A major but biased new paper on consciousness

[Ninshub]

So the problem is that we should have defined and outlined this as an altered state that appears when people are resuscitated, because we still don't know when it actually happensc.

@tim is the guy for this question.

I'm not sure I understand grammatically what you're saying in those questions. What is the "still" there for?

The "still" means that these are still actual examples of real data that is repeating in a majority of cases. Examples that show "other" reasons for the NDE experience.
Still means that they have not been explained or eliminated through empirical science. And they supply other alternative data or reasons for parts of the experience.

If people are currently (still) discovering that most, if not all, tunnel experiences are reported by patients who had heart failure, then heart failure has to be considered as a possible cause of this tunnel effect. Not the NDE experience itself, or by itself. In particular if NOBODY else, or a very small statistical number of them have the tunnel, while all heart failure do. A physical cause for the tunnel portion.

This usually means that other portions of the NDE likely also can have other explanations, and are then not something magical, special, or any cause to believe in life after death because of some altered state. Refusing to acknowledge this is not science, it is woo woo fringe.

Just like other repeat items: drugs used for reanimation, or drugs used to try and save people, or drugs used to render people unconscious for surgery, etc.

So physical causes that are still in the empirical data, yet appear to be ignored for the sake of glorifying the NDE above and beyond science. That makes it woo woo.

The same is true for colorful versions of NDE experiences that are biased to fit any religious belief. 
If we are currently (still) seeing an angel in one NDE, and an Egyptian escort diety in another, both based on previously held religious convictions, then we still have polluted data, colored by the wishes, belief, or religions of the people experiencing the NDE.

These show that NDE are still of the mind, not pure, and not universal. 
They are polluted by your living memory, wishes, beliefs when you were alive. This shows that your beliefs, memory, and attachments are coloring NDE.

So if we have not reconciled these simple and obvious examples of different visuals, or the results that scream they are the result of a physical source like the heart attack... then they are still there, and screaming for scientific attention.

We STILL only have an altered state initiated by death and revival. Not anything supporting life after death.

When we have a death, and then a ghost appearing that can explain what it was like, what it is like "over there", and we can repeat that with other ghosts, confirming the same data, that is empirical. Come up with that ghost machine, and we can talk further.

[Ninshub]

If people are currently (still) discovering that most, if not all, tunnel experiences are reported by patients who had heart failure, then heart failure has to be considered as a possible cause of this tunnel effect. Not the NDE experience itself, or by itself. In particular if NOBODY else, or a very small statistical number of them have the tunnel, while all heart failure do. A physical cause for the tunnel portion.

Where are you getting this supposed data from?

Regarding the expectation hypothesis in your second question, that's been well addressed by NDE researchers. Have you looked into this? I don't have time to go into this right now, but I might try to bring out a few key points when I do.

Durward 

I'm going to keep this relatively short. I personally find your posts difficult to parse because you fire off so many statements (whether factual or not) in each one, I wouldn't know where to start if I was going to respond to them (which I'm not, I simply don't have the time). This one is incorrect, for instance. 

So the problem is that we should have defined and outlined this as an altered state that appears when people are resuscitated, because we still don't know when it actually happensc.

We do know when it actuallys happens, though (the OBE during cardiac arrest) because we have enough reliable cases (from surgeons, doctors and medics etc) where patients have reported observing details of their operations that they could not possibly have seen or been aware of. Whilst it is true that these cases are technically anecdotes and therefore not empirically proven, that does not mean that they don't have great evidential value when considered as a whole.

Anecdotes are the bedrock of science and when you have enough of them from reliable sources, meticulously collected and studied, they do in fact amount to meeting a standard of evidence that takes them to a level regarded as beyond reasonable doubt. A level accepted as good enough in courtrooms, for instance, to sustain a conviction.

