Why do I feel threatened?

Maybe? 

I emailed M/s Roberts some of the more persuasive NDE literature in an effort to educate her. No reply, naturally. I only can imagine what she was thinking (what is this crap and who is the f*cking idiot)

Maybe I'm a grumpy old git but I can't stand either of them.

A little off-topic but I well remember my time in the UK just before I emigrated to New Zealand. I was a regular at a Meetup group in which we would discuss much the same subject matter that we discuss here in this forum. It became a standing joke to the group that I would be guaranteed to groan at the mention of Brian Cox (the women seemed to like him though). 

So tim, I'm with you - can't stand the man. I don't remember much about Alice Roberts but it was another long held grumble of mine that the BBC would only invite either hard-line atheists or dogmatic materialists to comment whenever the paranormal was brought up. Stephen Fry is another arrogant twat, by the way.

So tim, I'm with you - can't stand the man. I don't remember much about Alice Roberts but it was another long held grumble of mine that the BBC would only invite either hard-line atheists or dogmatic materialists to comment whenever the paranormal was brought up. Stephen Fry is another arrogant twat, by the way.

You must surely remember Fry’s spitting rant about God when asked by well known presenter Gay Burn on the famous Irish ‘Late late show’a few years back, we discussed it at the time. It was really interesting to see someone like him get so worked up about something that he doesn’t believe in. Of the three presenters mentioned I quite like Cox, though they’re all close minded to quite a degree. He admits to being agnostic rather than an atheist I think, just don’t get him on the subject of ghosts. 

Actually, now that I think about it, there’s really none of the anti-psi people that get me that worked up. There’s really no-one name that I really get worked up about, Hitler, Stalin, etc I’ve been very fortunate in this life, to not experience any real suffering imposed by man. I think there are loads of people I strongly disagree with, and would not like to have anything to do with, but I try to accept it rather than fight it internally.

You must surely remember Fry’s spitting rant about God when asked by well known presenter Gay Burn on the famous Irish ‘Late late show’a few years back, we discussed it at the time. It was really interesting to see someone like him get so worked up about something that he doesn’t believe in. Of the three presenters mentioned I quite like Cox, though they’re all close minded to quite a degree. He admits to being agnostic rather than an atheist I think, just don’t get him on the subject of ghosts. 

Actually, now that I think about it, there’s really none of the anti-psi people that get me that worked up. There’s really no-one name that I really get worked up about, Hitler, Stalin, etc I’ve been very fortunate in this life, to not experience any real suffering imposed by man. I think there are loads of people I strongly disagree with, and would not like to have anything to do with, but I try to accept it rather than fight it internally.

That's how I feel. To me it's just a lot of effort to have to sit there like yoouuuu fuckin bastards you dumb pricks don't know anything all the time. People are obviously ignorant, biased and up themselves but takes too much out of you to hold grudges. Though of course I'll admit there's certain people when I seem them it's like oh this fuckin guy again.

"yet each also seems to hedge against it from an academic standpoint?" 

I think they have to until Parnia (or some other group) moves the debate along further.

The "bundling" of Survival and telepathy may make the argument harder.  Parnia is doing the professional thing and has cemented the factual basis of NDE reports and established a pathway forward for data gathering standards.  

I think that the survival component brings anti-religious headwinds.  I would not pick NDE's as the best chance for convincing the academic mob  Surely, to "prove" an NDE is the gold standard for Psi marketing.  In media presentations it would be like a mike-drop.

The better suited marketing strategy, in my humble opinion, is the work of Sheldrake and biologist exploring mind in animals.  The principal of anomalous information transfer is at the root of Sheldrake and Parnia research.  Once a methodology is framed, the study of Psi - as a pragmatic phenomena - will procced at a lower emotional level. Psi that presents as biology that includes humans and other organisms.  
 
I think that simple solid evidence, at the basest level of natural instinct, erodes the anti-Psi base and leads to an organized argument faster.  Once there is an established means of HOW it works - then the scope of acceptance for Psi will open up.

  Only recently have scientists accorded chimpanzees, so closely related to humans we can share blood transfusions, the dignity of having a mind. But now, increasingly, researchers who study octopuses are convinced that these boneless, alien animals — creatures whose ancestors diverged from the lineage that would lead to ours roughly 500 to 700 million years ago — have developed intelligence, emotions, and individual personalities. Their findings are challenging our understanding of consciousness itself.

   https://orionmagazine.org/article/deep-intellect/

You must surely remember Fry’s spitting rant about God when asked by well known presenter Gay Burn on the famous Irish ‘Late late show’a few years back, we discussed it at the time. It was really interesting to see someone like him get so worked up about something that he doesn’t believe in. Of the three presenters mentioned I quite like Cox, though they’re all close minded to quite a degree. He admits to being agnostic rather than an atheist I think, just don’t get him on the subject of ghosts.

