Meryl and Beau From Campfire Sht Show |375|

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Mar 13, 2018.

  1. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,284
    OK, but imagine the howls of protests from sceptics if you had re-assessed your memories to something closer to the actual 9/11 events!

    Can you remind us of the original story here - before you revised it - and then give us the revised version!

    Remember that the precognition might be in the form of a cartoon version, or it might be someone elses experience, which might be warped in all sorts of complex ways.

    We all tend to baulk at people who tune their recollection after the fact, but shouldn't we always be wary of tuning a recollection after the fact to make it less significant?

    David
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
  2. Chukobyte

    Chukobyte Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    In my opinion, the "everything isn't what it seem" (i.e matrix, truman show) moments of life are powerful and invigorating to one's self. If we dig below the surface on many topics labeled "conspiracy", we discover a possible alternative reality which sometimes challenge our pre-conceived notions (only if we're open to it). The process of challenging and doubting our established beliefs and paradigms is important because the same process is used to innovate which can add to the improvement and refinement of pretty much everything (self, scientific theory, musicianship, podcast, etc...). Perpetual doubt is needed to discover truth and I don't think you can explore deep spirituality and consciousness without having a accurate map of reality.

    "Conspiracy" is already a loaded word attached with a wide variety of stereotypes, but that doesn't detract from the fact that there are real conspiracies. If spirituality is about looking beyond the looking glass then I think studying conspiracies could possibly get one closer to that. Also, I just wanted to say that I enjoyed Alex's interview on "The Higherside Chats". I was following the Wolfgang Halbig VS Leonard Pozner trial but I didn't learn about the conclusion of the trial until that interview!
     
    AryaS, Hurmanetar, Alex and 2 others like this.
  3. Reece

    Reece Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,255
    Home Page:
    On the lower level, the diet prescribed to us all these decades is, as you say, certainly not a conspiracy; meaning, the doctors, dietitians, and those in our direct eyesight were not "in on it." But after reading that Plato advised "feeding the slaves potatoes," I've come to where I can't think of the high carb/wheat/empty grain + low fat diet as anything but extremely intentional. Which is to say, I'm afraid that I ultimately can't agree with you on it not being a conspiracy. I would bet anything that those at the top of the pyramid know exactly what's been advised. Now, with keto becoming so radically popular and realizing that many diseases are much less common on it - or at least respond very well to it - and that fat is a greatly superior energy source for the human body than glucose, it seems all the more evident.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
    AryaS and Hurmanetar like this.
  4. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,284
    You aren't really in disagreement with me - it is unquestionably a terrible scandal, but I suppose that most researchers now or back in the early years explicitly thought they were engaged in a conspiracy.

    I have come to realise that scientists can be frighteningly easily lead astray - deliberately or accidentally. Having been in science a long time ago, I suspect many scientists don't have a feeling of total mastery of their subject (I didn't) and if everyone else says X, they are going to puzzle over why X seems false to them, then maybe drop it for a bit, then maybe try to discuss it with someone and get laughed off, then just fall into line!

    A major factor may be sheer information overload - you never feel you know enough to want to really stick your neck out!

    David
     
    AryaS and Reece like this.
  5. Different people react differently to different diets. The low carb diets don't work for me. Other people like them and I don't want to take them away from them. But I wish the low carb true believers would accept that what works best for them might not work best for everyone else.

    We had a thread on this but the forum is closed now...
    http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/the-diet-wars-low-carb-or-low-fat.3952/
     
  6. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,284
    I have moved this thread to the "Why science is wrong about almost everything" section. It seems to accept posts again now, but perhaps you could check that that isn't just me accidentally using my magic powers!

    Just out of interest, where you trying the low carb diet for anything in particular - e.g. T2D?

    It may be that sugar is the real villain because it is composed of sucrose, that breaks down into 50% fructose.

    David
     
    Jim_Smith likes this.
  7. Why do you think fructose is a problem? As I understand it, fructose is only converted to glucose in the liver where it is stored as glycogen so it doesn't directly cause insulin production the way glucose does. Insulin signals the body to store fat, and high levels of insulin can eventually result in lowered ability to produce insulin (T2D).

