Problems with this section; for Frank (Agnosticism)

by Frank Paris , Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 16:13 (5259 days ago) @ David Turell

"These people do gleen information through them, information they should not have been able to find out."-Please give me precise examples of information they receive in NDE that they should not have been able to find out.-"They always communicate with the dead, when there is communication."-How is it known that they communicate with the dead? How is it known that there is communication?-"The general pattern is quite consistent."-What is this general pattern?-"Why do so many poeple have the same experience?"-Please give me a precise description of the experience that so many people have. -"All information that passes is telepathic."-From what?-"Yes, based on this I think an afterlife is a possibility."-If it's only a possibility, what other alternative explanations are there? Or is no one in this field interested in exploring other possibilities? The way good science works, when you have data in need of explanation, alternative explanations are always put forward in competition with the scientists' favorite theory to see how well they stand up in comparison with the favored explanations, in anticipation that peer reviewers will raise these alternative explanations and claim they are more probable. Give me some assurance that the scientific method is being practiced here. Otherwise I'll have no alternative but to believe it is all wishful thinking.-"This NDE information has not been widely disseminated in the public."-Why is that? In the field of science, this is only true when the data is regarded as tentative and too preliminary to trust it for peer review. Is this data rigorous enough and ready for peer review or not?-"I don't think it is copycat."-What do you mean by that?-"Frank, please acquaint yourself with this area, and don't jump to conclusions."-In asking these questions, that's exactly what I'm trying to do.