AwareofAware

Evolving news on the science, writing and thinking about Near Death Experiences (NDEs)

Hypothesis Checking and NYU meeting

Firstly, I am currently in the process of writing a book on NDEs. As part of that I am having to reread the book on the front page of this blog, Aware Of Aware. I apologize to anyone who bought that, it is truly a stinker. My new book will be much better (I hope!). As part of the book I am trying to identify what I would have as the central hypothesis that is being tested in AWARE II. This is the best I could come up with…if any of you think this isn’t a hypothesis, or could improve it then let me know:

“If OBEs in NDEs are a real phenomenon then the consciousness is a separate entity that leaves the body when the patient’s heart has stopped beating and brain activity has ceased.”

I then make these predictions of the results that would be needed to prove the hypothesis true:

Approximately 1% of CA survivors who meet the study’s inclusion criteria and who survive long enough to complete all interviews in the AWARE II study will have scientifically validated OBEs (correctly identify the image on the tablet). This is based on 10% having NDEs, 25% of those having OBEs and 40% of those seeing the target. That comes to 1% of the total. So this is my prediction for the different possible totals who complete the study as described above.

250 – 2-3 scientifically verified OBEs

500 – 5 scientifically verified OBEs

750 – 7 scientifically verified OBEs

1000 – 10 scientifically verified OBEs

And so on.

Secondly, can someone who lives in or near NYC please attend this. I will consider sharing some of the registration and (reasonable) travel costs on receipt of a full reliable report of what was said, along with some snapshots of slides and speakers. If I still lived in Toronto I’d fly down for this. PM me if you are up for this by using the contact me link at the top.

NYU what happens when we die

Single Post Navigation

95 thoughts on “Hypothesis Checking and NYU meeting

  1. Werner Bartl on said:

    Are you more positive about Ben’s results? yes funny is that they have invited an experienced seaman

    Like

    • Madelaine Lawrence on said:

      I’m not sure consciousness leaves the body during an NDE. It could be when the body is underdeveloped as in the young, has been altered by old age, illness, and grieving that enable us to experience beyond the current understanding of our capabilities.

      One interesting phenomenon is the lack of description of smoke or mist leaving the body when someone has an NDE. It is not unusual for others to see what they describe as smoke or mist leaving the body when someone dies and does not come back to life. It seems full death might be different than NDEs even when that person has flat lined.

      I would also suggest not just looking at NDEs but looking broader at the many transpersonal experiences that occur close to and after death.

      Check out The Death View Revolution: A Guide to Transpersonal experiences surrounding death and a host of other descriptions of transpersonal experiences surrounding death in articles and books. Hello from Heaven, is an excellent book about after death communication that happens to grieving individuals.

      Like

    • @Madelaine Lawrence

      Hi, are you Madeleine Lawrence the NDE researcher and writer ? If so, I loved your book describing the experiences of patients in coma, “In a world of their own”!

      On the subject of something leaving the body, Al Sullivan’s experience of seeing the surgeon “flapping his arms” was featured in that book and here is a ‘relatively’ recent re-enactment of his out of body experience during his open heart by-pass surgery.

      Interestingly, the real life Dr Hiro Takata actually featured in the video and confirmed that what Sullivan reported seeing (during his out of body experience) actually did occur. There is no way that Sullivan could have seen the surgeon making those particular (and unique to him) arm movements.

      What he was actually doing was keeping his hands pressed tight against his upper chest (for good hygiene) and “pointing” with his elbows instead, giving instructions to his assistants and scrub nurses, which looked to Sullivan rather peculiar and amusing.

      Sullivan was lying flat, anaesthetised with his eyes taped shut, behind a curtain, but described seeing all this from a position above the operating table. If “nothing left the body”, I don’t see how this can be explained. In fact it makes perfect sense that “something” must have left the body.

      Like

      • Louis Wilbur on said:

        The book “Near Death In The ICU” by Laurin Bellg MD documents numerous cases of veridical OBEs that have taken place during NDEs in her patients. Laurin has been a doctor for many years and these are all cases that she had personally documented. Most of her cases are not found in other NDE literature and her book is required reading for anyone who is really interested in this subject. The veridical NDEs that she documents is simply astounding. No matter what one’s opinions are about NDEs, it is hard to read her book and not come away believing that consciousness can be dislocated from the body under extreme circumstances.

        Like

  2. Rich Gowell on said:

    I think the term “real” is problematic. A hallucination is a “real” phenomenon, it just doesn’t seen to point to a transcendent reality. Veridical OBEs on the other hand, do. This is the salient distinction to be made I think.

    Like

    • Thanks for the pickup Rich.

      Like

    • Paul M Battista on said:

      I hope you can post the video. Can’t wait to see it

      Like

      • I think the I Pad might be a really unnecessary point to be honest unless your trying to win a debate that is unnecessary because a lot of people don’t follow the evidence and see where it leads. It all depends if the NDEr pays attention to the I pad or not, its up to them, not us, and not Sam Parnia’s team ect, I am sure he knows this also. Most people who have NDEs might not be focused on something that specific it doesn’t seem important to them at that point. When a person is out of there body they are thinking this is different, looking at there body, feeling wonderful, meeting relatives, looking at doctors, visiting beautiful place, and have many,many other things to focus on. No one is telling them before they have a CA “if you have a Aware/NDE please look at the I pad on the top right hand corner and remember to tell us what the picture is if we bring you back even though there is a high chance your going to be permanently dead”. Even Dr Mary Neal who had an OBE/ADE told Sam Parnia she might not have seen that Ipad cause she didn’t expect to come back and was focused on big things that are important.

