Scientific Evidence of Survival of Consciousness After Death

reply to post by soulwaxer


You can star a post by pressing the blank star that's not colored blue at the top of each post. You flag a thread by pressing "flag" at either the top or the bottom of the thread. However, you must attain 20 posts in order to flag a thread.

reply to post by angellicview


Oh, I see. Thank you!

Here is an interview with Dr. Pim van Lommel, the Dutch cardiologist I mentioned earlier:

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Enjoy!

Originally posted by nightbringr

Originally posted by TupacShakur
It's called '___', an extremely powerful hallucinogen/psychedelic that your brain releases massive amounts of upon death. This would account for reported near death experiences.

Except this isnt true at all.

Dr Rick Strassman, the authority on all things '___', and author of "The Spirt Molecule", has debunked this himself. And i quote:

Quoted from Erowid vault and an interview with Dr Strassman
"I did my best in the '___' book to differentiate between what is known, and what I was conjecturing about (based upon what is known), regarding certain aspects of '___' dynamics. However, it's amazing how ineffective my efforts seem to have been. So many people write me, or write elsewhere, about '___', and the pineal, assuming that the things I conjecture about are true. When I was writing the book, I thought I was clear enough, and repeating myself would have gotten tedious.

"We don't know whether '___' is made in the pineal. I muster a lot of circumstantial evidence supporting a reason to look long and hard at the pineal, but we do not yet know. There are data suggesting urinary '___' rises in psychotic patients when their psychosis is worse. However, we don't know whether '___' rises during dreams, meditation, near-death, death, birth or any other endogenous altered state. To the extent those states resemble those brought on by giving '___', it certainly makes one wonder if endogenous '___' might be involved, and if it were, it would explain a lot. But we don't know yet. Even if the pineal weren't involved, that would have little overall effect on my theories regarding a role for '___' in endogenous altered states, because we do know that the gene involved in '___' synthesis is present in many organs, particularly lung. If the pineal made '___', it would tie up a lot of loose ends regarding this enigmatic little organ. But people seem to live pretty normals lives without a pineal gland; for example, when it has had to be removed because of a tumor.

"In both these regards--the pineal-'___' connection, and endogenous '___' dynamics--we ought to know a lot more within the next several years due to the efforts of a research group being led by Steven Barker at Louisiana State University. He, with his grad student Ethan McIlhenny, are developing a new super-assay for '___', 5-MeO-'___', bufotenine, and metabolites. This assay will be capable of detecting those compounds much more sensitively than previous generations of assays. They're looking at endogenous levels in awake sober normals, to assess baseline values of these compounds. We should have some data from those samples within a year. They also will be looking at pineal tissue. Once we have some baseline data in normal humans in normal waking consciousness, comparisons can be made between those levels and levels in endogenous altered states, like dreams, near-death, and so on."

So yeah. All taken out of context and no proof whatsoever of the amount of '___' available in our bodies being enough to cause any kind of "trip". Nor has it been proven that the penial can produce it at all in the first place.

Thanks for that quote, I will have to look that up later. As much as people talk about '___' people just accepted it as truth. without any solid evidence.

Originally posted by angellicview

Originally posted by scottlpool2003
reply to post by angellicview

 

If the girl was born blind how would too much oxygen in the incubator cause it? That's not born blind is it? How much of the rest of your 'evidence' is untrue?

THIS I know about. I am a Neonatal Nurse. I know that a newborn receiving too much oxygen can cause blindness. Now you're definitely in my 'hood. If YOU do not know about this, what makes me think anything you say is true? What? Because you are a human being and I will treat you as such. I know that every person is not speciallized in every subject. That's why you come here and read books and go to school. To learn.

edit on 8-12-2011 by angellicview because: Spelling error

Excuse me? I didn't say that the baby couldn't be blinded in the incubator... If you read books, read my post the baby was blinded in the incubator not the womb hense NOT born blind. Some specialist. And my degree is in computing. Geesh

This business about the long tunnel and seeing dead family members is nonsense to me.

