"Why I am no longer a skeptic"

We were talking about sensory awareness, not the perception of an elevated level of consciousness, which is why I brought up the BIS (relevant to the former, not to the latter).



That would have been an excellent case to write up as a case report. Although, I guess not remembering the patient's name or when it happened would make that difficult.


This is the story I saw:
http://www.allaboutheaven.org/observatio...ent-011248

Sorry, but nobody's sitting there eating lunch if a patient is in cardiac arrest and no CPR is being performed.

Linda

  The way I read it is that this occurred in between arrest events, not during an arrest.. I mean, he certainly wasn't in arrest and receiving CPR for 8 hours... Come on now!

We were talking about sensory awareness, not the perception of an elevated level of consciousness, which is why I brought up the BIS (relevant to the former, not to the latter).



That would have been an excellent case to write up as a case report. Although, I guess not remembering the patient's name or when it happened would make that difficult.


This is the story I saw:
http://www.allaboutheaven.org/observatio...ent-011248

Sorry, but nobody's sitting there eating lunch if a patient is in cardiac arrest and no CPR is being performed.

Linda

In the link you shared it mentions when it happened, it's all clearly a short, rubbish version (look at the site) - need to see in the book. There's the other case I mentioned and two others as well.

  The way I read it is that this occurred in between arrest events, not during an arrest.. I mean, he certainly wasn't in arrest and receiving CPR for 8 hours... Come on now!

That's the way I read it too - that when he ate the sandwich, is was likely during one of the periods when he wasn't in cardiac arrest and sense data wouldn't be unexplained.

Linda

In the link you shared it mentions when it happened, it's all clearly a short, rubbish version (look at the site) - need to see in the book. There's the other case I mentioned and two others as well.

Do you have the two others?

Linda

Do you have the two others?

Linda

Yeah, they're all in 'the self does not die'.

Richard Mansfield's patient's NDE (case 3.16) contained impressions of stopping and restarting the CPR, among other veridical impressions.

Case 3.19 concerns the NDE of a watchman, whose OBE started when he got a heart attack and included impressions of what happened before the CPR began.

Case 3.36 involves an NDE in which the patient saw how his girlfriend found him, before resuscitation.

Also case 3.24 and 3.26 - and the one I previously mentioned which you haven't commented on. 

Can go into more detail when I buy the book!

That's the way I read it too - that when he ate the sandwich, is was likely during one of the periods when he wasn't in cardiac arrest and sense data wouldn't be unexplained.

Linda

Maybe, maybe not.

First- sense data may still not be explained depending on his condition between arrests. My guess is that he was flat out unconscious and wasn't sensing at that time either. But can't prove that.

Also- not sure that most hard core deniers would agree with you that he couldn't have sensed anything during CPR. Don't mean to put word in your mouth: but I get the feeling that the only reason you are not pursuing that angle is that it isn't necessary in this case to do so as there are other things you can point to.

Feels to me that this is the way things go with discussing most cases. There is always, ALWAYS, something that a denier can hang their hat on. It's just a matter of how weak it is.

Yeah, they're all in 'the self does not die'.

Richard Mansfield's patient's NDE (case 3.16) contained impressions of stopping and restarting the CPR, among other veridical impressions.

Case 3.19 concerns the NDE of a watchman, whose OBE started when he got a heart attack and included impressions of what happened before the CPR began.

Case 3.36 involves an NDE in which the patient saw how his girlfriend found him, before resuscitation.

Also case 3.24 and 3.26 - and the one I previously mentioned which you haven't commented on. 

Can go into more detail when I buy the book!

Well, that brings up an interesting question. We've been talking about the kind of information which is regarded as reliable and valid, and the kind of information that I am looking for (the kind that I feel can be used to make real progress in understanding these phenomena). I talked about how even some prominent parapsychologists recognize that unrecorded stories are very problematic in this regard, and I gave some of examples of why this is so.

So given all that, why did you (and jkmac for that matter) choose to present this kind of information to me? Are you just trolling me?

Linda

Well, that brings up an interesting question. We've been talking about the kind of information which is regarded as reliable and valid, and the kind of information that I am looking for (the kind that I feel can be used to make real progress in understanding these phenomena). I talked about how even some prominent parapsychologists recognize that unrecorded stories are very problematic in this regard, and I gave some of examples of why this is so.

So given all that, why did you (and jkmac for that matter) choose to present this kind of information to me? Are you just trolling me?

Linda

Leave me out of that assertion..   

There's LOTs of stuff I can rightly be accused of: trolling is seldom one of them. 

Don't know how or why, but over the years I seem to have emerged as the perfect target of trolling. Lucky me.   

Probably because when my feathers get ruffled I occasionally tend to go on a big tirade. And I think trollers love to see that crap. 

Stupid me for doing that.

As to the point at hand-
I brought up examples that are classics and wanted to know what you thought of each. And you told me, and I learned a lot about your views  and approach in the process,,, which I have already described.

Maybe, maybe not.

First- sense data may still not be explained depending on his condition between arrests. My guess is that he was flat out unconscious and wasn't sensing at that time either. But can't prove that.

Also- not sure that most hard core deniers would agree with you that he couldn't have sensed anything during CPR. Don't mean to put word in your mouth: but I get the feeling that the only reason you are not pursuing that angle is that it isn't necessary in this case to do so as there are other things you can point to.

Feels to me that this is the way things go with discussing most cases. There is always, ALWAYS, something that a denier can hang their hat on. It's just a matter of how weak it is.

I didn't say that he couldn't have sensed anything during CPR. We were talking about seemingly impossible sense data, like sense data occurring when a subject was in cardiac arrest and not undergoing CPR  I said that the incident (the physician eating the sandwich) wouldn't have occurred under those conditions. You're right that we can't prove anything with this case. About the only thing we know about it is that it can't be an example of seemingly impossible sense data. So why it was even brought up as a potential example of impossible sense data is a puzzle to me.

Linda

Leave me out of that assertion..   

There's LOTs of stuff I can rightly be accused of: trolling is seldom one of them. 

Don't know how or why, but over the years I seem to have emerged as the perfect target of trolling. Lucky me.   

Probably because when my feathers get ruffled I occasionally tend to go on a big tirade. And I think trollers love to see that crap. 

Stupid me for doing that.

As to the point at hand-
I brought up examples that are classics and wanted to know what you thought of each. And you told me, and I learned a lot about your views  and approach in the process,,, which I have already described.

I wasn't asserting that you were trolling. I was genuinely puzzled and asking you what was going on - I suggested trolling as a possibility because I was having trouble thinking of some other reason for this strange behaviour. I'm relieved to find out this wasn't the case. Thank you.

My response to post hoc stories is "that sounds potentially interesting. What happens when stories are collected under conditions of good reliability and validity?" The answer will be the same whenever post hoc stories (no matter how meticulously they are researched after the fact) are offered.

Linda