        Like

  3. As long as they have verifiable aspects then that’s all that needs to be demonstrated. We have alot of evidence already and much more coming in. I wouldn’t care to much of peoples strong biased opinion that is not based on evidence or what they would like to be true that is not based on evidence. I try to remind myself that to many people make unsubstantiated claims. Sam Parnia says “by definition they(NDEs) cannot be hallucinations cause the report real events”. Also neurosurgeons/scientist make to many category errors. This is why they need to use philosophy and its obvious. They ignore to much evidence because they don’t study philosophy and you cant do science without philosophy. Ive been studying Philosophy of Mind and neurosciences under Brandon Rickabaugh’s work and many others. Anyone can visit his website and read is dissertation papers he might be the best in the world on the mind.

    Like

    • neuroscientists take consciousness to be a priori what the brain does. most neuroscientists dont even believe mind exists, its just all computation to them. its waste of time arguing with them. unfortunately the scientific establishment does not fund nde research and actively tries to suppress it.

      Like

  4. http://neardth.com/aware-parnia.php
    https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/aware-results-finally-published-no-evidence-of-nde/

    Found this two articles. Would be interested in your thoughts and opinions about this. Thanks in advance.

    Like

    • Worlee and novella, read those ages ago. They are staunch materialists, don’t waste your time reading them. Worlee has a terrible reputation and novella just use countless strawman attacks, promising consciousness is in the brain and will be explained very soon mechanistically.

      Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        I find it hilarious that Woerlee used to go through Amazon books regarding NDEs and start trying to debunk them. Gerry, give it a rest already, will you?

        Like

    • Okay thank you all for your answers:)

      Like

  5. I would recommend the self does not Die its a book. They refute Worlee claims in that book.

    Like

    • Worlee and Steven are not experts on the philosophy of mind. David Bently,Robert koons, Edward Feser, Brandon Rickabaugh, Eric Hernandez, JP Moreland, David Chalmers, Inspiringphilosophy, ect would be more appropriate to comment on The Soul. This video explains. People stop being lazy read books and study its not hard. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lpiMzVA6lDE

      Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        I’m skeptical of Inspiringphilosophy.
        But David Chalmers is definitely my go-to. You’re right, it’s not hard to read a book or two.
        I hate to say it, but most of the materialists I’ve seen so far in person and online ( mainly aggressive ones on YouTube ), are college-aged. Like around 18 to 23 years old.
        I’ve even said that to some of them upfront in person, in the most lighthearted way possible. They’d rather go out drinking, gambling, see movies, go clubbing, partying, playing video games, etc.
        I’m not against any of those activities at all ( except for drinking and gambling ), because they’re a lot of fun.
        But when I said that to them, their responses were “you’re ageist AND superstitious! I hope you’re not a teacher, or don’t become one.”

        I agree with you.
        If people have time to see a two-hour movie, go out clubbing, and spend 9 hours playing video games, then they have time to read up on things, study, and open their world up to more than the things I mentioned. No excuses.

        Like

  6. @madaline Lawrence the Soul does leave the body thats what the evidence shows and the aware study stated “they cannot be hallucinations because they report real events. This mist or smoke is not in the evidenced experiences. Dr Mary Neal did not report any mist or smoke and she had an NDE neither do the main stream Experts mention this, you can email them if you want. Sam Parnia also does not Mention this therefor that person might be mistaken or is making it up. Read the evidential cases not the ones who are just self reporting with no evidence. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bOPrLZTTrDI

    Like

  7. Kelesther on said:

    “This is why they need to use philosophy and its obvious. They ignore to much evidence because they don’t study philosophy and you cant do science without philosophy.”

    They do study or seem interested in philosphy…. When they think or when it seems to agree with their worldview.
    When philosphy doesn’t look like it supports materialism, they start calling it BS, bunk, useless, and “an excuse for pseudoscientists/spiritualists, because they’re so arrogant, refuse to admit they’re wrong, and consider other possible and rational explanations for things”.

    As I always say, everybody ( materialists and mind-beyond-brain proponents ) loves science, when it agrees with them, when they think it does, or supports their worldview.
    But the second it starts keeping them awake at night, disagrees with them, contradicts their worldview and beliefs, or makes them lose sleep, that’s when they start hating, twisting, and distorting science.
    Kind of like how so many kids and teenagers claim to LOVE school. That is until they’re asked to actually do some work, put down the video games and cell phone, study, and wake up early in the morning. Then they scream “school is ruining my life!”.

    Like

  8. A soul has not eyes to see material images. I think what souls “see” are feelings and only can visualize what is inside the mind of people they focuse on.

    Like

    • Kelesther on said:

      I think you’re right.

      Like

    • Juan, you touch on something that I was just about to write a few paragraphs on in my book. It is actually a deeply philosophical question about exactly what our senses are sensing. What is the true nature of experience? If you can see without eyes, then how and what are you seeing. I don’t agree with the answer that you are experiencing other peoples memories, due to perspective and the fact that after the OBE you “see” lots of other stuff but neither do I necessarily have a better explanation at this stage. My book is still at first draft stage, and I’m sure I will change this little section on “senses” without sensory organs, and memory without brain, many times before I publish it. It is one of the more intriguing aspects of NDEs!
      On another note, I’ve been loving the discussion so far. The divide between materialists and believers can only be crossed with something approaching scientific evidence, and that is what the AWARE II study will achieve. However, even then the most hardened skeptics will not believe.
      I do believe AWARE II will get a few hits despite people not being briefed before keeling over with a CA. I also think the new version of the “COOL” study may kick out some very interesting results as they will be able to brief people before as the environment is more controlled.

      Like

  9. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/09/free-will-bereitschaftspotential/597736/
    A little off topic, but an interesting article nevertheless. This study has long been a pillar of the materialist neuroscience platform.

    Like

    • Yes, I never took that experiment seriously, rather silly to have a 60% prediction debunk free will, and there’s also the major issue of behavioural disposition which is clearly not free will. It’s good to see some neuroscientists are not blindly worshipping the meat robot ideology and are actually questioning such deep issues.