You die and the body you left behind is just a shell that no longer functions, so how come the other deceased are wandering around in their repaired shells greeting the newly deceased? Are these wanderers fully clothed?

It's suggesting that at time of death you only take the etheral body and leave behind the physical one but at some point you get it all back and go through eternity working the tunnel greeting the newcomers.

I do however have a hard time thinking the consciousness can be wiped out to be non-existant, so I think this is just wishful thinking to ease in the passing.

I think during a hospital procedure where you are clincally dead, not all senses are shut down, and you can hear and form an image in your mind that matches the script of what you heard..

Originally posted by scottlpool2003

Originally posted by angellicview

Originally posted by scottlpool2003
reply to post by angellicview

 

If the girl was born blind how would too much oxygen in the incubator cause it? That's not born blind is it? How much of the rest of your 'evidence' is untrue?

THIS I know about. I am a Neonatal Nurse. I know that a newborn receiving too much oxygen can cause blindness. Now you're definitely in my 'hood. If YOU do not know about this, what makes me think anything you say is true? What? Because you are a human being and I will treat you as such. I know that every person is not speciallized in every subject. That's why you come here and read books and go to school. To learn.

edit on 8-12-2011 by angellicview because: Spelling error

Excuse me? I didn't say that the baby couldn't be blinded in the incubator... If you read books, read my post the baby was blinded in the incubator not the womb hense NOT born blind. Some specialist. And my degree is in computing. Geesh

Okay, I see the quote you are talking about:

Vicki was born blind, her optic nerve having been completely destroyed at birth because of an excess of oxygen she received in the incubator. Yet, she appears to have been able to see during her NDE. Her story is a particularly clear instance of how NDEs of the congenitally blind can unfold in precisely the same way as do those of sighted persons. As you will see, apart from the fact that Vicki was not able to discern color during her experience, the account of her NDE is absolutely indistinguishable from those with intact visual systems.

My apologies that I misunderstood what you were saying. My guess is that possibly the person making this quote didn't have the knowledge about the subject of Neonatology, and therefore misquoted his or her quote. You are arguing here on semantics. The baby was blinded very shortly after birth. Then during the NDE of the adult individual, she could see. She had trouble discerning color, probably because she had no knowledge of colors, or the names of colors. Here is the rest of the story that the link I posted leads to:

Vicki told Dr. Ring she found herself floating above her body in the emergency room of a hospital following an automobile accident. She was aware of being up near the ceiling watching a male doctor and a female nurse working on her body, which she viewed from her elevated position. Vicki has a clear recollection of how she came to the realization that this was her own body below her. The following is her experience. I knew it was me ... I was pretty thin then. I was quite tall and thin at that point. And I recognized at first that it was a body, but I didn't even know that it was mine initially. Then I perceived that I was up on the ceiling, and I thought, "Well, that's kind of weird. What am I doing up here?" I thought, "Well, this must be me. Am I dead? ..." I just briefly saw this body, and ... I knew that it was mine because I wasn't in mine. In addition, she was able to note certain further identifying features indicating that the body she was observing was certainly her own. I think I was wearing the plain gold band on my right ring finger and my father's wedding ring next to it. But my wedding ring I definitely saw ... That was the one I noticed the most because it's most unusual. It has orange blossoms on the corners of it. There is something extremely remarkable and provocative about Vicki's recollection of these visual impressions, as a subsequent comment of hers implied. "This was," she said, "the only time I could ever relate to seeing and to what light was, because I experienced it."

My point is this: well, for one thing, you are grasping at straws to try to disprove NDE's. And for another thing, I would appreciate it very much if you'd state your opinion without demeaning anyone. Treat everyone with respect and as a fellow human being.

For the sake of presenting a fair discussion of the subject matter.............

