Harvard Neurosurgeon Confirms The Afterlife Exists

originally posted by: elementalgrove

I suppose what stood out to me was when he attempted to refute it using his understanding of the brain.

But did he actually do that?
It seems to me he did nothing more than refute all the commonly accepted opinions with nothing more than "I don't think so". He didn't seem to refute those beliefs with any substance, just dismissed them with flowery language in an attempt to make himself seem more credible.

originally posted by: elementalgrove
You are correct that no ones subjective experience within the realms of the mind are more believable than anyone, however given the usual refutation that these are all simply hallucination of the mind I liked his take on why that is not so easily applied to his state.

I agree.
Like I said I have experienced something myself, and I know nothing more than anything science has presented. I desperately want to believe that I saw both my parents at the end of the brightly lit tunnel and that they both hugged me, I really, really want to believe that, but I also understand the power of the Human brain and the fact that we know almost nothing.

I'm comforted by the single idea which overrides everything I read and see on this subject - our memories, thoughts, personality and intellect are all driven by electrical energy. Energy never dies, it simply transforms from one state to another or moves from one place to another. Therefore, my own theory is that there is something after, the energy within our minds has to go somewhere, it has to continue to exist.

One individual's subjective experience under the most traumatic circumstances possible do not make any logical statements about the nature of reality or anything else for that matter.

Only human confirmation bias would claim otherwise.

Now, that said, also logically speaking, the tautology "we cannot know what we cannot know" applies here.

I can say that without better evidence I have no reason to believe in the Western concept of "afterlife."

That's just me though. Carry on!

a reply to: elementalgrovecheers, I've been an Alan watts fan for years and his videos have provided much comfort to me. I think it's where I've got a few of my ideas on reincarnation from. I like the idea of reincarnation as experiencing everything from human form to animal/insect form. I understand that what we really are is just vibrations of energy in different forms

I

a reply to: elementalgrove

“... Not some abstract, hard-to-fathom kind of love but the day-to-day kind that everyone knows-the kind of love we feel when we look at our spouse and our children, or even our animals. In its purest and most powerful form, this love is not jealous or selfish, but unconditional.

This.

We only catch glimpses of it here with our spouses and children, but what I experienced was a love (not erotic at all) so deep and profound that it puts even those day to day glimpses to shame and still brings tears to my eyes.

Mine wasn't an NDE. Just a dream, but it was so real.

There were a few take-down pieces written about Alexander a couple of years back, including one by neurologist Oliver Sacks. The others focus on establishing whether Alexander is fibbing about incidental details in order to establish that he is probably fibbing about his NDE. Sacks, however, leaves petty character assassination out and goes straight to the central problem with Alexander's account:

Alexander insists that his journey, which subjectively lasted for days, could not have occurred except while he was deep in coma. But we know from the experience of Tony Cicoria and many others, that a hallucinatory journey to the bright light and beyond, a full-blown NDE, can occur in 20 or 30 seconds, even though it seems to last much longer. Subjectively, during such a crisis, the very concept of time may seem variable or meaningless. The one most plausible hypothesis in Dr. Alexander's case, then, is that his NDE occurred not during his coma, but as he was surfacing from the coma and his cortex was returning to full function. It is curious that he does not allow this obvious and natural explanation, but instead insists on a supernatural one.

To deny the possibility of any natural explanation for an NDE, as Dr. Alexander does, is more than unscientific -- it is antiscientific. It precludes the scientific investigation of such states.

www.theatlantic.com...

Yea so, I'm not buying it. I'm supposed to take in the "Harvard" title and be like, OMG, it must be true!! Is that what's going on in some people's minds? Do you think educated people can't have bizarre experiences and/or hold irrational beliefs? Not too wise of an approach in life.

NDE's, after careful weighting, are boring. It's very easy for me to understand what's going on. People fear the unknown, and what happens after death is the ultimate unknown. We have a primal instinct to survive, and not existing is something we find difficult, like the concept of infinity, to truly grasp. So we make up stories. We tell these to ourselves and each other to increase group fitness.