    I had tried a low carb diet several times to lose weight but it never helped. What worked for me is a balanced diet where I reduced the glycemic load (ie eating low glycemic index carbs or reduced amounts of high glycemic index carbs). I eat a lot of vegetables. I also tried to learn which foods made me feel full and which stimulated my appetite. That helped a lot because when I understood which foods made me feel full, I would reach for those when I was hungry. I realized the foods you crave are often not the ones that make you feel full but if you understand which foods make you feel full it changes how you react when you are hungry. What makes me feel full is when I eat carbs, protein, and fat at the same time. Another thing that helped is recognizing when I was most hungry and planning my diet to eat more early in the day when I was most hungry and less at night when I was less hungry. I also learned that the carbs you eat do not under normal circumstances get converted to fat. So the real culprit in weight gain is not sugar or fat, it is too much sugar and too much fat together in the same meal. So a low carb diet can work, and a balanced diet with a lower glycemic load can also work.

    One recommendation for a balance diet is to get 20-25% of your calories from protein, 45-60% from healthy carbs, and 15 - 20% from fat. That is roughly what I follow. That and learning what foods make me feel full helps me to keep my weight down. If you look at a curve of body weight vs longevity, the longest lived people are halfway into the overweight region between "normal" and obese. That is where I have been keeping my weight.

    Another aspect to diet is how it affects mood. There are reports of some people getting depressed on low carb diets. Research into serotonin metabolism would predict that. Insulin also causes the brain to take in trypotphan which is needed for serotonin production. Too little carbs or too much protein (other amino acids can bloc tryptophan uptake) can result in low levels of serotonin. Again this will vary from person to person. Some people say a low carb diet improves their mood some say it depresses their mood. I would not contradict any of them when they speak for themselves.

    Another area of controversy is how exercise influences weight gain or loss. One thing I read which seems to explain my experience is that exercise (or anything stressful) can increase levels of stress hormones which can lead to weight gain. It varies from person to person and depends on the type of exercise. I find that if I exercise too much, I put on fat. At one point I was walking 15 miles per week carrying heavy camera equipment and a tripod doing nature photography and I gained weight resulting in the highest body weight of my life. Again, the effect of exercise can vary from person to person and depends on the type of exercise. I am not contradicting anyone who says they lost weight by exercising.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
  8. Michael Patterson

    Michael Patterson New

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    173
    Home Page:
    If we are serious about understanding conspiracies I don't have an issue. But I think Jim_Smith's "People overestimate how well they understand how things work." is almost too kind. People grossly overestimate - and this throws conspiracies into a whole different puddle of mud.

    I have been obliged, over the past few weeks, to spend hours suffering through YouTube videos of risable nonsense served up by pseudo rational folk who have not the slightest acquaintance with ordered argument or plausible evidence. I suspect that there is a living to be made from peddling delusional BS under the guise of some implausibly argued hypothesis - or at least the potential to earn earn enough to defray the costs of making this nonsense public.

    Don't get me wrong I am perfectly content that the world is chock full of intentional acts to conceal the truth or deflect our attention from seeking it. It is perfectly plain, for example that materialism was promoted over any alternative POV because it enabled the emergence of moral pragmatism and relativism. And it enabled a religion to favour total misrepresentation of reality over disturbance to its doctrine and dogma. This combination of debased morality and complicity of religion features in most of the misfortunes that have been visited upon our collective cultures for a long time.

    Cracking open that unholy alliance is a moral duty, I think, for all who love truth - exposing the political, economic and intellectual wilful distortions of the scientific, the spiritual and the historic. But that moral duty must be armed with a disciplined intellect and a fine tuned nose for BS.

    The reality is, sadly, that many are open to the slimy flattery of the faux conspiracy advocates who are eager to lure their audience into self-deluded agreement with their ludicrous nonsense. I have friends, people I love and respect as normally rational folk, telling me they know enough science to know what is being presented to them is 'plausible'. No they don't. The pitch that sucked them in has skilfully flattered them. I have watched the videos they have begged me to watch. They are flaw-ridden nonsense.

    Maybe you may think I am going too hard here? I have spent weeks delving into a conspiracy theory, discovering things ignored - things that wreck the credibility of the main protagonist. I am just doing my job - the kind of thing I get paid for - a professional analysis of a purported situation to determine what is an appropriate response.

    Alex is exactly right in thinking that dissolving the conspiratorial fog that has blinded our intellects to genuinely free inquiry is a vital mission. But beyond that is a miasmic swamp into which deliberate misinformation is inserted to precipitate idiot conspiracies that have people wasting their time and energies chasing phantoms. What better way of keeping a people divided than to sow suspicion and doubt and mistrust that distracts them from the real conspiracies?

