₦airaland Forum

budaatum:
Dude, you are flipflopping! First you don't trust scientists, now you ask if my experience matches scientist's criteria.

I am certain I was not dreaming when the entire water at the bar beach was in my belly, nor was I dreaming when 30 5mg valium tablets jumped down my throat.

But you just consider how much sense it makes for you who seem to have had no "personal level of awareness" of NDE want to claim I who have is making a "wrong association".

Please stop imagining things about me in your head. I have always suspected you and others believe I am anti science or don't trust scientists.

The difference between me and you is this, I accept as truth, untill it is proven otherwise, what has been conclusively proven in the sciences and by scientists, while you ,from what you have displayed here, just swallow uncritically any opinion expressed by scientists as fact. That's why you think the brain is creating the experience of NDE which is not proven yet.

So ,don't cast me in the coinage of those who are anti science. Anything in the sciences that can't be questioned is not science, but dogma, and if you're afraid to question findings in the sciences, then you don't know science very well to question it .

A person like that , which you're turning out to be, is not different from a gullible religious fanatic who is afraid to question anything in their religion and just swallow everything their religious leaders tell them and start acting like a zombie. You believe the brain is creating the experience contrary to what scientist are starting to find out. Have you ever taking the time to find out if what was believed in the past concerning NDE has scientific support.

No ,You have not . This is very obvious from our ongoing conversation. You are not certain about what you know, but just regurgitating unproven claims in the sciences because nearly everyone you know is saying the same thing, so to you must be true.



I just ask you simple questions for us to determine if what you have made of those experiences is the right one. Instead of answering those, you want to deflect by throwing dust everywhere that I don't trust scientists.

OK ,let's say it's true that I don't trust scientists, is that what makes you believe you have made the right associations concerning those experiences? Please learn to accept responsibility for your actions and don't shift it on others.

Now you have just shown that you don't know enough of the phenomena to make any sense of it.
This is what you don't know. NDEs is a type of OBEs .There are different types of OBEs triggered differently. NDEs is triggered during traumatic experiences; drowning, cardiac arrest etc.

Other OBEs can happen in full waking consciousness and are triggered differently. What is common in the different type of OBEs which NDEs is one of them, is the experiencer, during this period, having external visual awareness of seeing things that are" there" ; veridical vision, seeing things from outside the body which corresponds to objective reality ..

So ,anyone who has experienced any type of OBEs and was conscious enough during that time, is in better position than anyone else to make sense of those kind of experiences; NDEs
In your case ,you probably had those experiences associated with NDEs , but was not fully conscious enough, unlike some others to be aware of what was going on ,hence you didn't remember anything when you came to.

Or you had the experiences consciously experiencing those vivid imageries associated with the phenomena, but failed to recollect your experiences after you were reviled, due to psychological and biological reason. This is the explanation given by scientists currently investigating NDEs why people fail to report their experiences.

You are in the dark, Buda, about this things, and just making conjectures in your head.

What you think is not what it is . It is obvious to me that you're just anchoring on what scientists used to believe in the past about NDEs.

So much more is now known in the sciences about NDEs .Please educated yourself very well before discussing these things. You have a phone and data. Help yourself and get better informed.

budaatum:
First. Triple, everything any of us says is just our opinion based on our experiences or what we've learnt somewhere or been taught or told or made up in our own heads.

Now, I myself have experienced almost dying twice, once when I drank up all the water at the Bar Beach, and another time when 30, 5 milligram valium tablets found a way to jump down my throat.

At both instances were there what many describe as near death experiences, but the clue is clearly in the "near", which implies not exactly dead, and which means brain (and nervous system) activity has not exactly stopped, though I must confess that no one measured how close to death I actually was since they thankfully were more focused on keeping me alive.

Good your brought this in.

Have you ever paused to think, or ask yourself that what you have made of those experiences you had is based on what you know ?

It is has been proven by cognitive psychologist that we all learn by association, that is, what we make of whatever experiences we have is based on our level of awareness as at the time we have those experiences.

And ones level of awareness is the totality of the experiences had and all the knowledge acquired; truths and facts proven, which assist greatly in making the right judgement or association.

So ,ones level of awareness is a critical factor in making the right associations and learning correctly from our experiences.

When we make the wrong associations from whatever we have experienced at any time, it is because we don't know enough to know what is the correct thing to think of what we have experienced, and as result we don't learn anything or even learn the wrong thing which we then hold on to as the truth.

Now the question for you now, BUda, is do you think you know enough to judge correctly that your experiences qualifies for NDE?

Did your experiences match those who have had NDEs based on the criteria used by scientists to determine correctly what is authentic experiences different from dreams or delirium that are mistaken for the real thing?

What makes you think you have not made the wrong association from those experiences you had and now think you know the truth?

Do you know what happens in the brains of people who have had NDEs to know your experiences were the same thing as NDE and you not just assuming?
https://neo.life/2022/08/your-brain-at-the-moment-of-death/

budaatum:
By the way triplechoice. Not once, to my notice, have you shown you have learnt anything in this thread. What you've continuously done is insist what you know is what there is to know whilst refusing to consider what anyone else has presented here, which shows you are not searching for knowledge because you think you know enough or more than anyone else.

