Problems with this section; for Frank (Agnosticism)

by David Turell , Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 02:03 (5259 days ago) @ Frank Paris

"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.
During the NDE they walk down a dark tunnel to a very bright light. They meet people there, people who are dead, and some times are told that someone known to them has just recently died, by telepathy
"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 patients are resuscitated after the NDE and report it to the doctor, what the dead told them. In hospice it is easy enough for the doctor or attendant to confirm that the patient did not learn this information from visitors or family, but only through the experience.
"The general pattern is quite consistent."
>
>What is this general pattern?
The walk down the tunnel, the communication. Often they are just told it is not their time and to go back. The response is very often the patient wants to reject. They feel at rest and at peace, and may feel love, and want to stay.
>
> "Why do so many people have the same experience?"
It is about 20% of those who go through this. The majority are pleasant, but around 17% are unpleasant. No one can correlate the factors that produce this in one's personality.
>
>Please give me a precise description of the experience that so many people have. -Given above.
"All information that passes is telepathic."
>
>From what?
From the dead to the patient in the NDE.
"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.-Frank, I know the scientific method. I've about 34 entries in the world medical literature, from a time I was a research fellow and considered academic medicine as a career. There is a study going on now in hospices to cover about 1,500 patients with this experience, to learn more about it. I saw the announcement on line while ago. I don't remember anymore than that.
But let me tell you about the Lancet study: 344 resuscitiated coronary patients. Around 80 had NDE's. These were graded as to 'depth" (How complex and complete they were). Resuscitation brings death rather quickly afterward in many patients. They prospectively followed the patients. 21% of all NDE'rs died in 30 days; only 9% in non-NDE'rs. Among the very deep NDE'rs 43% died in 30 days. Premonition of death?-"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?-The Per van Lommel article was obviously peer-reviewed, but in the lay literature there has not been much discussion. There are some books the public can read, mostly by M.D.s. The current study, if as carefully done as van Lommel, may allow it to come out. A friend of mine had an out of body (OOB) about 20 years ago during surgery. As a good Catholic she checked with her priest, because it frightened her. He reassured her as did I, but this is still typical.
"I don't think it is copycat."
> 
> What do you mean by that?
As in crimes where a killing spree or a type of robbery is copied. I would think those close to death are more circumspect than 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.
I'm please you are interrogating me in this fashion. I find it a very fascinating issue.