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 -

Consciousness may persist after death, study suggests


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, and-then said:

You are dismissing the multiple accounts where things were seen and heard that could not be accounted for since they were quite distant from where the medical emergency is concerned.  As for proving anything to you and others here, I care not at all what you believe on this issue.  I'm reasonably certain that those like yourself will NEVER admit even a possibility that your science could be lacking in the least.  Which is a great irony as I see it.  To each his own.

The problem I have with NDE is that the experiencer wasn't dead...hence the Near of NDE.   Unconscious is unconscious...not dead.  

In order for life after death to happen...number one would be ...death must happen.  To date...no one DEAD has ever come back to life.  So the only one's who could actually know of such a thing would be those who are DEAD....and...as the story goes...Dead Men tell no tales.   Why?  Because they are dead.

So...if no one Dead can speak of Life after death...where did this concept come from?  It came from the human Fear of death.  And where did the fear of death come from?  From the human ego.  It's all belief.  It's fine with me if most people believe in life after death.  It isn't fine for me though...because...Dead Men tell no tales...and Near Death Experiences are experiences from people who didn't die.  It's pretty cut and dried.  Anecdotes are anecdotes.  They are not nor can they ever be proof of anything.  And belief...exists only in the shadowy darkness of not really knowing the truth.  But then, ego gets in the way of not knowing...because...it creates a fear of death in the believer and hence comes the concept.

It isn't that we don't know...it is only that those who are steeped in belief cannot ever realize the actual truth.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, joc said:

And belief...exists only in the shadowy darkness of not really knowing the truth

Or thinking of other possibilities beyond the present square.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, and-then said:

You are dismissing the multiple accounts where things were seen and heard that could not be accounted for since they were quite distant from where the medical emergency is concerned.  As for proving anything to you and others here, I care not at all what you believe on this issue.  I'm reasonably certain that those like yourself will NEVER admit even a possibility that your science could be lacking in the least.  Which is a great irony as I see it.  To each his own.

Just like you dismiss any sciences that put a dent in your faith. 

Anecdotes are for self validation. As far as possibilities go, you could not be more ironic. You can't accept that science refutes your notion so you refuse to consider it and point at tall tales. You are an enemy of reason. 

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

28 minutes ago, openozy said:

Or thinking of other possibilities beyond the present square.

Problem being a lot of people who claim to be thinking outside the box have just traded one box for a paranormal one. 

It's a backwards step. 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, and-then said:

You are dismissing the multiple accounts where things were seen and heard that could not be accounted for since they were quite distant from where the medical emergency is concerned.  As for proving anything to you and others here, I care not at all what you believe on this issue.  I'm reasonably certain that those like yourself will NEVER admit even a possibility that your science could be lacking in the least.  Which is a great irony as I see it.  To each his own.

If you didnt care what i think you wouldnt jump ro reply, its your nature, You are taking my opinions personally try not to, You are taking stories as facts with no evidence to support the stories and that to me is a far greater irony and mystery

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Problem being a lot of people who claim to be thinking outside the box have just traded one box for a paranormal one. 

It's a backwards step. 

Exactly correct,  many true believers who call skeptics closed minded themselves will except paranormal as the only possible explanation, i am open for evidence to supprt claims and stories its not my problem there never is any.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joc said:

The problem I have with NDE is that the experiencer wasn't dead...hence the Near of NDE.   Unconscious is unconscious...not dead.  

In order for life after death to happen...number one would be ...death must happen.  To date...no one DEAD has ever come back to life.  So the only one's who could actually know of such a thing would be those who are DEAD....and...as the story goes...Dead Men tell no tales.   Why?  Because they are dead.