I'm not sure whether it was on this forum or elsewhere that the possibility of Fry being a reincarnation of Oscar Wilde was discussed. At any rate, I think Fry's irate rant about god probably has causes that he himself is not fully aware of. Many of our obsessions, likes and dislikes have some sort of trail leading back like a thread through multiple past lives - in my opinion.

Of the presenters mentioned, I avoid Cox completely, Alice Roberts can be ok on occasion, though for science I prefer Jim Al-Khalili, he seems to have enthusiasm for his subject without being too pompous. On other topics such as history, I prefer Janina Ramirez - and she did a presentation on the history of ghosts with Dr. Irving Finkel and did so with warmth rather than condescension.

The "bundling" of Survival and telepathy may make the argument harder.  Parnia is doing the professional thing and has cemented the factual basis of NDE reports and established a pathway forward for data gathering standards.  

I think that the survival component brings anti-religious headwinds.  I would not pick NDE's as the best chance for convincing the academic mob  Surely, to "prove" an NDE is the gold standard for Psi marketing.  In media presentations it would be like a mike-drop.

The better suited marketing strategy, in my humble opinion, is the work of Sheldrake and biologist exploring mind in animals.  The principal of anomalous information transfer is at the root of Sheldrake and Parnia research.  Once a methodology is framed, the study of Psi - as a pragmatic phenomena - will procced at a lower emotional level. Psi that presents as biology that includes humans and other organisms.  
 
I think that simple solid evidence, at the basest level of natural instinct, erodes the anti-Psi base and leads to an organized argument faster.  Once there is an established means of HOW it works - then the scope of acceptance for Psi will open up.

   https://orionmagazine.org/article/deep-intellect/

Interesting ! Do you perhaps mean, let mainstream science get used to psi first and only then discuss survival ?

I'm not sure whether it was on this forum or elsewhere that the possibility of Fry being a reincarnation of Oscar Wilde was discussed. At any rate, I think Fry's irate rant about god probably has causes that he himself is not fully aware of. Many of our obsessions, likes and dislikes have some sort of trail leading back like a thread through multiple past lives - in my opinion.

Of the presenters mentioned, I avoid Cox completely, Alice Roberts can be ok on occasion, though for science I prefer Jim Al-Khalili, he seems to have enthusiasm for his subject without being too pompous. On other topics such as history, I prefer Janina Ramirez - and she did a presentation on the history of ghosts with Dr. Irving Finkel and did so with warmth rather than condescension.

I remember that (rant) being centred around his angry 'virtue signalling ?' (I've pinched that) , seemingly extremely righteous demands, to know what kind of "God" gives or allows children to get cancer and die. 

It's a slam dunk for many people. But when you think about it a bit further, though without assuming that cancer is God given, there are also numerous other ways that children can meet a nasty end, falling off a cliff for instance. Nevertheless, any attempt to interject with such would be (possibly) met with violent rage and an order to shut your ignorant mouth.

Brian Cox (the women seemed to like him though)

I have noticed this mystifying phenomena. A candidate for scientific study, surely.

I remember that (rant) being centred around his angry 'virtue signalling ?' (I've pinched that) , seemingly extremely
righteous demands, to know what kind of "God" gives or allows children to get cancer and die.

I believe the Sci-Fi writer Richard Morgan is from the UK as well? I once had the...let's call it pleasure of trying to discuss theology with him [in some online space]. I was trying to talk about Whitehead"s conception of God and he insisted that this question of suffering - IIRC he actually used the children getting cancer argument - must be relevant.

It didn't matter that Whitehead's idea of God wasn't the Abrahamic one [with that kind of top-down control over reality], and I just abandoned the discussion because it felt pointless.

I can sort of get hating God though this feels at odds with Atheism, but when one is trying to make sure any conception of God is a target of that hate it all starts to get a bit silly.

edit: Made me recall a woman I'm friends with, very dedicated to animal rescue and possibly an afterlife for animals, but I recall any [time] the comment section of her blog turned to discussions of God she'd demand non-atheists stop proselytizing.

edit 2:

I emailed M/s Roberts some of the more persuasive NDE literature in an effort to educate her. No reply, naturally. I only can imagine what she was thinking (what is this crap and who is the f*cking idiot)

This actually made me recall another friend who sent an email to Susan Blackmore about a dream he had wherein he walks into a house and takes a book off a shelf. This dream was an accurate picture of the next day, including the exact text of the book. Blackmore actually said that this was in fact enough for a personal belief in Psi, though my guess is she'd never admit to that publicly.