      I thought some about free will and I actually lean more towards the no free will camp lol, but not because of the meat robot/mind is what brain does ideological worship bullsht. But rather because I simply cannot make sense of what free will is, I know what constitutes no free will but I don’t know what type of behaviour constitutes free will. If a soul is making decisions how does it arrive at that decision? If it uses some process to arrive at a decision that’s not free will, if it chooses at random that’s not free will either. Furthermore according to my view on how things work, that consciousness has no properties and simply observe brains, there shouldn’t be free will or otherwise consciousness has the property of being able to make decisions. Decisions are based on knowledge or feelings, and both of these are causally dependent on brain activity, so even assuming a soul is making decisions, it’s not “really in control” because the knowledge and emotions are fed from a material object. I don’t think my thoughts are mature enough to express myself clearly, so you probably think im just talking gibberish here.

      Like

  10. Thank you for your answer and congratulations for this interesting blog. I would like to clarify that I did not mean to say that souls can access to people memories, what I understand from people who have experienced several OBEs is that you can “see” material things that are common to general consciusness. But obviously without eyes you cannot see them directly. And I think that a soul cannot see an specific material image if nobody knows about it.

    Like

    • The problem with souls, is that they don’t resolve the hard problem. Merely assuming a non physical substance is no different from assuming new forms of matter, the hard problem still plagues dualism. Consciousness cannot be an objective publicly observable thing, because hard problem plagues any objective publicly observable thing you can imagine.

      Like

  11. Is David Chalmers a dualist? Does he believe in something like life after death?

    Like

    • He’s a property dualist, he doesn’t believe after life. He thinks consciousness is strongly emergent, meaning when a certain level of complexity is reached something entirely new comes into existence.

      Like

  12. And can anyone give me their thoughts on this? It is a short YouTube video just about 4mins.

    Thanks in advance and sorry for bothering with my questions.

    Like

  13. And just a last question. Does this doesnt prove in some way that consciouness is nothing special at all?

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227983252_Quantum_mechanics_needs_no_consciousness

    Like

    • No that doesnt say anything about consciousness. Experiments have shown for a long time no human or animal is needed to destroy interference patterns, I must be misunderstanding something because some very notable physicists said the consciousness cause collapse is consistent with experiments (although a very minority view). That merely says consciousness isn’t needed to collapse wavefunction, which I and almost everyone fully agree with, it doesn’t do anything to make consciousness less mysterious.

      And Chalmers does also entertain panpsychism, but he said he’s leaning more towards strong emergence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhRhtFFhNzQ where there are brand new laws governing consciousness once sufficient complexity is reached. If I’m to be reasonable, I don’t believe afterlife, but I also know the evidence for it and problem with no afterlife (it would logically imply consciousness is generated by brain activity, which demands strong emergence or some nuanced form of panpsychism, but there’s still an issue because of the objective publicly observable thing I mentioned). I think vast majority of philosophers and scientist who take consciousness/free will seriously and don’t worship the meat robot ideology like the legions of angry teens, don’t believe afterlife because of the tight correlation between brain activity and conscious experiences. But they are confusing content of consciousness with consciousness. the afterlife question is whether we still have the ability of experience after death.

      As to your video, I looked at the description “But could the source of consciousness really just all be contained in the neurons, synapses and other connections within our brain?” and didn’t bother watching one second of it. I simply don’t understand how these idiots think complex behaviour of material objects explains consciousness, they don’t assume strong emergence or panpsychism they somehow think it can be completely reduced to brain activity. Mass delusion of staunch materialists, if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

      Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        Consciousness is located in the claustrum, and if you switch it on and off like a light switch, you have no memory of it being ‘switched off’.
        Materialists should be happy now. They got what they wanted, no consciousness beyond the brain.

        Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        Nothing new here. I think they really do believe if you repeat the same tired arguments enough times, then it will come true.
        Sorry, it doesn’t work that way, materialists.

        And since there are many comments disagreeing with the video, the materialists respond: Many people here hate it and get triggered when you have a natural explanation for NDEs and OBEs, because it is difficult to see something that goes against things you’ve come to believe from a young age.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Kelesther
        About the video: Well I mean everything he says sounds quite logical to me. How is his debunking exactly wrong?

        And your comment about the claustrum, was it sarcasm? If so I am sorry I am not good in finding out if someone says something in a sarcastic kind of way:)

        Like

  14. No because you can see several papers that argue the opposite. Regardless of the role on consciousness quantum physics raises serious questions about what materialism even means. The quantum atoms are not at all like the classical atom.

    Like

  15. Kelesther on said:

    I think too many people, MOSTLY materialists, have a cartoonish interperatation regarding paranormal phenomena, afterlife, etc, like you see on video games, movies, and TV shows, like the Supernatural TV series.

    Paranormal, consciousness, and NDE research has nothing to do with standing in the middle of a big glowing pentagram, ‘wanting magic to be real’, or ‘wanting an ability to cast magic spells, shoot lightning from hands, summoning demons, transparent ghost people, or fighting spirits’. Or a “real-life world of Harry Potter”.

    This is not something to dismiss as childish fun and games, or ‘wanting to believe in Santa Cluas, Tooth Fairy for adults ( afterlife ), and myths such as bigfoot and the loch ness monster’.
    This is serious business.

    Like

    • That applies to the legions of angry teens and college morons. There are old professionals who know the non materialist literature well and still spam “woo, pseudoscience, everyone is a meat robot with no consciousness/free will”. I think these people are malicious, they are trying to sabotage society by pretending to be champions of reason in order to spread their meat robot bullsht.

      Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        When I was debating with some skeptics a while back, they linked me to this Robert W Lester channel, and a video debunking astral travel:

        https://www.youtube.com/user/robertwlester/search?query=spiritual+experiences

        I must say, YouTube is not really a place for agnostics ( me ).

