It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Proof of What Happens To Us After Death and the Subsequent denial of it.

page: 19
12
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




Death is permanent. You seem fairly alive to me, but you should probably be more careful.


How can you argue about death as a living person either?




edit on 8-5-2015 by swarm303 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 8 2015 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: bb23108

Lol ... I posted after a night down in a local tavern with a group of friends ... artists, musicians, a scientist, a politician and business owners ... great night

But alas I was "Four sheets to the wind" so to speak ... Full of Gusto

So apologies to all are in order ... I apologise



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So there is a difference between being dead 10 minutes, 7 hours or 15 years huh? No pulse, no brainwave activity, on life support, then comatose for a month and a half not good enough for you. Family not knowing if you're going to pull through and if you do, are you going to be a vegetable?

I'd say leaving my body, seeing it lay there on the table and wondering about the hospital seeing family members that I had not seen in 20 years with 5 of her 7 children and her mother that had been even longer is pretty dead. How would I know that they called in my entire family? Laying on a table in surgery, yep those doctors were kind enough to wake me up just to tell me that my family members were there to see me die.

They call it Near Death because they were lucky enough to resuscitate you AFTER you die. Dead is dead. There are stories out there of people who have been dead for 10-20 hours, lying on a slab in a morgue waiting to be hacked to pieces and suddenly return to life. I suppose they weren't dead either. What? Are we just taking little naps? And millions of people have had this same experience. In a court of law, I'm pretty sure over a million first-hand witnesses would be acceptable as proof.

Having the chief of staff of OSU who happened to be my surgeon, come in the room throwing his hands up and saying, "OK, I have no idea how you are still here. What's your secret?" I have a case study there if you had access to such things, you would know that I am not a liar. The disability papers from Social Security quoting what the doctors had said, that's no proof either. Having your sternum and ribs cracked open to massage your heart? Nope, not dead. Just sleeping.

CRS so far has only been proven to be contracted in CCU or ICU. First case was 2004. I've even got pictures of me in the Rototron that they had to fly in from Houston with over 20 lines, tubes and drains. I was OSU's first case. It got into my blood stream and killed me. The side effects of dying from this and the drugs they gave me prevent me from ever having surgery again. In fact, I am terminal from it. I have been sent home from the hospitals since this has happened to die comfortably. I signed myself out of the ICU in Murfreesboro, TN AMA last week because I wanted to be with my family back in Ohio where I lived. I had ARDS and was exposed to black mold and MRSA which surprise, got into my blood stream and darn it, I died again from it. Death in this form as we know it(ha-ha)...we are biological entities with energy, electricity coursing through our veins. If you unplug a light from the socket in the wall, did the energy disappear?

If you only knew how many body parts(vital organs) I am missing and am still alive and breathing, you would be as flabbergasted as the doctors who treat me. My liver ruptured, and it totally regenerated and the same Chief of staff removed one organ twice as it had grown back. OOPS! How'd that happen?

There are some of us out there who get tried for a higher purpose. Whether you, believe it or not, is of no consequence. Some day, as I said before, you will know for yourself. Til then, I wish you peace and a hunger for the truth that cannot be satiated until you find it! Science is not a new concept. It does not go against the Bible as some would say...probably just have never read it or can't understand it. Nebuchadnezzar invaded Israel to get Daniel, who was trained in all sciences(word for word) chief of the Magi. He wanted his knowledge. Several times in history, mans knowledge has been taken from him to start back over at 0. Why? Because knowledge without wisdom is laughable and dangerous. So, you be careful, my friend!
edit on 8-5-2015 by cloudwatcher because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: cloudwatcher

Thanks for you post

I have friends who have experienced such things as you describe
They too are not liars

I hope you are keeping well now



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
So it seems for everyone else this is the rule...



while some have favors...



originally posted by: cloudwatcher
They call it Near Death because they were lucky enough to resuscitate you AFTER you die. Dead is dead.


Thank you for your post, and hope you feel better.
Reason they call it near death is simple - because it is near death, near the point of no recovery.
edit on 8-5-2015 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: artistpoet
a reply to: bb23108

Lol ... I posted after a night down in a local tavern with a group of friends ... artists, musicians, a scientist, a politician and business owners ... great night

But alas I was "Four sheets to the wind" so to speak ... Full of Gusto

LOL!

I actually enjoyed a lot of what you wrote.

But isn't it against the law to drink and post? Reminds me of that old Arnold S movie where he walks in on his drunk wife and says ...
www.youtube.com...

edit on 5/8/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: artistpoet

A closed mind is a mind that can refer only to itself, assumes, presupposes, guesses, and basically travels in a circle. An open mind can refer to things outside of itself, connecting thoughts not to thoughts, but to the world. Which one are you?



