Consciousness during CPR

Honestly I just saw skeptics asking third parties about the rainbow, and getting answers that didn't fit in with Eben's story. The proponents then asked his family about it, and decided to believe them.

Personally, the wisest choice i think would have been to say that Eben's rainbow could not be verified as there were different and conflicting statements. Instead, naively, the proponents choose to just accept what the family told them.

So taking the words of witnesses who were there over the words of skeptics who more than likely were not is naive, gotcha. I'm with tim, I really don't know why I commented and see no point in continuing. Both Jim_Smith and IANDS have excellent rebuttals to the skeptics smear campaign against Eben, which are linked below. Read them or continue to call all proponents naive while spouting arguments we have heard for years. I couldn't care less. 

https://www.iands.org/ndes/more-info/ndes-in-the-news/970-esquire-article-on-eben-alexander-distorts-the-facts.html

http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/08/dr-eb...y-you.html

Given the questionable tactics skeptics have employed in the past I'd have trouble accepting their reports - do they have proof of what the third
party persons were saying?

That said I don't think Eben Alexander's NDE is that great of a data point compared to the larger variety of cases.

Or try a past-life regressionist. Yes, I know one can be sceptical. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". Getting direct first-hand experience, for better or for worse, is worth thousands of pages of opinions.

Do you have a recommended service - I have thought about this, even considered paying for my twin, to see if we end up with an overlap in past lives.

Given the questionable tactics skeptics have employed in the past I'd have trouble accepting their reports - do they have proof of what the third
party persons were saying?

That said I don't think Eben Alexander's NDE is that great of a data point compared to the larger variety of cases.

I tend to agree. On the one hand,there have been attempts to muddy the waters around this case, in so doing adding to the stature of the case, in that it receives publicity. On the other, as these things go, it is just one more case among thousands, and there are many which I find much more fascinating.

Or try a past-life regressionist. Yes, I know one can be sceptical. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". Getting direct first-hand experience, for better or for worse, is worth thousands of pages of opinions.

Do you have a recommended service - I have thought about this, even considered paying for my twin, to see if we end up with an overlap in past lives.

Not a service as such. I was reluctant to even consider the idea of regression myself, though I already had strong ideas about past lives. What I did try was one or two self-regression videos found on youtube. I got no results at all to begin with. Some months later I tried again and started to get something. It will vary from one person to the next, but I think patience was the thing I needed most, there is no hurry or rush.

Is it I or these things keep getting debugged and come back like nothing happened?
:l

Is it I or these things keep getting debugged and come back like nothing happened?
:l

Which do you mean - the things in favour or the things against?

Both sides seem to be persistent to me.

Which do you mean - the things in favour or the things against?

Both sides seem to be persistent to me.

I mean both, to my view, the evedence is neutral.

I mean both, to my view, the evedence is neutral.

Each side is biased. But skeptics in my opinion have a better starting position, materialism usually managed to explain most stuff in time.

Now that you've become a sceptic along with lets eat, raff, (that's absolutely fine) would you be so good as to actually explain how some alpha brainwaves during prolonged CPR (in 2 patients out of 19), explains all veridical out of body experiences, instead of just sounding off continually ?

Lets hear it. How about starting with Al Sullivan. Take us through it step by step. Or you choose your own case that you think has been debunked by Parnia's poster.

Please don't lump me into a position I haven't spoken in support of. My only concern with my prior posting is that the evidence has been misrepresented in regards to flatlining.

I tend to agree. On the one hand,there have been attempts to muddy the waters around this case, in so doing adding to the stature of the case, in that it receives publicity. On the other, as these things go, it is just one more case among thousands, and there are many which I find much more fascinating.

Not a service as such. I was reluctant to even consider the idea of regression myself, though I already had strong ideas about past lives. What I did try was one or two self-regression videos found on youtube. I got no results at all to begin with. Some months later I tried again and started to get something. It will vary from one person to the next, but I think patience was the thing I needed most, there is no hurry or rush.

What videos though?

Each side is biased. But skeptics in my opinion have a better starting position, materialism usually managed to explain most stuff in time.

Explain to their view, at this time, yes. But it prove nothing more.