discussing a scientific term. If the brain has stopped sending electrical signals then the brain has stopped functioning. If, through CPR or electric shock or anything else, the brain again starts sending its signals and the heart and everything else begin to function then the person is "alive." If nothing EVER changes from that state they are in, then they are officially "dead."

The only thing that prevents a death certificate, an "official" certification of death, is if something can be done to "change" the patient's state. If NOTHING changes then he is dead. If it does change he is alive. To claim that a person who suddenly had changes that made him alive was never "dead' is just a semantics game.

If you wish to play word games please continue but I have no interest in such ridiculous exercises.

[Shabd Mystic]

If anyone is interested in this story here is a link to an MP3 file that is a 52-minute interview with the Harvard doctor who the Newsweek story is about.



The interview is done by a site called "skeptico.com" so it should be interesting (I am downloading it now but haven't listened yet).

The page with that interview in text form is here:

http://www.skeptiko....ath-experience/

Edited by Shabd Mystic, 10 October 2012 - 04:41 AM.

[Likely Guy]

Shabd Mystic, on 10 October 2012 - 03:10 AM, said:

Why change it? It's the headline of the Newsweek article. I'm not saying I wrote it. I'm saying Newsweek wrote it that way to attract attention and hits.

I reiterate; "To be clear, in the headline of the story, it say's 'Heaven is Real'... (and as I said), in this one person's account."  Which, taken by itself, is fine.

To declare the 'Proof of Heaven', is a whole different matter. I'm just saying there's going to be a whole lot of people asking you for your proof, not anyone else's, and a bunch of NDE examples aren't going to sate them.

Edited by Likely Guy, 10 October 2012 - 05:07 AM.

[Shabd Mystic]

Likely Guy, on 10 October 2012 - 05:03 AM, said:

I reiterate; "To be clear, in the headline of the story, it say's 'Heaven is Real'... (and as I said), in this one person's account."  Which, taken by itself, is fine.

To declare the 'Proof of Heaven', is a whole different matter. I'm just saying there's going to be a whole lot of people asking you for your proof, not anyone else's, and a bunch of NDE examples aren't going to sate them.

Well then, let 'em ask away. I'll tell them what I already told you, "I" was not the one who claimed to have proof. If they want to ask the Harvard neurosurgeon who made the claim referenced in this thread's title, they can contact him via his Website here:

http://www.lifebeyonddeath.net/

[Shabd Mystic]

Shabd Mystic, on 10 October 2012 - 04:24 AM, said:

If anyone is interested in this story here is a link to an MP3 file that is a 52-minute interview with the Harvard doctor who the Newsweek story is about.



The interview is done by a site called "skeptico.com" so it should be interesting (I am downloading it now but haven't listened yet).

The page with that interview in text form is here:

http://www.skeptiko....ath-experience/

I just listened to the interview and it's great and well worth a listen. Especially for any self-proclaimed "scientific minds." Of course if you are one of the many people here who believe they already have the answers to everything in the world, just feel free to show yourself so everyone can admire your incredible knowledge.

.

[Shabd Mystic]

More from the doctor:

Quote

After many minutes up to tens of minutes or so of no blood flow, flow might then be restored and what remained of the brain would begin to heal. Permanent damage to brain cells begins after four minutes of zero blood flow. Often, neurons in that situation go into an idling mode from which they may be rescued to start functioning again, at least partially, depending on their reserves and on the time they are without blood flow. Longer periods of cardiac arrest lead to more diffuse brain damage, and under most conditions are not survivable after tens of minutes.  

It is crucial to understand the importance of my illness being acute bacterial meningitis. Those lacking a medical background need to understand why that is so critical. “Dying” of a cardiac arrest, then being brought back to life can do very little damage to the brain, compared with spending a week in deep coma due to bacterial meningitis. To borrow an analogy from Annie Dillard, comparing the two is like comparing "kissing a man, to marrying him." Not even in the same ballpark!  

Medical situations leading to loss of consciousness for many hours or days (head trauma, stroke, brain hemorrhage, meningitis, etc.) bring a patient much closer to death than transient cardiac events leading to unconsciousness due to decreased blood flow (which includes most cases of patients declared “dead” during cardiac arrest, then resuscitated). Most of these conditions, except for meningitis, tend to involve only part of the neocortex, often with deeper, more primitive parts of the brain involved.

Meningitis is unique in its diffuse destruction of the outer surface of the brain, the neocortex (eg. the ‘human’ brain). It thus has the greatest efficiency in mimicking human death, and still allowing for possible recovery to tell the tale (due to relative preservation of deeper 'housekeeping' structures common to most higher animals). That is why my particular case is having such a dramatic effect on the medical community.  

