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.
62 (18%) patients reported some recollection of the time of clinical death (table 1).
Several theories have been proposed to explain NDE. We did not show that psychological, neurophysiological, or physiological factors caused these experiences after cardiac arrest. Sabom22 mentions a young American woman who had complications during brain surgery for a cerebral aneurysm. The EEG of her cortex and brainstem had become totally flat. After the operation, which was eventually successful, this patient proved to have had a very deep NDE, including an out-of-body experience, with subsequently verified observations during the period of the flat EEG.
With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the thus far assumed, but never proven, concept that consciousness and memories are localised in the brain should be discussed. How could a clear consciousness outside one's body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death with flat EEG?22 Also, in cardiac arrest the EEG usually becomes flat in most cases within about 10 s from onset of syncope.29,30 Furthermore, blind people have described veridical perception during out-of-body experiences at the time of this experience.31 NDE pushes at the limits of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind-brain relation.
Research should be concentrated on the effort to explain scientifically the occurrence and content of NDE. Research should be focused on certain specific elements of NDE, such as out-of-body experiences and other verifiable aspects. Finally, the theory and background of transcendence should be included as a part of an explanatory framework for these experiences.
Originally posted by Raideur
I gave up back up there. Believe what you want. If you want to think we have a soul, so be it. However, when you die, come give me a visit.
Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Originally posted by AngelaLadyS
I have a question for a non believer.
What kind of proof would you need?
A simple test with repeatable results, like in science class.
Example:
You cast spell A, which causes result B, and repeat. If the results are the same consistently, then the magic spell works. Then we can work on the why.
I mean, if people are casting these spells anyway, why can't anyone watch? And why doesn't anyone report having witnessed it. If something is real, then there are people who observe it? If no one has observed it, then how can it be known to be real?
[edit on 22-10-2004 by DeltaChaos]
Originally posted by rizla
Disclaimer: I'm not advocating anyone try the things I mentioned. They do 'work' but I don't know how and they might be dangerous. Strictly adults only and don't do it with a bad attitude.
Originally posted by Misfit
practice of Ouija is not Magic, as it is a connection, not an event.
Misfit
Originally posted by rizla
Why it isn't it majic? The glass goes round and round, showing a deplorable disregard for physics.
Originally posted by Misfit
Ouija is a portal, a doorway to whats not here. Any half-ass with no clue of Magik and little if none of Ouija [nor its consequences] can open doors with it.
Misfit
DeltaChaos
Who can prove magic exists?