Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Near-death experiences: four possible theories


UM-Bot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Whatever gets folks through the night I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

How do you prove that though? If there is no brain function? Pam Renolds comes to mind. That women was as dead as dead could be. Blood drained from her body, temperature way below what it takes to live. Brain functions closely monitored, and were zero. Head phones in her ears playing sound to help make sure her brain wasn't registering noise. Was completely blind folded.

Yet she described everything that happened in the room. Described the unique surgical tools. Was able to describe in detail conversations between the nurse and doctor. All this from the view of the ceiling. All confirmed by the doctor who performed her surgery. 

There seem to be some false statements here, some misrepresentations, as well as information being left out. Can you revisit the case and revise your claims? This is not quite representative of what actually happened. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, csspwns said:

There seem to be some false statements here, some misrepresentations, as well as information being left out. Can you revisit the case and revise your claims? This is not quite representative of what actually happened. 

No. If you have a problem with what I said prove it otherwise. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Absolutely. These same people who claim science, logic ect completely ignore the thousands upon thousands of NDE's, that have been categorized, combed through, searched for and found many similar patterns. The many many instances of people knowing things while clinically dead that were happening in the room, and many outside of the room. The hours on end of scientific research, and even peer reviewed articles they act as though it doesn't even exist. Completely blow if off. It's hypocritical. 

How can science analyse an anecdote? 

Goddam scientists are ignoring unicorns minotaurs and Gorgons too damned closed minded fools. Don't they know Nessie is the key? 

You are asking for something incredibly stupid. Anecdotes only impress the ignorant. 

You are more hypocritical than most regarding this subject. You refuse to look at the science and I assume it's because science doesn't fawn over anecdotes like you do. You are easily impressed by wild stories. What you think is evidence is just entertainment. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Sorry but this is just wrong, scientifically speaking. According to science clinically dead is just as dead as any other definition of death. No measurables can be found different on a near death experience then a permanent one. To think otherwise is absolutely technically speaking, a belief. And will remain so until scientifically proven otherwise. 

BS. You're a couple decades our of date and you know it. I've shown you so before. Sam Parnia has illustrated that the death process could last up to several hours. You're just repeating old beliefs as usual. 

If you hate science so much just admit it. You think magic makes the world work. And that's just silly. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:
12 hours ago, joc said:

I think you are mistaking beliefs for knowledge.  The two are not the same.  We do know that when the body dies no one ever comes back from that.  It is factual.  Near death is just that Near.  Death is completely different.  It is knowledge that says dead things do not come back to life, not belief.  

 

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Sorry but this is just wrong, scientifically speaking. According to science clinically dead is just as dead as any other definition of death. No measurables can be found different on a near death experience then a permanent one. To think otherwise is absolutely technically speaking, a belief. And will remain so until scientifically proven otherwise. 

When we are talking about being dead...we are talking about being permanently dead.  Permanently...like Jesus in the grave for 3 days with a spear through his heart.  Clinically dead is not permanently dead.  This isn't a science technical question.  This is a logical question.  If Near dead is the same as Permanently dead, then why after 24 years doesn't Grandma just come back to life and wow us with her brilliant assessment of Heaven or Hell?  Because she is permanently dead.  

And if you want the real Scientific Technical definition of dead...that is it.  Permanently Dead!  oooooh, 3 points for me because I just coined another great name for a band!!!:sk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

No. If you have a problem with what I said prove it otherwise. 

The doctors involved don't tell the same story that the Author (Sabon) did.

https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg19125700-200-near-death-evidence/

I would like to comment on Eric Kvaalen’s letter, in which he cites an article from The Lancet (2 September, p 18). He implies the article validated a near-death experience (NDE) in which a patient claimed that, while flatlining on an EEG, she was aware of her surroundings. He says: “This included an out-of-body experience, during which she observed things that happened during the period of the flat EEG and that were subsequently verified.” Perhaps Kvaalen could supply details of this verification. It does not appear to come from the article in The Lancet but from a book called Light and Death: One doctor’s fascinating account of near-death experiences by M. B. Sabom, specifically chapter 3, “Death: the final frontier” featuring “The case of Pam Reynolds”.

 

The Reynolds case has received very thorough scrutiny in the British magazine The Skeptic (vol 18, nos 1 and 2). The two-part in-depth article, called “An anaesthesiologist examines the Pam Reynolds story”, by Gerry Woerlee, finds no convincing evidence for an NDE, let alone verification of Reynolds’s observations whilst “dead”. Woerlee tells us “…it was an experience whose roots lay in the functioning of her body, complemented by imagery nestling in the deepest reaches of her psyche, as well as the fact that she was awake for several periods of time during her operation.”

 

 

You know how it goes from here.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSk2rMXprHVP_Sm4JeUXk1

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joc said:

 

When we are talking about being dead...we are talking about being permanently dead.  Permanently...like Jesus in the grave for 3 days with a spear through his heart.  Clinically dead is not permanently dead.  This isn't a science technical question.  This is a logical question.  If Near dead is the same as Permanently dead, then why after 24 years doesn't Grandma just come back to life and wow us with her brilliant assessment of Heaven or Hell?  Because she is permanently dead.  

And if you want the real Scientific Technical definition of dead...that is it.  Permanently Dead!  oooooh, 3 points for me because I just coined another great name for a band!!!:sk

She wasn't dead anyway 

That's an exaggeration to make the paperback more readable. 

NDE lovers eat that crap up. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Whatever gets folks through the night I guess

That's so funny.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2022 at 6:28 PM, jmccr8 said:

I have never had any fear about dying nor do I now but everyday any time could be my death so don't care much when or where.