So...if no one Dead can speak of Life after death...where did this concept come from?  It came from the human Fear of death.  And where did the fear of death come from?  From the human ego.  It's all belief.  It's fine with me if most people believe in life after death.  It isn't fine for me though...because...Dead Men tell no tales...and Near Death Experiences are experiences from people who didn't die.  It's pretty cut and dried.  Anecdotes are anecdotes.  They are not nor can they ever be proof of anything.  And belief...exists only in the shadowy darkness of not really knowing the truth.  But then, ego gets in the way of not knowing...because...it creates a fear of death in the believer and hence comes the concept.

It isn't that we don't know...it is only that those who are steeped in belief cannot ever realize the actual truth.

I dont always get along with you but this above is a jewel! :nw:

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

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Problem being a lot of people who claim to be thinking outside the box have just traded one box for a paranormal one. 

It's a backwards step. 

Some have but they are a minority, most are open to other possibilities like forward thinking scientists. Sometimes you need to take a step back and observe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joc said:

It isn't that we don't know...it is only that those who are steeped in belief cannot ever realize the actual truth.

https://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/life/whatever-happened-to-my-tennis-shoean-nde-story/

How does this fit with your belief about NDEs?  It's indisputable that no one has died and returned.  Incidents like the one above simply cannot be refuted scientifically so those who are invested in the belief that NDEs are fantasy material simply ignore or mock such reports as false while having no way to actually prove - scientifically - that this evidence was not real.  My point is not to demand that anyone be forced to believe anything but if their faith is in science then they have an obligation to answer such questions with evidence, do they not?  The anecdote above is just one of many such occurrences that bolster the idea that people who experience these events are experiencing something REAL and so far, inexplicable.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, openozy said:

Some have but they are a minority, most are open to other possibilities like forward thinking scientists. Sometimes you need to take a step back and observe.

I don't think that is a minority. I'd say the majority that believe in an afterlife, believe blindly. No rhyme or reason. It's just a very popular story. 

Hell, some people even on this forum still champion the idea of duality. It's not like that's still a possible avenue to follow. It simply is not. We do know that much. It's a box inside a box. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, and-then said:

https://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/life/whatever-happened-to-my-tennis-shoean-nde-story/

How does this fit with your belief about NDEs?  It's indisputable that no one has died and returned.  Incidents like the one above simply cannot be refuted scientifically so those who are invested in the belief that NDEs are fantasy material simply ignore or mock such reports as false while having no way to actually prove - scientifically - that this evidence was not real.  My point is not to demand that anyone be forced to believe anything but if their faith is in science then they have an obligation to answer such questions with evidence, do they not?  The anecdote above is just one of many such occurrences that bolster the idea that people who experience these events are experiencing something REAL and so far, inexplicable.  

I never took you for being credulous and naive however sounds like you didnt read replies, the above you shared is just a story it has nothing to support it happened at all or happened the way described it has no provenance.

Its no different than if i told you i can fly like superman and you believe it on my word alone actually it is different me telling you a BS story is first party and you hopefully wouldnt believe i can fly,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, and-then said:

https://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/life/whatever-happened-to-my-tennis-shoean-nde-story/

How does this fit with your belief about NDEs?  It's indisputable that no one has died and returned.  Incidents like the one above simply cannot be refuted scientifically so those who are invested in the belief that NDEs are fantasy material simply ignore or mock such reports as false while having no way to actually prove - scientifically - that this evidence was not real.  My point is not to demand that anyone be forced to believe anything but if their faith is in science then they have an obligation to answer such questions with evidence, do they not?  The anecdote above is just one of many such occurrences that bolster the idea that people who experience these events are experiencing something REAL and so far, inexplicable.  

 

 

Where is Maria today?

Funny how the anecdote is relayed by Kimberly Clark Sharp, the person who allegedly found the shoe.

But where Maria to confirm Kimberley's story? 

Gone with the wind ...........

Some people will believe anything as long as it's what they want to hear. 

It's just another anecdote. Told by a third part at that. Not so impressive with a little follow up. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, the13bats said:

I never took you for being credulous and naive however sounds like you didnt read replies, the above you shared is just a story it has nothing to support it happened at all or happened the way described it has no provenance.