    Yes, and I feel deeply embarrassed about saying this, but I do think that there is a conspiracy to generate conspiracy theories. In an age of Fake News (thanks DT) and deeply skilled manipulators we imagine that we know enough to know what's what at our peril. And worse, we are induced to revile those who disagree with us and believe all authorities are always telling lies. What a perfect formulation!

    Let's get a grip on our egos and stand together - and focus our passion on what really counts. We are not so smart we cannot be flattered and seduced, subtly groomed or turned quietly and elegantly to the dark side.
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,454
    So you’ve spent weeks working on this? In itself that statement is interesting.

    How many conspiracies have you debunked in that time? Which ones are we talking about? Flat earth or 9/11 type thing, I think there’s a huge difference.
     
  10. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,284
    Lets move the discussion back to the re-opened thread. Why don't you repost your question on that thread and I will reply there - so the discussion is readable by others coming to the thread.

    David
     
  11. Michael Patterson

    Michael Patterson New

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    173
    Home Page:
    I got hooked into Sandy Hook at first. Unpacking that is very interesting and I am still digging into Halbig's claims about his expertise. That has taken a long time because (a) its actually hard to find stuff that is not part of the conspiracy and (b) when I do its a lot to read through - and then go check.

    I haven't bothered with Flat Earth. That's just too silly for me. 9/11 is a different matter. Building 7 is a smoking gun for me. That suggests foreknowledge in high places. That's enough to tell me a conspiracy is afoot. The extent is not something I have gotten into. This is not disinterest, just a matter of priorities on my time.

    I had to get involved in chemtrails. Yes there is nasty shit being sprayed into the atmosphere for what seem to be utterly deranged purposes. But contrails are real and are a real problem too. I am down on the chemtrail nonsense because the arguments are weak and lazy and the videos ridiculously manipulative and lying seems to be standard. Despite what is claimed I don't think NASA lies about everything.

    There maybe a real problem with lunatic climate and weather manipulation, but there is also a real problem with contrails in very high air traffic regions being ignored because those who should be concerned think they are chemtrails and other folk think they are loons. Way to go airline industry - distract attention from the shit you are dumping in our skies - turning it into a farce.

    And of course bloody Nibiru - the mysterious planet only people who make YouTube videos can see and the thousands of amateur astronomers around the planet have unaccountably missed. And some how the video makers have the tech to say what is going to hit us where and how big the waves are going to be. Seriously?

    As with so many conspiracies the theorists believe that the reason they see the evidence is a unique intelligence or insight and the rest of us have been befogged by media manipulation - or lack of intelligence. We refuse to see what "Blind Freddie" can see because we have "our heads in the sand".

    If we pay attention to what is going on these days we will see that there are a lot of credible people who are taking up what were once dismissed as 'conspiracy theories' because the evidence in support has been established. There is a huge community of dissenting POVs that permeates the academic communities, highly educated and rational folk and those who are just plain sensible and rational.

    Yes, there will always be trailblazers who push the boundaries of the acceptable and the credible. But let's not confuse them with the batshit crazy folk who are given platforms by reckless radio and podcasts hosts, or who are sufficiently well sorted to make their own entree into popular culture.

    I have no doubt some of the things I may think are presently delusional will turn out to be okay. But only very few. I think the filter for credible thinking applied by a well-informed intellect and a decent education should be sufficient to remove the more lunatic propositions. However I do think think the Bell Curve applies. Here in Australia we have a modest population of 24.5m, and that's not large enough population for a minority group to develop and sustain a sufficient market share. But in a USA population of around 325m (plus the Canadian and Mexican flow over) you can sustain a viable nut job enterprise. This has nothing to do with merit of idea, just market share. And once crazy hits sufficient volume to sustain market presence you have distorting factors at play in your culture. But I am no economist and I expect to be shot down by folk with a cannier take on economic realities.

    I have no interest in pretending these nonsensical conspiracy theories have any merit. I have a particular background in ritual magic, esoteric philosophy and psi phenomena, and I am very well read in this area over 4 decades. I think I can distinguish between a sensible discussion and somebody talking complete bollocks. I bet most folk can't. And yet I have heard what seem to be decent podcasts catering to utter nonsense without any hint of doubt, and even actively encouraging the delusional nonsense.

    I don't want to come across as some inflated big head. The fact is that there are some areas in which I am a 'subject area expert' and my professional role disposes me toward careful research and critical assessment and interpretation of data. My natural impulse is to object to claims I think are misleading and wrong. And I get angry - a surprise to me.