I don't know, but I'm assuming you require double blind "hits" in tightly controlled studies before you are willing to accept that these observations from the patient actually occured when they had no brain function. These experiments are ongoing and because of the extremely difficult nature of the experiment, we don't have one of those yet. Only one patient has ever been in a position (out of body) to actually have a chance of seeing the target (a target).  

We do have one (or two) very persuasive cases that were collected in the clinicial trials done so far that do in fact demonstrate that full consciousness was present without a functioning brain, but as in one case, the patient did not have his experience in a controlled area (a room with a target fitted) it could not be proven to the standard that hardline sceptics have demanded, even though it is patently obvious what occurred and when. 

As to your statement about 'heart failure' (do you mean heart stoppage?) and tunnels and the correlation thereof, I'm not aware that there is any. The tunnel experience occurs in NDE's no matter what the underlying crisis event and in many NDE's (particularly in the non western accounts) it doesn't of course.

[Ninshub]

Thanks tim. Don't leave this thread for too long.

Thanks tim. Don't leave this thread for too long.

Hope I don't need my tin hat, Ian. (Gulp)

I shudder to think what you mean by excellent empirical evidence.  You read it in a book somewhere so it must be true?

 Read it in a book so it must be true...?  You don't see the irony of that statement ?

We do know when it actuallys happens, though (the OBE during cardiac arrest) because we have enough reliable cases (from surgeons, doctors and medics etc) where patients have reported observing details of their operations that they could not possibly have seen or been aware of. Whilst it is true that these cases are technically anecdotes and therefore not empirically proven, that does not mean that they don't have great evidential value when considered as a whole.

This shows a non-acceptance of how many other forms of altered states can supply this same information, or you haven't studied how psi works yet, or compared NDE data to the many other altered states. 

Psychics, remote viewing, OOBE, AP, dreams, Sean Harribance could all tell you what went on in surgery, sometimes before the surgery, sometimes after the surgery. This desire to force NDE data to be different, and then theorizing why, in my humble opinion, is a mistake. There are no earthly time / space factors in many psi phenomena.

This is an altered state, so why is it suddenly exempt from being just like every other version of information supply across the Psi phenomena range? 
Because people wish for it to be something different or special. So go ahead and wish away, that always blocks sicence.

The only thing special is how the altered state is achieved. And I can't recommend this method. I can't recommend waiting for this method to find out what it is.

My point was simply, we can show everything the NDE claims in a bunch of other altered states, without dying.

We do have one (or two) very persuasive cases that were collected in the clinicial trials done so far that do in fact demonstrate that full consciousness was present without a functioning brain, but as in one case, the patient did not have his experience in a controlled area (a room with a target fitted) it could not be proven to the standard that hardline sceptics have demanded, even though it is patently obvious what occurred and when. 

If this is the point of the NDE, wonderful. I'm not a skeptic of the occurance of this altered state, or the results of that altered state, or what people can do during this altered state.

But most of the NDE people are into battering and beating anyone down who doesn't see it exactly like they do, and like to jump up and claim that it is proof of more than it is, while screaming and foaming at the mouth.

I have explained before that I have been functional in multiple consciousness situations at the same time, in other people's dreams, and more.
And most of you think I don't have a functional brain as it is. Come on, laugh, it was funny.

We can again take so many different psi phenomena and show how this is in agreement with how they might function, how they are independent of the human condition.

I don't see any issues here.

I don't know, but I'm assuming you require double blind "hits" in tightly controlled studies before you are willing to accept that these observations from the patient actually occured when they had no brain function.

No, I don't require that. I'm actually drawn to follow studies and inform myself when I see correlations that match other psi resources. And I don't agree that the brain is the only location or source of our awareness. So I'm not as impressed or shocked by this finding as some might be. When they toot this horn and jump up and down yelling and screaming while ignoring all other psi phenomena, I just shake my head and wonder why people get hooked and can't see beyond this one description, one source of data, and are blind to simple comparisons. 
It just blows my mind to see it turned into this hyper religious thing people need to fight over.