Dr. Jeffrey Long Responds to "NDEs are an Illusion" - Part 2

[TheRosenbergTrials]

continued again from directly below...

again...if your filter is week,YOU'RE WEAK. why aren't you asking questions from the perspective of "there is no way that happened!"? That is the healthy perspective when confronted with metaphysical claims. read about lucid dreaming possibilities in the traumatic seconds before and after, magnetic imaging experiments, other trauma that induces similar experiences. taken together, we CAN construct a plausible explanation of NDE's.

[AnduinX]

@TheRosenbergTrials: That is completely the wrong position to take things. If you look at things from the perspective of 'there's no way that happened', then virtually no amount of proof will ever satisfy you. Your materialist belief system is essentially set in stone. There's a fine line between being a healthy skeptic and being closed minded.

[AnduinX]

@TheRosenbergTrials: For example, let's say hypothetically the awareness during resuscitation study, a large, peer-reviewed study on NDEs came out with 'evidence' that people were able to describe things that happened while they were flat-lining. If I held your view, my conclusion would immediately be that the results had been doctored by the researchers themselves, or if the results were genuine, they were simply extremely improbable chance hits and they prove nothing.

[AnduinX]

@TheRosenbergTrials: If taken to the extreme you can deny a nearly limitless amount of evidence. At what point do you step back and say, hey, there's something going on here?

[TheRosenbergTrials]

@AnduinX

this is a fact-specific "position" i am taking. i am not a materialist, per se, and i would never suggest about anything that "there is no way that could happen". i am a rationalist. to this point, there has been no such study that demonstrates with any certainty that people have had an nde during or after flatline. there is no way to know that the experience doesn't happen in the traumatic seconds before flatline. allow me this: what kinds of questions are you asking?

[TheRosenbergTrials]

@AnduinX

clarification: in the original post, "there is no way that happened!", was meant as an expression of disbelief and skepticism--a launching off point from which we set out to ask tough questions. It is not suggestive of a closed-mindedness or unwillingness to believe. in my answer to you, i explained that "i would never suggest about anything that "there is no way that happened", and i stand by that, insofar as it being a closed-ended statement or a non-starter.

[TheRosenbergTrials]

continued from directly below...

with blossom figure on it. really? she suddenly has sight, admittedly didn't know how to even make sense of her sight and she can zoom in on her ring and see it with clarity? she said she recognized it by shape and that it was gold. this sounds like an experience anyone can have that is transformative but doesn't prove or even suggest anything extraordinary IS happening. it's cool! but it ain't solid. if you think it is, your filter is weak. cont'd...

[TheRosenbergTrials]

continued from below...

more stochastic examples include people winning lotto drawings twice in one day. read about stochasticity. very interesting. contributing factors include things i thought about after asking myself health skeptical questions. do some people wear red shoes in the place? did she overhear a convo about a red shoe stuck in gutter? we will learn more after parnia's study. blind "sightings"? blind can sketch images with words. woman recognized her gold ring... contd...

[TheRosenbergTrials]

it strikes me as silly that i can think of "plausible" explanations for your best evidence, but somehow you refuse to try. that is indicative of the problem here. you too- easily cling to wishful thinking, rather than see the situation with what, to me, is beautiful and brutal honesty. to you, it seems, it's just brutal.

plaus expl? shoe story: several good ones. begin with stochastics. weird coincidences happen. drive past a reebok sign just as radio ad says the word reebok. contd.>

[TheRosenbergTrials]

alex, sorry for ganging up, but i find you to be dangerous. you recently defended the uri geller studies from the 70's. yikes. if you bothered to look more closely at these studies (as they continued) and what eventually became of geller, you would have gleaned all you need to know from learning that he now admits to being an entertainer. it is this type of laziness and dishonesty that immediately discredits not only many of your individual points of view, but also the goal of your show.

[heightboosting]

@TheRosenbergTrials How do you explain the case of NDE where this girl talked about some tennis shoes on the top of the roof of the hospital where she fully described how the shoe looked like and also exactly where it was located.... One of the nurses or who it was that went up to check, found the shoe and it was exactly like the girl had described... And how can you explain blind people who are able to decribe events happening in other rooms of the hospital while she is clinically dead ?

[TheRosenbergTrials]

here's the deal: there is zero evidence (including the work of sartori) that demonstrates that nde's happen during EEG flatline. One the other hand, there is evidence that suggests the mind is capable of producing complex dreams and/or illusory memories in the span of a nanosecond. see the book, "the dreaming universe". it's so troubling that alex seems to be unable to step back from his naive arguments-from-ignorance and his delusional need to validate the supernatural.