        Robert Lester looks like a college-aged person ( or not. I completely suck at guessing age groups ). He seems to love quoting Oliver Sacks when it comes to spiritual experiences.
        The link was just a catagory for spiritual experiences and bad evidence.

        The rest of his channel though, he debunks and rants about New Agers. People that no real researcher of consciousness and the like take seriously. I can’t take any of them seriously.
        Heck, the only person I take seriously that Lester mentions, is Sam Harris ( he’s a fan of Sam Harris ), but hardcore materialists elsewhere, are constantly accusing Harris of ‘an atheist that knows or should know better but doesn’t, because he’s open to dualism and buddhism, which is woo. He should know better’.

        I, and many people already know that The Spirit Science by Jordan Pearce is a joke, and Victor Zammit is nutty and unreliable.
        I personally don’t believe in psychics and mediums.
        Sylvia Browne? Channeling Erik? Teal Swan? Koi Fresco? Lanza? Chopra? Come on, we already know they’re all unreliable, pseudoscientists, mentally ill, frauds, cult leaders, quantum woo, etc.
        Just low hanging fruit debunking.
        And Robert repeats this over and over in 80% of his videos that it gets tiring. And even more so on his own blog: People who think or are convinced there is more to life than the physical, are mentally ill/deluded, or need and want to believe there is more. It’s just a comforting fantasy for when life gets to hard due to hardships like injury and illness, and to cope with death.

        However, I do agree with some things Lester says in one of his videos at some point: “Spiritualists can be arrogant and not even consider alternative and rational/natural explanations for things. Or refuse to admit they might be wrong. We should always consider the natural explanations, not resort to afterlife, or paranormal ones.
        And don’t believe everything you see and read. Especially the internet, those comforting spiritual afterlife books, and spiritual mysticism websites.”

        That is true, but some materialists can exhibit the same behavior. Refusing to consider the alternative. Even after exhausting many of the natural explanations.
        A lot of things can go both ways for proponents and materialists.
        There’s two sides to everything.

        Like

  16. What do you guys think about Dr. Habermas”s retelling of a NDE starting at 11:52? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KQk8C406_1I&feature=youtu.be

    Like

    • I’ve heard of those, they aren’t well corroborated. If they had the corroboration of pam reynolds or al sullivan it would mean something else. Aware 2 is trying to get a rigorous controlled veridical observation like this.

      Like

    • The atheist doesn’t know how to debate these NDEs, his arguments are very bad. Put me in his place and I will counter all of the jesus guy’s arguments.

      Like

  17. The above could give aware 2 some hope.

    Like

    • justinechevarria on said:

      The guy was not an athiest he is a Christian and he was doing a mock debate and I know both guys Ive talked with them both personally.

      Like

  18. Kelesther on said:

    “Great video. Clearly those whose consciousness is influence by religious dogma finds fault with your video. I’m like the scientific community, I don’t know. I have a close friend who told me how she had an out of body experience without any trama. She was handling a prisoner as a correctional officer. She said suddenly she saw herself outside the body doing her job. I am a former science teacher of public and private schools. I know of no present theory of science that can explain this. It may not be supernatural but it maybe a function of our brain and science that we haven’t understood just yet.”

    “Obviously, you can knock somebody unconscious and when they wake up, they won’t know what happened, so I don’t think that it is a big surprise that they found something specific in the brain that controls consciousness. This is a thought-provoking video like many of your videos, but I don’t think it really moves the needle regarding the spiritual argument. I would be curious to see how a Buddhist would respond to this, since they seem to argue that consciousness is like matter and energy, and can be neither created nor destroyed. My problem with that is that it does not appear that living organisms had consciousness in the universe for about 12 billion years. So where was all this consciousness before there were brains?”

    “Mind is a simply a function of the brain just as digestion is a function of the digestive organs yet no one believes that digestion persists after death in some ethereal dominion.
    Mind is not a stand alone construct, it is highly dependent on physical apparatuses; organs working together, lungs heaving constantly to supply oxygen, heart pumping to circulate that blood, the nervous system. Humans are great at assumptions and creating narratives, God is a total concoction, we decompose and go back into the environment, no supernal being needed.”

    “This means there is no afterlife and consciousness is the brain. And all OBEs are completely brain based”.

    Those are the reactions to that claustrum switch video. Not surprising. If you find fault or disagree with the video, you’re afraid of death and don’t want to let go of your beliefs in an afterlife.
    It’s the same stuff over and over. I swear, I can hear the hard materialists sigh with complete relief.

    Like

  19. justinechevarria on said:

    @Chad I would highly recommend you read the work of Brandon Rickabaugh on the Soul. Also here is his paper Against Emergence https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/5f3bdc_4d40cc7cf25e43a09c1ec99d99472741.pdf

    Like

  20. Kelesther on said:

    @Chad I was thinking about that one comment of yours for a bit.
    I understand your frustration regarding loads of people thinking there is only one reality ( physical materialism ). But I wouldn’t call them teenage and college “morons”. I think “moron” is a bit of a harsh word. And I don’t think they’re being ‘malicious’ either.
    I had a cartoonish interpretation of it all, when I was a teenager. It was even worse, when I was around 20-23 years old.
    And when it came down to DMT experiences ( no, I’ve never done DMT. The chances of me doing it are slim ), when people started talking about seeing entities and other realities, I said “Why are you calling it the Spirit Molecule? DMT doesn’t take you anywhere. It’s all in your head”. When I was around my mid-20s, I realized that’s not the way the paranormal and/or consciousness research works.

