Leslie Kean's new Netflix documentary

It's just such a shame to me that some people will, wrongly, dismiss the academics like the UVA for having their two most notable members in this documentary because a medium channeling a little boy sounded/looked silly. 

It's going to be difficult for me to just move on when these people are mocking, ridiculing or shaming my beliefs and people I look up to, knowing that a documentary featuring some I have even spoken to may have their reputations unfairly weakened because some people can't be bothered to do any further research.

My oldest friend who is now a professor of psychology used to make rude jokes about anyone I mentioned as being involved in the study of near death experience. This was in the nineties. He was of course part of the "Institution" that had/still has, a strangle hold on what is considered as acceptable good science. 

We have to bear in mind that science has been a great success since it consigned "superstition" to the dustbin several hundred years ago. They are maybe understandably afraid that it will open the door to all kinds of nonsense. 

And I do think we have to be careful in that respect. We can't just start talking about "souls" as if it's some part of a human being that can be classified and brought into the consulting room like a sore elbow. 

I think the eventual benefits will more likely lie in the realisation that we can't carry on killing each other, abusing animals and messing up our surroundings. We could actually have a more peaceful world because of the realisation and acceptance (finally) that our consciousness is a continuum and we have responsibilities and duties. The actual science won't change that much, I would have thought. I hope this doesn't sound like a homily BTW, even though I think it does (apologies)

My friend is now much more open to NDE's and even mentions them in his lectures. So there has been some movement. He used to be mortified even by the very mention of them.

Most of us, if not all of us, will be dead by the time STEM academia has a majority view that there is an afterlife.

That said I think we'll see a general acceptance of Psi data by...say, 2040.

Yep, I agree with that.

I have my own misgivings about mediumship (especially physical mediumship) and ghost hunting. Maybe it is because those are the two areas which are most prone to sensationalism - especially in the kind of media which thrives on sensationalism. I've had a few sessions with mediums and have never been entirely convinced. I have been convinced that at least one was out to fleece me, however. 

Once again I would implore you to forget about the reactions of those who will never accept any of it. Remember that they are as much invested in promoting and defending their worldview as you are for yours. No doubt if they read some of your posts here they would be quoting you on another forum as a prime example of gullibility. With that in mind, I have always wondered why someone like Steve001 spends his time arguing with us here. I suspect he does exactly that: quotes us on sceptic forums. At least Paul makes us think and malf makes us smile.

He certainly does. His explanation for the Lloyd Rudy case had me in stitches.

Well yes, we can't bring up mention of souls. I'm just hoping folks like Anil Seth realise their own arrogance and ignorance some day. I am baffled at how he can think his own old article from 2013, even before the completion of the AWARE study, is somehow more scientific than the first episode featuring actual experts on the subject. His vague, short, pretentiously-worded criticisms, given the context, come off as bitter and close-minded.

Someone in his comments even mentioned veridical NDEs as being impressive but of course he didn't reply to her. 

For those curious, here's his outdated take from 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...ast-hurrah

Well yes, we can't bring up mention of souls. I'm just hoping folks like Anil Seth realise their own arrogance and ignorance some day. I am baffled at how he can think his own old article from 2013, even before the completion of the AWARE study, is somehow more scientific than the first episode featuring actual experts on the subject. His vague, short, pretentiously-worded criticisms, given the context, come off as bitter and close-minded.

Someone in his comments even mentioned veridical NDEs as being impressive but of course he didn't reply to her. 

For those curious, here's his outdated take from 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...ast-hurrah

I remember it, Omni and it's a biased, poor assessment of the facts but to be fair I have seen worse. Unfortunately, we can't stop
'sceptics' from muddying the waters and I suspect rightly or wrongly that many of them 'get off' on it. Are we not making a mistake by letting them wind us up ?

I'm just depressed that's all at so many of these unfair or unjustified extremely low scores from people who didn't pay attention or didn't watch more than two episodes and just dismissed the rest. It's at a 5.8 on IMDB now (though there are still several positive ratings), but 5.8 is equivalent to roughly 2.5-3 stars. I guess that's not too bad considering that one needs to consider the quality of the entire series, but still. I'm sick of seeing a review where they'll complain that 'alternative explanations' aren't given, which is not the case for the NDE episode at least, moreso the other episodes.

Edit: Dropped to 5.7 now. I'm nervous as to whether it will fluctuate any further.

