"Proof of Heaven" - best selling book by athiest neurosurgeon that had an NDE

[QUOTE=The Macho Man]No, I'm not trying to have the same argument we had a few months ago that you forgot about. I'm just saying you have a shitty memory.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, maybe so :)

[QUOTE=shlver]No they can. Turning to the supernatural and ignoring scientific and practical explanations is not credible despite it coming from the mouth of a neurosurgeon.[/QUOTE]
No they can not...not right now anyway.

He is trying to combine science and spirituality with his nonprofit organization...there is a science behind "the other side...its just a different plane with a different science book.

The existence of other demintions isnt out of the realm of science

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]No they can not...not right now anyway.

He is trying to combine science and spirituality with his nonprofit organization...there is a science behind "the other side...its just a different plane with a different science book.

The existence of other demintions isnt out of the realm of science[/QUOTE]
I don't have the time to read the book. If you can take the time to outline his scientific points that would be nice.
If not, then read actual papers on anesthesia awareness and biochemical cascades after flatlining and resulting apoptosis. there's plenty of papers that provides practical explanations for NDE's and insights into the process of brain death. If you have not read any of these papers, then you are in no position to say anything about what science has to say on NDE's.

[QUOTE=shlver]I don't have the time to read the book. If you can take the time to outline his scientific points that would be nice.
If not, then read actual papers on anesthesia awareness and biochemical cascades after flatlining and resulting apoptosis. there's plenty of papers that provides practical explanations for NDE's and insights into the process of brain death. If you have not read any of these papers, then you are in no position to say anything about what science has to say on NDE's.[/QUOTE]
Shlver everything trying to explain NDEs right now is theory...there is nothing that every excepts.

It would go against science to rule anything out, including the existence of another plane.

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]I am at it again...


really though, I don't understand why this isn't a fascinating subject to everyone...atheists included[/QUOTE]
Because not everyone is retarded

[QUOTE]while in a meningitis-induced coma in 2008 proves that consciousness is independent of the brain, that death is an illusion, and that an eternity of perfect splendor awaits us beyond the grave — complete with angels, clouds, and departed relatives, but also including butterflies and beautiful girls in peasant dress.[/QUOTE]
:roll:

[QUOTE]It would go against science to rule anything out, including the existence of another plane.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Alexander’s book and publicity campaign have been criticized by scientists including neuroscientist Sam Harris who found his account “alarmingly unscientific” and who has written that “Everything — absolutely everything — in Alexander’s account rests on repeated assertions that his visions of heaven occurred while his cerebral cortex was “shut down,” “inactivated,” “completely shut down,” “totally offline,” and “stunned to complete inactivity.” “The evidence he provides for this claim is not only inadequate — it suggests that he doesn’t know anything about the relevant brain science.”[4] “Even in cases where the brain is alleged to have shut down, its activity must return if the subject is to survive and describe the experience. In such cases, there is generally no way to establish that the NDE occurred while the brain was offline.”[5] Neurologist and writer Oliver Sacks agreed with Harris, saying that "to deny the possibility of any natural explanation for an NDE, as Dr. Alexander does, [B][COLOR="Red"]is more than unscientific — it is antiscientific."[/COLOR][/B]..."The one most plausible hypothesis in Dr. Alexander's case...is that his NDE occurred not during his coma, but as he was surfacing from the coma and his cortex was returning to full function. It is curious that he does not allow this obvious and natural explanation, but instead insists on a supernatural one."[/QUOTE]


What's next? Dreams are real?

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]Shlver everything trying to explain NDEs right now is theory...there is nothing that every excepts.

It would go against science to rule anything out, including the existence of another plane.[/QUOTE]
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say with this incoherent post.

That wasn't hard to understand at all...

Shvler, let's say this guy is telling the truth and in his head HE KNOWS FOR FACT that he saw an afterlife and even God, but obviously he can't prove it. What do you expect him to say? Is he supposed to lie and act as though it might have been a dream? Even though it felt more "real" than life on Earth?

This paragraph stood out to me

[quote]It will take me the rest of my life, and then some, to unpack what I learned up there.
The knowledge given me was not “taught” in the way that a history lesson or math
theorem would be. Insights happened directly, rather than needing to be coaxed and
absorbed. Knowledge was stored without memorization, instantly and for good. It
didn’t fade, like ordinary information does, and to this day I still possess all of it, much
more clearly than I possess the information that I gained over all of my years in school.
That’s not to say that I can get to this knowledge just like that. Because now that
I’m back here in the earthly realm, I have to process it through my limited physical
body and brain. But it’s there. I feel it, laid into my very being. For a person like me
who had spent his whole life working hard to accumulate knowledge and understanding
the old-fashioned way, the discovery of this more advanced level of learning was,
alone, enough to give me food for thought for ages to come . . .[/quote]

This is the one thing that gets me about these cases. They never actually bring anything back beyond vague notions of interconnectedness and time being an illusion. Beyond that they never have a solution to a problem that we didn't know about. Not one thing that gives us more information about this world. Sure we get plenty of stuff about the next world but none of that is verifiable. Granted he says that processing the information is limited by his brain's ability, but come on. If you can understand different depths of the afterlife and the beauty of the metaphysical surely you can give us an original thought about something in this world too?

It is easy for brains to come up with fictional constructs, it is much more difficult for them to put together actual working models of reality.

