(2017-09-19, 07:02 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]3) I believe that's what he says (I have as well, FWIW).
4) I know it's counter-intuitive, but I suspect that the areas you are used to regarding as trouble-prone are probably better off than the areas you are used to regarding as somewhat trouble-free.
Well, to come full circle, I agree that parapsychology does not have a good reputation. I don't know if 'taboo' is the right word, since clearly scientists are participating in the field. The same claim could be made about alt med, yet millions have been spent by the US government for research into the therapies. Research goes on in all sorts of areas that other scientists make fun of. What gets people to shut up, what garners respect for an idea, is research which offers decent evidence for the idea. Barry Marshall likes to play up the fact that people made fun of his idea that H. pylori causes gastric ulcers. But once his good quality studies backed up the idea, it took off and he ended up with a Noble prize. I've seen lots of ideas which are just as unacceptable as psi become acceptable in the face of evidence. I think parapsychologists are on the right track with the recommendations which have been made by those I mentioned in my original post. It's a matter of having the patience to follow through on them. I noticed that the study Guerrer did on the double-slit experiment didn't seem to be pre-registered.
Linda
3) Interesting, care to share? No worries if not.
4) You don't know what areas of medicine I have suspicions about!
Some scientists are participating, and I think you are being overly kind about the effect of evidence and it's abilities to change peoples minds. Usually it takes time, and it some cases tens to hundreds of years, for minds to change. I would also argue that due to it's links to spirituality etc, the fraud of psychics/mediums psi is a more difficult idea to get acceptance for then H.pylori causing gastric ulcers. (There's also organisations literally dedicated to 'debunking' Parapsychology and related topics). I agree, but Parapsychologists have been accepting recommendations for years, the evidence is still coming, I want them to keep improving but I don't think implementing the newer recommendations will magically gain acceptance). Guerrer probably wasn't pre-registered because he's not a Parapsychologist, it's hard enough to get independent attempts at replications as it is, though every Parapsychologist has no excuse not to pre-register. (I don't think this is an issue though, due to Parapsychologists publishing null results and the file drawer effect effectively being ruled out at this stage).
(2017-09-19, 07:15 PM)Roberta Wrote: [ -> ]Some scientists are participating, and I think you are being overly kind about the effect of evidence and it's abilities to change peoples minds. Usually it takes time, and it some cases tens to hundreds of years, for minds to change. I would also argue that due to it's links to spirituality etc, the fraud of psychics/mediums psi is a more difficult idea to get acceptance for then H.pylori causing gastric ulcers. (There's also organisations literally dedicated to 'debunking' Parapsychology and related topics). I agree, but Parapsychologists have been accepting recommendations for years, the evidence is still coming, I want them to keep improving but I don't think implementing the newer recommendations will magically gain acceptance).
That's a good point.
Quote:Guerrer probably wasn't pre-registered because he's not a Parapsychologist, it's hard enough to get independent attempts at replications as it is, though every Parapsychologist has no excuse not to pre-register. (I don't think this is an issue though, due to Parapsychologists publishing null results and the file drawer effect effectively being ruled out at this stage).
He did contact Radin though, who I would hope would be in the habit of encouraging pre-registration.
I suspect pre-registration will be more useful with respect to flexibility in outcomes and selective reporting, than with the failure to report.
Linda
(2017-09-19, 08:07 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]We were talking about sensory awareness, not the perception of an elevated level of consciousness, which is why I brought up the BIS (relevant to the former, not to the latter).
That would have been an excellent case to write up as a case report. Although, I guess not remembering the patient's name or when it happened would make that difficult.
This is the story I saw:
http://www.allaboutheaven.org/observatio...ent-011248
Sorry, but nobody's sitting there eating lunch if a patient is in cardiac arrest and no CPR is being performed.
Linda
The way I read it is that this occurred in between arrest events, not during an arrest.. I mean, he certainly wasn't in arrest and receiving CPR for 8 hours... Come on now!
(2017-09-19, 08:07 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]We were talking about sensory awareness, not the perception of an elevated level of consciousness, which is why I brought up the BIS (relevant to the former, not to the latter).
That would have been an excellent case to write up as a case report. Although, I guess not remembering the patient's name or when it happened would make that difficult.
This is the story I saw:
http://www.allaboutheaven.org/observatio...ent-011248
Sorry, but nobody's sitting there eating lunch if a patient is in cardiac arrest and no CPR is being performed.
Linda
In the link you shared it mentions when it happened, it's all clearly a short, rubbish version (look at the site) - need to see in the book. There's the other case I mentioned and two others as well.
(2017-09-19, 08:39 PM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ] The way I read it is that this occurred in between arrest events, not during an arrest.. I mean, he certainly wasn't in arrest and receiving CPR for 8 hours... Come on now!
That's the way I read it too - that when he ate the sandwich, is was likely during one of the periods when he wasn't in cardiac arrest and sense data wouldn't be unexplained.
Linda
(2017-09-19, 08:41 PM)Roberta Wrote: [ -> ]In the link you shared it mentions when it happened, it's all clearly a short, rubbish version (look at the site) - need to see in the book. There's the other case I mentioned and two others as well.
Do you have the two others?
Linda
(2017-09-19, 09:36 PM)Ifls Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have the two others?
Linda
Yeah, they're all in 'the self does not die'.
Richard Mansfield's patient's NDE (case 3.16) contained impressions of stopping and restarting the CPR, among other veridical impressions.
Case 3.19 concerns the NDE of a watchman, whose OBE started when he got a heart attack and included impressions of what happened before the CPR began.
Case 3.36 involves an NDE in which the patient saw how his girlfriend found him, before resuscitation.
Also case 3.24 and 3.26 - and the one I previously mentioned which you haven't commented on.
Can go into more detail when I buy the book!
(2017-09-19, 09:35 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]That's the way I read it too - that when he ate the sandwich, is was likely during one of the periods when he wasn't in cardiac arrest and sense data wouldn't be unexplained.
Linda
Maybe, maybe not.
First- sense data may still not be explained depending on his condition between arrests. My guess is that he was flat out unconscious and wasn't sensing at that time either. But can't prove that.
Also- not sure that most hard core deniers would agree with you that he couldn't have sensed anything during CPR. Don't mean to put word in your mouth: but I get the feeling that the only reason you are not pursuing that angle is that it isn't necessary in this case to do so as there are other things you can point to.
Feels to me that this is the way things go with discussing most cases. There is always, ALWAYS, something that a denier can hang their hat on. It's just a matter of how weak it is.
(2017-09-20, 06:27 AM)Roberta Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, they're all in 'the self does not die'.
Richard Mansfield's patient's NDE (case 3.16) contained impressions of stopping and restarting the CPR, among other veridical impressions.
Case 3.19 concerns the NDE of a watchman, whose OBE started when he got a heart attack and included impressions of what happened before the CPR began.
Case 3.36 involves an NDE in which the patient saw how his girlfriend found him, before resuscitation.
Also case 3.24 and 3.26 - and the one I previously mentioned which you haven't commented on.
Can go into more detail when I buy the book!
Well, that brings up an interesting question. We've been talking about the kind of information which is regarded as reliable and valid, and the kind of information that I am looking for (the kind that I feel can be used to make real progress in understanding these phenomena). I talked about how even some prominent parapsychologists recognize that unrecorded stories are very problematic in this regard, and I gave some of examples of why this is so.
So given all that, why did you (and jkmac for that matter) choose to present this kind of information to me? Are you just trolling me?
Linda