WIKIPEDIA

Biological analysis and theories
The first formal neurobiological model for NDE was presented in 1987 by chilean scientists Juan Sebastián Gómez-Jeria and Juan Carlos Saavedra-Aguilar from the University of Chile.[46] In the 1990s, Dr. Rick Strassman conducted research on the psychedelic drug Dimethyltryptamine ('___') at the University of New Mexico.[47][48][49] Strassman advanced the theory that a massive release of '___' from the pineal gland prior to death or near-death was the cause of the near-death experience phenomenon. Only two of his test subjects reported NDE-like aural or visual hallucinations, although many reported feeling as though they had entered a state similar to the classical NDE. His explanation for this was the possible lack of panic involved in the clinical setting and possible dosage differences between those administered and those encountered in actual NDE cases. All subjects in the study were also very experienced users of '___' and/or other psychedelic/entheogenic agents. Some speculators consider that if subjects without prior knowledge on the effects of '___' had been used during the experiment, it is possible more volunteers would have reported feeling as though they had experienced an NDE.
Critics have argued that neurobiological models often fail to explain NDEs that result from close brushes with death, where the brain does not actually suffer physical trauma, such as a near-miss automobile accident. Such events may however have neurobiological effects caused by stress.
In a new theory devised by Richard Kinseher in 2006, the knowledge of the Sensory Autonomic System is applied in the NDE phenomenon. His theory states that the experience of looming death is an extremely strange paradox to a living organism—and therefore it will start the NDE: during the NDE, the individual becomes capable of "seeing" the brain performing a scan of the whole episodic memory (even prenatal experiences), in order to find a stored experience which is comparable to the input information of death. All these scanned and retrieved bits of information are permanently evaluated by the actual mind, as it is searching for a coping mechanism out of the potentially fatal situation. Kinseher feels this is the reason why a near-death experience is so unusual. Because people who experience NDEs report the experience of memories long considered lost, this theory necessarily depends upon a theory of memory in which all memories are indefinitely retained.
The theory also states that out-of-body experiences, accompanied by NDEs, are an attempt by the brain to create a mental overview of the situation and the surrounding world. The brain then transforms the input from sense organs and stored experience (knowledge) into a dream-like idea about oneself and the surrounding area.
Whether or not these experiences are hallucinatory, they do have a profound impact on the observer. Many psychologists not necessarily pursuing the paranormal, such as Susan Blackmore, have recognized this. These scientists are not trying to debunk the experience, but are instead searching for biological causes of NDEs.[50]
According to Engmann,[51] near-death experiences of people who are clinically dead are psychopathological symptoms caused by a severe malfunction of the brain resulting from the cessation of cerebral blood circulation. An important question is whether it is possible to "translate" the bloomy experiences of the reanimated survivors into psychopathologically basic phenomena, e.g. acoasms, central narrowing of the visual field, autoscopia, visual hallucinations, activation of limbic and memory structures according to Moody's stages. The symptoms suppose a primary affliction of the occipital and temporal cortices under clinical death. This basis could be congruent with the thesis of pathoclisis—the inclination of special parts of the brain to be the first to be damaged in case of disease, lack of oxygen, or malnutrition—established eighty years ago by C. and O. Vogt.[52] According to that thesis, the basic phenomena should be similar in all patients with near-death experiences. But a crucial problem is to distinguish these basic psychopathological symptoms from the secondary mental associated experiences which may result from a reprocessing of the basic symptoms under the influence of the person's cultural and religious views.
Research released in 2010 by University of Maribor, Slovenia had put near-death experiences down to high levels of carbon dioxide in the blood altering the chemical balance of the brain and tricking it into 'seeing' things.[40] Of the 52 patients, 11 reported NDEs. [53][54]

Related to the discussion, here is a list of triggers for NDE's

Death Surgical procedure Dream Psychedelic drugs Extreme stress Extreme gravity Brain stimulation Extreme meditation Deathbed vision Relaxation Seizure Psychic vision Coma Astral projection After-death vision Trance mirror gazing Eye movement Falling Alien abduction Sexual orgasm Mental illness

You can visit the link if you want to click on each thing on the above list to see the different kinds of NDE-like experiences people have had in each situation. It is definitely an interesting subject!

