Hoover Institute video on Mathematical Challenges to Darwin's Theory

[Subduction Zone]

There of course needs to be control to make sure that the questioner is not manipulating the answers of those who verify the OBE accounts.
Do you remember reading that those with OBEs could describe their resuscitation much more accurately than those without OBEs.
Is that more substantial?

The supposed studies that you had were rather flawed. You don't even have a working hypothesis, That means that you do not have any scientific evidence. You only have anecdotes and stories. They may merit further investigation, but they are far from being evidence.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What I mean by "independent witnesses" is people who were there are confirm the things that the OBEers say happened in their stories. It is what I have been saying all along.

How did any of those witnesses determine that someone's mind left their body?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How did any of those witnesses determine that someone's mind left their body?

All of their minds left their bodies too? But they never went back.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is not just hearing stuff that is reported, it is seeing also.
No I don't think we need to leave our body to hear a siren while we sleep.

Except for those notes put up on high shelves. Nobody can see those.

If we don't need to leave our body to hear a siren while we sleep, why would we need to leave our body to hear what's going on in the very room we are in?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So are you saying that there is a natural explanation for unconscious people being able to hear and see events in a room and sometimes in another room.
And why do you call the OBEs magical. All it is is a phenomena that can be shown to be true in the real world and so must be natural, or so I am told.
Are you saying that all evidence for things outside the parameters of current scientific understanding is called magic and just ignored even if there is no explanation in those parameters, until an explanation in those parameters can be found?

Yes. Our brains can still detect what is going on around us while we sleep. We also know that our brains tend to fill in missing information, after the fact, to try to make sense of things. We also know that our brains can create false memories. That was the point about my question about your brain being aware of a siren outside, even as you're asleep.

You have provided NO explanation as to what is going on in an OBE. You just claim minds are leaving bodies without explaining how and then jumping from there to "God did it." You need to propose a mechanism or something to explain it.

I'm still waiting on an example of one of these "verified" events.

 

[Brian2]

How did any of those witnesses determine that someone's mind left their body?

The OBEers just related their stories/experience.
The witnesses just confirmed what the OBEers said.

 

[Brian2]

Except for those notes put up on high shelves. Nobody can see those.

If we don't need to leave our body to hear a siren while we sleep, why would we need to leave our body to hear what's going on in the very room we are in?

Seeing what happened and events in other rooms is another matter.
Putting signs up high does not guarantee they will be noticed. If they are not noticed and nothing else confirms an reported OBE then there is no evidence there.
If they are not noticed and people confirm what someone saw or heard then that is evidence still. (stronger for confirmed sight things than for hearing I guess)

 

[Brian2]

Yes. Our brains can still detect what is going on around us while we sleep. We also know that our brains tend to fill in missing information, after the fact, to try to make sense of things. We also know that our brains can create false memories. That was the point about my question about your brain being aware of a siren outside, even as you're asleep.

You have provided NO explanation as to what is going on in an OBE. You just claim minds are leaving bodies without explaining how and then jumping from there to "God did it." You need to propose a mechanism or something to explain it.

I'm still waiting on an example of one of these "verified" events.

I said nothing about "God did it". I did supply an answer outside the parameters of current science however where science has not been able to answer neurologically what has gone on.
The mechanism would be that minds exist in a spirit and that mind is not material based.
Is any of the following an example of verified events?
From this website: Near-Death Experiences Evidence for Their Reality

Line of Evidence #2


Seeing ongoing events from a location apart from the physical body while unconscious (out-of-body experience)
A common characteristic of near-death experiences is an out-of-body experience. An out-of-body experience (OBE) is the apparent separation of consciousness from the body. About 45% of near-death experiencers report OBEs which involves them seeing and often hearing ongoing earthly events from a perspective that is apart, and usually above, their physical bodies. Following cardiac arrest, NDErs may see, and later accurately describe, their own resuscitation.

The first prospective study of the accuracy of out-of-body observations during near-death experiences was by Dr. Michael Sabom.8 This study investigated a group of patients who had cardiac arrests with NDEs that included OBEs, and compared them with a control group of patients who experienced cardiac crises but did not have NDEs. Both groups of patients were asked to describe their own resuscitation as best they could. Sabom found that the group of NDE patients were much more accurate than the control group in describing their own resuscitations.

“A man should look for what is, and not what he thinks should be.”

-Albert Einstein
Another prospective study of out-of-body observations during near-death experiences with similar methodology to Sabom’s study was published by Dr. Penny Sartori.9 This study also found that near-death experiencers were often remarkably accurate in describing details of their own resuscitations. The control group that did not have NDEs was highly inaccurate and often could only guess at what occurred during their resuscitations.

Two large retrospective studies investigated the accuracy of out-of-body observations during near-death experiences. The first was by Dr. Janice Holden.10 Dr. Holden reviewed NDEs with OBEs in all previously published scholarly articles and books, and found 89 case reports. Of the case reports reviewed, 92% were considered to be completely accurate with no inaccuracy whatsoever when the OBE observations were later investigated.

