ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 23rd January 2020, 06:02 PM   #1
derem
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 14
Strange NDE

Found a very strange NDE case that I haven’t really seen tackled anywhere. I don’t personally feel NDE’s are super compelling because of cross cultural differences and that the “Greyson” scale basically seems to push NDEs towards a certain themes vs seeing if NDEs are different, and I think at the very most a believer might be able to argue that some are not hallucinations (some of them seem to think all NDEs brain explanations have been debunked, but it’s prolly a combination of multiple elements, considering psychedelics can all give a very similar effect to an NDE)

Originally I thought the Pam reynold case was one of the most convincing but seeing fls debate it and seeing how the researchers for the case (who allegedly contacted the doctors) weren’t exactly perfect unbiased researchers, I think there’s reasonable doubt to say it’s definitely not full proof


But I found another NDE case by lynnclaire Dennis which, somewhat seems compelling but also seems really woo and crazyland, and I don’t know how to explain.

The majority of the NDE is pretty standard stuff, but then she allegedly saw a pattern in her NDE that had some crazy mathematical significance. What’s compelling is that after showing this pattern to a few professors, some of them a bit distinguished like Louis Kauffman (obviously no Stephen hawking but not an idiot either), they’ve been studying it for awhile

Eventually they made a thing called the mereon matrix in a book (she released multiple books, but she + other professors made a book called the mereon matrix)

Normally I’d write it off as BS, and the pattern itself is hardly anything mind boggling (it’s some weird knot theory thing). but the fact that it had been researched by a bunch of professors makes it a bit odd, since I don’t see why they would study nonsense. It got published in a scientific journal called Elsevier, which isn’t the greatest iirc but more credible than a parapsychology journal (although sometimes crap gets filled in and thereve been scandals).

However, some of the points they make seem levels beyond levels of crazy, and it obviously hasn’t gained scientific acceptance or traction whatsoever, which is odd considering her near death experience made it seem her discovery was gonna be hugely important, despite it being relatively unknown still.

The main reason I find this compelling is that, to my knowledge this is the only NDE I know of where a person came back with “scientific knowledge”, although it’s been extremely exaggerated, and it seems to be backed up by at least a few credible researchers, and she hasn’t been caught in fraud yet.

In terms of things that make me doubt this story.

The timeline is a bit odd. NDE happens in a hot air balloon in 1987, allegedly pronounced dead and all that stuff, and either more NDE or just “dreams” in 1991 and 1993, but I’ve heard that she was pronounced dead at the hospital and revived, or that she was resuscitated by her husband. Also, 10 years is more than enough time to learn more about what she saw in terms in terms of learning about the science of it. Finally, her being the only person to bring back knowledge for an NDE (there was another guy that Kenneth Ring and PMH Atwater endorse, but he was proven to be a fraud and got sued a bunch) and for it to be something as strange and vague as it is is very questionable and might just be a remarkable coincidence (it’s not as if the shape is this absurd thing, it looks like a pretty typical drawing someone does when trying to make a cool shape, WHATS itneretsing is that the professors found it so compelling)

Finally, that mereon matrix theorem she and her researchers have spent so much time working on have gotten so little traction you can’t even find a sliver of it on Wikipedia, unless you look up the authors, then it shows up as a tidbit on their published works. I haven’t really found a critique on it because I don’t think anyone smart enough would slog their way through it, and obviously I’m not asking anyone to read it because it’s a lot and clearly didn’t leave a big impression to be influential

Just wondering if anyone knew about this or could debunk it more lol, it does make me feel uneasy altho it’s far from full proof.

Last edited by derem; 23rd January 2020 at 06:03 PM.
derem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 08:48 PM   #2
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,868
To quote Douglas Adam's bowl of petunias, "Oh no, not again". Again.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ead.php?t=7999
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2020, 11:08 PM   #3
derem
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
To quote Douglas Adam's bowl of petunias, "Oh no, not again". Again.
Huh? I know the Pam Reynolds NDE has been discussed here before but thatís not the one I was referring to
derem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 12:07 AM   #4
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,215
I found a web site devoted to the "Mereon Matrix" and found this gem of lucid explanation:

Quote:
Everything is made of the same stuff, stardust. Difference does not mean different. The fundamental nature of this whole system reveals how diversity is essential to unity, further validating the fact that you, your neighbour, and a stranger; a frog and the pond scum it swims in; a flawless diamond and a dirt encrusted rock are all connected. What makes everything unique? The vibration that informs its form.
It goes on at great length from there, but the vibe got so intense I had to like you know chill or something and I got the munchies and what was I talking about? Oh yea, the vibe. It's the vibe, man. It's like cosmic and tubular.

I think I ran into a web site that generates this stuff. Ah yes, the "New Age [autocensored word for bovine byproduct] Generator." Here we go...