Two groups. One has no culture based on trying to shy away from the inevitable. People die in this group, they suffer, and it leaves a mark on the living. Not a good one. The second group has had some sort of genetic mutation in a chunk of it's people. These people have a tendency to trip out under stress. This psychotic breakthrough gives them an experience they believe to be so real, that they adopt rituals, and belief system to explain it. When many of them pass, they have an extreme version of this experience that ties into the beliefs they have formed over their lifetime. Now, instead of being in fear of death, the individual has a pleasant experience, ceases to exist the same as the person in the first group, except those who survive are marked differently. They feel strengthened in their group convictions, their belief system. They have the ability to lower their stress levels in uncertain times where death may be around the corner.

It's a trade off. You have one in the group too much of a genetic load towards psychosis, goes overboard we have to call him a shaman, or a schizo, or maybe he suicides or what have you. Overall, which group do you think is more fit? Rinse and repeat over the eons, groups that have the bizarre experiences live on, until perhaps a day comes, a time of rising atheism, a time where we have answers for most of our questions, where perhaps we're on the verge of living much longer... and the tide turns in favor of those without the need to so fear death.

I use the two groups thing a lot. Well I used to. Hell of a lot less time pondering now, most of it made sense to me long ago.

a reply to: elementalgrove

From www.evawaseerst.be...

Internet is drawing our attention to the same characteristics of near death experiences all over the world. They are always coming back. This can be no coincidence.
- the experiences exist for centuries;
- they are separate from any religious background or age;
- the mind seems to act apart from the body;
- there is always talk of a tunnel with a bright white light;
- the light consists of consciousness and is peaceful;
- material things there are of no interest;
Witnesses explain: 'Everyone consisted of light. We felt each other as if we were one and the same spirit.' Exactly the words of the oldest religions. And exactly the words Edgard Mitchell said when he stood on the moon.
People who have had a near death experience, don’t care about what others are saying about them. Those who previously did not believe in life after death, suddenly no longer see death as an endpoint. They are more spiritual and care less about material things. The quiet certainty they demonstrate when they carry on with their life speaks for itself. They don’t believe in scholars who ignore their experience.

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: Klassified

It only makes sense that there would be no universal experience within this realm, just as there is no universal experience within our physical form.

10 people can witness the same event and come away with drastically different versions of it. If we are considering the possibility of life after death and the implied reincarnation along with it, there is no way that anyone will experience the same thing, we are quite literally talking about an infinite amount of variables that could effect someones consciousness.

Which is my point. NDE's are named appropriately. NEAR death experiences. Which is probably why they are so varied. Although it is possible each of us experiences the "afterlife" differently to some degree, but at some point, there has to be that which is common to all of us.

This old news. Ofcourse there is a after life, there is evidence for this everywhere you turn.

There is also this psychologist that has worked with over 10 years or so with people. Watch this TED talk and what he has collected over the course:

www.youtube.com...

Since the dawn of civilization great empires and people have all believed in higher power. Then come our age and these atheist try to tell us other wise. U go down and split an atom and its all light from there on. Hmmm remember that sayn ''Let there be light'' I wonder where that comes from. Come on folks people from that time couldn't possible come up with that # if it wasn't true. But go ahead believe what you will robocop....

reincarnation - impossible if you think about it for a minute. Because that would mean that this would wold always have the exact same nr of people, animals and so on. So no. reincarnation is for the stuped ones. If you believe in reincarnation that means somebody is in control of reincarnation and wouldn't it be just much easier for the Creator to great new humans, animals and so on instead och recycling??? Take for example Buddhist, they sit there and meditate almost their whole life. For what purpose?? if God created you, would he not want you to live life instead of sitting and dreaming away your self?? The argument just don't hold. God is the answer and nothing but God. Just like Jesus said. ''I'am tellin you the Truth!!''

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: SaturnFX

what makes you so skeptical of what you actually are?

do you believe in only what you can see?

I am skeptical of many things.
Its through skepticism that drives me to want to uncover the truth, and is it that which has given me some pretty wild experiences,
however, the experiences I have had are not conclusive, so..I seek more to narrow down my understanding.
Some people have the power of belief in them like, at birth, different brain composition. They dont need any proof at all, hell, they dont even research, they just adopt say, a religion and thats it, bam.
Me
My brain requires a sufficient amount of conclusive evidence, preferrably objective, but if it is subjective, then a lot more.
Thats just how I work. If I say I believe in X...I feel disingenious, I feel I am lying in order to either comfort myself or another..so, instead I will explore what I entertain, relay to the best of my knowledge my findings, and discuss with other like minded folks what conclusions can come from it.
and one day, who knows...I may have enough behind me to say I believe..until then...I wish, I suspect, I hope, and I explore.