What's amusing however is your no sense use.

Yea, the reason I refuse to consider what you and others say is because you hide behind science to express opinions that lack scientific backing. A top scientist expressing an opinion should be seen for what it is; what he thinks and not fact

If you were honest to admit that what you say is just your opinion, then I don't have any problem. I won't resist anything.

So next time, tell me the reason behind your claims. Are you making a spiritual claim or scientific claim. If it's the later then be ready to answer the questions that should follow

Someone has said here that NDEs are lucid dreams or mind tricks caused by certain brian mechanism .I rejected that and proved that based on current studies that claim lack scientific support. No such brain mechanism has been identified in the brains of people having the experience directly

Now for the sake of your integrity, please tell me what is wrong with my reaction?

Did I react without providing valid reasons for my reaction.. Now tell me I didn't

budaatum:
Except for the fact that the use of your senses in your search seems to be limited, unfortunately, which is why you are willing to make stuff up hoping to be believed but get frustrated when those who do use their senses disbelieve you.

It's because you don't know you can bypass your physical senses by expanding your consciousness to perceive things that you should not ordinary know is why you want me be to be like you to cure your cognitive dissonance . Sorry ,it won't work for you.

How do you know you're using your senses very well when you struggle to make any meaningful impact on this thread?

Now tell me , what is consciousness and how has it emerge?

I know your answer will come when the stars start to fall from the sky.

budaatum:
This is the basis of my disagreement with you.

Science is the use of ones senses to verify facts as opposed to making up crap with no supporting evidence.

The Christian definition is below.

But your physical senses, buda is limited, the reason you need help.

You don't know this, that's why you want to fight a lion with your bare hands. You won't survive it.

It said that a man who doesn't know the limitation of what he knows lack wisdom.

I know what I know , but I know what I know is not all there's to know, hence my continue search for knowledge everywhere.

If you know that you know more than me ,then spill it out, and don't hide behind Bible verses that can be subjectively interpreted.

I have told you in the past that I don't need your Rosicrucian interpretation of scripture.

I refuse to be postulated into your nonsense.

budaatum:
I've said my bit on this triple, but you want to ignore it by yelling "trolling" instead of considering what you read. Time will tell who's blind.

Tell me why I made the comment in the first and what led to it, if you know anything?
Mr know- it- all- in- his- head who lacks the courage to say what he claims to know.

I have repeatedly mentioned that what ever opinion I expressed is not supported by science, but doesn't mean its not true.

There are truths not proven yet in the sciences

And because you don't know this simple fact ,you want to project your ignorance on others

You're the only one on this thread that has not contributed anything tangible, but want to assume you know.

Someone ignorantly said electrical charges is cause of something, and try to correct him that effect should not be taken as cause.
The next thing, you jumped in to take my comment out of that context it was made to spill garbage.

You certainly don't have any iota of respect for yourself, that is why you continue to troll .

Time will tell indeed. Nonsense

budaatum:
I can't let you hide nonsense in your verbiage hoping it's not seen.

Where is the nonsense? Blind buda

budaatum:
Sounds like you don't know that the brain is just a part of the "neural mechanism" and that electrical charges are a part of that nervous system, and you think because you don't know no one else knows.

Taking my comments as usual out of the context it was made.

Beside, nobody knows. If you know tell us

Your habit of trolling is really working against you.

KnownUnknown:
That's your problem.



Why? Because it's nonsense.



If majority experience NDE or OBEs spontaneously, there should be a minority who experience OBE willfully. Maybe the OBE started spontaneously with all of them, and a minority can exercise their will after they find themselves outside their body.



This statement is bullshit that appears to be a coherent sentence but says absolutely nothing.



No, you won't find them because they don't exist.



Sure.



You wait, just don't hold your breath.

Well, everything you have said is based on what you know. And what do you really know?

Your responses is from what you think and not based on facts of what is currently known.

If you think you know all the facts concerning the phenomena and what causes it, then please answer these questions.

1, If it is dreams as you say, then how do you explain people like me who have had the experience in full waking consciousness to know and see things that is actually "there" ;veridical vision.
I hope you know what veridical vision is. Scientist investigating the phenomena have confirmed people have veridical vision, and its a mystery to them, hence they can't completely rule out NDEs as dreams.

2, who or what being is having to experience the mind tricks, as you described it, during this unconscious state when there's no evidence of the activation of neural mechanism that can results in lucid dream . In other words who or what is having the conscious vivid NDE experience in a period of unconsciousness .

These are the questions scientist are battling to answer, but it seems you have all the answers from the confidence you have been displaying.

So, please provide the scientific explanations .

FYI, there are tips and techniques on the net f you can search for them to experience OBEs consciously to demonstrate it for yourself. There's a quick method you can use also if you have the boldness to try it out.