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: NorEaster


Seems simple until you are required to describe the materially-structured management function (you repeatedly refer to it as "we" above) that activates these "parts of the brain" and generates these simulations, and does so on-the-fly in the manner that is experienced by literally every person on a daily (hell, moment-to-moment) basis. Talk about glossing over a really important technical item with a theoretical premise. That's pretty stunning.


“Materially-structured management function”? That would be the first time I’ve ever heard that phrase in any context. By “we” I meant human beings, human bodies, and no misuse of labels is going to change what we put them on. The human being is the object of our inquiry and study in every case. The body, in accordance with its environment, is the sole thinking, speaking, feeling, conscious object. That is what every person is experiencing, but because they cannot sit and observe the parts and movements inside their own body, they obviously imagine something else is at work here. There is absolutely no need to venture beyond the body in search of algorithms and functions, for that is exactly what you will not find. A description of its parts, their relationships and their movements will suffice.


And yet, the entire discipline called Cosmology has always been reduced to math equations, models and computer simulations, and dazzling feats of Inductivism in its efforts to offer any notions whatsoever concerning what can and cannot be considered responsible scientific theory. No experiments are possible when testing theories involving macro-systems of such scale, and(whether you agree or not) 90% of what is gleaned from radio telescopes is based on decades-old conjecture concerning what could be determined from vaguely similar blurs and smudges buried in mountains of otherwise inconclusive data. Of course, no scientist with an interest in his/her career would ever suggest such a thing.


I agree with you here, absolutely. I was watching a panel discussion on the LHC and if there were other theories besides the Higgs Boson that were credible, and they brought up the technicolor theories. The only reason they didn’t like these theories as much as the Higgs theory was that the equations weren’t as elegant. The value of the theory isn’t its truth value, but its mathematical elegance. It blew my mind.


I hope you look into that book I linked. It makes the case that the mind is such an emergent system. It's very well researched and equally well presented. I learned a lot from it myself.


I will read the book.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


You totally missed the point of what I was saying, I'm not surprised though. I wasn't talking about the words on your computer screen, I was talking about where they came from. Are words physical? Not at all, they're abstract concepts located within the mind. Abstract ideas are not of the physical world, yet they are a part of your being, a part that you deny exists.


Abstract ideas are of the physical world. Look, here’s one: “Are words physical? Not at all, they're abstract concepts located within the mind.” You can see it, read it, write it etc. It is physical. We only call it abstract when it has nothing to do with the world, with particulars or with observable objects. You abstracting, on the other hand, is not an abstract idea and is a concrete physical occurrence.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: cloudwatcher

I do not doubt your experience at all. It sounds terrible, and I'm glad you pulled through. What it has to do with knowledge and wisdom I am unsure, but I'll attempt to heed your message.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: swarm303




How can you argue about death as a living person either?


Only as a living being can you watch someone die and witness what happens to them after death. The dead person cannot see what happens to himself after death, and cannot report any of his observations. Only living people can argue about death.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: swarm303




How can you argue about death as a living person either?


Only as a living being can you watch someone die and witness what happens to them after death. The dead person cannot see what happens to himself after death, and cannot report any of his observations. Only living people can argue about death.


so in your opinion, what is it that gives life meaning? without the reward of an afterlife i mean.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

An open mind is like emptying a glass of dirty water in order to receive clean water.
If you add new ideas to the glass still holding a pre set glass of ideas, dirty water ... the result would be the new water would be contaminated

Do you have an open mind?






edit on 8-5-2015 by artistpoet because: Typo

edit on 8-5-2015 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: cloudwatcher
I'd say leaving my body, seeing it lay there on the table and wondering about the hospital seeing family members that I had not seen in 20 years with 5 of her 7 children and her mother that had been even longer is pretty dead. How would I know that they called in my entire family? Laying on a table in surgery, yep those doctors were kind enough to wake me up just to tell me that my family members were there to see me die.


What an incredible ordeal you have gone through! Would you share with us more of the actual experiences you had beyond the physical body? Many descriptions of NDEs are very consistent, and I am always interested in as much detail as someone can remember and cares to share.

Thank you for your posts!



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
There is absolutely no need to venture beyond the body in search of algorithms and functions, for that is exactly what you will not find. A description of its parts, their relationships and their movements will suffice.

Right, we need not, nor can we ever "venture beyond the body".

We finally agree on something!


However, what the whole body is altogether is another matter. It involves far more than the physical aspects we perceive here. One can discover what the body is altogether through direct experience of its entirety, which includes the physical body-mind, the subtle body-mind, and the causal body-mind. This recognition is a most profound matter.

