Those familiar with my work know that I'm fascinated by certain aspects of the near death experience. However, all NDEs are not created equal. Some reveal more valuable information that other NDEs. And some accounts are fraudulent, of course. No matter what information a specific account may contain, my atheist friends refuse to believe them -- they simply can't afford to believe any of them could be true, because the only thing that could possibly continue to exist after the death of these material bodies is an immortal soul. Instead, the atheist will vehemently protest that every NDE is nothing more than a pleasant hallucination produced by the human brain in order to ease the transition from life into death. According to them, the NDE is evolution's contribution to death to make the experience slightly less unpleasant. But this creates a problem for NDE claims where the person describes a totally miserable experience in hell -- what are we to make of those particular "anecdotes" of dreadful hallucinations? If NDEs are nothing but hallucinations, why would some be pleasant and others unpleasant? Perhaps it is possible not every NDE account is a hallucination, or a lie. In fact, there is a category of NDE phenomena that offers clear and confirmable evidence that the physical brain and spiritual mind can literally separate, called corroborated veridical NDE accounts. This phenomena suggests that the mind can actually learn accurate information apart from the physical brain -- information that can later be independently investigated and either … [Read more...]
The Spiritual Brain and the God helmet
In a very good book written by Mario Beauregard and Denyse O'Leary, titled The Spiritual Brain, (I would give it five stars, if I rated books with stars at my website) there is a chapter called "The Strange Case of the God Helmet" which describes a physical device that "scientists" place on their head so that low-powered magnets can stimulate the temporal lobes of the test subject. Seriously. The tin-foil hat crowd now has legitimate competition. Only a person who doesn't believe God exists and has apparently become desperate to prove it would deliberately try to artificially simulate the effect that belief in God has on people of faith. About neuroscientist Michael Persinger (co-inventor of the God helmet) Beauregard wrote: Echoing Dawkins, Persinger has called religion "an artifact of the brain" and a "cognitive virus." (page 81) Speaking of Richard Dawkins, he had to try the helmet himself, of course, but he didn't experience any of the hallucinations the helmet can allegedly sometimes cause. Persinger attributed the failure of Dawkins to "experience God" using the helmet was due to his "well below average" score in temporal lobe sensitivity to magnetic fields, whatever that means. Of course, Persinger had to publish the results of his 2002 "study" in the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders. Beauregard (and O'Leary) wrote: Persinger concluded two things: that the experience of a sensed presence can be manipulated by experiment, and that such an experience "may be the fundamental source for phenomena attributed to visitations by gods, spirits, and … [Read more...]
The Pearl: 30 March 2015
The only source of knowledge is experience. – Albert Einstein Albert Einstein was arguably one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century. This quote is particularly interesting because there are some renowned modern scientists who would try to convince you the opposite is true -- they actually claim that careful inference is superior to personal experience. However, seeing is indeed believing. In my book Divine Evolution, I wrote about my personal experiences -- yes, I do mean to imply there were multiple occurrences -- with ghosts. Many of these paranormal experiences were witnessed by other people. And in another chapter, I wrote about my personal encounter with the risen Christ on the night I connected the dots that linked Matthew 7:7 and Revelations 3:20. Then in my Counterargument for God, I sought to examine what I perceive to be a connection between the near death experience, or NDE, and ghosts, which of course could be called ADES, for after death experiences. My personal experiences were not hallucinations. They were nothing less than evidence that strongly indicates that the mind and brain are actually separable entities. There is scientific evidence to support my claims, known as corroborated veridical NDE events. These events involve a person who has a medical emergency of some nature that puts them temporarily in a state near death, and they claim to have out-of-body experiences. What makes these claims of particular interest are two facts: their medical condition can be verified, and these people make a specific claim of acquiring … [Read more...]
Are NDE accounts all full of Malarkey?
Critics of my nonfiction work are well aware that I believe that some NDE accounts may hold key evidence which could settle for good the question of whether our consciousness ceases to exist the same moment our physical brain/body dies. That answer would seem to be "no." Corroborated veridical NDE perceptions, refers to new memories created by the individual in question while they were in a documented medical state of emergency which might be most accurately described as "somewhat" near death. To be honest, I'm not really interested in generic claims of an NDE or knowing every story behind every claim. In fact, there is only one aspect of any potential NDE claim that actually intrigues me at this point. I've seen and heard enough of them about heaven to believe in the possibility that heaven exists. I've also seen and heard enough NDEs that claimed to have occurred in hell to accept that possibility as well. The fact that NDEs can result in either heaven or hell suggests that the experience is not dismissible as a euphoric hallucination caused by chemical reactions in a dying brain. It doesn't really matter to me about the "degree of death" involved, meaning whether or not a medical professional had technically declared the individual in question to be dead at some point, assuming they recovered after recovery became unexpected. My foremost interest is knowing whether or not this person claims to have learned new information while incapacitated, and whether that evidence can be investigated and corroborated or debunked by an independent third party. If … [Read more...]