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: Klassified

It only makes sense that there would be no universal experience within this realm, just as there is no universal experience within our physical form.

10 people can witness the same event and come away with drastically different versions of it. If we are considering the possibility of life after death and the implied reincarnation along with it, there is no way that anyone will experience the same thing, we are quite literally talking about an infinite amount of variables that could effect someones consciousness.

Which is my point. NDE's are named appropriately. NEAR death experiences. Which is probably why they are so varied. Although it is possible each of us experiences the "afterlife" differently to some degree, but at some point, there has to be that which is common to all of us.

it is arguable that near death experiences are primarily the result of dimethyltriptamine, which our bodies produce naturally.

originally posted by: Klassified
So...who's right and who's wrong?

I am


stop being soo intolerable!




So, imagine for a moment that we design our eternity..that the universe, in its vast sense of humor, will allow you to live forever..give you no choice actually, and in the tiny fragment of a blink of a life you have, you had to create your eternity.
So, if you chose to believe life after death is hell, you get stuck in hell for eternity..if you think there are 72 virgins awaiting you, you are locked in a room with those 72 virgins for eternity and can never escape (man, no wonder they died virgins..these guys are totally socially awkward), etc.

frightening thought...there is nothing I do that I would want to remain consistent for an eternity.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
it is arguable that near death experiences are primarily the result of dimethyltriptamine, which our bodies produce naturally.

DHT allows for a lot of connecty feelings, but does it give vivid hallucinations? dht is popular in nightclubs and outside of making colors pretty and touching things more..squiggy, it doesn't send you down what can only be described as powerful yet curiously lucid and logical mescaline trips?

Now, back in the day of my lunacy, I experimented with hallucinagenic drugs..for awhile it was my thing.
If I talk to hippys about this stuff, they go on about trips and higher states of consciousness, but its all bogus. those trips are not with order..you aren't really lucid and it doesn't make logical sense. Once you "come down", you can look back on a trip and even if the hallucinations were powerful, you know full well it was just a bit of brain scrambling you experienced. Same with (most) dreams...a feeling of false illogical mind wandering is happening.

So, when NDE folks go on about a different yet fully logical to them reality that even after waking up still claim and demand that was the actual real reality..you gotta consider maybe there is more going on here than just a doped up brain.

then we got ghost stories..and that throws a big wrench into the works

originally posted by: Rocker2013
I desperately want to believe that I saw both my parents at the end of the brightly lit tunnel and that they both hugged me, I really, really want to believe that, but I also understand the power of the Human brain and the fact that we know almost nothing.

You know what interests me is those stories of people who flatlined that weren't expecting it..you know the stories, people who go in for some totally random routine surgery and something goes wrong while they are under and bam..ndes.

they had no expectation of dying, the brain wasn't set up to comfort them, yet they have their nde and they are seeing relatives long since past, heaven, etc.

I can see if you fall to the ground in heart attack mode, the brain may create some sort of...sanity bubble mixed with drugs that creates a afterlife experience, sure..but why would it happen when you have no prep for it.

the afterlife experience in the brain makes no sense..if the brain is dying, it is gonna conserve power as much as possible, blacking out, shutting down asap seems a more logical function for survival than going into virtual reality mode with a experience more powerful than any of your waking moments.
just doesn't add up.

I am open to alternative answers, just not open to complete dismissal due to afterlife not making much sense...hell, I know it doesn't make sense..none of it does, but it is what it is..strange things need to be investigated.

I was chemically induced into coma about 10 years ago.

I agree very much with the doctor's experience.

a reply to: elementalgrove

I don't get it.

So he claims to have had a rich interactive audiovisual experience and it could not have been a hallucination... because of reasons.

*burp*

thebestpageintheuniverse.net...

originally posted by: zandra
Internet is drawing our attention to the same characteristics of near death experiences all over the world. They are always coming back. This can be no coincidence.

You forgot a couple:
* All of NDEs are told by people who are alive and conscious.
* Nobody who has been declared clinically dead and devoid of brain activity for say, two weeks, has been revived and told any such stories.

As long as these two factors are in play, it can't be discounted that these experiences are in some way a result of or at least influenced by, being alive.