    You’re not going to walk through a cemetery, church, or an old house and see ghosts and spirits. Your deceased great grandparents are not floating transparent versions of themselves wandering around the earth.
    You’re not going to summon or see any spirits or demons by standing and sitting in a pentagram mat on the floor, holding a thick book, surrounded by candles and chanting.
    You won’t see the Grim Reaper standing near a dead person’s body.
    And you’re definitely not going to find yourself standing in some sort of demonic realm and see a succubus after standing in a pentagram long enough.

    And one more thing regarding Robert W Lester. I completely understand his frustrations and the reasons why he’s an atheist and skeptic.
    He used to believe in comforting new-age fluffery, but didn’t find evidence. Only bad evidence, cults and cult leaders, frauds, confabulation, arrogant and/or narcissistic believers, charlatans, lies, manipulative believers that distort facts/reality, etc. He started asking more questions and went beyond his faith.
    Those are all very good reasons to question and doubt.
    Many spiritual people would rather believe and accept things that give them happiness, comfort, and helps them sleep at night, not things that make them feel sick and keep them awake with fear, anxiety, misery, dread, and possibly depression ( the possibility their beliefs are false and there’s no afterlife ). Whether it’s true or not.
    And that “we can’t or shouldn’t accept things with very weak/bad evidence or zero evidence, just because it’s comforting and makes us feel better. Whether it’s an afterlife book, or spiritual websites. Don’t believe everything you read.”
    He’s made all of that loud and clear, and I don’t think he needs to keep repeating all of it again and again in almost all of his videos ( we all get it, alright Robert? )

    What I disagree with though, is that anyone who remotely thinks there is more than the physical, or is completely convinced, is “suffering psychosis/mental illness, delusional faith, denying reality, prefer comfort over truth, wants a reward for physical suffering ( illnesses ), and afraid of death. They also desperately want to believe that their suffering, such as being constantly sick, are meant to happen, and will be rewarded with a comforting afterlife in the end.
    Spiritual people hide behind self-serving delusions and hallucinations like OBEs, rather than dealing with problems. They use OBEs as an escapism and to feel special, or be special snowflakes. To escape reality.
    But we need to suck it up, face the real world like adults, and let go of those eastern myths and eastern mysticism. Don’t waste your life hoping for things that don’t exist. Live the one and only life you have: This one.”

    The thing is, there are many rational people who were convinced the mind is completely brain-based, but changed their minds. But materialists constantly accuse them of being “ignorant skeptic/atheists that should know better. Not enough skepticism, and having a powerful hallucination/delusion that convinced them there’s more, when it’s nothing but a fantasy world that contradicts reality, and have succumbed and are suffering delusional faith. They no longer trust science.”
    At least, that’s what Chocolate Hat says, and he’s probably implying that ALL skeptic-turned-believers have been fooled by convincing hallucinations regarding NDEs( I still can’t take Koi Fresco seriously ).

    Oh and as far as DMT goes, maybe it’s external, or maybe it really is just all in our heads, and people are just searching for patterns and meaning to confirm their beliefs. Confirmation bias. Whatever keeps them from getting too depressed, and gets them out of bed long enough to survive and reproduce, right?
    But people are still looking into it. Real scientists, not just pseudoscientists and those cringey narcissistic New Agers that have no interest in the truth.

    If anyone here is interested with things regarding DMT and psychedelics, might I suggest visiting this blog by Sam Woolfe?

    Like

    • Common OBE’s are not interesting and are not ADE’s . I hate to be blunt but mystics should not be taken seriously. There is a reason no serious scholar uses these as evidence. The problem is to many people try to lump different expenses and call them NDEs or OBEs without evidence. Please stop. Peter Fenwick “What is clear from the literature is that spontaneous out-of-body experiences are very common, that there is no disruption of normal neurophysiological functioning, and that they are probably dissociative states in which the experiencer will gain no veridical perception away from the body. Indeed, as Augustine has pointed out, except in rare cases, tests of obtaining “objective” information from this dissociated state usually fail (Murray and Fox, 2005).

      Like

  21. Kelesther on said:

    @max on

    Yes, that was sarcasm. No need to apologize, max on. 🙂

    Like

  22. Hey guys! It’s me… again. I am sorry if I am anoying BUT I have a question. I really dont know much about it but it seems to me that quantum physics has maybe something to do with consciousness. I have terms in my mind like “the observer effect” and stuff. I dont know if anyone of you has ever really looked into it but I would like to know your thoughts about this video: https://youtu.be/yOtsEgbg1-s
    Thanks in advance and I hope you have a good day:)

    Liked by 1 person

    • I just clicked history in my youtube, and this video showed up, wondering how tf i clicked this nonsense. So i went to his channel and got this gem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSlS2xE8rH8. I didn’t bother wasting much time watching it, he said something about “PSE” he invented and how it proves 0.999… doesnt equal 1. This clown claims “My aim is to challenge any outrageous claim where I consider the logic behind the claim to be flawed”, my god, he must be a high school drop out. Luckily for him 0.999… can also mean 1-x, where x is an “infinitesimal”, and 1-x is not equal to 1, but in this case 0.999… is not defined as the infinite series, and only a clown would not know the DEFINITION of the value of a infinite series is its limit. Sadly the clown most likely thinks 0.999… should equal 1-x, while having no idea what the real definition of infinitesimal is.

      And this clown show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpfY8m2VLtc. The -1/12 comes from uniquely extending the zeta function, it’s like how 1-1+1-1+…=0.5, it’s not the series literally converges just that there’s an analytic continuation of the series that’s well defined at the point where the series oscillates/diverges. But i guess this kindergarten math is too advanced for clowns.