Below is link done using a individual who can expand their consciousness through imagination or thoughts which are the things that results in having the experience. It contain some heady stuff and it's a long read.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00070/full#B7

KnownUnknown:
Here's Parnia from 2008. Safe to say, NONE of the NDEs were able to identify the pictures.


"These observations have raised the intriguing – and controversial – possibility that the mind and consciousness may continue functioning after we have reached the point of death and the brain has shut down.
While an absolute impossibility to many scientists, for those who have experienced them and their respective doctors they are real. The key for science is to determine whether these experiences are illusions or whether they are real.
During AWARE, investigators will place images strategically in hospital bays, such that they will only be visible by looking down from the ceiling and nowhere else.
If after 36 months, hundreds of patients report being “out of body” yet no one can report seeing the images, then we must consider these reports to be nothing more than illusions.
If on the other hand there are hundreds of positive reports, then we will have to redefine our understanding of the mind and brain during clinical death.
For now though, only time will tell what the AWARE study will possibly reveal about our beginnings and our inevitable end."

Please let's behave like adults and no more insults.


The experiment may not succeed in achieving its goal and this is why.

Majority of people having NDEs or OBEs experience it spontaneously, meaning that they don't have control over the experience.

Whatever happens outside the body is controlled by the strongest memories that grabs ones attention and that is what the person will drawn in to experience was consciousness expands outside the body

The best subjects for the experiment will be those who can do it at will and have control over what they experience. But such persons are rare to find, and from what I know they may not be willing to participate in what they would regard as a mundane exercise.

I have bookmarked a study group report that succeeded in using just one person who is able to to OBE at will. I will search and paste the link

For Now, let's wait the report for Aware11 and see if they have achieved more success than the first phase.

KnownUnknown:
What's there to be embarrassed about? You need to stop projecting.
What I posted and everything you've posted point to brain activity, no matter how limited, being responsible for NDE/RDE. You are the one who thinks there is something more going on and have failed over countless exchanges on this thread to prove your position is more than mumbo jumbo.,

This very Simple. The study report you brought claimed that certain neural mechanism is responsible for NDEs experience.. That was the reason you're were masturbating on it that it's lucid dreams,mind tricks.

But new studies done to observe directly what goes on in the brain when people are having the experiemce didn't identify such neural mechanism causing it. .Only electrical charges was observed during this period and rhat is not the same as brain mechanism but effect of something going on that. is yet unknown.

I think the problem you have ,sorry to say this, is that you don't know that electrical charges is effect and can't be the cause if NDEs.

There's no observation of any neural mechanism activated during the period that can create such vivid imageries of NDEs in the head of anyone.
This is what they have said and I have posted a screen shot on this .

If you insist the electrical charges is cause, then explain how this is scientifically possible to create the NDE. Simple matter.

It seems you don't want to let go of what you took from the study report which claimed that NDEs are lucid dreams.
Current findings says it is not true.

There are comment sections on those blogs I posted. Go there are express your opinion of what you think or contact the study group that they are wrong about their conclusion.

Then explain to them how electrical charges can cause NDEs because that is the only thing observed.

From.a scientific point of view the cause is not really known ,and I won't be tempted to replace that with my own opinion anymore if you expect me to do that.

It is left for anyone to make of it what they want to make of it until everything is unraveled scientifically..
Below is what I earlier posted . Please read it again and understand the issue at hand. It's not what you think.

KnownUnknown:
More nonsense.
The experiment should be easy. Just tell them to go to a specified room when they are in their NDE or OBE or any other nonsense state, and enumerate or describe the contents of the room.

Until then you’re NDEs, OBEs, are as real as dreams and just like dreams, it’s all in your head.
You must have missed this when you posted an earlier screenshot

PARNIA: As the heart stops and we die, the brain is flatlined and nonfunctional. However, using brain electrical monitoring, there is growing evidence that in this state (as people pass away), there are markers of activity (beta, delta, and sometimes gamma waves) that emerge for a very short period.


And this statement below from your proof is just Parnia’s unfounded opinion including “aspects of reality”, “the totality of of person’ as conscious experience”, etc. It is clear that the brain creating hallucination and illusion while his claims about “aspects of reality” at the height of bullshfit.

So, in short, it is not so much that the brain is creating these experiences as a hallucination or illusion but rather than the brain is enabling access to aspects of reality and a person’s own consciousness, including the totality of a person’s conscious experiences throughout the entirety of their lives, real and correct memories of their own interactions with others in life and the meaning of those actions, thoughts, and intentions.

And is the activity linked with NDEs or responsible for it? No

They never said so.

See ,I have not accepted anytthing they did as perfect. You don't seem to understand this.

It is to compare your nonsense. Make what you want to make of it. Is your business.

The reason I brought this in has been achieved

Their process is on going not conclusive yet, but yours is concluded and it is trash

Modified. You said they should tell people who may not know if they will experience OBEs or NDEss to go into a room and describe something? Do you even know the difference between something happening spontaneously and at will?

You certainly don't know.