    There are things we should be mad about - the mundane distortions of dominant discourses that serve lust for profit and moral disregard for all that gets in the way. There are things we should be wary of, and concerned about as we learn more. Then there are things that may be interesting but of no real functional importance. Finally there things that are lurid fantasy or delusion that, because they purport to be expressions of reality, are not even worth engaging with as entertainment.

    I am probably wrong, but at the moment I can't measure that degree of error. What I have works for me for the moment.
     
    Hurmanetar, Steve and Laird like this.
  12. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,454
    As an ex airline pilot, all I can say about Chemtrails is that many or most of the videos that talk about this subject are nonsense...however...I do think there are far too many jet aeroplanes in our atmosphere. They may not be consciously dumping shit into the atmosphere, but nevertheless, it can’t be good. My last airline has well over three hundred 737s and the plan is for around five hundred. Where will it end? The cost of a ticket to Spain is often ridiculously low, and we seem quite happy with things as they are.

    It’s a bit late thinking this way now, I know. Call me a hypocrite. Guilty.

    There is much more than that that’s worth investigating about 9/11 imo.

    The thing is, I have been called a nutter and worse just for asking questions. I get worried when I see the start of such behaviour from our government. That’s when I start to feel like I’m living in a dream, that real life is not what it appears to be.
     
    AryaS likes this.
  13. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,564
    9-11 was an inside job.
     
    AryaS, Hurmanetar and Steve like this.
  14. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,564
    yep, that's been proven :)
    “Conspiracy Theory”: Foundations of a Weaponized Term | Global ...

    “CIA Document 1035-960” was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by the New York Times. The directive is especially significant because it outlines the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government” vis-à-vis the Warren Commission Report. The agency was especially interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the [Warren] investigation.”

    The memorandum lays out a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” For example, approaching “friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” to remind them of the Warren Commission’s integrity and soundness should be prioritized. “[T]he charges of the critics are without serious foundation,” the document reads, and “further speculative discussion only plays in to the hands of the [Communist] opposition.”

    The agency also directed its members “[t]o employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”

    1035-960 further delineates specific techniques for countering “conspiratorial” arguments centering on the Warren Commission’s findings. Such responses and their coupling with the pejorative label have been routinely wheeled out in various guises by corporate media outlets, commentators and political leaders to this day against those demanding truth and accountability about momentous public events.

    • No significant new evidence has emerged which the [Warren] Commission did not consider.
    • Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others.
    • Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States.
    • Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it.
    • Oswald would not have been any sensible person’s choice for a co-conspirator.
    • Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” [during the Warren Commission’s inquiry] can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes.
     
    AryaS and Hurmanetar like this.
  15. Hurmanetar

    Hurmanetar New

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,362
    Home Page:
    But of course :)

    I'm sure I sound like a broken record, but I'm going to mention hierarchy and decentralized network again. Maybe it is so basic that everyone already sees it and I'm just fascinated with the obvious, but anyway... IMO, it is impossible to explicate the conspiracy culture phenomenon at a high level without talking about the different forms of organization as applied to the noosphere.
    [​IMG]

    If we imagine a spectrum from centralized hierarchy on the left to a distributed network on the right, then conspiracies are the result of the steep power pyramid of ages past. Conspiracy theory culture is developed as a result of the noosphere getting jolted from (a) to (c) in the above diagram and then gradually evolving towards (b).

    Yeah, a lot of the time a lot of us don't know what the hell we're talking about, but we are each nodes existing in an increasingly interconnected network, and we are collectively developing the same way any neural network develops. Before 9/11 the human hive mind looked more like (a) above. Then 9/11 comes along at the same time that the internet looked more like (c) above. The chaos of 9/11 primed our "circuits" to begin to recognize conspiracy.

    From 9/11 onwards, we were presented with images and news stories one after another of traumatic events and we began to sort them out and develop more nuanced perceptions. Certain individuals arose as major nodes in the new network. The strength of each node began to be modified as feedback came in and the network now migrates back towards (b).

    Like the Bitcoin blockchain miners, we are all constantly comparing notes and in the process of reaching a consensus on what is real. When a threshold is reached, suddenly perceptions shift as a new "mainstream" is established... not unlike that optical illusion we've all seen where a dancer appears to be spinning one direction and then if you try, you can see the dancer spinning the opposite direction. Have you ever imagined the neuronal storm that must be going on inside your head to make that shift? The battle that occurs to arrive at the consensus on which way the dancer is spinning?

    The tendency over time is for things to migrate back towards centralization so we need periodic episodes of chaos to reset the network and overcome institutionalized biases. Our brains being massive networks, perhaps that is what the Kundalini experience is? A big jolt of chaos to the mental system that causes entrenched hierarchical perceptions to dissolve allowing a reset and reorganization to take place?