Originally posted by violet
This business about the long tunnel and seeing dead family members is nonsense to me.

You die and the body you left behind is just a shell that no longer functions, so how come the other deceased are wandering around in their repaired shells greeting the newly deceased? Are these wanderers fully clothed?

It's suggesting that at time of death you only take the etheral body and leave behind the physical one but at some point you get it all back and go through eternity working the tunnel greeting the newcomers.

I do however have a hard time thinking the consciousness can be wiped out to be non-existant, so I think this is just wishful thinking to ease in the passing.

I think during a hospital procedure where you are clincally dead, not all senses are shut down, and you can hear and form an image in your mind that matches the script of what you heard..

That's okay if you don't believe in it. Everyone has their own beliefs and I respect yours' as valid for you.

I believe it has to do with the frequency of light vibration resulting in multidimensions. Hey, it may not be your cup of tea. No problem here. Peace

I posted two parts of an interview of a cardiologist talking about his NDE research near the top of this page, but this time I will attempt to embed, because they are very informative. Here goes...:

reply to post by soulwaxer


Thank you so much, and I guarantee you I will watch these later! Right now I am preparing dinner and trying to keep up with this thread. Thanks again for posting them

Originally posted by overratedpatriotism
Thanks for that quote, I will have to look that up later. As much as people talk about '___' people just accepted it as truth. without any solid evidence.

Your welcome.

There is so much disinfo out there that people insist on crediting to Dr Strassman. It is no wonder he is frustrated and debunking these theories people attribute to him. To me its a matter of people believing what they want to believe.

That being said, i have done my own "experimentation". One conclusion i have come up with is these are very unpredictable substances and you never know what you will experience. Everything from aliens to angels. Devils to god, past, present, future and so much more. I am convinced these substances simply free our minds to wander. I dont believe anything substantial as far as the afterworld or the meaning of life can be gleened from such things.

reply to post by angellicview


Just a note FYI

Are you aware how difficult it is to read text colors that are nearly the same tone as the background? Thought maybe you did not realize. Colors are pretty and all but people still have to read them.

reply to post by TsukiLunar

The world was once considered flat too. No-one believed it was round - until it was proven so.
No-one believed in auras-then science caught up & now they are able to photograph them.
Science is fallible - since Einstein decided nothing was faster than the speed of light everyone accepted this as fact & true because science was not developed enough. Now they have found things that move faster than light.
the atom was believed to be the smallest thing - then they split it.
Just because science has not found a way to validate these experiences does not make them not real.
By placing your faith in only what science can prove you are limiting your experiences on this planet.
Also the body produces lots of chemicals, commonly hormones-eg when you get a fright the body produces adrenalin to give you extra speed & faster response times. It would then seem reasonable that just before death, in that last millisecond(which is an infinite amount of time for the body to react), there was a chemical release of some kind. Again I fail to see how this negates the near death experience.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Peace & love to you all

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by angellicview

 

Just a note FYI

Are you aware how difficult it is to read text colors that are nearly the same tone as the background? Thought maybe you did not realize. Colors are pretty and all but people still have to read them.

Yes, I see that now. Thank you

Originally posted by angellicview

Originally posted by steveknows
This is an unabashed misleading thread heading. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I find it very sad that you feel you need to lie to get people to have a look at your thread.

If what you've said in the post was written in a book, which some bits are, it wouldn't be found in the science section of a library.

edit on 8-12-2011 by steveknows because: Typo

That is incredibly harsh. I am not ashamed of myself and the evidence I present does fall under the guidelines to be scientific evidence. I have not lied in any way. In fact, the title of my thread is exactly the title of the page of the website which I derived my information from. No, it isn't found in science books. As you can see, it is currently a controversial subject. Here is a link to an article in Time Magazine entitled, Evidence of Afterlife.

