If paranormal perception in near death experiences were 'proven' what would this mean?

What do you mean by shown to exist?

Proven to exist by first eliminating all possible physical effects that would underlie a materialist explanation. Then somehow deciding which is the most probable supernatural explanation: whether poltergeists are due to ghosts interacting with the physical world or the alternative, psychokinesis produced by the increased psychic energy of adolescents. Given the extremely complex methodological difficulties inherent in this type of study, you can see why skeptics are so adamant against this type of research.
 
Just to clarify woo woo. It's not that skeptics outright reject such things it's the way such things are presented: first a conclusion is reached then one reasons their way to it. Have you seen examples?


You mean that a supernatural explanation is reached by the believers or survivalists prematurely without first exhausting any possible physical explanation?
 
Proven to exist by first eliminating all possible physical effects that would underlie a materialist explanation. Then somehow deciding which is the most probable supernatural explanation: whether poltergeists are due to ghosts interacting with the physical world or the alternative, psychokinesis produced by the increased psychic energy of adolescents. Given the extremely complex methodological difficulties inherent in this type of study, you can see why skeptics are so adamant against this type of research.
As far as I can see that was done with the Cardiff Poltergeist. I can't see what more David Fontana could have done. Of course, there's always the get-out of fraud, or undetected error I guess.
 
As far as I can see that was done with the Cardiff Poltergeist. I can't see what more David Fontana could have done. Of course, there's always the get-out of fraud, or undetected error I guess.
The Cardiff poltergeist is an interesting one, if you mean the polt in the lawnmower repair shop? Even the experiencers couldn't accept that it could perform on demand, and insisted everyone in the room kept their hands on the table with little fingers touching, but it still threw objects. That only leads hoaxing from all concerned, or a crushing level of naivety and an unbelievably dextrous and motivated hoaxer permanently on hand. It should be said that on one occasion a member of the firm claims he saw a small boy sitting on a shelf, which lends weight to the haunting theory rather than the de-localised energy idea of poltergeist activity.
 
as far as I understand it, there are a number of potential causes for Poltergeist activity; one of which may be haunting.
 
Careful with that. Parapsychology needs to raise the bar, but not because it requires extra high standards imposed arbitrarily by skeptics! The standards that Wiseman was comparing parapsychology to is psychology. It has become clear that for awhile psychology standards have not been all that rigid or high - and they are feeling the brunt of it. And they are not alone.

See this article by Kennedy on exactly this: Is the Methodological Revolution in Psychology Over or Just Beginning? (2016).
And you should also be as careful to note that people like Kennedy, Hansen, and others who have clearly demonstrated objectivity and skepticism, who have spent good portions of their lives investigating and contemplating these phenomena are also convinced that the phenomena are indeed real. While Kennedy is stressing, in this particular paper, the need for better methodologies, he also takes a much broader view that includes the importance of the experiences that you tend to downplay in favor of methodologies.

http://jeksite.org/psi/trickster_panel_paper.pdf

Cheers,
Bill
 
Last edited:
I feel, the information is still too scarce. Currently, if all the information be proved true, we can say nothing except that there is something unusual which could possibly happen when near death occurs. Perhaps there is some unusual brain activity.

Information quantity (or information amount?).

Sometimes when you enter a curious and unfamiliar domain, you would expect that you wouldn't receive too much information, so your expectation about information is quite low, based on that, if you receive some information, you would then surprise, you would say that's super vivid and detailed.

We originally expected near death experience subjects could feel absolutely nothing during their brain not working (not working at least perceived by current science), so whenever there is something reported, that should surprise us and we label that as vivid and detailed.

No, that's not. Actually, the so-called verified out of body senses which were in accordance with real world, are in all very vague and information-lacking.

We use our senses to perceive this world, our senses can deceive us, so no one can know anything is absolute real for 100% certainty. The whole world could be an illusion.

However, this doesn't mean that, there is no point talking about whether it is real or not, how real or how not real. We observe more information, we "feel" more real. Charlatans can deceive us but if we ask more and more information, they would feel more and more difficult to continue the deceive.

Our brain has a limitation to produce sufficient information to cheat us, to force or lure us to believe something is real. In our dreams, our reasoning and judging and self-judging ability was asleep, so we didn't question the real or unreal when we were dreaming. After we woke up, we compared the information quantity in dreams and the real world, found that was a dream because that was created by brain with its limited imaginative activity, and the real world has much more abundant information quantity.

We can't absolutely prove a thing to be real, but more information it reveals, the more possible it is real. Our brain can easily fool us with something which contains only a little information.
 
Back
Top