Parnia's results are in-he's a proponent now

#5
A proponent of what? Materialism? ID? Gravity?
Your comment is as hilarious as it is thought-provoking. If you'd been following the Parnia threads, you would realize this could only be in reference to the reality of the non-material aspect of NDE claims. This is interesting because of pronounced skepticism on the part of proponents on this site (including myself) regarding his ability to come up with results like this because of the way he conducted the study, which seemed designed to prevent the recording of any pro-psi data. However, he seems to have come up with data to satisfy himself that consciousness does not require brain function. This is not the point around which most skepticism circulated (whether subjects would spot and remember the OBE targets placed in operating theatres), but if it gets the same result, then it works.

AP
 
#7
Your comment is as hilarious as it is thought-provoking. If you'd been following the Parnia threads, you would realize this could only be in reference to the reality of the non-material aspect of NDE claims. This is interesting because of pronounced skepticism on the part of proponents on this site (including myself) regarding his ability to come up with results like this because of the way he conducted the study, which seemed designed to prevent the recording of any pro-psi data. However, he seems to have come up with data to satisfy himself that consciousness does not require brain function. This is not the point around which most skepticism circulated (whether subjects would spot and remember the OBE targets placed in operating theatres), but if it gets the same result, then it works.

AP
Glad I could give you your daily medicine. Still, you posted an article in a public forum. And your response to my pointing out the vagueness in the title amounts to "if you knew what I did, you'd understand what I mean."

That said, I knew what you meant. It was my sarky way of pointing out that applying the terms proponent/skeptic without qualification - as many people do - is inaccurate.

Lorng live the sarc!!
 
Last edited:
#8
Glad I could give you your daily medicine. Still, you posted an article in a public forum. And your response to my pointing out the vagueness in the title amounts to "if you knew what I did, you'd understand what I mean."

That said, I knew what you meant. It was my sarky way of pointing out that applying the terms proponent/skeptic without qualification - as many people do - is inaccurate.

Lorng live the sarc!!
Frankly, this comes across as on the level of Bill Clinton trying to suggest that he misunderstood the meaning of the word 'is' in testimony given in the Paula Jones case--not credible. By your own admission, you knew what was meant.

AP
 
#11
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/pdf

I thought the results were pretty anti-climatic. Probably not fair but I was hoping for more. Ah well onward and upward. BTW it never even occurred to me that Parnia wasn't a believer after hearing him on Terry Gross, and reading his last book a year or two ago, until I heard Alex commenting here.
There was a talk given by Parnia, I think addressing the UN, close to the start of the AWARE study, where he said if nothing out of the ordinary was uncovered within about three years, it would be reasonable to conclude that the experiences were hallucinations, which was indeed his expectation, and to halt the study at that stage. Obviously it has continued for rather more than three years, which in itself implied already that something unexplained had been found. [I just had a quick look for that talk, to find the exact quote, but not found it yet]

In my opinion, Parnia has always been careful to not say anything which is not supported by the evidence. His views have seemed to gradually shift, which I think it is reasonable to assume has been roughly in step with the evidence uncovered.
 
#12
The incident with the individual who reported the timed beeps when his awareness should've been non-existant stood out to me. I was reminded of the end of the movie "Contact" where (spoilers ahead) the President's advisor informed James Woods of the 18 hours of static recorded on Jodie Foster's head camera when all other measurements and observations showed the pod as airborne for mere seconds-- the only data to support that Foster had indeed traveled into deep space.
 
#18
This is from the Aware II proposal archived 12/13/2014

https://web.archive.org/web/2014121....org.uk/Search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=17129

It is possible that patients who are able to recount these experiences may have better patient outcomes in terms of reduced brain damage, improved functional ability and better psychological adjustment to the event. We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind.
I think Parnia became very conservative about stating his conclusions because he does not want to jeopardize research funding or discredit the research results. If he makes statements that other scientists say cannot be justified by his results, it can ruin prospects for future research and also harm his collaborators.

http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/03/interview-with-near-death-researcher.html
On February 27, [2013] Dr. Sam Parnia was interviewed on the Coast to Coast AM radio program. Dr. Parnia is conducting the AWARE Study on near-death experiences (NDEs). As part of his research, he interviews patients who have suffered cardiac arrest. A summary of the interview was posted to a discussion forum by the member Wendybird.

During the interview, Dr. Parnia said the patients he has studied are not just having "near-death experiences", they are having "actual death experiences". They have been clinically dead for "minutes if not hours". The fact that some patients have memories of what was happening around them during that time is proof that consciouses survives death. Wendybird commented that at the outset of the research Parnia seemed skeptical but while conducting this research he became convinced that the afterlife is real.​
 
#19
Didn't parnia say NDE were as of right now a illusion? Or did he change his stance?
The only example I can find of Sam Parnia expressing a preference for the idea of the NDE being an illusion is back in 2010.

At about 2:45 in this video:

Quote:
If we get say 500 people who all supposedly die and come back and all that sort of stuff, and they all claim they saw Dr Smith, and they have all these incredible stories, and they can describe what was happening, and we can demonstrate that was happening when they're going through cardiac arrest and their brain is shut down, then supposedly, if they really are out of their body, they should see that picture.

If on the other hand it's just an illusion, a trick of the mind, which it may well be, and I suspect it will turn out to be, then we would expect no-one to be able to see those pictures.
Note this was a long time ago, back in 2010. He wasn't basing this remark on any results, it was far too early for that. In any case it wasn't a definitive statement, just a rather understandable cautiousness.

If you haven't seen this talk before, it may be worth a trip down memory lane, bearing in mind this is from more than six years ago.

Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 1]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 2]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 3]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 4]
 
Last edited:
#20
The only example I can find of Sam Parnia expressing a preference for the idea of the NDE being an illusion is back in 2010.

At about 2:45 in this video:

Quote:


Note this was a long time ago, back in 2010. He wasn't basing this remark on any results, it was far too early for that. In any case it wasn't a definitive statement, just a rather understandable cautiousness.

If you haven't seen this talk before, it may be worth a trip down memory lane, bearing in mind this is from more than six years ago.

Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 1]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 2]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 3]
Dr Sam Parnia: Near Death Experiences During Cardiac Arrest [Part 4]
In other words he appears to be saying that there needs to be sufficient evidence of a veridical nature to form a conclusion, which his study hasn't so far discovered?
 
Top