Consciousness during CPR

...any regular bursts of electrical activity in the EEG is fine with me. 

We got there in the end, didn't we. 

nope, I'm meaning the room above wasn't secret and hidden... unlike the secret and hidden targets.

It was secret and hidden to the patient, in the respect that he wouldn't have ever been in it or been allowed to go in it.

Yes, but it wasn't secret and hidden to those who knew about it, for example, the medical staff who were in attendance.

Right.  So you are assuming that the medical staff were "thinking about the nursing station" (during his resuscitation) and consequently "transmitted" those thoughts into that particular patient's head.

It was a rather accurate detailed description, though, wasn't it. If such a "transmission" is possible, wouldn't we expect it to be more vague and less defined. Maybe resulting in the patient thinking he was seeing real patients, not plastic dummies > He was very clear about this, wasn't he.

He also described the pipes and the wiring as he ascended through the ceiling. Were the attending medics also thinking about those , as well as the insulation he claimed to have seen ?

Max said > "I'm just being accurate..."

No, Max, it's me that's being accurate, whereas you're just trying to open a window of opportunity (for yourself ?) in the pattern of burst suppression (used in neurosurgery to routinely flatten brainwaves). 

Even Gerry Woerlee accepts that burst suppression eliminates the possibility of any experience. He couldn't do anything else, because it's a fact.

This is where I find these arguments a bit confusing.

Isn't what you're arguing that burst suppression eliminates the possibility of any experience on the standard materialist assumption that mind is entirely generated by brain activity?

But NDE proponents don't accept that assumption, and argue that experience is possible under burst suppression. The problem is that under other assumptions the possibilities become far less clear. One has to avoid using materialist assumptions to argue for one non-materialist hypothesis (survival) over another (psi).

Excuse me, but are we taking Bellig's case as 100% confirmed?

I haven't heard third party accounts of the event, or an interview with the patient. I don't have anything to really validate that NDE other than Bellig's tale.

And that isn't enough, not for me. Not for anyone with even just moderate skeptcism.

It could be anything really. A mistake, false memories, bias, wishful thinking, the patient could have heard about the room during recovery and, lastly although unreasonable, fraud

Excuse me, but are we taking Bellig's case as 100% confirmed?

I haven't heard third party accounts of the event, or an interview with the patient. I don't have anything to really validate that NDE other than Bellig's tale.

And that isn't enough, not for me. Not for anyone with even just moderate skeptcism.

It could be anything really. A mistake, false memories, bias, wishful thinking, the patient could have heard about the room during recovery and, lastly although unreasonable, fraud

YOU...don't have to take any case as confirmed. Do as you please, Raff.  Personally, I have no reason to believe that Laurin Bellg made the case up or told lies about it, but of course, it is possible. For what it's worth (not much to an excitable character like you appear to be) the people at IANDS described Laurin as impeccably honest and reliable/trustworthy 

No case on it's own can ever be "proof" of anything, but when you have hundreds of reports that broadly 'agree' with each other, then it becomes harder to dismiss them. Is it really likely that every single veridical case can be explained by error, fraud, or whatever Steve 001 can come up with ? 

Why not contact Dr Bellg and ask her yourself  ?