    In a centralized hierarchical system there are always secrets, information is capital, deception is necessary, and narrative is power.
    In a distributed network, everyone knows everything, information is constantly validated, validation strengthens the node, and narrative is the consensus rather than the script of an authority.

    Okay... end of sermon on network/hierarchy.

    Regarding the absurdity of biological robots in a meaningless universe... I feel like that is the result of atheist materialist fundamentalism, but most people aren't really fundies. They prefer to live with and ignore the implicit contradictions in their paradigm and go by feel rather than reason it to its nihilistic conclusion.

    As a result, most debates about "biological robots" with materialists come down to ideas of monism vs. dualism. In a way, Alex is promoting a dualism (hey guys there's something "other" to consider here!) and the materialists are saying, "there can't be something "other" because how would we even interact with it? So it is all physics and material".

    But what needs to happen is someone needs to point out that material - as in a solid object - is an ideal, and we can stretch the definition of material into something immaterial.

    The real dualism is between things that follow rules and things that don't. If it follows rules and regularities it can be viewed in some sense as material (even if in an alternate dimension) and the scientific method can analyze it. If it does not follow rules and regularities then it is only an experience.. it is immaterial... until it happens again... and again... and again... and by repetition it becomes material... it graduates from chaos to order as our pattern recognizing neural networks adapt and integrate it.
     
  16. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,284
    Well yes, that would certainly be a conspiracy, but would you claim that all the examples of bad science are conspiracies?

    David
     
  17. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,564
    you're right... at least partially. it's really a matter of the science-types falling into the "not even wrong" category when it comes to stuff like dualism v. non-dual.
     
    Hurmanetar likes this.
  18. LetsEat

    LetsEat Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    359
    NDE's can be very similar to hypoxia based experiences.

    I would search the forum for references to G-loc but the search function hasn't worked for a while. Apologies if this has already been beaten to death.
    https://www.near-death.com/experiences/triggers/extreme-gravity.html

    G-Loc is the loss of blood to the brain caused by extreme gravitational stress such as that experienced by Pilots in a centrifuge.

    G-LOC Characteristics in Common With NDEs
    (underlining not mine)
    1. Tunnel vision / Bright light
    2. Floating
    3. Automatic movement
    4. Autoscopy
    5. Out-of-body experience
    6. Not wanting to be disturbed
    7. Paralysis
    8. Vivid dreamlets / Beautiful places

    a. Euphoria
    b. Dissociation
    9. Pleasurable
    10. Psychologic state alteration
    11. Friends / Family inclusion
    12. Prior memories / Thoughts inclusion
    13. Very memorable (when remembered)
    14. Confabulation
    15. Strong urge to understand
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2018
    Hurmanetar likes this.
  19. None of the materialist attempts to explain NDEs can really explain them. NDEs cannot be explained by: a lack of oxygen, a dying brain, hallucinations, religious expectations, cultural expectations, hearing about medical procedures after the fact, hearing during resuscitation, brain dysfunction, inhibitory network failure, retinal dysfunction causing an image of a tunnel, brain chemicals such as ketamine, endogenous opioids, neurotransmitter imbalances, or hallucinogens including DMT, REM intrusions, epilepsy or seizures, psychopathology, unique personality traits, residual brain activity during unconsciousness, the experience occurring before or after brain activity stopped, brain activity during CPR, evolutionary adaptation, depersonalization, memory of birth, medication, naloxone, defense against dying, partial anesthesia, misuse of anecdotes, or selective reporting.

    http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/07/materialist-explanations-of-ndes-fail.html#nde_explain_oxygen


    Lack of oxygen:

    - Hogan: Lack of oxygen causes stupor without memories of the experience. People experiencing NDEs report enhanced consciousness not stupor and they remember their NDE. "Dr. Fred Schoonmaker, a cardiologist from Denver, had by 1979 carried out investigations of over 2,000 patients who had suffered cardiac arrests, many of whom reported NDEs. His findings showed that NDEs occurred when there was no deprivation of oxygen."

    - Tymn (Summary of Hogan)

    - Prescott (including acceleration induced hypoxia in pilots training under high g forces.):

    The primary features of acceleration-induced hypoxia, however, are myoclonic convulsions (rhythmic jerking of the limbs), impaired memory for events just prior to the onset of unconsciousness, tingling in the extremities and around the mouth, confusion and disorientation upon awakening, and paralysis, symptoms that do not occur in association with NDEs. Moreover, contrary to NDEs, the visual images Whinnery reported frequently included living people, but never deceased people; and no life review or accurate out-of-body perceptions have been reported in acceleration-induced loss of consciousness.