KnownUnknown:
In May, Parnia led a multidisciplinary team of national and international leaders who published the first peer-reviewed consensus guidelines for the scientific study of recalled death experiences. The published guidelines end with this statement: “Although systematic studies have not been able to absolutely prove the reality or meaning of patients’ experiences and claims of awareness in relation to death, it has been impossible to disclaim them either.”

Lmao, oh yeah? It’s not impossible to disclaim you disingenuous clown. It’s all your head.

See how you just embarrassed yourself. Show me where I emphatically stated anything has been proven scientifically.
I referenced the study as a comparison for the trash you brought because you don't know what makes study a. valid. Or you want to pretend?

Now, you want to turn it around as if I said it is proven. But at least it said it can't be proven scientifically, and if you understand science very well you should know what that means

When something is not proven scientifically it means either of this; it may be true or not true, but we don't know

Besides, you just picked what to troll on and skipped the below from the others.The article you sheepishly swallowed claim without evidence that brains mechanism can still function to produce the vivid imageries associated with NDEs.

This not the first time you have brought in trash study that are invalid

KnownUnknown:
The only people deceiving the public are those selling stories about NDE and OBE experience. The “current approach” looks like nonsense or maybe your screenshot didn’t provide enough information. What types of scientists are doing these studies?

“ Emergency Department or Research
staff will be alerted to cardiac arrest and
will attend with portable brain oxygen
monitoring devices and a tablet which
will display visual images upwards
above the patient as resuscitation is
taking place.”

Seriously?

After that fanciful activity, the whole thing still hinges on whatever fantasy the subject wants, which will be wholly dependent on what they already know or believe.

“Survivors will then be followed up and with their
consent will have in-depth, audio
recorded interviews.”

OK, sorry I have not shared any link.

The project is tagged AWARE, Awarenesses Resuscitation studies, A collaboration between top scientist from different parts of the world. Doctors ,nurses and other health practitioners in hundreds of hospitals spread across Europe are involved too. It is a massive project, not something done by an individual scientists working alone.

The first phase ,AWAERE1 started in 2014 has ended you can search for the report by doing a simple Google check with the key word, AWARE1. However, the first phrase didn't meet with much success.
.It is the second one ,AWARE11, that has raised some hope from the teasers already released.

You don't need to parody anything now until you get the full report, and also know about the strict methodology used in the study.

They are not set out to confirm any assumptions. The rigorous methods used has eliminated any form of researchers bias.

https://awareofaware.co/2022/05/08/aware-ii-15-percent-of-people-had-reds/

https://neo.life/2022/08/your-brain-at-the-moment-of-death/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/05/07/near-death-experiences-will-studied-seriously-number-people/

https://awareofaware.co/2020/10/17/more-data-from-aware-ii-news-on-aware-iii-and-my-book/

I hope you take the time read the articles from the above links.

KnownUnknown:
Do you still have these spontaneous experiences?

Are these spontaneous experiences limited to your body’s location?

Can your “OBE body” view things that are not in your body’s vicinity?

Can your “OBE Body” travel? If yes, how far?

The questions you're asking have their answers in what I already wrote. Please take time to read them again.

I. expect you to know the difference between spontaneous and at will.

And supposing, anyone can do what you're asking you expect them to let you know about it, and then you ask them to fly to your house to confirm what you're doing right now?

Your thoughts are still influenced by all the mumbo jumbo nonsense you have heard.

OBEs is expansion of consciousness, and what is experienced after that depends on the level of awareness of the individual.

It is not special powers but natural phenomena which everyone experiences in varying degrees.

Having a strong sense of knowingness about something going on somewhere far from you that you later confirm to be true, means your consciousness has expanded to perceive things outside of your body.

People think if they don't experience the usual dramatic NDEs or OBEs of leaving the body, then they have not experienced it. Not true.

Scientists are confirming that everyone do have the experience, but can't consciousness recall their experiences due to psychological or biological reasons.

My approach to the phenomena is mostly from a scientific point of view,so don't place me in the category of those who want to show they can demonstrate they have super powers.

Any further questions similar to the ones you asked above will be ignored.

Below is an uncommon OBEs experience. I can confirm this because I was having almost the same kind of OBEs spontaneously while growing even till adulthood. Singing in the choir, and the next thing ,I am watching my body singing. Walking home, and the next I am observing my body from up below. Those experiences were the things that pushed me to investigate the phenomena everywhere; esoteric groups, sciences reading everything I could lay my hands..

I have leant a lot ,and the most important I learnt is that no group has the complete answer, science or others, but by combining all that I learnt from everywhere I have to a certain extent being able to put the different piece of the puzzle together to create a near perfect picture behind the reasons I had those experiences in the past.