Quote:
Nothing is impossible. This life is nothing short of a condensing quantum shift of archetypal science.Flow is a constant. The multiverse is aglow with electromagnetic resonance. Potentiality is the driver of love.
Although you may not realize it, you are astral.Today, science tells us that the essence of nature is growth. Intuition requires exploration. Consciousness consists of molecular structures of quantum energy.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 01:32 AM   #5
derem
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I found a web site devoted to the "Mereon Matrix" and found this gem of lucid explanation:

It goes on at great length from there, but the vibe got so intense I had to like you know chill or something and I got the munchies and what was I talking about? Oh yea, the vibe. It's the vibe, man. It's like cosmic and tubular.

I think I ran into a web site that generates this stuff. Ah yes, the "New Age [autocensored word for bovine byproduct] Generator." Here we go...
So the main reason Iím extremely confused

It does seem new agey and very BS filled, but whatís confusing is there seem to be legitimate professors (and at least one seemed fairly distinguished) in there, doing a bunch of math and I donít see anything from him endorsing any psi or supernatural stuff, although the nde girl certainly does.

However, none of what they say seems to have effected Mainstream science at all and thereís totally motivation for money, fraud, etc.
derem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 10:56 AM   #6
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,403
Originally Posted by derem View Post
So the main reason Iím extremely confused

It does seem new agey and very BS filled, but whatís confusing is there seem to be legitimate professors (and at least one seemed fairly distinguished) in there, doing a bunch of math and I donít see anything from him endorsing any psi or supernatural stuff, although the nde girl certainly does.

However, none of what they say seems to have effected Mainstream science at all and thereís totally motivation for money, fraud, etc.
I'd say you just gave the answer: there's the right motivation but for some reason, the scam never really took off.

Could be similar to why some illegal Multi-level Marketing scams take off and others flop.
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 11:50 AM   #7
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,905
Originally Posted by derem View Post
It does seem new agey and very BS filled, but what’s confusing is there seem to be legitimate professors (and at least one seemed fairly distinguished) in there, doing a bunch of math and I don’t see anything from him endorsing any psi or supernatural stuff, although the nde girl certainly does.
I had a sociology professor who was certain that reincarnation had been proved by science. (He wrote a book about it called You Cannot Die, by Ian Currie. He died a few years later. I wonder where he is now?)

Anyway, the first thing to check about a professor is what their training is, since it's very common for professors to have crazy ideas about specialties other than their own.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 12:54 PM   #8
carlitos
"mŠs divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,213
Crazy Professors - Jim Fetzer, Jerome Corsi, and Steven Jones have PhDs.

The Amazon blurb could have been written by that New Age text generator:

Quote:
Mereon is an approach to the unification of knowledge that relies on whole systems modelling. It is a scientific framework that charts the sequential, emergent growth process of systems. A dynamic structure, Mereon provides insight and a new approach to General Systems Theory and non-linear science. Mereon evolved through a new approach to polyhedral geometry and topology that is related to the dynamics of the polyhedra. It is related to a large number of systems, physical, mathematical, and philosophical. In linking these systems, Mereon provides access to new relationships among them and combines geometric and process thinking. This book provides the fundamentals of such connections for an ongoing search for order, directionality, and diversity that is found in this unity. It is written in clear language that manages to connect diverse disciplines and in doing so, makes a complex system easily accessible and understandable. It will be of interest to mathematicians, geneticists, and all those interested in researching unity in science and astrobiology.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 02:28 PM   #9
derem
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
I had a sociology professor who was certain that reincarnation had been proved by science. (He wrote a book about it called You Cannot Die, by Ian Currie. He died a few years later. I wonder where he is now?)

Anyway, the first thing to check about a professor is what their training is, since it's very common for professors to have crazy ideas about specialties other than their own.
While I do agree that the title professor doesnt mean theyre right at all, and that even distinguished professors can clearly be wrong, the kauffman guy seems fairly well respected in his field, although its not the most popular of fields, hes from the university of chicago btw
derem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 02:51 PM   #10
derem
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
I'd say you just gave the answer: there's the right motivation but for some reason, the scam never really took off.

Could be similar to why some illegal Multi-level Marketing scams take off and others flop.
So heres where im confused

Looking at the contents from the book they gave out on google, its more so that while some of it does seem pretty odd and new agey, some parts of it not written by the NDER doesnt seem to make these assumptions.

Now the validity of the math and even the non new agey conclusions and all that stuff can easily be called into question because of how little traction it has gained. Futhermore, this being essentially the only case of its kind, and the fact that she clearly did start learning about the field at the very latest after 1995 and possibly earlier, and that she wrote her book on it 10 years after her NDE

One other big thing is that the "shape" she created "from her nde" wasnt neccessairly anything crazy in terms of it being "oh how could she have gotten this knowledge anywhere else!" I mean 99% kf it (idk if this term is right) seems to be retrospective confabulation, she said she remembered seeing a shape in her first NDe and continued to try to remember it.

She also allegedly replied to a user called shen on the skeptic forum, and while she definately seems educated (seems, since idk anything about knot theory cuz who cares lol) in that field, she also seems cuckoo crazy and super defensive, and possibly just a liar in general (hasnt gotten a cheque in 27 years, wrote 5 books inbetween that time)

I guess my main thing is wondering how valid her "alleged visions" actually were in terms of their contributions to this "math theory" and how valid this "math theory" really is.