      Like

  23. On QM well it sure is suspicious and has been sine the founders of QM
    Speaking on the non physical . The Navy admits to non physical things. these are a large looking objects that sure behave like Quantum Objects but even worse they accelerate at the rate of one gram breakthrough starshot ( that is a proposed human one gram probe that would nee a 100 gigabyte laser to accelerate like these things)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/09/18/those-ufo-videos-are-real-navy-says-please-stop-saying-ufo/

    Like

    • I don’t think those are ufos, they are most likely secret weapons being tested only the highest ranking guys know about. How would aliens get here? Wormholes are science fiction, and even if they got here by some impossible means they’ll either kill us immediately for our minerals or at least make themselves known. Why on earth would they hide themselves so well? Aliens will just be like humans, they don’t have the “god mentality” of hiding from humans and demanding worship.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. justin Echevarria on said:

    I would look at Inspiringphilosophy video’s on this one. He knows quantum mechanics very well. > JUST BE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_xEraQWvgM

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks I know his channel but I dont think he is adressing the problem the guy in the video I posted stated.

      Like

    • Kelesther on said:

      I’m sorry, but I don’t we should look to Inspiringphilosophy regarding quantum mechanics.
      I can’t explain it at the moment, but something’s telling me he’s not really a reliable source for quantum mechanics. Terribly sorry.

      Like

  25. Kelesther on said:

    Here are two things of what I think hardcore materialists should do:

    1. Look up ‘pseudoscience’ in a dictionary and Wikipedia.

    The idea of consciousness being completely brain based, aka materialism/physicalism, is not science. Dominant view? Yes. But not science. Just because something is a dominant view, doesn’t mean it’s true.

    2. Stop looking at Rupert Sheldrake and Chopra as the major sources of post-materialism. Yes, Sheldrake may be a pseudoscientist ( I’m extremely skeptical of Sheldrake ), and Chopra is definitely unreliable, but they’re not the only ones who are looking beyond materialism.
    There are more ‘rational’ and better scientists that are questioning and rethinking pure materialism. Not arrogant New Agers or pseudoscientists.

    I noticed when someone mentions post-materialism, people automatically think of Chopra, Sheldrake, Robert Lanza, Bruce Lipton, and Graham Hancock. A bunch of popular easy targets for skeptics, and low hanging fruit.

    Materialists need to understand this, it’s not that ‘spiritualists’ “no longer trust science and are abandoning/rejecting science for a comforting fantasy world”. They’re not abandoning or distrusting science at all. They’re abandoning materialism. Not the same thing.
    Materialism is a belief and outdated, not science.
    It has nothing to do with them being ‘whiny anti-materialists, dogmatic, and refuse to let go of the comforting supernatural belief of independent consciousness’.
    Perhaps I’m wrong.

    Like

  26. Louis Wilbur on said:

    Glad to read that you are writing a book about Near Death Experiences. I recommend you use the book “Near Death In The ICU” by Laurin Bellg, MD as a reference. It is one of the best books on the subject ever written, although I suspect you are already aware of this excellent resource.

    Like

    • justinechevarria on said:

      @Kelesther have you actually fact checked him? Im sure he has a feeling he is correct so then who is right and who is wrong? Everyone knows he’s really reliable. He provided his sources in his videos and has experts in quantum Mechanics view his videos , have you not read them or spoken to quantum physicist? I have. I rather look to experts. Rather than someone who hasn’t looked at the data. My feelings tell me to look at the data. Not to someone who has a”feeling” which may or may not be a feelings at all. Reason is important. To many people don’t look at the data then claim to know things about a subject. Sorry to be blunt but this is what post modern people do now and days and its frustrating and blinds people from following truth.

      Like

      • Kelesther on said:

        I guess you’re right.
        Maybe that’s what I needed. Bluntness.
        I guess this is what happens when skepticism has been drilled into my head for years by hardcore skeptics.
        All because I watched too many YouTube videos and engaged with or replied to the commenters. That’s my own fault, I’ve gone down the rabbit hole.
        I think I just need to learn to shake it off and look at the data, but at the same time maintain healthy skepticism.

        I’ve been exposed to too many Chocolate Hat YouTube channel videos, who has ‘debunked’ InspiringPhilosophy in his childish looking puppet shows, before I even knew InspiringPhilosophy existed online:

        He has many more videos that ‘debunk’ InspiringPhilosophy, but you get the point. If I hadn’t discovered Chocolate Hat, BEFORE discovering IP, I don’t think I would be saying any of this right now. Or let alone have all of this unnecessary doubt.

        Ah, healthy skepticism. Is it a blessing or a curse? I think it can be both. So maybe a clessing? or blurse? 😛

        I’m sorry if I annoyed you. I know you’re frustrated, I am too. But please be patient with me.

        Like

      • I think if you want to know something you should study the subject in detail and decide for yourself. Experts are also very biased, what they can be usually counted on is not flat out lying about straight up facts (they’ll still distort facts though). Appealing to authority is something the legions of angry teens often do (and professional pseudoskeptics too), except the “authorities” they mention are extremely biased staunch materialists who think they are better than everyone else. You only trust these authorities if they mention something everyone can verify.

        Like

  27. justinechevarria on said:

    @max the video was mostly about hidden variables, watch IP’s series on quantum mechanics. Yes he does. https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TViAqtowpvZy5PZpn-MoSK_

    Like

  28. justinechevarria on said:

    The best thing to do is read books not debate.

    Like

  29. Another interesting case from a good source. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JL1oDuvQR08

    Like

  30. Kelesther on said:

    @justinechevarria

    I definitely agree. Skepticism is not a stopping point.

    “Also IP already responded to CH.”

    Which ended up with CH responding to Civilianname295 who responded to CH debunking IP’s response to CH. It’s like ‘response’ inception. Guess you can’t please everybody.
    At least the ‘response war’ has ended a year ago.

    While science really does seem to be leaning towards panpsychism, people are still saying “panpsychism is a security blanket people cling to in a last desperate attempt to maintain and refuse to let go of the belief of consciousness being separate from the brain”.
    It’s basically the same reaction from materialists to others who even remotely rethink pure, or ‘full-on’ materialism after having materialistic views for so long:

    “Just because that person is a highly educated neuroscientist/scientist, doesn’t mean he’s rational.”