    - Facco and Christian

    Evidence against simple mechanistic interpretations comes also from a well-known prospective study by van Lommel et al. (2001), which showed no influence of given medication even in patients who were in coma for weeks. Factors such as duration of cardiac arrest (the degree of anoxia), duration of unconsciousness, intubation, induced cardiac arrest, and the administered medication were found to be irrelevant in the occurrence of NDEs.

    ...

    Furthermore, complete brain anoxia with absent electrical activity in cardiac arrest is incompatible with any form of consciousness, according to present scientific knowledge, making the finding of an explanation for NDEs a challenging task for the ruling physicalist and reductionist view of biomedicine (Kelly et al., 2007; Greyson, 2010b; van Lommel, 2010).

    - Beauregard:

    As pointed out by renowned NDE researcher Sam Parnia, some individuals have reported an NDE when they had not been terminally ill and so would have had normal levels of oxygen in their brains.

    ...

    Parnia raises another problem: When oxygen levels decrease markedly, patients whose lungs or hearts do not work properly experience an “acute confusional state,” during which they are highly confused and agitated and have little or no memory recall. In stark contrast, during NDEs people experience lucid consciousness, well-structured thought processes, and clear reasoning. They also have an excellent memory of the NDE, which usually stays with them for several decades.

    ...

    Such rapid acceleration decreases blood flow and, consequently, delivery of oxygen to the brain. In so doing, it induces brief periods of unconsciousness that Whinnery calls “dreamlets.” Whinnery hypothesized that although some of the core features of NDEs are found during dreamlets, the main characteristics of dreamlets are impaired memory for events just prior to the onset of unconsciousness, confusion, and disorientation upon awakening. These symptoms are not typically associated with NDEs. In addition, life transformations are never reported following dreamlets.

    - Greyson

    Moreover, cells in the hippocampus, the region thought to be essential for memory formation, are especially vulnerable to the effects of anoxia (Vriens et al., 1996).

    Fighter pilots experienceing anoxia due to high g forces tend to report visions of living people not deceased people as NDErs do.

    - near-death.com

    Other possible explanations are a lack of oxygen in the brain, or too much carbon dioxide. But these would not explain why some patients are able to give full and cogent reports of things that went on around them during their NDE. Cardiologist Dr. Michael Sabom has reported one patient who, while having a NDE, watched his doctor perform a blood test that revealed both high oxygen and low carbon dioxide. Comparisons between NDEs and hallucinations produced by an oxygen-starved brain show that the latter are chaotic and much more similar to psychotic hallucinations. Confusion, disorientation, and fear are the typical characteristics, compared with the tranquility, calm, and sense of order of a NDE. There are some features in common: a sense of well-being and power, and themes of death and dying. But people who have experienced both at different times say that there is an unmistakable difference.

    Hallucinations, whether deliberately drug-induced, the result of medication, or caused by oxygen deprivation, almost always take place while the subject is awake and conscious, whereas NDEs happen during unconsciousness, sometimes when the subject is so close to death that no record of brain activity is recorded on an electroencephalograph, the machine that monitors brain waves. Also, the medical conditions that take subjects to the brink of death, and to having a NDE, do not necessarily include oxygen-deprivation, or any medication. This is particularly true of accident victims. NDEs appear to occur at the moment when the threat of death occurs, not necessarily at the time, maybe hours later, when death is close enough to be starving the brain of oxygen.

    ...

    Ultimately, all materialistic explanations for NDEs must fail because they cannot explain the paranormal components of the phenomena, such as shared near-death experiences where multiple people share a near-death experience, and veridical near-death experiences where the experiencer remembers verifiable information that could not have been perceived with his normal senses even if he were conscious.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2018
    LetsEat likes this.
  20. G-Loc produces tunnel vision. NDErs report going through a tunnel. NDErs see the sides of the tunnel, they see entities that they pass as they move through the tunnel. That is completely different from tunnel vision which is losing sensitivity to the periphery of the visual field. When conscious people go through a real tunnel, no one confuses that with tunnel vision or claims it is caused by G-LOC.

    Is there a primary reference where involuntary movements are observed to be present during NDEs?

    An NDE is not a dreamlet. In NDE's there are multiple scenes that follow one another according to a logical progression.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2018
    LetsEat likes this.

Share This Page