Below is brief description of current approach used in investigating NDEs. Nothing like creating fake evidence, simulation, to deceive the public

KnownUnknown:
https://www.livescience.com/19106-death-experiences-lucid-dreams.html

Nelson said conclusions from the research should be "cautiously drawn" until the findings pass the peer-review process, but they are nonetheless well-aligned with prior research on NDEs. "Lucid dreaming can be conditioned and bears an uncanny similarity to near-death," Nelson told Life's Little Mysteries. "Indeed, Raduga's study demonstrates the similarity of near-death and lucid dreaming. Evidence from many sources converges to support that lucid dreaming and near-death use similar brain mechanisms but in different circumstances."

I have the time to now respond to the report in the link you shared, but before doing so ,I would like to react to the above conclusion you lifted from it.

At first glance, it appears to have something in
it to suggest that the controversy around NDEs or OBEs has been settled, but after going through the full report, I didn't find anything that should warrant the conclusion made, but claims arrived at through mere speculation.



Lucid dreams and NDEs are subjective experiences, but different kind of subjective experiences. Artificial sweetener and honey can't be compared to be the same thing. The reaction we get from either substances in our taste buds and how our brains react to the different sweet experiences can't be exactly the same..

Lucid dreams can be conditioned, but NDEs happen spontaneously and in circumtances that are unique, so we can't say they use the same brain mechanism and not a different one. The researchers and the study participants have never had NDEs before, so how were they able to make the comparison to be sure it is the same. experience. Did they measure the light in the heads of the subjects used in the experiment to be sure it is of the same intensity? How did they judge that how the subject felt is exactly the same as those who have experienced it directly. Most people who experience NDEs usually say the experience is had to describe, but the conditioned subjects in the experiment find it very easy to describe their experience suggesting it can't be the same as the one that occur naturally.

The claim that lucid dreams and NDEs uses the same brain mechanism s misleading information. It is for the uninformed to swallow. There's no scientific evidence anywhere other than the assumption that they both uses the same brain mechanism. Those who experience NDEs are mostly those whose brains are nonfunctional. So how can a brain in such a condition still function to produce the vivid imageries associated with NDEs?

These question is what scientist who are
currently engaged in a massive study into the phenomena are trying to figure out, yet the study which was done around 2012 that is not published in any peer review journal, despite high hopes ,it would,, is stating something not scientifically correct or not proven yet.

Now ,let's get into the study proper to see if it can pass the test

As at the time the study was conducted, 2012, scientist investigating NDEs didn't have much data to work with. They rely only on the unverified stories of people who claim to have had the experience to carried out their investigation.. Also ,not much was known, unlike now, about dreams , especially lucid dreams.

So hampered by the above limitations the study group, proceeded to conduct an experiment to know the cause of the phenomena. The procees was flawed from the start by the assumption that NDEs is created by the brain and must be hallucination.

So with this wrong assumption influencing the whole process, they gathered 20 subjects, conditioned them to experience in their dreams the popular stories about NDEs: floating towards a brightlight, seeing dead relatives and experiencing a feeling of great love and so on, not being aware that not everyone has the same NDEs experiences .

After the experiment ,with the observation made in the brains of their conditioned subjects, they then used the results to speculate that the same brain mechanism must be responsible in the brains of those who claim to have had direct NDEs.

This honestly is horribly wrong. Truths in the sciences are arrived at through a direct observation or demonstration of natural phenomena. You don't speculate.

NDEs, in the clinically dead, as I already mentioned occurs mostly when the brains is in a nonfunctional state or reduced activity, so how were they able to know ,without direct observation, the exact brain mechanism involved in those having the experience spontaneously?. They just use the results from their experiment to speculate that's all.

Another. error in the study is the use of healthy people who have never had the experience in a false setting that is different from the usual natural settings; hospital wards, emergency wards, and those under the care of first responders., from where people have reported experiencing it. NDEs is not a regular occurrence outside its natural settings In fact it hardly happens.. OBEs can happen anywhere, but not NDEs.

I guess the researchers just like most people don't know the difference between the two terms, OBEs are NDEs and what they signify. They're used interchangeably by most people to mean the same thing, but they don't mean the same. OBEs is the general term which covers all kinds of experience when consciousness is said to operate outside the body, while NDEs is a type of OBEs that mostly happen to people having a traumatic experience; the clinically dead or those facing death such as drowning etc.

So the use of healthy subjects who never had the experience in investigating NDEs can be likened to using non athletes in a non sporting environment to determine the cardiorespiratory level of long distance runners. Very wrong move.

Modern research into the phenomena no longer make use of this method of simulating NDEs in people outside its natural settings in order to make sense of it .Scientist, unlike in the past , now realize that it is not enough to grasp all of the complexities involved in the phenomena.

So , what they do now is to go to where it is happening live; emergency wards, armed with highly sophisticated modern brain scanners and other devices to capture what goes on in the brains of people having the experience. They also use the opportunity to interview anyone willing to share their experience, to get a first hand report. This has been very helpful and they now know much more than before.

NDEs based on current findings is now called EVA , External visual awareness. They said the change of name is because the term NDEs or OBEs is not scientific enough to describe all they have found out about the phenomana. OBEs or NDEs limit the experience to just one kind of experience It also create the impression in people's mind of another body ,not seen, operating outside the body. Scientist says they have not seen any evidence of a body floating outside, but only evidence that consciousness can function outside the body. This to me is correct. There's no real tangible body floating outside.