No one knowledgeable about my medical specifics doubts the miraculous nature of my full recovery. It is also a miracle that I remember so much from within coma. But there it is, and I must deal with it. It happened for a very big reason.

[Shabd Mystic]

A different section with Q&A about mysticism compared to his NDE:

Quote

Carol asks:

I have been thinking that parts of your experience might coincide with the reported experiences of some of the Christian mystics, or of enlightened people from other religions as well. Their descriptions are remarkably similar to yours, but presumably their brains were functioning normally. There is some evidence of altered states produced during meditation that might lead to profound spiritual experiences.

These were characterized by an absence of most brain activity. I'm beginning to think that the enlightenment phenomenon is at the root of all spiritual systems, and that our organized religions and personal convictions may be somewhat irrelevant, as if we're looking in the wrong place for the truth.

I assure you that I have never had an enlightenment experience, although I've done some meditation, but I believe in my bones the truth of what other people report -- the oneness of All and the "love that passes all understanding".


Eben replies:

Carol, thank you so much for your thoughts.

"Light from Light," the anthology on Christian Mystics, and "Gnostic Gospels" were most helpful in my attempts to explain my experience. I meant to emphasize the role of meditation in seeking that enlightenment when I discussed how Buddha was "Awake," but I was running short on time. It is clear that one does not need a near-death experience to achieve enlightenment.

I have been musing over Ken Wilber's Quantum Questions, an excellent anthology he edited in 1984 containing essays pertinent to mysticism written by some of the leading scientists of the Twentieth Century (Einstein, Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Planck, Pauli, deBroglie, Jeans and Eddington).

Hints at my main message about quantum mechanics and science were conveyed in some of the quotes presented at St. John's, and especially the one from Einstein about "behind all the discernible concatenations [in peering into the secrets of nature], there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable [a force beyond our comprehension]."

Current science at the cutting edge of investigating quantum gravity (synthesis of QM and General Relativity) and the holographic principle of the universe leaves the door wide open for the critical and fundamental reality of spiritual experience.

I agree with you on the issue of organized religions - their only relevance is in providing spokes to the hub that we all share. And the coin of that Realm is -- LOVE!

.

[Habitat]

Shabd Mystic, there is no need to nearly die to encounter "heaven", the mystic sages agree you merely need to "die to the world".

[Bling]

I don't agree with that as being proof of heaven or any kind of afterlife, it was just a weird experience. Just because he's a doctor doesn't mean he's right and has superior knowledge of this matter. He wasn't actually dead. If he has come back from the dead then is he a zombie?

[preacherman76]

He made a really good point that I had never thought of before. If this is simply a matter of unexplained brain activity, then why is it that the only people they meet in this altered conscienceness that they know, are all dead? You think it would be more likely that they would see people that they interact with everyday, then seeing people they only knew when they were children, ect ect. Very cool story.

[failturner25]

preacherman76, on 10 October 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

He made a really good point that I had never thought of before. If this is simply a matter of unexplained brain activity, then why is it that the only people they meet in this altered conscienceness that they know, are all dead? You think it would be more likely that they would see people that they interact with everyday, then seeing people they only knew when they were children, ect ect. Very cool story.

I dream of the deceased and my dead dogs sometimes without seeing anyone else, does that mean I was in heaven?

Anyway, how do we know he wasn't lying, lying is pretty easy to do nowadays, people fall for all sort of things.

[preacherman76]

failturner25, on 10 October 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

I dream of the deceased and my dead dogs sometimes without seeing anyone else, does that mean I was in heaven?

Anyway, how do we know he wasn't lying, lying is pretty easy to do nowadays, people fall for all sort of things.

No, do you ever dream of people that are alive? I do. Ive dreamed of dead people as well. That certainly is brain activity. What he describes here is something totaly different.

Maybe he is lieing. There isnt anyway to say for certain. But dont cha wonder, even for a second, what if he isnt lieing?

[Shabd Mystic]

Habitat, on 10 October 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Shabd Mystic, there is no need to nearly die to encounter "heaven", the mystic sages agree you merely need to "die to the world".

I know that, lol. And you already know I know that. But what does that have to do with the Newsweek story?

[Shabd Mystic]

Bling, on 10 October 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

I don't agree with that as being proof of heaven or any kind of afterlife, it was just a weird experience. Just because he's a doctor doesn't mean he's right and has superior knowledge of this matter. He wasn't actually dead.

And you "know" this, why exactly?