I never realized this would be such a highly charged subject and I suspect that the people who are so verbally abusive about it are the ones who really didn't read the OP with an open mind or click any of the links. I will no longer argue over whether this OP presents "Scientific Evidence" or not. I will just leave the information up for the people who are interested in learning more about it. Those that don't can certainly move on to another thread which is more to their liking.

It's not harsh at all. Imagine a thread heading that said " science provides evidence there's no life after death" Then the thread went on to say that observation form scientisist who have almost died record nothing to the the effect of life after death. It would prove nothing.

That's basically what you've done. The thread isn't just misleading, It's an obvious attempt, to get science minded people, and anyone else, to have a look. Like the car salesman who puts a good deal in the paper and when you get there he says it's been sold but he's got another good one that costs a bit more.

And you can't argue over it because it doesn't present scientific avidence at all.

Perhaps you should have put." Is there scientific evidence and please read with an open mind."

*Is there life after death?

The Christian Bible teaches that the physical body dies, but the spirit is eternal - being created in the image of the eternal GOD. We were originally created without death, but the introduction of sin bought physical death and seperation from GOD spiritually, because of that sin. Jesus Christs' resurrection is the model of what happens to all of mankind upon death. The Bible teaches that there is no re-incarnation. One life - one judgement - one eternity - spent either in fellowship with GOD (heaven), or seperated from GOD (hell).

*Is Heaven or Hell real?

Jesus Christ spoke frequently about heaven and hell - providing valuable insight into both. The Bible teaches that our eternity will be spent in one or the other. Our choices during our 'physical' life determine which one that will be. Jesus declares that HE (and HE alone) is the door to heaven. Jesus' death on the cross and resurrection from that death, has provided the ONLY way that mankind can enter heaven. Apart from faith and repentance to Jesus Christ, hell is the default eternity.

*Do we have a soul or spirit?

The Christian Bible teaches that mankind is made in the image of GOD - that is - having an eternal spirit. We were created ' very good' as described in the Genesis account of creation. Yet through sin, our original design is corrupted and our physical vessel breaks down and dies. Our spirit, however exists forever, although being seperated from GOD, (spiritual death). Where our spirit exists after death is determined by our choices while we are alive. By default it is doomed for spiritual death forever (seperation from GOD and spiritual torment). Our spirit is made alive only through faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus declares of HIMself that HE is the way, the truth and the LIFE.


Be Blessed.

reply to post by steveknows


I don't think you even read the thread or looked at the links. Yes, there is scientific evidence. Sorry you don't agree.

reply to post by angellicview


Really nice work on the presentation. Star and flag of course.

I am a big believer in the higher realms of human consciousness and I am certain, based on my own experiences that the soul is transported out of the body when you die, and it goes to the astral realms, where mind meets matter so to speak, this is the place that souls who are not currently in a physical form inhabit. When people speak of moving towards the light, this is literally what happens, a light appears, and the soul needs to consciously decide to enter it, upon entering it you are literally transported to the higher realms.

This is a reason that you should not fear death, ever. It is just as natural as life, and once you have experienced what lies beyond you will no longer worry about the petty day to day bickering that seems to engulf us all. Thanks again for the thread, we need to break down these barriers and help people understand the true nature of this physical reality, which is a lot stranger than you could ever imagine.

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by angellicview

 

How can you disagree with that? It's a hallucinogen, meaning that it would produce hallucinations, meaning that if people would end up not dying, they would report having visions or whatever. That explains it pretty accurately.

The big question is whether those 'hallucinations' are generated IN the brain, or whether they are external and somehow find their way into the psyche, via mind opening substances. I'm of the latter persuasion, no doubt at all. This is one of the big problems I have with societies classification of said substances, who is to say that the 'hallucinations' find their origin principally inside the brain, I think that they are external, and once you can tap into that realm, you can receive the information that is available there.