    “Just because he was a hard full-on atheist and skeptical at first, doesn’t mean he’s looking for truth.
    David Chalmers is on the woo-woo train, and even Harris is not immune to supernatural woo beliefs.
    He’s been around the buddhist mysticism party for too long, succumbed to dogma, and is now infected (( uh, Harris only said the word buddhism 20 times in his book, and said he is NOT a buddhist, his sentence was ‘IF I WERE a buddhist’. I snuck a peak of one of his books using google.books. I regret nothing )). This is exactly what happens. Don’t stop or suspend thinking critically, or you’ll be sucked into woo.
    Those philosophers are bound by bias (( nobody’s immune to that. And nobody is rational 100% of the time 24/7 )), and the neuroscientists are stuck in their current diagnosis.
    And proponents are and will continue to come up with an endless list of excuses so they can sleep at night.”

    “Just because many people, including well educated scientists and atheists, suddenly accept the idea of mind being separate from the brain, doesn’t mean it’s true nor should we accept it.
    That’s ad-populum usage proponents like to use. That’s like saying ’many other kids believe in Santa Clause, that must mean Santa is real’.
    We must remain skeptical. Some people learned about religion before learning about science, when it should be the other way around, but it isn’t.”

    And here’s my favorite that materialists love to use:
    “Look at the news. Millenials are no longer believing in religion, but are now believing in other BS such as astrology, psychics, astral projection, and other pseudoscience.
    This is what happens when people grow up with those fairy tale magical thinking beliefs. They’ll find anything they can latch onto that fits their beliefs. Some are hardwired and predisposed to believe.
    They no longer believe in religion, but now believe in eastern mysticism and new age woo?
    That’s not surprising, since they are young, most likely to be uneducated, and gullible. They desperately need to believe in something, anything that’s bigger than themselves and transcends physical reality. Especially when times get tough. That’s one of the reasons why so many people in general, attribute hallucinations and dmt drugs to a ‘greater reality’, when it’s just all in their heads.

    Another thing. Spiritualists, at any age, get severely depressed when they let go of their new age beliefs, find out their eastern beliefs are false, or the evidence they found was wanting, bad, insufficient, or nonexistent.
    They grew up with a security blanket.
    If they hadn’t been brainwashed, or grown up with the belief that we are more than just matter, they wouldn’t be so depressed when they find out it’s all myths, wishful thinking, and that consciousness is brain-based.
    Mind equalling brain is not depressing, it’s just spiritualists find it depressing because that means letting go of their long and strongly held childhood beliefs in the supernatural.
    Getting depressed over your beliefs being false is like a child being upset and crying when he realizes Santa isn’t real.
    But we grow up, realize, and accept that we aren’t special snowflakes. And no matter how much we suffer or how hard life gets, there is no higher power or higher self watching us, and death is the end.
    Life is not perfect or a bowl of cherries and people will suffer, get hurt, and get sick. Some more than others, but that’s just it. Consciousness does not exist beyond the brain.

    People at any age with psychotic illnesses ( mainly paranoia and schizophrenia ), gullible, extremely religious, and being high on hallucinogenic drugs are more likely to accept this delusional stuff.
    But now millennials are going to waste the rest of their adult lives believing in fairy tales and delusions.”

    I’m pretty sure CH would run to his supporters and fellow YouTubers and say at least one of those sayings above.
    Or he would accept the possibility that consciousness being dependent on the brain, is more of a belief or based on faith, rather than science and rationality ( I’m not holding my breath ).
    But this is how rational people should react and behave? Just accuse and assume everybody else of no longer trusting ‘science’ and ‘succumbing to superstition’, no matter how skeptical they were beforehand? That sounds very rational and mature. Not!
    Maybe all of that is just me, but that’s what’s been going on lately. Just making observations of what I’ve seen over the years up until today.

    “The best thing to do is read books not debate.”

    You’re right.
    I need to start reading more books regarding consciousness and such, not forums and YouTube, which is where all of my unnecessarily large amounts of doubt stemmed from.

    Like

  31. Apologies if this has already been posted somewhere (lots of great comments on this blog), but I came across a fairly recent YouTube video of a Dr. Parnia talk. I’m not sure of the date of the talk, though the video is dated Jun 9, 2019, but it has an interesting audience Q&A session at the end. Here’s the link in case anyone is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkTh6wNlYao
    I’m curious though – can anyone tell which conference this was from?

    Like

    • @abcd I think this may already have been posted on this blog. I think it was actually from 2018 judging by the slides he showed and the things he said. There was a more recent update in May this year which he presented at rounds at NYU, although the slides hadn’t been correctly updated. I am preparing for my own presentation tomorrow on my book on the Origins of Life so don’t have time today to look into this, but maybe one of the regulars could confirm.

      I will be more active again after my talk is done and I am cruising in my new job which is Neuroscience. It will be nice to have the word Neuroscience in my job title and hopefully lend a bit of credibility to the things I say on this subject…although never as much as Dr Parnia.

      Like

  32. Just found something interesting! At the NY meeting
    https://www.nyas.org/events/2019/what-happens-when-we-die-insights-from-resuscitation-science/?tab=agenda

    speaking in the Session Dr. Parnia speaks in is Cherie Aimee who had an NDE under cardiac arrest. So I googled a bit and got these from 2018 from Megyn Kelly’s TODAY show and he is interviewed too.

    at 7:20 minutes

    https://www.today.com/video/doctor-describes-the-science-behind-a-near-death-experience-1301059139948

    from the start.