What people perceive as a body floating out is an illusion created by how the mind perceive the expansion of consciousness that is occurring during that period. . In fact the so called hallucination experienced during this period is not we think it is . It is triggered by inner an experiences going on; consciousness expanding outside the body. It is just like wet dreams which corresponds to physiological process going on in the body that leads to real ejaculation. The dream is illusion, but what happens within our body . is real.



Again, another major error, is the study group focusing only on NDEs that appears hallucinatory while avoiding the ones that come with veridical vision; where the person experiencing NDEs is able to perceive directly from outside their bodies, what doctors and nurses are doing to revive it, something that should not happen given what is known in the sciences about how the human brain work; consciousness is not suppose to operate outside the body it is believed.

This particular kind of NDEs with veridical vision, is the major reason, scientists a now fully interested in investigating the phenomena. The study group in the report never succeeded in replicating this kind of NDEs . They avoided it ,I believe, because they realize it would put paid to what they want to establish that NDEs are supernatural claims and hallucination, which is not untrue, but not completely true.

The misconception of thinking that NDEs are supernatural claims is because of what religious people say about it. They don't really understand it and are usually excited to use it to validate their religious beliefs of heaven and hell as being real .

The popular kind of NDEs of seeing a bright night in a tunnel or the dead, is not wholly hallucinatory as people think. What has happened is that once consciousness expands beyond the body, it isno longer under the grip of the brain, it has the freedom to experience as real any memories contained within it, that is ,if it thinks of anything, it sees it immediately just like we experience in dreams. It doesn't mean it is dreaming during this period as it is still possible to see things that are "there". Those who don't have such expectations of seeing heaven or hell won't experience it, but usually have a direct perception of things from outside their body. However, not everyone remembers their experiences due to physiological or biological reason according to what scientist are finding out.

Finally,the report also contain a misleading information that OBEs or NDEs is caused by brain damage or psychosis. But this is not true
Healthy people have experienced the phenomena.The errors I have highlighted from the report is also found in most other study done before now to investigate the phenomena.. They're filled with conjectures and written in mostly tentative language, "it is likely that" it may be possible" etc. Meaning they're not sure of anything. But it is swallowed becuse a top scientist has written it ,so he should know better.

So ,you can see that you brought a very weak study that is shoddily done as prove that the phenomena is explained.It is actually garbage in and garbage out to confirm their assumption. Very disappointing I must say.

Here below is a snippet of how things are been done correctly. It involves scientist from different parts of the world working together to unravel NDEs. Thousands of hospitals, doctors and nurses are also involved in the investigation. It started in2014. The first phase ended with little success. The second phrase has also ended with the report soon to released.

Teasers from the report already released suggest surprises .

budaatum:
Yuk, to common sense. What we are discussing here requires sense that is far from common, but can you see how I am not just accepting everything you are trying to put in my head?

I must be a top scientist!

It's your choice whatever you choose to accept. so don't accuse me of trying to put anything into your head. I don't expect everyone to accept whatever I present. Those who see something in anything I present may want to investigate it further ,but if you don't why wasting your time and energy resisting my comments?

The worst part is that you don't even take your time to read anything as most of your replies have shown. It is not only me you have done this to which I have noticed. A beg,oga Buda forget this matter until you're interested in a sincere conversation.



Before I forget, congratulations if you see yourself as a top scientist,but I think its all in your head because you have not demonstrated anything tangible for anyone to consider you as one.

Where are the scientific articles written and research you have conducted about anything?

When you're really interested in what I know and how I have come to know it I will know and be more willing to engage you. For now, I tell you, I don tire for your mata.

Happy Sunday.

budaatum:
This is not a reason for then assuming that everything scientists imagine happening in the future will become a reality, hence your "some".

And the other extreme is that a humanbeing who lives by the free reign of their imaginative faculty better be a creative artist or they might end up eating imaginary food. Neither extreme is good for successful living, I would think.

That's where common sense is needed. Top scientists are not devoid of common sense. They know how to edit whatever thoughts come into their heads and not just accept everything.

budaatum:
Neither of us know everything triple, and how consciousness operates, or even what it means to be conscious, is one thing no one can possibly know everything about. But some things are fundamentally clear. Dead things are not conscious.

As for my own consciousness, it develops and grows daily, as I find things around and inside me that I have hitherto been unconsciousness of. But if I am aware of something, I, personally am conscious of that thing, though as you say, to what extent, is debatable.

P.s. Nairaland is a wonderful tool for growing ones consciousness, especially of oneself. One can go back and read one's past posts and see how conscious one was and is now.

The question I asked was simple, How conscious are you of your own consciousness

Everyone is not operating at the same level of awareness and one's level of awareness is determined both by the knowledge one has acquired and the experience had.

So what do we all know and what have we all experienced together each time you begin a statement with the word, we .......?

