Misleading NDE articles?

Many articles I’ve read lately , some from the same site , or news site; which I’ll mention, or sites familiar to many of us here , which r linked , at places like daily grail, have seemingly been quite misleading with NDE research or findings .

Making it sound like it’s brain based , people are not really “dead.” 

Maybe it’s just me , but hearing the same thing over and over causes me to weirdly doubt myself and question my own conclusions that , no, a conclusion has not been reached as to the cause of NDE’s.

I just don’t want to fall victim of falsely moving the goal posts for myself , so to speak, to keep “believing” when the evidence is against what I want to believe ? 

Who knows if it makes sense 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...dying.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...r-die.html

Maybe it’s just me , but hearing the same thing over and over causes me to weirdly doubt myself and question my own conclusions that , no, a conclusion has not been reached as to the cause of NDE’s.

That's how gaslighting can work ~ the same misinformation or disinformation is repeated again and again, and eventually you might start considering the possibility of it, not because it's logical, but because you keep seeing it.

Near-death experiences are not brain-based whatsoever, and have never once been demonstrated to be. But the Physicalist or Materialist must defend their ideology, so they repeat misinformation and disinformation not only to try and convince others, but also themselves, to keep their illogical, emotion-based ideological faith alive.

Many articles I’ve read lately , some from the same site , or news site; which I’ll mention, or sites familiar to many of us here , which r linked , at places like daily grail, have seemingly been quite misleading with NDE research or findings .

Making it sound like it’s brain based , people are not really “dead.” 

Maybe it’s just me , but hearing the same thing over and over causes me to weirdly doubt myself and question my own conclusions that , no, a conclusion has not been reached as to the cause of NDE’s.

I just don’t want to fall victim of falsely moving the goal posts for myself , so to speak, to keep “believing” when the evidence is against what I want to believe ? 

Who knows if it makes sense 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...dying.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...r-die.html

i've noticed that quite a bit especially on daily grail, not just nde's but  parapsychology and the paranormal in general. Most of  their debunking attemps have alreading been thoroughly discredited on this site and skeptiko in the past. Maybe it's a cyclic thing? 
I don't know what to make of  it. I can see how it could be disconserting to somebody new to the field.

The two 'Daily Mail' links are to recent articles, but they are just regurgitating old material. One is a strange take on Dr Sam Parnia's work, using the word "terrifying" which is pure tabloid sensationalism. Best to refer directly to Parnia's work. The other, a researcher, "carried out a large-scale review of dozens of studies", fair enough but it means there's nothing new to see, just one individual's take on the matter.

For me, the issue isn't these articles, but the fact that there isn't something new being written about, just rehashing old stuff.

Do u think it’s more beneficial to have a “both/and” approach rather than an “either/or” one for a lot of topics discussed here .

If I’m watching a football game , the game “shows up” on my tv and certain things I do, can manipulate the game, like the image or sound or even my ability to watch it , but the game is never literally effected by doing that. It just seems that way. 

Maybe it’s how it is with NDE’s, similar experiences . I know some would argue “Occam’s razor,” and adding an extra element is unnecessary or makes things more complicated, but … with some of the evidence of non local experiences / perceptions outside of even the proximity of an “event,” … I don’t know . Who knows 

I think wondering whether the brain is truly "turned off" is mistaken approach for asking whether NDEs are proof of Survival.

What we have are veridical information obtained that is either about this world - OOBEs - or some other existence where those who are dead communicate information to the NDEr.

There will likely be some aspect of the brain that is functioning during an NDE, if only the parts having to do with regulation of the body's processes. It would be interesting to find out whether the amount of brain activity is enough for the formation of conscious experiences but we don't even know exactly what brain structures/processes are minimally necessary at this point. (AFAIK, at least!)

I think wondering whether the brain is truly "turned off" is mistaken approach for asking whether NDEs are proof of Survival.

What we have are veridical information obtained that is either about this world - OOBEs - or some other existence where those who are dead communicate information to the NDEr.

There will likely be some aspect of the brain that is functioning during an NDE, if only the parts having to do with regulation of the body's processes. It would be interesting to find out whether the amount of brain activity is enough for the formation of conscious experiences but we don't even know exactly what brain structures/processes are minimally necessary at this point. (AFAIK, at least!)

