near to death episodes (Endings)

by George Jelliss , Crewe, Saturday, March 01, 2008, 13:13 (6109 days ago) @ David Turell

David Turell wrote: "George really misses the point of all this by trying to invent a story of how the patient knew who had his teeth. As all Darwinists do, they invent just-so stories to 'explain' what cannot be explained." - I don't think I missed that point. I accept that there is a lot we don't know about the functioning of the brain. Quantum theory may well have something to do with it. I'm prepared to leave it to the experts. Much research is needed, and there is every sign that it is making progress. - Am I a "Darwinist"? Well I'm convinced by the evidence for evolution by natural selection, which was argued so ably by Darwin, and has been enhanced considerably in the nearly 150 years since he wrote by many able investigators. I also admire Darwin for his personal qualities. But I also have considerable regard for the work of other scientists, does that make me a Galileist, Keplerist, Newtonist, Einsteinist, Thomsonist, Penroseist, or whatever? - A "just-so" story as I understand it comes from Kipling's "How the Camel got his Hump" and other such fancies. My explanation of the lost teeth episode was not an imaginative fiction. It was more in the nature of a deduction from the facts of the case, such as one would find in a detective story. One tries to explain an event that appears inexplicable (such as a death in a locked room) by examining the evidence and questioning its reliability.