So you are exactly right - one can never venture beyond the whole body-mind because to transcend it altogether, necessarily requires That which already transcends it all - non-separate unconditional Reality itself, in which no such "we" or "me" exists.

By the way, why do you limit your venturing to just the physical dimension of the body-mind, given your correct statement above?


edit on 5/8/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm


so in your opinion, what is it that gives life meaning? without the reward of an afterlife i mean.


People give life meaning—or in the case of believers, other people do it for them.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: artistpoet


An open mind is like emptying a glass of dirty water in order to receive clean water.
If you add new ideas to the glass still holding a pre set glass of ideas, dirty water ... the result would be the new water would be contaminated

Do you have an open mind?


I have a discriminating mind.

Inspect the water before you put it into your glass, and you'd never have dirty water in it.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: bb23108


By the way, why do you limit your venturing to just the physical dimension of the body-mind, given your correct statement above?


For ethical reasons. I never lose sight of what I'm curious about. I can see it, I can smell it, I can feel it, I can taste it, and thus I can imagine it. It is prior to any idea, principle, theory or notion I can possibly have about it. It is exactly what needs to be defended.

We pile subjective labels on it—the self, the mind, consciousness, body/mind; it struggles to apprehend itself—yet despite this, it is still there, it hasn't gone anywhere, nothing added to or subtracted from it. Light hits it. It takes up space, and is the only thing in its space. It can affect and be affected. It can interact and be interacted with. So why not treat it as such? Why not speak about it as such? and find value in what it is rather than what we hope it to be?

I don't treat a human being as a body because some strict materialistic principle tells me to, or because "science" tells me I should. Describing the body in terms of dead matter nauseates me almost as much as describing it in terms of dead spirit. Matter itself is ill-defined. The physical is ill-defined. I don't believe in substance. I don't see a body as a collection of matter, or atoms, or meat, or bags of chemicals, for nothing shows these concepts of the body to be true. I tell you, bb, once you can value the body for what it is, for what it is capable of as an object, sharing no boundary with anything other than itself, intrinsically original, you will defend it, and in so doing you will be defending everything.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I tell you, bb, once you can value the body for what it is, for what it is capable of as an object, sharing no boundary with anything other than itself, intrinsically original, you will defend it, and in so doing you will be defending everything.

We have always agreed on the integrity of the body - as a whole, not just as a bunch of parts that comprise it. I greatly respect and appreciate your passion for its defense on this basis.

I have also spoken about it being integrated as a whole with its environment, on which it is completely dependent - as a necessary foundation for understanding what is true.

But I also know that the body is more than the physical - its boundaries are far greater than you are giving it credit for. One can only find this out through real intelligent investigation.

Why limit the boundaries of the body-mind? Why not allow for further discovery beyond the physical boundaries? If it is not true, so be it, but that has not been my discovery. Find out if this is true or not.

This absolutely does not require going within, trying to escape from bodily existence, etc. It simply is a matter of staying in place in the conscious "position" that is inherent in our simply being.

On this basis, it is revealed more and more that the body is far greater than just the physical manifestation its own five senses confirms that it is, and also limits it to.


edit on 5/8/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




Inspect the water before you put it into your glass, and you'd never have dirty water in it.


I think you mis understand my point ... Perhaps my wording "Dirty Water" conjures a wrong impression
The glass is obviously one's mind ... a mind full of ideas and beliefs
My point is ... if you do not set aside your pre set ideas and beliefs when faced with new information ... Your pre set ideas will contaminate your consideration of new ideas ...

I am sure we both understand this principle ...
The new idea upon consideration may prove to have value or not ... upon contemplation of it
Your already set ideas and beliefs are not thrown away as such ... simply set aside

Much like when watching a film or reading a book etc we suspend our disbelief for the sake of entertaining the idea of it

I agree to differ ... Like you I am an intelligent person ... believe it or not ...
Like you I have my own field/s of study and life experience and my own personal proof as do you
Yet we differ fundamentally ...

I am sure you would agree we would be wasting each others time to try convince the other of our own ideas and beliefs

However this does not mean we can not share a dialogue

One thing I do agree with you on is ... Whilst on Earth ... it is the most important thing to be present here
I believe what we do here is the most important thing
When we die ... what will we leave to the world
You will leave what you will you will leave be it ideas, philosophy
I as an artist will leave paintings that will continue to exist here on earth ... long after I am gone

I know you do not share the same belief as I regarding what occurs when we die
But it is not really important at all ... it is what we do whilst we are here that truly matters

Please do not take anything I say personally ... as I am thinking aloud here ...
I also apologise if my flippancy and remarks have offended you ... I can be very impulsive at times

I am prepared to agree to disagree ... we all share the same planet after all

Regards a/p








edit on 8-5-2015 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join