Its no different than if i told you i can fly like superman and you believe it on my word alone actually it is different me telling you a BS story is first party and you hopefully wouldnt believe i can fly,

Make yourself orange with fake tan and he will probably believe you can fly like Superman.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I don't think that is a minority. I'd say the majority that believe in an afterlife, believe blindly. No rhyme or reason. It's just a very popular story. 

Hell, some people even on this forum still champion the idea of duality. It's not like that's still a possible avenue to follow. It simply is not. We do know that much. It's a box inside a box. 

But you are referring to religious belief it seems, I don't include this in my idea of paranormal.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, and-then said:

https://www.is-there-a-god.info/blog/life/whatever-happened-to-my-tennis-shoean-nde-story/

How does this fit with your belief about NDEs?  It's indisputable that no one has died and returned.  Incidents like the one above simply cannot be refuted scientifically so those who are invested in the belief that NDEs are fantasy material simply ignore or mock such reports as false while having no way to actually prove - scientifically - that this evidence was not real.  My point is not to demand that anyone be forced to believe anything but if their faith is in science then they have an obligation to answer such questions with evidence, do they not?  The anecdote above is just one of many such occurrences that bolster the idea that people who experience these events are experiencing something REAL and so far, inexplicable.  

Firstly, I have no belief about NDE's.  You do.  Secondly, it is impossible to prove a negative.  It is not anyone's job especially that of Science to prove something does not exist.  

Quote

no way to actually prove - scientifically - that this evidence was not real.

My point is not to demand that anyone be forced to believe anything but if their faith is in science then they have an obligation to answer such questions with evidence, do they not?

There is no Faith in science...there are those who believe in Science ...but science itself is a logical, evidentiary,  testing procedure designed to discover..The Truth. There is no 'belief' in The Truth.  The Truth just is.  Do you 'believe' that the milky way galaxy is the only galaxy in the entire universe?  No.  You know that it is not. 

Where there is Knowledge belief is completely unnecessary.  

To the anecdote at hand.  Neither you nor I have ever met the person named Maria.   It is perfectly fine and naturally human to put your 'faith' in an anonymous story...but doing so puts The Truth further from your grasp.  The Truth is that Dead people do not come back to life.  And you agree because you 'know' that to be the truth.  There are however, explanations for 'knowing' things one couldn't know.   Your subconscious mind is still categorizing information even while you are unconscious.  Your ears for example are still hearing things said...just because you don't have any conscious memory of it is irrelevant.  When the NDE patient returns to consciousness it is impossible to know what they have heard others say while they were 'asleep'.  Dreams don't last minutes they happen in a flash.  NDE experiences are best thought of in that realm as well.  And anecdotes are anecdotes are anecdotes.  You don't know them, so why believe them?  Because there are so many similar stories.  That should indicate more of a process of something happening upon returning to consciousness.  Not something wooful like their consciousness was separate from their body.  Zero proof of that.  And it is upon the believer to Prove the existence of Consciousness separate from a body...not upon anyone else to prove that it doesn't exist.  One cannot prove a negative.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, openozy said:

Or thinking of other possibilities beyond the present square.

Thinking of other possibilities beyond the present square is called .......

.....................................................................................................................  F  A  N  T  A  S  Y.   The truth just is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joc said:

Thinking of other possibilities beyond the present square is called .......

.....................................................................................................................  F  A  N  T  A  S  Y.   The truth just is.

But I'm sure some of todays truth will be laughable in the future as history has proven.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, openozy said:

But I'm sure some of todays truth will be laughable in the future as history has proven.

History has also clearly shown that humans have been appealing to the supernatural to explain phenomena for millennia, and not once, ever, has the answer turned out to be something supernatural.

