It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Something we sensitives have been yapping on about for ages, and many times our words either landed on deaf ears , or people call us mentally challenged.
reply to post by wildtimes
Some of us understand this, and NDE's are wonderful for glimpsing into the truth, such as Anita Moorjani's, where she become her infinite Higher Self, and saw it was like a completed infinite tapestry, and we were a thread in this, our current life.
But why do you insist on believing that one's personality, identity etc survive one's physical death? And some of you even claim that one transcends their ego upon death, while retaining their "individuality" (quite convenient), and you call that "the higher self". When in fact any conception of a "self" is ego, your "higher self" very much included.
It's interesting how people want to pick and choose the truths they hear or read. And then they feel they are entitled to interpretive liberties that change the definition or meaning of those truths.
reply to post by wildtimes
I find this claim interesting. I'd never before heard of reports coming from people that had been dead for hours, after rigor setting in, but then being revived and with tales to tell. Can you point me to some authoritative works on this? I would like to read something verifiable rather than just "new agey" stuff that makes claims without the data to back it up. Thanks.
reply to post by Serdgiam
A fuzzy, staticy, thousand-shades-of-gray picture.
Very little is even close to absolute.
Whether and how the dying brain is capable of generating conscious activity has been vigorously debated.
But in this week's PNAS Early Edition, a U-M study shows shortly after clinical death, in which the heart stops beating and blood stops flowing to the brain, rats display brain activity patterns characteristic of conscious perception.
"This study, performed in animals, is the first dealing with what happens to the neurophysiological state of the dying brain," says lead study author Jimo Borjigin, Ph.D., associate professor of molecular and integrative physiology and associate professor of neurology at the University of Michigan Medical School.
"It will form the foundation for future human studies investigating mental experiences occurring in the dying brain, including seeing light during cardiac arrest," she says.
Approximately 20 percent of cardiac arrest survivors report having had a near-death experience during clinical death. These visions and perceptions have been called "realer than real," according to previous research, but it remains unclear whether the brain is capable of such activity after cardiac arrest.
"We reasoned that if near-death experience stems from brain activity, neural correlates of consciousness should be identifiable in humans or animals even after the cessation of cerebral blood flow," she says.
Wildtimes is just making an observation about what is going on. Scientists are now embracing the afterlife, and maybe it's because it is such a common thing among people, it is becoming a cultural norm, they are starting to believe it too?
The question was "why are so many scientists...?" There are so many reasons why, but what wildtimes is pointing out, the scientific community is conceding that there are things they have no answer for, no matter how many experiments they do to disprove it, they haven't been able toand since the rest of the world believes scientists with their lives, then the many experiments are proving right there is an afterlife and NDEs, OBEs, RV and AP. So, since they can't disprove it, then they have to concede.
Everyone does that. If it doesnt fit in with what you perceive to be the truth, then it is generally discarded. Some will take the opportunity to explore it, but at first glance, I would say its just a general human response and quite natural.
Even when we use language to communicate, we each have our interpretation of what the words mean. And the overall "picture" that is formed will differ from person to person. Books made into movies is an excellent example, though its deeper than that.
The biggest difference, in my opinion, is whether one actively explores the presented ideas (inevitably through their own biased context), or whether they direct their energy to tear down the message and messenger.
Humans, eh? We are a funny people.
Something tells me NDE's are a result of higher awareness, of recognizing intangible concepts and exploring them, of opening ourselves up to new sensations, new trains of thought, new philosophical doors that grant us the psychological flexibility to experience such encounters. Call it "spiritual puberty". Something is changing inside of us, and as a result, our relationship with the world beyond/above/within/etc this world is also changing.