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 not, no big deal. One more story wouldn’t change my mind.
The most popular claims stemming from NDEs, such as the sensation of travelling through a dark tunnel toward a bright light, or meeting dead relatives, etc. — those claims don’t constitute useful information, at least not in my opinion.
That sort of claim cannot be tested or investigated. To the non-observer, these tales should be considered nothing more than interesting anecdotes. In my opinion, that is.
Essentially corroborated veridical NDE perceptions contain information that while in a physical state of critical illness or severe near-fatal injury, the traumatized individual reports learning new http://nghomes.com/2021/05/31/comparison-of-crypto-exchanges information that can be independently investigated and verified to be true.
I only want to know two things: does this person make any claims that can be investigated? Does he or she claim to have modified their lifestyle after the experience, and if so, how? I’m interested in information that can both be investigated and potentially authenticated.
For example, during her famous “Operation Standstill” experience, while heavily sedated and with her eyes taped shut, Pam Reynolds was allegedly able to create a new memory of “seeing” the specialized tool being used to cut a hole in her skull well enough to accurately describe it later.
Pam also allegedly “heard” a conversation between her neurosurgeon and a cardiovascular surgeon tapping her femoral artery in order to drain all the blood from her body while nodes placed in her ears were making clicking sounds to distort her ability to hear.
NDEs are described by skeptics as nothing more than pleasant hallucinations caused by chemical reactions in a dying brain that ease the transition into death.
That hypothesis fails to take into account the fact her “new” memories formed while her brain was completely incapacitated were independently investigated and found quite accurate.
Another alternative scenario suggested that Pam had experienced anesthesia awareness. The problem is that sort of speculation only works if one ignores the statements by her neurosurgeon, Dr. Robert Spetzler. Nine minutes and fifteen seconds into this video, Dr. Spetzler appears to completely rule out the possibility of anesthesia awareness as an explanation for Pam’s new memories.
Pam’s NDE claims are remarkable, but not unique.
Accounts of corroborated veridical NDE perceptions or events become even more intriguing when that individual claims to have learned information from location “A” while their body was provably in location “B”.
For another example, while in critical condition and undergoing emergency neurosurgery to save her life, Michaela Roser claims to “remember” her two grandmothers sitting in the hospital cafeteria with her parents, and both grandmothers uncharacteristically leaving to smoke a cigarette with her father.
What makes this corroborated veridical NDE evidence so important? Well, if this evidence could ever be proved true, it would completely destroy the strict materialist worldview, which is coincidentally the typical atheist worldview.
The main reason I no longer actively seek new NDE stories is because I’ve heard more than enough and seen ample evidence that convinces me.
Either Pam, Michaela, Colton Burpo, and all the others with scrutinized claims of corroborated veridical extra sensory knowledge must be liars all collaborating in a bizarre conspiracy for no discernable reason, or most or all of them could be telling the truth.
While it would certainly be nice and charitable to conjure up some pleasant compromise and pretend these people were being honest if their experiences can be proved false, but unfortunately we don’t have that luxury.
And remember, our pool of witnesses in many cases include doctors and family members, often including people that lack easily discernible motives for lying to support a false claim. If we’re going to dismiss their claim of having corroborating evidence and assume what they are saying is a lie, we must also assume the lie is deliberate.
If we assume these people are all lying, then the question to ask immediately becomes, cui bono?
Who benefits from this lie? What is their motive? Certainly the author of a bestselling book has a decent motive to lie, especially if the lie can help turn a mediocre book into a bestseller with millions of copies in print, every author’s dream.
But what about Pam, Michaela, and all those others who have claimed to experience an NDE and offered corroborating veridical NDE evidence in support of their claim, but failed to write a book to capitalize on the lie?
When Alex Malarkey recanted his alleged NDE described in the New York Times bestseller The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven, it didn’t bother me in the least because I hadn’t read his book.
The news that his account was a fabrication didn’t affect my worldview one bit. Nor did it diminish the evidence for corroborated veridical NDE events even slightly.
The irony that the phrase “full of malarkey” means get modafinil prescription online replete with foolish words or ideas did occur to me. And writing deliberate lies in a nonfiction book in order to turn it into a bestseller is a really deplorable thing to do.
There’s a category of literature called ‘fiction’ that exists specifically for this purpose. As the author of two award-winning nonfiction books that aren’t bestsellers, let me agree wholeheartedly with those who might say Mr. Malarkey was full of malarkey.
So if I never had any interest in Mr. Malarkey’s story, why am I writing about it now?
Well, apparently I’m not the only one who believes people giving an NDE account must either be lying or telling the truth.
For example, my atheist friends cannot afford for any alleged evidence of corroborate veridical NDE perceptions to be deemed true without suffering serious damage to their worldview.
As if to illustrate my point, one of these atheist acquaintances rather gleefully re-posted a link to the story on Facebook, making sure he tagged me so I’d see what he described as “more B.S. coming from another liar for Jesus.”
However, Alex Malarkey didn’t “lie for Jesus” — he lied for personal gain. He lied to get attention. He lied to sell books.
His motive was painfully obvious.
Contrast that thought with this little tidbit of information: Christianity as a religion clearly wouldn’t exist today, if Jesus’ disciples hadn’t continued preaching his message after his crucifixion. Yet with the exception of John, all of them were martyred for their efforts. The question is, why?
Cui bono?
Speak Your Mind