I'm all for thinking outside the box, and scientists and skeptics are just as imaginative as anyone else.  The trick is showing that what is outside of the box actually exists and backing it up, a lot of people skip over this part, that's where the interesting stuff is.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

skeptics are just as imaginative as anyone else

That was a good post LG except I'm pretty sure this part has been proven wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, openozy said:

But I'm sure some of todays truth will be laughable in the future as history has proven.

We first need to clarify our terms definitions.  THE truth is not the same as 'truth'.  Truth is the same as belief.  THE truth is what it is regardless of what anyone believes.    So, yes...all of todays 'truth' is laughable now and will continue to be laughable in the future.  

Truth = Belief  The Truth = The Truth

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, openozy said:

That was a good post LG except I'm pretty sure this part has been proven wrong.

Ha, a skeptic would probably take you to task concerning 'proven' wrong, actually.  I'm definitely skeptical about the above claim, maybe it's true for certain kinds of creativity. I suspect that it's not 'skeptics' but 'scientists' maybe, as the former isn't usually a typical group for analysis.

Regardless, there's a case to be made that scientists are at least as imaginative as artistic people and since they have so much more knowledge that just enhances it. There's a lot to laud about artistic uses of imagination, some are absolutely brilliant, but scientists' imagination has additional pressures and restrictions that make the imagining so much more challenging: the imagination has to conform to observation.  There seem to be a few different examples with Einstein, here's one: ( https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-eureka-moment/ )

Quote

Albert Einstein finally hit on the core idea underlying his famous theory of relativity one night after months of intense mathematical exercises. He had given himself a break from the work and let his imagination wander about the concepts of space and time. Various images that came to mind prompted him to try a thought experiment: If two bolts of lightning struck the front and back of a moving train at the same time, would an observer standing beside the track and an observer standing on the moving train see the strikes as simultaneous? The answer, in short, was no. The floodgates in Einsteins mind opened, and he laid down an ingenious description of the universe. With his sudden insight, Einstein turned our conceptions of time and space inside out.

Certainly Einstein would not have reached his brilliant notion without his vast knowledge of physics and his ability to think clearly. But the decisive moment arose from his capacity to imagine physical reality from a perspective no one else had ever tried. Einstein was a master at restructuring problems.

 

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

59 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Ha, a skeptic would probably take you to task concerning 'proven' wrong, actually.  I'm definitely skeptical about the above claim, maybe it's true for certain kinds of creativity. I suspect that it's not 'skeptics' but 'scientists' maybe, as the former isn't usually a typical group for analysis.

Regardless, there's a case to be made that scientists are at least as imaginative as artistic people and since they have so much more knowledge that just enhances it. There's a lot to laud about artistic uses of imagination, some are absolutely brilliant, but scientists' imagination has additional pressures and restrictions that make the imagining so much more challenging: the imagination has to conform to observation.  There seem to be a few different examples with Einstein, here's one: ( https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-eureka-moment/ )

 

I said this because a study found very skeptical people have a certain part of the brain smaller than others. I read this on another paranormal site. Now I'm going into my fallout bunker :gun:lol.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joc said:

We first need to clarify our terms definitions.  THE truth is not the same as 'truth'.  Truth is the same as belief.  THE truth is what it is regardless of what anyone believes.    So, yes...all of todays 'truth' is laughable now and will continue to be laughable in the future.  

Truth = Belief  The Truth = The Truth

Sounds like semantics to me joc. What about considering possibilities beyond our still primitive knowledge. And remember you can't let The Truth get in the way of a good story :lol:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, openozy said:

Sounds like semantics to me joc. What about considering possibilities beyond our still primitive knowledge. And remember you can't let The Truth get in the way of a good story :lol:.

Our knowledge is not primitive.  The Belief Systems are primitive.  Belief equals NOT knowing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, joc said:

Our knowledge is not primitive.  The Belief Systems are primitive.  Belief equals NOT knowing.

 

But it will be in the distant future and the academics of today will look like knuckle draggers. That's if humans survive that long, which is highly unlikely. I BELIEVE this to be true but no one knows.

  • Like 1
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.