I remember it, Omni and it's a biased, poor assessment of the facts but to be fair I have seen worse. Unfortunately, we can't stop
'sceptics' from muddying the waters and I suspect rightly or wrongly that many of them 'get off' on it. Are we not making a mistake by letting them wind us up ?

Agreed -> Plus it does little good to cry on some tiny forum, posting everything from nearly decade old articles to the latest comment scraped from Youtube.

If anyone really is bothered that much, they can make an effort in being an advocate toward people who are persuadable.

I'm just depressed that's all at so many of these unfair or unjustified extremely low scores from people who didn't pay attention or didn't watch more than two episodes and just dismissed the rest. It's at a 5.8 on IMDB now (though there are still several positive ratings), but 5.8 is equivalent to roughly 2.5-3 stars. I guess that's not too bad considering that one needs to consider the quality of the entire series, but still. I'm sick of seeing a review where they'll complain that 'alternative explanations' aren't given, which is not the case for the NDE episode at least, moreso the other episodes.

This is all very familiar to me. I mentioned before that this kind of worry over what sceptics say had a negative effect on my own health, resulting in depression. I should have added that people here and elsewhere were at pains to give me the kind of advice that I gave you in earlier posts: stop worrying about what you can never change. 

My son and I had years of - admittedly good natured - debate on these subjects and we both now realise that we come from different ends of the spectrum when it comes to matters of psi, the afterlife and the nature of reality. He's a staunch materialist-atheist and will follow that kind of thinking wherever it leads. He thinks that I am slightly bonkers for my worldview but I have made my case and there's nothing more I can do. I know that he does not read the articles and books I recommend so what's the point? His view is that others have assessed that evidence and debunked it so why should he waste his time on it?

Thankfully, he and I agree on politics and other potentially incendiary matters so life is bearable.

No need to get all depressed and jittered about this Omni they're all only reviews. As far as I've seen website and youtube reviews have been fairly positive. I do find it super interesting that the medium discussions is what has soured the documentary. I wonder if it would have been better if instead of trances and spirits they just showed scientific tests where there is about 5 layers of blinding, without any crazy paranormal stuff at all. Weird how NDEs are okay, but mediums are too hard to believe.

Also, Omni, I'd say a good time for some introspection here. Why do all these dissenting opinions bother you? They don't make the evidence go away. I wonder if you're something like me about how you want to be in the majority group, so when the group shows a dissenting opinion you give it more validity than it actually has.

No need to get all depressed and jittered about this Omni they're all only reviews. As far as I've seen website and youtube reviews have been fairly positive. I do find it super interesting that the medium discussions is what has soured the documentary. I wonder if it would have been better if instead of trances and spirits they just showed scientific tests where there is about 5 layers of blinding, without any crazy paranormal stuff at all. Weird how NDEs are okay, but mediums are too hard to believe.

Also, Omni, I'd say a good time for some introspection here. Why do all these dissenting opinions bother you? They don't make the evidence go away. I wonder if you're something like me about how you want to be in the majority group, so when the group shows a dissenting opinion you give it more validity than it actually has.

I can't speak for Omni but I have often asked myself why those opinions bother me. The fact is that, among the people I would otherwise identify with - the people who respect research, science and truth over fabrication and delusion, the majority view is opposed to mine on these subjects. So I ask myself, what is it that convinces me but not them? 

All I can say is that I was drawn to these subjects out of a very real fear of the approaching end of my life. Everything I have ever had to wait for - sometimes for years - eventually arrives and it was as clear to me when I was 10 years old as it is now that I am almost 70 that so too will the time of my own death arrive. Had I gone along with the prevailing view of my friends and peers I would have been convinced that death means oblivion and that terrifies me for some reason. On the other hand, I was told stories by my elders who had lost family in WW2 about strange appearances of those who had died on the battlefield yet stood there in the bedroom, trying to communicate the fact that they live on.

Was I to dismiss these "ghost" stories as mere fantasy or did this offer hope in the face of my own fears? So I have dedicated a lot of my own time to reading about such phenomena. I have weighed the evidence and sought to form personal philosophy which can accommodate such evidence without veering into the realms of religious faith or magical thinking. The views of those I would otherwise identify with are still important to me and still cause me to doubt my own conclusions but I must say that I find it ironic that those who profess to have no faith often act as though they are in the thrall of some compelling dogma.