Well... this is contradicted by the knowledge we have of verified brain states of patients who reported going through an NDE. Pam Reynolds, again, being the classic example where here brain was completely non-functional, yet she had full, lucid out-of-body awareness.

So, by that, it would appear rather succinctly that no brain processes are necessary for conscious experience in itself. Rather, brain processes are only necessary for a mind that needs to operate a physical form, in order to function in the physical world.

Brains are perhaps akin to... an engine in a car so to speak, in that you the driver don't need a functioning car engine to exist, but you need a functioning car engine to operate and make the car work.

I figured a while ago that the brain is necessary for a number of functions, primarily to control the body and enable useful functioning in the physical world. Next, it is responsible for human language; notably during NDEs, communication is via telepathy with no words needed, vast tracts of information such as answers to questions about life are shared instantly. On waking, much of this is no longer accessible, at least not in the depth with which it was experienced.

And also, though I don't consider memory to be stored only in the brain, some brain function is needed for the formation of memories. It's one area where I don't have a clear grasp or model of how things might work, as the brain function during an NDE (little to none) seems inadequate for the task of forming memories. It's almost as though memories stored 'elsewhere' are accessed after the NDE and a simplified version is formed as a memory by the brain. Or perhaps the brain holds a sort of key to allow access to external memory, rather than the memory itself. Sometimes the full rich content of the NDE may not be recalled until days, weeks or even years after the event.

I just wish that there was no vital signs at all, period . When there are brain waves associated with consciousness or awareness like that, even in “spikes,” up to that far into cardiac arrest and doing CPR, now we have to correlate the brain signals with the seeming “out of body stuff.” And explain it or rationalize it from our “non dual perspective .” Seems i keep moving things around in my own mind to justify how it could still be real or true . 

Now, since it seems someone can claim the stuff they heard or saw somehow happened while there brain was still alive , like an assault victim being raped and feeling disassociated and out of body, either it’s the same , as in protective .. brain based .. or the actual self , pops out so to speak or something like that, or rejoins something it’s a part of , in circumstances of death, near death or related experiences.

I’ll focus on cases where someone perceived something they couldn’t have even in the area … like the person who supposedly saw the nursing room stuff above the floor he was on at the hospital.

And not “Mary’s” shoe type cases. Can’t really corroborate those . I bet once u break it down, barely any actually could be. Validated like that . 

Maybe the language is messing us up. Talking of paranormal and normal , physical and non physical . Maybe it’s all same stuff morphing into different things , in ways , forms , dimensions that never go away , just change . Who knows .

I just wish that there was no vital signs at all, period . When there are brain waves associated with consciousness or awareness like that, even in “spikes,” up to that far into cardiac arrest and doing CPR, now we have to correlate the brain signals with the seeming “out of body stuff.” And explain it or rationalize it from our “non dual perspective .” Seems i keep moving things around in my own mind to justify how it could still be real or true . 

Now, since it seems someone can claim the stuff they heard or saw somehow happened while there brain was still alive , like an assault victim being raped and feeling disassociated and out of body, either it’s the same , as in protective .. brain based .. or the actual self , pops out so to speak or something like that, or rejoins something it’s a part of , in circumstances of death, near death or related experiences.

I’ll focus on cases where someone perceived something they couldn’t have even in the area … like the person who supposedly saw the nursing room stuff above the floor he was on at the hospital.

And not “Mary’s” shoe type cases. Can’t really corroborate those . I bet once u break it down, barely any actually could be. Validated like that . 

Maybe the language is messing us up. Talking of paranormal and normal , physical and non physical . Maybe it’s all same stuff morphing into different things , in ways , forms , dimensions that never go away , just change . Who knows .

Well there is "zero brain activity", where no signaling exists, and the question of whether whatever is happening when a person is clinically dead - such as possible faint electrical activity - is enough to sustain the kind of vivid experiences we have in NDE reports.

Admittedly everyone has their own threshold for evidence, for me the sum total of Survival evidence is convincing...however I've also had "weird", potentially paranormal [experiences]. I also think there are "a priori" reasons to believe in Survival, so I admit this boosts my confidence in the evidence we do have for Survival.