[QUOTE=miller-time]This paragraph stood out to me



This is the one thing that gets me about these cases. They never actually bring anything back beyond vague notions of interconnectedness and time being an illusion. Beyond that they never have a solution to a problem that we didn't know about. Not one iota that gives us more information about this world. Sure we get plenty of stuff about the next world but none of that is verifiable. Granted he says that processing the information is limited by his brain's ability, but come on. If you can understand different depths of the afterlife and the beauty of the metaphysical surely you can give us an original thought about something in this world too?[/QUOTE]
because many of them claim to have seen the future you expect them to come back with the cure for cancer or something? ha, never thought of that.

perhaps that would mess up our destiny or something...


Miller, let me ask you, do you beleive that eveything this man put into that book he truly believes himself? Does he come off as sincere/genuine?

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]because many of them claim to have seen the future you expect them to come back with the cure for cancer or something? ha, never thought of that.[/quote]

It doesn't even have to be something that big. Just a tidbit of new information. Not philosophical or spiritual, but natural.

[quote]Miller, let me ask you, do you beleive that eveything this man put into that book he truly believes himself? Does he come off as sincere/genuine?[/QUOTE]

He seems genuine. I don't doubt he had those experiences and he believes they are real. I just think they aren't really that interesting or original. I haven't finished the book yet but the parts I have found most interesting were from his own life, his adoption, his medical career, his experience of having meningitis. The NDE is more elaborate than most, but it still doesn't me think it could be anything but a product of the human mind.

[QUOTE=miller-time]It doesn't even have to be something that big. Just a tidbit of new information. Not philosophical or spiritual, but natural.[/QUOTE]
can you give me an example of some sort?...because these people do bring back all sorts of info, but yes nothing that is going to change medicine or advance the auto industry or anything like that.

[QUOTE=miller-time]He seems genuine. I don't doubt he had those experiences and he believes they are real. I just think they aren't really that interesting or original. I haven't finished the book yet but the parts I have found most interesting were from his own life, his adoption, his medical career, his experience of having meningitis. The NDE is more elaborate than most, but it still doesn't me think it could be anything but a product of the human mind.[/QUOTE]
Do you not find it fascinating that he was a nay sayer like yourself and then after having one he is a believer?

do you know that if you had one yourself you would most likely be a believer?...there are no NDEers that come back saying "that was probably just a product of my brain"...they come back saying that the brain is a handi-cap to them...we are trapped in it.

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]can you give me an example of some sort?...because these people do bring back all sorts of info, but yes nothing that is going to change medicine or advance the auto industry or anything like that.[/quote]

It could be anything. A fact about sub atomic particles or the age of the universe or how the moon was formed or even something more profound like how and where life began or the solution to an unsolved mathematics problem.

[quote]Do you not find it fascinating that he was a nay sayer like yourself and then after having one he is a believer?[/QUOTE]

I don't think that it is that fascinating really. The guy went through a harrowing experience, it would be weirder if he had no reaction to it at all. While he is a neurosurgeon he is also still a human being. He is no more capable of operating under bizarre circumstances than anyone else. He is no less susceptible to delusions and hallucinations than anyone else.

[quote]do you [B]know [/B]that if you had one yourself you would most likely be a believer?...there are no NDEers that come back saying "that was probably just a product of my brain"...they come back saying that the brain is a handi-cap to them...we are trapped in it.[/QUOTE]

I don't know that, but I'd agree it is possible. I'm not saying the experience isn't amazing or profound. As I said, you would expect a dramatic outcome. But at the same time that doesn't mean that they were real.

I have a friend who had psychosis, trust me, the things that happened to him in his mind were as real to him as anything else he had experienced in his life. He even says now that his memories of those events still feel like they were real and if he didn't understand that they were hallucinations and delusions he would probably still think they actually happened. Because in a way they did happen. His brain formed the memories like it does for any other experience. Doesn't mean they happened though does it?

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]That wasn't hard to understand at all...

Shvler, let's say this guy is telling the truth and in his head HE KNOWS FOR FACT that he saw an afterlife and even God, but obviously he can't prove it. What do you expect him to say? Is he supposed to lie and act as though it might have been a dream? Even though it felt more "real" than life on Earth?[/QUOTE]
Of course not. But his background in science as a neurosurgeon lends no credence to his beliefs.
Why are you so insistent on avoiding the very plausible scientific explanations? Seriously, go do research about the plausible physiological explanations for the "symptoms" of NDE.

[QUOTE=shlver]Of course not. But his background in science as a neurosurgeon lends no credence to his beliefs.
Why are you so insistent on avoiding the very plausible scientific explanations? Seriously, go do research about the plausible physiological explanations for the "symptoms" of NDE.[/QUOTE]


In this day and age, plausibility doesn't always lead to believability. You just proved his point that you believe in plausible evidence which leads to it becoming a [I]theory[/I] of NDE's. What the good doctor who wrote this book is stating, is that in his field of expertise, he has no plausible evidence to prove that science is behind our NDE's since he is a doctor and he is bound to look for a scientific explanation first.

We can argue about all the plausible arguments you want, but there is yet to be a scientific explanation for dreams, much less NDE's.

[QUOTE=Patrick Chewing]In this day and age, plausibility doesn't always lead to believability. You just proved his point that you believe in plausible evidence which leads to it becoming a [I]theory[/I] of NDE's. What the good doctor who wrote this book is stating, is that in his field of expertise, he has no plausible evidence to prove that science is behind our NDE's since he is a doctor and he is bound to look for a scientific explanation first.

We can argue about all the plausible arguments you want, but there is yet to be a scientific explanation for dreams, much less NDE's.[/QUOTE]
Nope. Actual observed medical phenomena that reproduced symptoms of NDE. Look up anesthesia awareness.
It is not "just a theory" as you and primetime like to put it. It's apparent that you have no idea what you're talking about.
A neurosurgeon finds no plausible evidence that science is behind our NDEs.
Like really... People use this kind of connotation? "is the sky blue because of science?"