    The last I transcribed this bit … “including research that I have done which is that perhaps the human mind or consciousness, the self, the part that makes us who we are, what the older generations called the soul, is essentially something that is like electromagnetic waves, it’s a different entity that we haven’t yet discovered but is not necessarily produced by the brain. The brain is acting as an intermediary in the same way that a TV set right now is acting as intermed … ”

    So the soul is actually a different kind of entity that science hasn’t yet detected. So no change from his book.
    Just think it interesting that this lady has been invited to speak before Dr. Parnia, someone who is sure her NDE was really real.

    Like

  33. This is an old video from 2016 but i haven’t seen this part https://youtu.be/Hz_4FGdWVF8?t=308, he’s very direct in saying that, never seen him that direct in an interview so far. But in some other videos his tone is less sure. Maybe if we all spam his email folder with the same question he’ll answer?

    Like

  34. Anyone find out about the New York event?
    I think his tone varies by audience.

    Like

      • I have been very lax. Eduardo sent me this article the other day, but I’ve been so busy I haven’t had a chance to post it…or rather I tried on the app and it didn’t work! Very interesting. Eduardo and I both agree that there is no way Parnia would allow this to go out in his name if he didn’t have a hit or two.

        Like

      • I know I keep saying this but I’d be very surprised if he has the “numbers” yet (enough patients surviving to interview)…who actually had an OBE…who actually noticed the lap top… and BINGO…who actually saw and remembered the image/number whatever is on those screens.

        Of course, it’s just my pessimistic nature, but I have to say that what Parnia is saying there in the article Werner posted, would appear to be stated with some confidence. Does it mean he has hits ? I can’t allow myself personally to think that he has hits YET, simply due to low numbers but I do firmly believe he will get them sooner or later.

        Don’t forget if he has accurate veridical out of body experiences with a (measured)flat EEG, then that is nearly as good, surely ? That would certainly have given him a boost in what we all know is an incredibly difficult study to carry out.

        Like

      • Ben said >”I have been very lax. Eduardo sent me this article the other day, but I’ve been so busy I haven’t had a chance to post it…or rather I tried on the app and it didn’t work!”

        Just to be clear, Ben, is the article that Eduardo sent you, the same article that Werner Bartl posted that I’ve referred to ?

        Like

  35. That a answers my question.

    Like

    • Maybe we’ll be able to extrapolate some clues about the study from his forthcoming presentation in November. At least I think we can logically deduce that he can’t have found anything that supports a brain based explanation, for him to continue to make such statements as this (from the article above)

      “The fact that people seem to have full consciousness, with lucid well-structured thought processes and memory formation from a time when their brains are highly dysfunctional or even non-functional is perplexing and paradoxical.”

      Think about what he’s saying there. Absolute heresy to the scientific establishment ! I recently had an interesting conversation (in an on line blog comments section) with Susan Blackmore (not for the first time).

      She was kind enough to respond several times and I pushed her as far as I could, outlining the strength of the evidence that already exists to support the reality of veridical OBE/NDE’s. She said that she didn’t wish to argue about the strength of the evidence but said that…”If people really can see something they could not have known about in a well controlled experiment, then I will be shown to be wrong.”

      Of course, we know that this has already happened (hundreds of times), just not (arguably) in a well controlled experiment. But that statement from her was enough for me to back off.

      That’s way more open minded than the majority of academics…and it also indicates that Blackmore is well aware of the possibility that mind might be a separate entity to the brain. Has Parnia got anything significant to move the debate along ? Can he move it without the approval of academics such as Blackmore and co ?

      Like

  36. I believe consciousness is an undiscovered entity…..I would say he must have hits. If he has the hits who cares about the fading Carl Satan can club.

    Like

    • One thing that continues to bother me is how these NDErs retain their personality. Mind and consciousness aren’t the same thing, mind is the set of all non physical conscious experiences (opposed to physical conscious experiences like seeing red, pain, thirst). Most of the mind has been proven to be a product of brain activity. Parnia keeps on saying the part that makes us who we are continues after death, but the mind that makes us individuals/who we are is largely a material phenomenon. This is what worries me because NDErs should not have any personality or thoughts, they should literally be like cameras recording a video of their meeting with beings of light/deceased relatives.

      Like

      • Chad, this is a philosophical issue. It depends how you define consciousness, and your subjective understanding of what that word actually means. For me consciousness means spirit, and from my theistic worldview our spirits are individual entities that do have distinct personalities. I would argue that the evidence from NDEs specifically relating to encountering dead relatives provides supportive evidence for this.

        Now behaviour is a product of both the material mind/brain and consciousness/spirit. People regard behaviour as a result(due to) of personality but it is the result of a mixture of inputs.

        What is left after we die, I believe, is more than some sort of observing automaton.

        Like

    • @Chad

      Does it matter how we define mind/consciousness ? The point is that people can somehow “observe” and have well structured thought processes with reason and memory formation, from a position outside their physical bodies. They feel that everything that is vital about themselves is still functioning away from their physical shell (they often describe it that way). There is very little reason to doubt that this does happen, there are just too many solid cases in the literature.

      Neither Parnia nor anyone else, is surely ever going to be able to ‘measure’ what it is exactly that leaves the body. When we look at images created by FMRI scanners, we see changes in blood flow etc, we don’t see our sense of self with it’s thoughts, feelings/emotions but we know it’s/they’re there, for certain.

      Unless there is some new scientific breakthrough that allows us to ‘see’ thoughts (as it were), then I think we just have to live with the mystery. Thinking about it (no pun intended) I don’t see how such a machine (to quantify thoughts etc) could even be conceived of.

      Mind, consciousness, soul, spirit, call it whatever you want, is more than likely not even part of the electro-magnetic spectrum. If that’s the case, it’s something beyond are abilities to comprehend, which takes it into quantum territory and beyond, and I understand very little about the former and absolutely nothing of the latter.

      Like

  37. The fundies won’t like it either.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: