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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


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.
Tags nde , near death experience

Reply
Old 16th April 2006, 09:29 AM   #41
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Usual failure to think by Larsen. I did not claim Pam Reynolds had an NDE. Only one person did that and it was Pam Reynolds. Are you actually serious?
Ayup, Steve. In your own words:

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
What exactly do you want substantiated Claus? That she had the aneurysm, that she was clinically dead, that she had these visions of what are called near death experiences, that she lived to talk about it and did; that her case was investigated and written up by Michael Sabom, MD of Texas. The case was also investigated by psychiatrist Bruce Greyson, M.D. now Carlson Professor of Behavioral Sciences at the Univ of Virginia. Greyson considers this case the most evidential of all NDe accounts. And he has investigated many. He has developed the Greyson Scale for rating such experiences.

Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was flat, her brain-stem responses were
absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" near-death
experience based on an analysis of the events she recalled and when they actually ocurred.

Are you saying the Pam Reynolds case is a fabrication? Better tell Shermer that, he doesn't know and has commented on it, rather lamely and to no avail. Are you saying Reynolds is lying? Are you saying her doctors and others involved with the case were lying? Are you saying it never happened. I guess this kind of rebuttal of evidence occurs a lot around here.............and its not only beginning to get boring but to be a monumental waste of time discussing such cases as well. Why dont you all come back when you have something substantial to say.
You claimed that Pam Reynolds had an NDE, while her electroencephalogram was flat, her brain-stem responses were
absent, and no blood flowed through her brain.

Stop mucking about and explain how this is possible.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 10:04 AM   #42
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
It is, obviously, difficult to explain this to a person not familiar with the derivation of EEG signals and brain stem reflexes especially someone who thinks obtusely and has a personal axe to grind. First of all, I did not makle these claims. Others have and I credited them so stop saying I made "claims." I did not. I reported on them. You evidently are incapable of understanding the difference.

A flat EEG is not necessarily an EEG of a dead person. The EEG consists of 32 channels based on the placement of topographic electrodes using the International 10-20 system. The signals these capture is then transmitted to an amplifier. If the gain on the amplifier is cranked up enough you could get a wave from a canteloupe. If the gain is turned down sufficiently it could be flatline for a living person. My take is that Reynold's was flat-line but not dead. There are standardized gains for EEG but I did not see her EEG or her settings. You keep ignoring the concept that an NDE means "Near" death, not dead. We know the surgeons were operating on a bloodless brain, which is why they cooled her so the brain's need for oxygen could be diminished, render a safe field for them to remove her aneurysm and protect the brain tissue from permanent death. We do not know if blood flow is required as a prerequsiite to developing an NDE. As I said above, there are no studies in the literature which I could find (and if anyone knows of any I would be glad to have them presented here) which indicate that the functions ncessary to produce an NDE require the expenditure of energy induced by a normal or any level of metabolism or not. Perhaps it would be simpler to give a scenario: if you are sitting in a chair, not moving at all, how much additional energy would it require for you to see a light in front of you, hear a noise, to think or to form a recallable memory? If anyone knows the answer to this question, please let Claus know.

By the way, the quote above are not my words. Again you operate by misdirection and outright deception. You are making the assertion I made claims. I could not claim Pam Reynolds had an NDE, only she could make that claim.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 16th April 2006 at 10:10 AM.
SteveGrenard 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 16th April 2006, 10:09 AM   #43
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
It is, obviously, difficult to explain this to a person not familiar with the derivation of EEG signals and brain stem reflexes especially someone who thinks obtusely and has a personal axe to grind. First of all, I did not makle these claims. Others have and I credited them so stop saying I made "claims." I did not. I reported on them. You evidently are incapable of understanding the difference.

A flat EEG is not necessarily an EEG of a dead person. The EEG consists of 32 channels based on the placement of topographic electrodes using the International 10-20 system. The signals these capture is then transmitted to an amplifier. If the gain on the amplifier is cranked up enough you could get a wave from a canteloupe. If the gain is cranked down sufficiently it could be flatline for a living person. My take is that Reynold's was flat-line but not dead. You keep ignoring the concept that an NDE means "Near" death, not dead. We know the surgeons were operating on a bloodless brain, which is why they cooled her so the brain's need for oxygen could be diminished, render a safe field for them to remove her aneurysm and
protect the brain tissue from permanent death. We do not know if blood flow is required as a prerequsiite to developing an NDE. As I said above, there are no studies in the literature which I could find (and if anyone knows of any I would be glad to have them presented here) which indicate that the functions ncessary to produce an NDE require the expenditure of energy induced by a normal or any level of metabolism or not. Perhaps it would be simpler to give a scenario: if you are sitting in a chair, not moving at all, how much additional energy would it require for you to see a light in front of you, hear a noise, to think or to form a recallable memory? If anyone knows the answer to this question, please let Claus know.

By the way, the quote above are not my words. Again you operate by misdirection and outright deception. Those are your words. I could not claim Pam Reynolds had an NDE, only she could make that claim.
You are full of male bovine manure, Steve.

I quoted your words. You claimed that Pam Reynolds had an NDE while her electroencephalogram was flat, her brain-stem responses were absent, and no blood flowed through her brain.

Explain how this is possible.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 10:20 AM   #44
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
You are full of male bovine manure, Steve.

I quoted your words. You claimed that Pam Reynolds had an NDE while her electroencephalogram was flat, her brain-stem responses were absent, and no blood flowed through her brain.

Explain how this is possible.
Because you are a skilled, consummate liar Claus Liarson. Pam Reynold's made the claim. Others reported it including the circumstances. This is not the same as a claim. You are the one full of bull.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 16th April 2006 at 10:23 AM.
SteveGrenard 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 16th April 2006, 10:27 AM   #45
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,749
ETA to clarify- Responding to post 43.

Surely he just did. If the EEG gain was low enough, a flatline reading would be obtained.
I would suppose that the gain settings would be standardised for a "normal" sleeping brain, not one at low temperature.

As for the blood, it seems probable to me that there will be some stored oxygen in cells which will keep them operating after blood flow stops. Clearly, not for long- but again this might be extended (and probably slowed) by hypothermia.

Clearly if there was no celullar activity at all in a brain, it would be incapable of supporting any activity. That's tautologous. The conclusion in the case of Ms. Reynolds must therefore be that there was some activity (taking her claim of an NDE at face value).
This hardly seems worth disagreeing over- another possible cause of NDEs is presented. Interesting.
Can't we just leave it at that?
Soapy Sam 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 16th April 2006, 10:40 AM   #46
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Because you are a skilled, consummate liar Claus Liarson.
Oooh.... Same old Steve: Back to making fun of people's names, while providing absolutely no evidence of your claims.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Pam Reynold's made the claim. Others reported it including the circumstances. This is not the same as a claim. You are the one full of bull.
You made the claim, Steve. You argued in favor of a NDE happening.

If this is your way of weaseling out of your previous claim, so be it. Just another piece of evidence of your dishonesty.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 10:42 AM   #47
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Oooh.... Same old Steve: Back to making fun of people's names, while providing absolutely no evidence of your claims.



You made the claim, Steve. You argued in favor of a NDE happening.

If this is your way of weaseling out of your previous claim, so be it. Just another piece of evidence of your dishonesty.
Same old Claus. Called me a liar 4 times in three days and accused me having morbid fantasies and being full of bull-crap. You can dish it out but don't like it yourself do you bucko?
SteveGrenard 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 16th April 2006, 10:44 AM   #48
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Same old Claus. Called me a liar 4 times in three days and accused me having morbid fantasies and being full of bull-crap. You can dish it out but don't like it yourself do you bucko?
The difference is, I provide evidence. You merely squirm your way out of it.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 10:47 AM   #49
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,008
Quote:
The conclusion in the case of Ms. Reynolds must therefore be that there was some activity (taking her claim of an NDE at face value).
Or that the experience occurred before or after the transient "death", and simply appeared to happen "during" to her.
Either seem equally plausible to me, and we'll probably never know one way or another.
kellyb 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 16th April 2006, 11:02 AM   #50
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Or that the experience occurred before or after the transient "death", and simply appeared to happen "during" to her.
Either seem equally plausible to me, and we'll probably never know one way or another.
Absolutely plausible. We cannot and will never know at what point Reynolds perception of an NDE had ocurred. I said this somewhere above....it could've bene on the way down or way up if not at the nadir.

Quote:
Larson: You made the claim, Steve. You argued in favor of a NDE happening.

If this is your way of weaseling out of your previous claim, so be it. Just another piece of evidence of your dishonesty.

Absolutely I argued in favor of Reynolds' NDE happening since, well, it happened. We have her report of that. She is not a figment of Dr Sabom's imagination. She exists, she had a brain aneurysm, she had neurosurgery under profound hypothermia and on recovery reported the NDE. Why do you say she or her report did not occur? This is really being obtuse. Are you denying reality? You adopt the worn out tactic of denying something happened that happened just because you can't find an explanation for it. Reynold's claim was real. Her condition, surgery and hypothermia happened. Dr. Sabom and Dr Greyson both investigated and reported on it.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 16th April 2006 at 11:08 AM.
SteveGrenard 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 16th April 2006, 11:09 AM   #51
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Absolutely I argued in favor of Reynolds' NDE happening since, well, it happened. We have her report of that. She is not a figmment of Dr Sabom's imagination. She exists, she had a brain anueysm, she had neurosurgery under profound hypothermia and on recovery reported the NDE. Why do you say she or her report did not occur? This is really being obtuse. Are you denying reality?
I did not say that the report did not "occur". If by "occurring" you mean "being real", then you are, in fact, arguing that the NDE was real.

You are most confused, Steve.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 11:18 AM   #52
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,008
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
I did not say that the report did not "occur". If by "occurring" you mean "being real", then you are, in fact, arguing that the NDE was real.

You are most confused, Steve.
NDEs are real. They are experiences that happen near death.
We don't know that she totally "died" (I'm defining the death here as a total and complete cessation of any and all brain activity). IF she did, then the experience must have happened before or after the total loss of brain function.
Either/or.
kellyb 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 16th April 2006, 11:19 AM   #53
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
I did not say that the report did not "occur". If by "occurring" you mean "being real", then you are, in fact, arguing that the NDE was real.

You are most confused, Steve.
The report of the NDE is "real." Pam Reynolds is "real." Her experience was "real." What is it you don't understand about the meaning of this word. It is her published and well documented claim. It is not my claim. It is not Sabom or Greyson's claim. It was reported by Sabom first and later confirmed by Greyson. Are we having a language problem again? If you
think the claimant, Pam Reynolds is lying, so be it.
SteveGrenard 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 16th April 2006, 11:20 AM   #54
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
NDEs are real. They are experiences that happen near death.
We don't know that she totally "died" (I'm defining the death here as a total and complete cessation of any and all brain activity). IF she did, then the experience must have happened before or after the total loss of brain function.
Either/or.
And that's exactly what Steve claimed she was: Dead.
CFLarsen 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 16th April 2006, 11:35 AM   #55
trvlr2
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 832
Steve g--Who could say "when" this NDE occurred? I read the article, searched dreaming, found enough correlation beytween NDE and Lucid Dreaming to make me think that the experiences occur upon awakening...Couldn't pin down exactly how long in real time a dream may take,perhaps a few seconds? (consider the apparent "time dilation" which sometimes happens under stressful events).
In any event, NDE is a real phenomenon , at least as real as dreams. Maybe Larsen will have one, someday.
trvlr2 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 16th April 2006, 11:45 AM   #56
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by trvlr2 View Post
Steve g--Who could say "when" this NDE occurred? I read the article, searched dreaming, found enough correlation beytween NDE and Lucid Dreaming to make me think that the experiences occur upon awakening...Couldn't pin down exactly how long in real time a dream may take,perhaps a few seconds? (consider the apparent "time dilation" which sometimes happens under stressful events).
In any event, NDE is a real phenomenon , at least as real as dreams. Maybe Larsen will have one, someday.
Exactly. People dream shortly before waking up. These are called hypnogogic hallucinations. People also mentate and visualize shortly before going into deeper sleep. These are called hypnopompic hallucinations. After that people normally dream on a cycle of about every 90 to 100 minutes. If you sleep eight hours or 480 minutes, that's 4 to 5 times per night. People usually remember their dreams if they wake up from them, even if they arouse in the middle of the night from a dream.

If you equate REM sleep with dreaming, one REM period lasts anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes, occasionally longer, but you could have more than one dream during this time. The passage of time is certainly distorted or misperceived. It is not likely that a single dream is only a few seconds but may last several minutes at a minimum.

REM time duration and cycling is documented in the sleep lab with EEG (low voltage. mixed frequency), low EMG tone (sleep paralysis) and EOG (rapid eye movement called phasic or non-eye movement called tonic).
SteveGrenard 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 19th April 2006, 01:45 PM   #57
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
The report of the NDE is "real." Pam Reynolds is "real." Her experience was "real." What is it you don't understand about the meaning of this word. It is her published and well documented claim. It is not my claim. It is not Sabom or Greyson's claim. It was reported by Sabom first and later confirmed by Greyson. Are we having a language problem again? If you
think the claimant, Pam Reynolds is lying, so be it.
So, children's experiences of Santa Claus are "real". Way to go, Steve.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Exactly. People dream shortly before waking up. These are called hypnogogic hallucinations. People also mentate and visualize shortly before going into deeper sleep. These are called hypnopompic hallucinations.
Wrong.

Hypnogogic hallucinations occur when you fall asleep. Hypnopompic hallucinations occur just before you wake up.

Now I am really starting to doubt your education, Steve. Nobody with your claimed education can make such a mistake. It's equivalent to a geologist confusing stalagmites and stalactites.

You are either a fraud, or utterly incompetent. Given the evidence, most likely both.
CFLarsen 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 19th April 2006, 05:11 PM   #58
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Hypnogogic hallucinations in the context of this paper occur when you go into REM which is 90 minutes after you go to sleep and transition into REM or active sleep which is a latter stage of sleep between sleep and wakefulness. Most people wake up from REM which lasts anywhere from 10 to 20+ minutes per session. People also have 30 to 60 seconds of wake before lapsing into REM AS WELL, THUS MAKING THE OCURRENCE OF HYPNOGOGIC HALLUCINATIONS PRESENT IN A PERIOD WHERE YOU ARE TRANSITING FROM SLEEP TO WAKE TO REM TO WAKE. Hallucinations of the hypnogogic type occur on the onset of this phase of sleep. The definitions you give operate under normal circumstances but not in this context which is positing that REM intrusion is responsible for the NDE experience. I understand your confusion and sometimes I reply so quickly or I am rushed I do not explain it well. My apologies. In the morning, before awakening, people have a final prolonged REM period preceded by a
hypnogogic hallucination. I have seen these last an hour or more and sometimes much less so it is a matter of degree what you call them and when. But again, I understand the confusion.

The bottom line is that both these types of imagery are a virtually universal ocurrence and according to these researchers make a great deal of sense as the principal cause of so-called NDE experiences. I appreciate the fact you argue, using Pam Reynolds, that NDEs are due to other causes, and they may well be. But all causes could operate in different people under different circumstances. This is one that has been overlooked but I have to admit not by Randi as I found him referring to it in something he wrote some time ago but can't find it right now.

The following paper documents these variations. In our lab and talking even to people here I learned that people claim they have sleep paralysis (which is associated with imagery) when they wake up, and this
has to be when they wake up from REM which could be anytime during the night (4 ot 5 times about every 90 mins) including in the morning. As the following paper docuiments there seems to be little evidence SP occurs during the wakeful onset of REM sleep (SOREMP).

Quote:
Laboratory studies have also found that hypnagogic imagery and sleep paralysis can occur during sleep-onset REM periods (SOREMPs) and that isolated sleep paralysis is characterised by abundant alpha activity (Takeuchi, Miyasita, Sasaki, Inugami, & Fukuda, 1992; Takeuchi, Miyasita, Inugami, Sasaki, & Fukuda, 1994). SOREMPs have been associated with altered sleep schedules (Fukuda, 1994) which may predispose towards sleep paralysis (ASDA, 1990). Some consider REM sleep intrusions to be a necessary but not sufficient requirement for sleep paralysis (Takeuchi et al., 1992), though there is evidence to suggest that it is not inevitably associated with SOREMPs (see Ness, 1978). Although these SOREMP hallucinations are similar to other hypnagogic imagery, they seem to be more emotional and there is a greater awareness of the surroundings (Takeuchi et al., 1992, 1994).

http://www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/3549/pa_sp3.html

Are you saying children or adults who are given the experience of meeting someone dressed up like the mythical Santa Claus are not having an experience, that their experience is not real, that it is a hallcuination, a fake experience, a shared delusion among other children and their parents and caregivers present? Okay, if you think so.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 19th April 2006 at 05:26 PM.
SteveGrenard 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 19th April 2006, 06:01 PM   #59
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
It may help to understand that the pompic state simply means in a darkened, enclosed room which for these purposes means without the benefit of seeing. There is a specific EEG rhythm associated with being awake with the eyes closed: alpha. The gogic state implies visual, e.g. eyes open also with a specific EEG rhythm. The EEG rhythm of awake eyes open and stage 1 of sleep is the same. Stage 1 is sometimes called transitional sleep for this reason. When these states cross over during the night, especially in response to REM intrusion, the SkepDic's definitions
are not relevant anymore.
SteveGrenard 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 19th April 2006, 06:06 PM   #60
Jeff Corey
New York Skeptic
 
Jeff Corey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,714
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
..Hypnogogic hallucinations occur when you fall asleep. Hypnopompic hallucinations occur just before you wake up.

Now I am really starting to doubt your education, Steve. Nobody with your claimed education can make such a mistake. It's equivalent to a geologist confusing stalagmites and stalactites.

You are either a fraud, or utterly incompetent. Given the evidence, most likely both.
Beat me to it Claus. Once when a student asked how to tell the difference, I made up the mnemonic device, " G before P."
Jeff Corey 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 19th April 2006, 06:36 PM   #61
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Professor Corey:

Do you think children who are taken to see Santa Clause are not having an experience also? That they are delusional?

The difference between the gogic and pompic states in sleep are changing based on the realization of evidence from polysomnographic recording such as the authors from the OP citation point out with respect to both the arousals (to wakefulness) and REM intrusion accompanying them. G before P doesn't apply as it once did. You may want to review not only this paper but the subjects of alpha sleep, alpha intrusion and alpha REM, all of which are increasingly seen with increasing frequency and which also reverse the definitional status off gogic versus pompic hallucinatory ocurrences.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 19th April 2006 at 06:49 PM.
SteveGrenard 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 19th April 2006, 07:53 PM   #62
Jeff Corey
New York Skeptic
 
Jeff Corey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,714
Sorry, BUZZ!
That's the definition.
There will be a makeup test on Tuesday.
Jeff Corey 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 19th April 2006, 07:59 PM   #63
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by Jeff Corey View Post
Sorry, BUZZ!
That's the definition.
There will be a makeup test on Tuesday.
And for santa claus. Its a hallucination? Not a real experience for children taken to see "him"?
SteveGrenard 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 19th April 2006, 08:03 PM   #64
Jeff Corey
New York Skeptic
 
Jeff Corey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,714
What the hey does that have to do with anything?
Jeff Corey 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 19th April 2006, 11:15 PM   #65
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Hypnogogic hallucinations in the context of this paper occur when you go into REM which is 90 minutes after you go to sleep and transition into REM or active sleep which is a latter stage of sleep between sleep and wakefulness. Most people wake up from REM which lasts anywhere from 10 to 20+ minutes per session. People also have 30 to 60 seconds of wake before lapsing into REM AS WELL, THUS MAKING THE OCURRENCE OF HYPNOGOGIC HALLUCINATIONS PRESENT IN A PERIOD WHERE YOU ARE TRANSITING FROM SLEEP TO WAKE TO REM TO WAKE. Hallucinations of the hypnogogic type occur on the onset of this phase of sleep. The definitions you give operate under normal circumstances but not in this context which is positing that REM intrusion is responsible for the NDE experience. I understand your confusion and sometimes I reply so quickly or I am rushed I do not explain it well. My apologies. In the morning, before awakening, people have a final prolonged REM period preceded by a
hypnogogic hallucination. I have seen these last an hour or more and sometimes much less so it is a matter of degree what you call them and when. But again, I understand the confusion.
Steve, you are flat-out wrong. Hypnogogic hallucinations do not happen 90 minutes after you fall asleep.

Quote:
Hallucinations: Usually, these delusional experiences are vivid and frequently they are frightening. The content is primarily visual, but any of the other senses can be involved. These are called hypnagogic hallucinations when accompanying sleep onset and hypnopompic hallucinations when occurring during awakening.
WebMD
Quote:
The players with normal memories got much better at playing the game. The people with amnesia did not. This suggests that Tetris skill involves conscious memory but not procedural memory. But when waked, the amnesia patients were just as likely to report seeing falling Tetris blocks as the healthy novice players -- even though they had no conscious memory of ever having played the game. What makes this particularly striking is that the players were waked just as they were falling asleep. During this very early period of sleep, people feel as though they are awake. Indeed, dreams that occur during this time are called hypnagogic hallucinations to distinguish them from the generally more surreal dreams that occur in later sleep.
WebMD
Quote:
Hypnogogic hallucinations occur while falling asleep, and hypnopompic hallucinations upon awakening. Both last a few minutes.
SleepChannel
Quote:
Hypnogogic hallucinations are times when just as we are falling asleep we see something from our dream world in our real world.
MedicineNet
Quote:
hypnagogic

Denoting a transitional state, related to the hypnoidal, preceding sleep; applied also to various hallucinations that may manifest themselves at that time.
Medical Dictionary
Quote:
hypnogogic

If an hallucination is experienced as the patient is falling asleep then it is described as hypnagogic.
General Practice Notebook
Do you understand? Hypnogogic hallucinations do not happen 90 minutes after you go to sleep.

YOU ARE WRONG.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
The following paper documents these variations. In our lab and talking even to people here I learned that people claim they have sleep paralysis (which is associated with imagery) when they wake up, and this has to be when they wake up from REM which could be anytime during the night (4 ot 5 times about every 90 mins) including in the morning.
No, it doesn't. There is a difference between dreams and hypnogogic/pompic hallucinations.

YOU ARE WRONG.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Are you saying children or adults who are given the experience of meeting someone dressed up like the mythical Santa Claus are not having an experience, that their experience is not real, that it is a hallcuination, a fake experience, a shared delusion among other children and their parents and caregivers present? Okay, if you think so.
I am talking about the reality of what they experience. Is that the real Santa, or a fantasy?
CFLarsen 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 20th April 2006, 03:37 AM   #66
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
If you insist children are not having a real experience or that their experience is not real (which is what you said) when they visit Santa Claus ... or that Pam Reynold's was having a real experience. Remember now, we are saying "the experience" is real, its the object of "real." I realize that reality can be an elusive concept with different people having differing realities and sharing them. This is well demonstrated throughout discussion forums such as this where different posters bring different realities to the table all the time.

Quote:
... as you come out of sleep than the reverse, which would then be called the hypnagogic state) and ... remember, thought is action in the hypnopompic state, as ...


www.herownroom.com/fishbowl/ index.php?PHPSESSID=a0f0eea1cc42bfa592a22e5e2ac0d5 cc&topic=223.msg1054 - 53k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar

Encyclopędia Britannica
... visual hallucinations of a dreamlike sort; and hypnagogic or hypnopompic sleep paralysis, in ... or by REM-awakening techniques appears to reverse this ...
www.britannica.com/eb/ print?tocId=9109539&fullArticle=true - 65k - Supplemental Result -



File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
A hypnagogic. hallucination may culminate in a sudden convulsive twitch that WAKES the sleeper. Sleep paralysis (hypnopompic paralysis) ...
www.hpisum.com/downloads/Sleep_Disorders_Dirckx.pdf - Similar pages

“Hypnagogic images are OFTEN "seen" as we drift into sleep. Described as a pictorial consciousness, they are comprised of consciously perceived random images or thoughts that can last up to ten minutes. Some scientists call these ‘dreamlets’, but they are not classed as true dreams because they are not accompanied by REMs.”

In theory, gogic and pompic state hallcucinations can occur anywhere throughout the sleep cycle. If you adhere to the "rule", you must consider when sleep arousals between sleep stages intervene, most commonly going into and coming out of REM stage, then there is no policy which is tied to this. Its the arousal mechanism these authors feel are implicated in the cause of the gogic hallucinations that become NDEs. Since arousal equals waking or partial awakening, it turns upside down or reverses the gogic and pompic designations.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 20th April 2006 at 04:31 AM.
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 04:23 AM   #67
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Stop for a moment and consider definitional application of the terms: gogic is visual, pompic is non-visual (dark). When I first started to think about NDE and OBES myself, I placed these terms in the context of their definitions. A long time ago some dream worker like Freud or someone else, I don't know, talked to patients and decided that visual or gogic dreams or hallucinations occurred on sleep onset and non-visual at the end of sleep. Every author and teacher since then has repeated this rule which Professor Corey very nicely summed up in his mneomic. But my reality has always been that not only is this not valid but that we can and do have visual hallcuinations or dreams just before we wake up, thus negating the validity of this "rule." It seems like you Claus are the only one interested in this even though your reasons may be mundane. Now take this a step further and apply the rationale to NDEs. NDE's are visual in nature according to the reports of people who say they experience them. Since we know that we remember our dreams (visual) when we wake from them, can we be reasonably certain (perhaps not 100%) they ocurred at that time. And they are usually visual. All of us can now start thinking about this. Do we have a visual dream or dreamlet (hallucination) in the morning when we wake up? Or did what we visually remember occur when we first went to sleep? Is our morning on awakening hallucination strictly pompic or non-visual or is it visual?
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 04:34 AM   #68
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,324
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
The report of the NDE is "real." Pam Reynolds is "real." Her experience was "real." What is it you don't understand about the meaning of this word. It is her published and well documented claim. It is not my claim. It is not Sabom or Greyson's claim. It was reported by Sabom first and later confirmed by Greyson. Are we having a language problem again? If you
think the claimant, Pam Reynolds is lying, so be it.
Excuse me for budging in on a private fight, but can someone explain the Pam Reynolds case to me?

As I understand it, she entered an induced episode of virtual brain death and later reported an NDE type experience?

Who made the conclusion that the NDE type experience happened while she was virtually brain dead, and how did they come to that conclusion?

In general, how do anybody manage to place NDEs, which typically happen while the subject is more or less uncounscious, in an even approximate time-frame?

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans 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 20th April 2006, 04:45 AM   #69
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
If you insist children are not having a real experience or that their experience is not real (which is what you said)
No, you nincompoop. I said that Santa isn't real, despite children having "real" experiences of him.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
when they visit Santa Claus ... or that Pam Reynold's was having a real experience. Remember now, we are saying "the experience" is real, its the object of "real." I realize that reality can be an elusive concept with different people having differing realities and sharing them. This is well demonstrated throughout discussion forums such as this where different posters bring different realities to the table all the time.
I realize that you are separated from reality alright.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Gogic and pompic state hallcucinations can occur anywhere throughout the sleep/wake cycle since eye opening and closing occurs when sleep arousals
beween sleep stages intervene, most commonly going into and coming out of REM stage.
None of your quotes state this, Steve:

Quote:
... as you come out of sleep than the reverse, which would then be called the hypnagogic state) and ... remember, thought is action in the hypnopompic state, as ...
www.herownroom.com/fishbowl/ index.php?PHPSESSID=a0f0eea1cc42bfa592a22e5e2ac0d5 cc&topic=223.msg1054 - 53k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar
Even though this is the opinion of an anonymous person, did you read it? It disagrees with you.

Quote:
www.britannica.com/eb/ print?tocId=9109539&fullArticle=true
Link shows blank page.

Quote:
The term hypnagogic refers to the act of falling asleep, while hypnopompic refers to the act of awakening.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&cd=58
It disagrees with you.

Nincompoop.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Stop for a moment and consider definitional application of the terms: gogic is visual, pompic is non-visual (dark). When I first started to think about NDE and OBES myself, I placed these terms in the context of their definitions. A long time ago some dream worker like Freud or someone else, I don't know, talked to patients and decided that visual or gogic dreams or hallucinations occurred on sleep onset and non-visual at the end of sleep. Every author and teacher since then has repeated this rule which Professor Corey very nicely summed up in his mneomic. But my reality has always been that not only is this not valid but that we can and do have visual hallcuinations or dreams just before we wake up, thus negating the validity of this "rule."
No, it does not, Steve. Your warped sense of "reality" does not supersede the real world.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
It seems like you Claus are the only one interested in this even though your reasons may be mundane. Now take this a step further and apply the rationale to NDEs. NDE's are visual in nature according to the reports of people who say they experience them. Since we know that we remember our dreams (visual) when we wake from them, can we be reasonably certain (perhaps not 100%) they ocurred at that time. And they are usually visual. All of us can now start thinking about this. Do we have a visual dream or dreamlet (hallucination) in the morning when we wake up? Or did what we visually remember occur when we first went to sleep? Is our morning on awakening hallucination strictly pompic or non-visual or is it visual?
Steve, you can talk out of your ass as much as you like. It doesn't change reality: You are wrong.
CFLarsen 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 20th April 2006, 04:54 AM   #70
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Exactly Mr. Hans.

Her NDE was visual or gogic by her description but it cannot be placed in any time frame. We cannot say or prove it occurred at the beginning, middle or end of her experience. By his questionning Claus rightfully states that it wasn't during the middle or at the low point of her procedure because she was ametabolic and he doesn't believe anyone can dream or hallucinate or form thoughts and images while so depressed and he is probably right although I could find no studies of the subject. Reynolds is a unique and unquestionnably rare situation. Since she wasn't clinically dead (=metabolically depressed) at the onset, and we take her "perception" at face value, then it could have ocurred when she was waking up, thus reversing the time a gogic hallucination is stated to occur in textbooks. People remember their dreams when they wake up from them. She didn't know she was going to experience this when she went dark at the onset of her procedure (pompic) so if you value these researchers' theory, she experienced this hallucination when she started to wake up. Very nicely reverses gogic and pompic.
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 04:59 AM   #71
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
No Claus. You still don't get it. Gogic =s visual, pompic means dark. A hypnogogic hallucination relates to a sleep related visual hallcuination, hypnopompic to a non-visual one. You are falling into the same trap as the authors of these "rules" parrot by thinking gogic means sleep onset only and pompic means sleep ending only.
Someone else invented another silly mneomic saying "gogic" means "GO to sleep."

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 20th April 2006 at 05:01 AM.
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 06:03 AM   #72
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Steve, you are wrong. There is no way you can worm your way out of that huge blunder you made. The more you try, the more pathetic you look.
CFLarsen 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 20th April 2006, 06:07 AM   #73
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,324
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Exactly Mr. Hans.

Her NDE was visual or gogic by her description but it cannot be placed in any time frame. We cannot say or prove it occurred at the beginning, middle or end of her experience. By his questionning Claus rightfully states that it wasn't during the middle or at the low point of her procedure because she was ametabolic and he doesn't believe anyone can dream or hallucinate or form thoughts and images while so depressed and he is probably right although I could find no studies of the subject. Reynolds is a unique and unquestionnably rare situation. Since she wasn't clinically dead (=metabolically depressed) at the onset, and we take her "perception" at face value, then it could have ocurred when she was waking up, thus reversing the time a gogic hallucination is stated to occur in textbooks. People remember their dreams when they wake up from them. She didn't know she was going to experience this when she went dark at the onset of her procedure (pompic) so if you value these researchers' theory, she experienced this hallucination when she started to wake up. Very nicely reverses gogic and pompic.
EHr, in simpler words: We don't know when she had the perception or why. So what exactly makes it so interesting?

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans 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 20th April 2006, 11:51 AM   #74
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,008
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
No Claus. You still don't get it. Gogic =s visual, pompic means dark. A hypnogogic hallucination relates to a sleep related visual hallcuination, hypnopompic to a non-visual one. You are falling into the same trap as the authors of these "rules" parrot by thinking gogic means sleep onset only and pompic means sleep ending only.
Someone else invented another silly mneomic saying "gogic" means "GO to sleep."
Off topic, but you just cleared up quite nicely why my good friend who was recently diagnosed with narcolepsy has been having an awful time making heads or tails of the medical literature on sleep disorders.
kellyb 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 20th April 2006, 12:42 PM   #75
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
EHr, in simpler words: We don't know when she had the perception or why. So what exactly makes it so interesting?

Hans
I won't presume to tell you why the Pam Reynolds case is so interesting to a lot of people investigating the very widespread phenomenon of alleged NDES. I don't know for sure. From Claus' questionning, the case seems to be of great interest to him. If I had to speculate, it would be because about every person claiming to experience an NDE, even while unconscious, still has a functional brain. Reynold's MAY be the only NDEr without a functional brain during the period claimed for the NDE. Obviously I don't know ....but others and herself claim that's the case. I agree, as you say, it is impossible to know exactly when during the various legs of her experience she perceived what she saw and acquired the memories of this in order for them to resurface later as an NDE.

If your not familiar with the case it has been rehashed on skeptic sites as well as at the (pro) near death site, at some length, located at:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 01:03 PM   #76
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Off topic, but you just cleared up quite nicely why my good friend who was recently diagnosed with narcolepsy has been having an awful time making heads or tails of the medical literature on sleep disorders.
Yes, narcolepsy is formally diagnosed through a day time nap test called an MSLT. This consists of a series of 4 or 5 X 20 minute nap opportunities throughout the day, starting 1.5-2 hrs after the patient wakes up from an all night test. The nap could be longer than 20 min if any stage of sleep occurs since the protcool calls for making it 15 minutes from the first instance of any stage of sleep. If the subject has Sleep Onset REM defined as onset of REM (SOREM) before the 20 minutes are up in 2 out of 5 naps, the statistical confirmation of narcolepsy is present. The other symptoms used to confirm a diagnosis of narcolepsy (besides SOREM) may include: hypnogogic (visual) hallucinations (irrespective of where they occur), cataplexy, sleep paralysis and, of course, extreme sleepiness. I understand why this would now make sense for your friend.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 20th April 2006 at 01:27 PM.
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 01:08 PM   #77
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
I won't presume to tell you why the Pam Reynolds case is so interesting to a lot of people investigating the very widespread phenomenon of alleged NDES. I don't know for sure. From Claus' questionning, the case seems to be of great interest to him. If I had to speculate, it would be because about every person claiming to experience an NDE, even while unconscious, still has a functional brain. Reynold's MAY be the only NDEr without a functional brain during the period claimed for the NDE. Obviously I don't know ....but others and herself claim that's the case.
Obviously, you claimed before that this was, in fact, the case:

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
I have seen Pam's angios by the way so thats substantiation for me and so have a lot of other people.

What exactly do you want substantiated Claus? That she had the aneurysm, that she was clinically dead, that she had these visions of what are called near death experiences, that she lived to talk about it and did; that her case was investigated and written up by Michael Sabom, MD of Texas. The case was also investigated by psychiatrist Bruce Greyson, M.D. now Carlson Professor of Behavioral Sciences at the Univ of Virginia. Greyson considers this case the most evidential of all NDe accounts. And he has investigated many. He has developed the Greyson Scale for rating such experiences.

Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her
electroencephalogram was flat, her brain-stem responses were
absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly,
while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" near-death
experience based on an analysis of the events she recalled and when they actually ocurred.

Are you saying the Pam Reynolds case is a fabrication? Better tell Shermer that, he doesn't know and has commented on it, rather lamely and to no avail. Are you saying Reynolds is lying? Are you saying her doctors and others involved with the case were lying? Are you saying it never happened. I guess this kind of rebuttal of evidence occurs a lot around here.............and its not only beginning to get boring but to be a monumental waste of time discussing such cases as well. Why dont you all come back when you have something substantial to say.
Those were your words, Steve. Are you now retracting those words, yes or no?
CFLarsen 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 20th April 2006, 01:22 PM   #78
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Obviously, you claimed before that this was, in fact, the case:



Those were your words, Steve. Are you now retracting those words, yes or no?
Are you asking me to retract something from several years ago which I considered at the time as possible? If so, no.

Unlike you, however, I do look at new evidence and find the research published the other day compelling enough to revise my position to include this as among the most plausible non-paranormal explanations for 100% of the NDEs reported including Reynolds. The prior rationales such as those given by Susan Blackmore, a person who consumed much of her youth admittedly using hallucinogens on herself, et al, simply did not cut it for me where 100% of the cases were concerned and in fact dealt with only a small subset of all the possible cases that show up. In short it makes perfect sense to me whereas ketamine, hallucinogens in general, and hypoxia, for example, as a rationale for thousands and thousands of NDE cases is absurd. It may cover a small number but not all. This covers all.

I am truly honored you value my opinion so highly. Who wouldda thunk it?

PS: Pam Reynolds' case ocurred. It is real. It happened. Now we may have an excellent explanation for it. That's what we should be seeking instead of playing semantic parlor games.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 20th April 2006 at 01:24 PM.
SteveGrenard 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 20th April 2006, 01:27 PM   #79
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Are you asking me to retract something from several years ago which I considered at the time as possible? If so, no.
You have changed your mind, but you still stand by your words from several years ago. Great.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Unlike you, however, I do look at new evidence and find the research published the other day compelling enough to revise my position to include this as among the most plausible non-paranormal explanations for 100% of the NDEs reported including Reynolds. The prior rationales such as those given by Susan Blackmore, a person who consumed much of her youth admittedly using hallucinogens on herself, et al, simply did not cut it for me where 100% of the cases were concerned and in fact dealt with only a small subset of all the possible cases that show up. In short it makes perfect sense to me whereas ketamine, hallucinogens in general, and hypoxia, for example, as a rationale for thousands and thousands of NDE cases is absurd. It may cover a small number but not all. This covers all.
How do you know that it covers all? Have you checked these "thousands of thousands of NDE cases"?

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
I am truly honored you value my opinion so highly. Who wouldda thunk it?
I'm checking on you, Steve. Your past makes it necessary.
CFLarsen 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 20th April 2006, 01:40 PM   #80
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
You have changed your mind, but you still stand by your words from several years ago. Great.



How do you know that it covers all? Have you checked these "thousands of thousands of NDE cases.
Because hypnogogic hallucinations, REM, REM intrusion and arousals before and after REM occurs in ALL human beings unless they are taking or are being given drugs which suppress REM or have untreated conditions which affect REM. If the rationale covers almost all people, it covers darn well near 100% of all NDErs, a smaller subset of all people. It doesn't
require the non-parsimonious addition of complicating factors. It is
elegant in its simplicity and makes perfect sense. I am sorry you persist in
either looking for a paranormal explanation or, alternatively, subscribe to the reasons given by Blackmore et al. which at best are responsible for a small number of cases when their complicated explanations even exist.
SteveGrenard 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 » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

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 08:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.