Is it not that you're speaking from what you know and have experienced, and from those of others whose knowledge and experienced you subscribed to, and using it to interpret what others know that you don't know?

If you think you know more than me, I dont claim to know it all, please share what you know .I am open to learn from anyone.

So far on this thread you're amongst those who have not shared their own thoughts concerning the OP; what is consciousness and where has it emerged from?. Let's hear your own thoughts too. State the facts about the human consciousness as you know and understand it.



I am not forcing anything one anyone, but sharing knowledge that I have. If you can't agree. with it for any reason, then you are free to stick with what you know as long as it's working for you and makes you understand yourself better.

budaatum:
Actually, you made a claim without backing it up with anything. You never even claimed your consciousness operated outside your own body before making said claim.

No triple. My consciousness, as in my ability to be conscious, has not ever operated outside my body, not even when I was experiencing near death.

My consciousness is connected to the functions of my body so it can not operate outside my body just as the engine of a car can not get you anywhere if it is detached from the body of wheels and petrol tank and steering wheel and driver with a brain to direct it.

The question you should asl yourrself is ,what do you know about how your consciousness operates?

Do you know everything?
You can be aware of something, but not fully conscious of it.
So tell me how are you sure you're fully conscious of your consciousness?

budaatum:
Pigs will fly someday because it's a possibility.

Not everything scientist imagined in the past would happen in the future has happened.. But some have become a reality.

A humanbeing that lacks the capacity to give free rien to his imaginative faculty would struggle to succeed anywhere.

budaatum:
The driver, who is a human being with a brain, can not be put together with the car such that the human brain becomes the car's brain.

It appears it is difficult for you to consider things from the position of another

I have argued before now that consciousness has not emerged from matter and I still stick with that
Your response up there doesn't reflect correctly anything I have said


The analogy of the car,though not perfect, is simple to understand .The car and its engine is not what has emerged the driver inside it

So what are you talking about?

And you also think that any normal person would argue that a human brain can become the brain of a car.

A human being and a car are not the same entity. A human being can still function without car, but a car requires a human being to make it move even if driverless

budaatum:
No I do not want to see it first, triple, I just do not accept that everything conceived in a mind is currently possible. And the article you posted shows how unscientific some scientist can be.

Even I can read your mind if I have a good idea of what your brain activity looks like when you are thinking something, and I do not need a scan to spot it. I just give you a questionnaire asking what you are thinking and then present it to you as your mind read. Its what scammers do.

I used to the word, possibility, You don't know what that means?

Who is to say what is possible or not possible on the future? You?

budaatum:
This is absolute rubbish, triple, or you would post links to their stories that were verified.

I have on this same thread shared a link of a scientist involved in such research, and he is not the only one. The evidence they have gathered has been impressive, and it is becoming overwhelming for other scientist not to noticed. It's just a matter of time before they start looking into it.

Some of the things proven in the sciences exist first as rumors .You should always consider this before you dismiss anything as rubbish

In this age of the Internet you can get access to information that may be of help in your quest for the truth. I can't spoonfed your.

Besides you can do your own research. I already mentioned that'.You have boasted on this thread that you can employ the scientific method, so use that knowledge to know what is going on around you amongst the people you live it

budaatum:
How would you know? Have you had a direct experience of your consciousness operating outside your body?

You should answer the question first before throwing it back at me.

You made a claim about something without providing any reason to back it up. So I needed to ask you if you had had any experience of your consciousness operating outside your body to be sure of what you're saying.

nstead of giving and simple yes or no, you just want to complicate things by throwing it back at me. I need an answer from you first before I can answer yours.

budaatum:
Why "Not a good thing really" if "some persons are gifted with the ability"?.

Not everyone will abuse it
It is for their protection and those around them. Those who have the gift and abuse it ,with time will loose it.

I specifically went searching for the following in the article you posted:


Basically, they must know what's on my mind in order to be able to read my mind.

Scammers must also be provided with one's personal information before they can 'read' one's mind, even with a scanner.

If you had taken the time to read and understand why I referenced the article you would have not gone searching for that alone.

The main reason for that link is let us know the possibility ,in the future ,of directly knowing through more sophisticated brain scanner what is in ones mind . Science is progressive. Scientist continue to build on what has already been invented.

The technology we all enjoy today is something our primitive forbears would never had imagined possible.
Some years back video calls was only seen in science fiction movies, but today they are reality in our lives.

Everything scientists have invented was first conceived has a idea through imagination before it was brought to fruition.
You obviously don't think this way from some of your comments. You want to see it first before you accept it is possible. That kind of thinking won't lead to any kind of progress in the sciences or elsewhere

budaatum:
It is simple to understand but it is definitely not true that "Outside the physical body it can operate unhindered".

How would you know? Have you had a direct experience of your consciousness operating outside your body ?

Take your car engine. It does not in any way "act as the brain" and it can not walk freely. You car moves under the specific direction of the brain of the driver otherwise it remains in park, non-operated and hindered by its lack of a brain.