I guess its just since this is the only NDE that implies a scientific discovery has been discovered from it, although judging from reaction no scientific discovery seems to have been made (also theres a pretty strong chance the professor is just wrong lol)
derem is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 03:46 PM   #11
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 25,215
The figure in question appears to be a fairly routine geometrical knot. One could characterize it as two hearts conjoined with a mobius twist. Once a figure has been imagined, it's pretty easy to shoehorn all sorts of meaning and wisdom into it. Plenty of people, including plenty of charlatans, have managed to stuff the meaning of the life, the universe and everything into a figure. But let us set that aside and try to consider simply the question of whether initially seeing it was of any significance.

I would suggest that a person might have seen, imagined, drawn, or even invented such a figure at some time in life and re-saw it in a "NDE." Or, of course, among the zillions of such experiences recounted, even the honest ones, it seems hardly all that surprising that such a figure might emerge once. People have imagined and drawn interesting and pretty figures forever. Many figures of apparent mathematical significance can be generated without knowing beforehand what principles lie behind them. It's one of the great failings of those who read great depth into crop circles. There's a big gap, I think, between seeing the thing and presuming it has meaning.

While you are contemplating all this, I also suggest that you try dispassionately to look at the "mereon matrix" and try to imagine what, if anything, would change the theories involved, if, say, the curves on top and bottom were made into sharp angles, and the sharp angles on top and bottom were made into curves. How would it be different if it were proportioned differently? How significant is the actual shape of the matrix to the ideas overlaid on it, really? e.t.a. I will confess to ignoring the presumed math involved, but can you not imagine that another shape would result in an equally convincing pile of mathematics?
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)

Last edited by bruto; 24th January 2020 at 03:48 PM.
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2020, 04:39 PM   #12
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,403
Originally Posted by derem View Post
While I do agree that the title professor doesnt mean theyre right at all, and that even distinguished professors can clearly be wrong, the kauffman guy seems fairly well respected in his field, although its not the most popular of fields, hes from the university of chicago btw
Well this seems to be a classic case of appeal to authority. Yes, in many cases, a person's training, schooling, education, or experience has some impact but ultimately it all must fall upon evidence. They either have it or they don't. If they don't, then they should be honest about it and that's fine. It's okay to have opinions about things without evidence, but then there's no real reason to pay a huge amount of attention to it either.


Originally Posted by derem View Post
So heres where im confused

Looking at the contents from the book they gave out on google, its more so that while some of it does seem pretty odd and new agey, some parts of it not written by the NDER doesnt seem to make these assumptions.

Now the validity of the math and even the non new agey conclusions and all that stuff can easily be called into question because of how little traction it has gained. Futhermore, this being essentially the only case of its kind, and the fact that she clearly did start learning about the field at the very latest after 1995 and possibly earlier, and that she wrote her book on it 10 years after her NDE

One other big thing is that the "shape" she created "from her nde" wasnt neccessairly anything crazy in terms of it being "oh how could she have gotten this knowledge anywhere else!" I mean 99% kf it (idk if this term is right) seems to be retrospective confabulation, she said she remembered seeing a shape in her first NDe and continued to try to remember it.

She also allegedly replied to a user called shen on the skeptic forum, and while she definately seems educated (seems, since idk anything about knot theory cuz who cares lol) in that field, she also seems cuckoo crazy and super defensive, and possibly just a liar in general (hasnt gotten a cheque in 27 years, wrote 5 books inbetween that time)

I guess my main thing is wondering how valid her "alleged visions" actually were in terms of their contributions to this "math theory" and how valid this "math theory" really is.

I guess its just since this is the only NDE that implies a scientific discovery has been discovered from it, although judging from reaction no scientific discovery seems to have been made (also theres a pretty strong chance the professor is just wrong lol)
What is ultimately being concluded from all of this?

Something supernatural? "Life after death" is an oxymoron, so it can't be that, right?

Is it obtaining information through ways other than the normal human senses? By what mechanism is this information being obtained in that case? What is it that they're claiming, exactly? To be clear, I don't expect you to answer these questions but simply offering them as a way for you to continue to explore this area you're interested in.

If you're talking specifically about a mathematical theory, then it seems to me that the answers would be... mathematical in nature. There are many folks who post here, who claim that they have made some huge quantum mechanics breakthrough but have no real knowledge of quantum mechanics.
Me, I'm a maths dummy. So I can't comment specifically on any kind of mathematical claims if made in the language of mathematics. So, to go along with what bruto above is saying, one must examine the claims in that light.

Just understand that philosophy per se may be able to ask interesting questions but it takes scientific tools to arrive at any kind of truth value. Humanity has made huge strides in developing knowledge and tools in obtaining it, to the point that we can essentially conclude that magic, psionics, life after death, and such cannot exist.
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.