Another large retrospective investigation of near-death experiences that included out-of-body observations was recently published.11 This study was a review of 617 NDEs that were sequentially shared on the NDERF website. Of these NDEs, there were 287 NDEs that had OBEs with sufficient information to allow objective determination of the reality of their descriptions of their observations during the OBEs. Review of the 287 OBEs found that 280 (97.6%) of the OBE descriptions were entirely realistic and lacked any content that seemed unreal. In this group of 287 NDErs with OBEs, there were 65 (23%) who personally investigated the accuracy of their own OBE observations after recovering from their life-threatening event. Based on these later investigations, none of these 65 OBErs found any inaccuracy in their own OBE observations.

The high percentage of accurate out-of-body observations during near-death experiences does not seem explainable by any possible physical brain function as it is currently known. This is corroborated by OBEs during NDEs that describe accurate observations while they were verifiably clinically comatose.12 Further corroboration comes from the many NDEs that have been reported with accurate OBE observations of events occurring far from their physical body, and beyond any possible physical sensory awareness.13 Moreover, NDE accounts have been reported with OBEs that accurately observed events that were completely unexpected by the NDErs.14 This further argues against NDEs as being a result of illusory memories originating from what the NDErs might have expected during a close brush with death.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The OBEers just related their stories/experience.
The witnesses just confirmed what the OBEers said.

So, no.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Seeing what happened and events in other rooms is another matter.

I've yet to see an example of this.

Putting signs up high does not guarantee they will be noticed. If they are not noticed and nothing else confirms an reported OBE then there is no evidence there.

No, it doesn't. But it doesn't bode well for your claims either. And you can't just wave them away either. These are actual data points from controlled studies, and not just anecdotal stuff that you're claiming.

If they are not noticed and people confirm what someone saw or heard then that is evidence still. (stronger for confirmed sight things than for hearing I guess)

Sorry but confirming that somebody heard something in the room they were in is not very remarkable to me. It's rather mundane and ordinary, in fact.[/QUOTE]

 

[gnostic]

I said nothing about "God did it". I did supply an answer outside the parameters of current science however where science has not been able to answer neurologically what has gone on.

Science still evidence -testable & verifiable evidence - to verify and validate any premises or parameters, otherwise the premises &parameters are merely empty claims.

And YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND making "claims" are not evidence - they are just empty words, unsubstantiated opinions.

We have told you this repeatedly, time and time again, but you just ignore them, which not only you if more herbivores to science, but downright dishonest

 

[Brian2]

Science still evidence -testable & verifiable evidence - to verify and validate any premises or parameters, otherwise the premises &parameters are merely empty claims.

And YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND making "claims" are not evidence - they are just empty words, unsubstantiated opinions.

We have told you this repeatedly, time and time again, but you just ignore them, which not only you if more herbivores to science, but downright dishonest

I don't say that making claims is evidence. Where did you get that idea from.
If an OBEer tells us of their experience we believe they had that experience.
If subsequently someone is able to verify the details of that experience then that becomes evidence that the experience is real.
You are misrepresenting what I am saying.

"""We have told you this repeatedly, time and time again, but you just ignore them, which not only you if more herbivores to science, but downright dishonest"""

What does that mean?

 

[gnostic]

I don't say that making claims is evidence. Where did you get that idea from.

You keep saying you have "verification", and the only verification that really matter, are evidence.

Not anecdotes, because as I have told you repeatedly before, as well as others have done so, anecdotes are terribly unreliable.

 

[gnostic]

We have told you this repeatedly, time and time again, but you just ignore them, which not only you if more herbivores to science, but downright dishonest

What does that mean?

“herbivores”?

What the f—?!



My damn iPad’s autocorrect!

LOL

I don’t even remember what the word I had originally intended to use.

That’s so embarrassing.

Well, Brian, I hoped that you have been eating your fruits and veggies.

 

[gnostic]

My damn iPad’s autocorrect!

No, wait.

That was posted about 4 hours ago, when I was at the chemist, waiting for prescriptions.

I was using my mobile phone at the time, not my iPad.

It’s my damn ASUS phone!

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, wait.

That was posted about 4 hours ago, when I was at the chemist, waiting for prescriptions.

I was using my mobile phone at the time, not my iPad.

It’s my damn ASUS phone!

Either way I feel your pain. I have a table whose autocorrect was so bad that I called it autowrong. It did not misspell correctly spelled words, but it was always going "Hmm, you did not really mean that" and changing my text. I ended up shutting it off. Now my only problem with that tablet is when I occasionally bump a suggested word by mistake. I usually catch that but at least once one got past me and earned and the poster I was responding to was completely lost by that post.

 

[Brian2]

“herbivores”?

What the f—?!



My damn iPad’s autocorrect!

LOL

I don’t even remember what the word I had originally intended to use.

That’s so embarrassing.

Well, Brian, I hoped that you have been eating your fruits and veggies.

Yes and I had a handful of raw spinach tonight. I'm so lazy when it comes to cooking.