That is true...for all of us. We cannot live yesterday...we cannot live tomorrow...we can only live Today...and so...it is Today that we die.  Knowing that gives you and me a unique appreciation for life that those who do not understand that very simple concept cannot understand.  We were all born today, and we all die today!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

It could be, but you know ethics.

Ethics nonsense.

Often people are hooked up to an array of machines at the point of death. There might not be any "ghost O meters" in the room but plenty of real instruments record death every day. There are complete projects dedicated to the death process recording experiences but none confirm NDE claims. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Ain’t that the truth

Problem is that you sneer at truth to push fantasy.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

She wasn't dead anyway 

That's an exaggeration to make the paperback more readable. 

NDE lovers eat that crap up. 

...in a world, where Granny dies, but isn't really dead...24 years later...

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Anecdotes only impress the ignorant.

And forward thinking scientists

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

There are complete projects dedicated to the death process recording experiences but none confirm NDE claims. 

Yet they still can't explain how people have described things they couldn't have seen in the position they were in at their NDE. There is no explanation apart from them being out of their body. It is a provable paranormal event yet it is brushed aside because of egos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy lemme grab some popcorn to watch the dismantling of the statements and claims in the above post LOL. This is gonna be goooood.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, csspwns said:

Oh boy lemme grab some popcorn to watch the dismantling of the statements and claims in the above post LOL. This is gonna be goooood.

You better grab a drink too because you will be here for eternity, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, openozy said:

And forward thinking scientists

No, not as afterlife experience. When medical professionals look at NDEs it about watching the brain die. 

Real scientists already know physics refutes an afterlife.

Remember that the energy theories you have aren't what afterlife proponents preach. Don't get kookery mixed up with genuine attempts to understand the death process. As we have agreed before, if people really are seeing something out of the ordinary, there has to be better explanations than man made superstition.

1 hour ago, openozy said:

Yet they still can't explain how people have described things they couldn't have seen in the position they were in at their NDE. There is no explanation apart from them being out of their body. It is a provable paranormal event yet it is brushed aside because of egos.

Have a look at the only (and I would assume best) offering. The Pam Reynolds case. 

Then have a better look at Eben Alexander's story and all the holes Professors Carrol and Novea poked in his story.

Exaggeration explains at least 90% of claims immediately at a guess. Probably more. Not to mention over the top support for such loose ideals from the scientifically ignorant.

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

Exaggeration explains at least 90% of claims immediately at a guess. Probably more.

Can't se how you would prove that in any way. You are still sidestepping the fact about this

 

1 hour ago, openozy said:

Yet they still can't explain how people have described things they couldn't have seen in the position they were in at their NDE. There is no explanation apart from them being out of their body. It is a provable paranormal event yet it is brushed aside because of egos.

There is no explanation but I would be happy to hear one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also most people don't report this for obvious reasons, my guess about 90%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, openozy said:

Can't se how you would prove that in any way. You are still sidestepping the fact about this

 

There is no explanation but I would be happy to hear one.

I just did. Read the above post I left putting the Pam Reynolds story into perspective, and as noted, Eben Along with Raymond Moody challenged Sean Carroll and Steve Novea concerning the afterlife and Alexander's personal experience. 

There two well noted examples that NDE proponents fawn over and call unexplainable. They are not. There is very good information rationalising those claims. 

There's some explanations that are exactly what you are saying don't exist. The fables that have spawned from those claims are proven exaggeration. 

What facts are you proposing that I have side stepped? What about the irrefutable facts of science that determine an afterlife to be impossible? Aren't they worth a listen? I've looked into these stories and offered refutation as per my previous posts in this thread. Do any afterlife proponents even know why or how science refutes the afterlife? I've offered a link to Preacherman before detailing the science. He ignored it. How's that thorough or considering all aspects involved? 

You're accusing the wrong people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

I just did. Read the above post I left putting the Pam Reynolds story into perspective, and as noted, Eben Along with Raymond Moody challenged Sean Carroll and Steve Novea concerning the afterlife and Alexander's personal experience. 

There two well noted examples that NDE proponents fawn over and call unexplainable. They are not. There is very good information rationalising those claims. 

There's some explanations that are exactly what you are saying don't exist. The fables that have spawned from those claims are proven exaggeration. 

What facts are you proposing that I have side stepped? What about the irrefutable facts of science that determine an afterlife to be impossible? Aren't they worth a listen? I've looked into these stories and offered refutation as per my previous posts in this thread. Do any afterlife proponents even know why or how science refutes the afterlife? I've offered a link to Preacherman before detailing the science. He ignored it. How's that thorough or considering all aspects involved? 

You're accusing the wrong people. 

What one or two, there are thousands if not millions of these events. I don' t think .0001% or less would even count as proof this doesn't occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, openozy said:

Also most people don't report this for obvious reasons, my guess about 90%.

Sorry, don't believe that for a second.

Like I say, good people like Sam Parnia have researched the subject in my depth. Regarding NDE occourence with death, somewhere between 5 and 15% of people claim to have that experience. It's not a majority by any means.

There are oodles of claims on line. Heck, remember the Kevin Malarkey case?

How's his last name. .......Alanis Morissette anyone? 

Edited by psyche101
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

somewhere between 5 and 15% of people claim to have that experience. It's not a majority by any means.

I'm saying most people don't report it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

How's his last name. .......Alanis Morissette anyone? 

That was pretty funny 101.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, openozy said:

What one or two, there are thousands if not millions of these events. I don' t think .0001% or less would even count as proof this doesn't occur.

What would? 

Most people as you can see from others previous posting consider these benchmark cases. The best proof. 

Don't forget the old repeat a lie often enough..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.