I think the point made using the car analogy is lost on you. I am not just referring to the car alone but together with the driver.

Every environment has its limitations
While driving a car one is limited by the unique environment of the car. You can't be driving your car and at the same time walking inside of it to get to your destination. That's impossible. Outside the car ,one is free to walk to their destination .This my point .

budaatum:
You were doing so well until the above. There is no way to check if memories contained in mind is retained at death.

I think the correct thing you should have said is that there's no way that you know of to check
You can't speak for everyone as you don't know what others know that you don't know.

Sigh! Or should I say, pity such people do not write history books so their facts could be checked.

Some who were able to recall a previous life have had their stories verified . A little search on the net should bring you in contact with those or you conduct your own research by finding out if anyone around you can recall their previous life. You may get a confirmation if you succeed with it

LordReed:
If you read the report you'd have seen that the authors think NDEs are indicative of something transcendent so no that is not why I linked it. I linked it so that you can example to me how in your view a blind person can have OBEs or NDEs if they can't see. Does their consciousness or mind or whatever it is that leaves the body have eyes or how does it perceive the environment? A blind person cannot see the environment but if the OBE or NDE were actually real then they should be able to see the environment right? I am asking because that is not what is in evidence from this report.

If you go back to read what I replied you first, you will come across how it is possible for the blind to see outside the body, with what is seen transmitted to the physical brain through the pineal gland situated in the cent re of one's head

One sees the way we 'see' while dreaming. We don't see or hear with our physical eyes or hear while dreaming.
.

Honestly, if you have not experience this sort of thing directly, no amout of explanation would do.You will only try make sense of it from a physical perspective and not fully understanding much

If you study your dreams you could make some sense of how one sees outside the body

It needs to be experience than to talk about it. You're not able to know exactly how one sees without having the experience directly. One is not perceiving through the brain outside of the body


Besides, those who have had this experience don't check to see any eyes

Maybe when you have your own experience, you can check if you have one
Not everyone has the same experience of themselves outside their bodies

Some see an image of themselves similar to their their own physical body which is not 'real', others experience themselves as a globe of brilliant white light or surrounded by it

I mentioned before that it is not common for those born blind to see. I said so based what I confirmed to be true report and besides not everyone is willing to share their experience. So it may be common and I cannot deny this

I ignore the ones that are a product of hallucination, but it is still NDE with the content not corresponding to objective reality

LordReed:
Why would a diseased mind produce a diseased body, what's the link if the mind is just some intangible thing nor is it located in body?

Not located in the sense I have used it simply means it's actual location can be regarded as mental at this point and not in a physical space that can be viewed with the naked human eyes or any know instrumentation. But it is there.

It is possible to 'see' thought forms which forms mind. Some persons are gifted with the ability to view, not with the naked eyes, what you're thinking and able to predict your next move.

When we sleep , we see thoughts as pictures, but it is not possible to see this same pictures by an external.observer using a brain scanner.

We know that what we sometimes dream about can trigger certain responses in our brains which forces our bodies to respond
by producing a corresponding effect which matches what we are dreaming about even we dont consider those experiences as real.Wet dreams for instance

Yes ,science says the brain create these imageries, but as it ever been seen by an external observal other than the person dreaming? Not at all.

However, the closest that we can see using highly sophisticated modern brain scanners, are thought energy, not pictures, issuing forth from the visible human brain of someone engaged in thinking, with what is seen still subjected to interpretation to determine what exactly the person is seeing in their heads.

You can go online to research this. I am surprised that you have not brought this up or maybe you don't know about it
It should be your strongest point in arguing that matter is responsible for consciousness. But nothing is conclusive yet. Scientist are still not sure



So with this breakthrough in the sciences, there's hope that in the future, scientist would improve on what they have invented and develop far more superior scanners that can see thoughforms as pictures. By then a lot of things that goes on within the human being would be clearly revealed just like we have scanners these days to view babies in the womb, something that wasn't possible in the past.

But there's a raging controversy in certain quarters that neuroscientists should not proceed further for ethical reasons as it would mean that in the future unscrupulous individuals in possession of such scanners can view in pictures what exactly you're dreaming or thinking about and predict your next move

Not a good thing really.

If this becomes a reality someday what do you think it would signify?

For me I would mean that what we have always know about thoughtforms interacting with brains to sometimes create effects is actually true, but because it can't be observed at the moment by everyone. it is not accepted to be true.

Scientists rely on what can be observed or demonstrated to draw inferences from.What they can currently see is the brain and nothing else.

But as I have mentioned before there are alternative methods by which on can peer further into reality to see things correctly as they're ,and know exactly what is going on within ourselves and those of others around us


Those who have used those alternative methods know better than what everyone else know currently, but are not in a position tprovide evidence that will acceptable to anyone in the main body of science.

In the end all will be revealed and we then know the actual truth about the human being.

Modified. Read about modern brain scanners that can read ones intention through the link below and let me know what you tbink


https://www.theguardian.com/science/2007/feb/09/neuroscience.ethicsofscience