Very well written, but I'm afraid entirely wasted on your intended audience.
In reply to this comment by messenger:
If we're using terms like "tangible evidence", then I assume we're talking in scientific terms. If we're talking scientifically, then you need phenomena, a theory to explain them, and ways of testing that theory. "I would say..." isn't a scientific statement. What qualifies as "tangible evidence" has to be easily understood and agreed upon by everyone. If people don't agree that something is evidence of something, then it's meaningless. Like, if I suggest that graphite pencils are electric insulators, and you say that's bollocks, we can create an electric curcuit with a light bulb. We both agree that if the light bulb turns on when the electric circuit passes through a graphite pencil, then it's definitely not an insulator, regardless of our initial positions. So if the world at large doesn't agree that NDEs are necessarily evidence of God, then it's a meaningless argument. When you theorize God, it doesn't flow logically that when people are near death that they will necessarily see God. You can look at evidence and say, "This fits in with a theory of God." That's fair, but calling it evidence is not scientific. NDEs also fit with my theory that people seek ultimate authority the the worse and worse their living conditions are. I don't claim that it's evidence that I'm right, just that it supports or "fits" my theory. In other words, it proves nothing at all.

I confess I didn't watch the whole thing (I guessed where it was going once it trailed away from logical enquiry, and so far I haven't heard any surprises -- if there's anything new and interesting in this particular story, lemme know where and I'll watch).

About the mother praying at that moment. It's possible that there is some connection between mother and child that hasn't been properly measured, that only occurs when children are under extreme stress, and even then, only in rare cases (most mothers don't report "knowing" their children were suffering or dying when they hear the news later). That doesn't require Yahweh, or even any God. It's just a phenomenon that we don't know about. And again, "We can't explain it," isn't evidence of God any more than fully explaining the phenomenon is proof that God is fake.

If you cannot provide a test whose conclusion we both agree on for God's existence, then by scientific definition, you have no theory at all. When I press you, the only test you provide is me givnig myself fully to God, and the proof will be that he will contact me eventually if I do it well enough. There's so many loopholes in that to begin with, that no matter how long I did it without result, you'd be able to say why it didn't work. Also, even if it did have a result, I wouldn't agree that the result is proof of God. My theory is that if someone wants to believe something hard enough, and if they bend their will to believing it, they can come to beleive anything they want. It's widely dismissed as "self-delusion" or "choosing to live in a fantasy world" if you're talking about anything other than religoius faith. Some, including myself, also include religious faith in that category. No matter how real it seems, if you convinced yourself of it, that's a good reason to believe you might be deluded. Bottom line, there's no test that we generally agree on, so there's no theory, just your faith that it's true.

About the mother again. All of that could have been wishful thinking/guilty conscience. Mothers often feel guilty when horrible things happen to their children, and one way of "making up for it" in their own minds (or socially) is to tell themselves (or others) that they were suffering too at the same time, and even at a distance were praying for God to intercede.

So I can't explain what happened, but I can provide two decent theories that don't require God.

I'm not sure why, but to people of faith, there seems to be a fear that everything unexplained, if not explained by their God, is somehow a strike against him. That's not at all how science or logic work. There is no phenomenon that requires God to be responsible for it, except the ones he is specifically described as having done himself in the Bible. There's nothing in the Bible that says people's experiences when suffering extreme mental trauma must be caused by God. If they're explained some other way, your theory of God stands just as strong as before. It's when you go attributing everything that YOU don't understand to God's hand that you get yourself into trouble because when those things are later objectively explained another way then you have to change your story. Better to think critically from the begining, and say with authority what God definitely is and isn't, and what God definitely is and isn't responsible for. Then, if any single one of those things is disproven, then you can simply agree that your description of God is wrong.

You missed my comment above about God and patience. You've said elsewhere that God lives outside time, and looks at the history of the universe like a movie that he can browse and interfere in at will. But then you also say that he has "patience" which can "wear out". "Patience", by definition, means being forced to wait, and "wearing out" means eroding in time, both of which requrie living in time. These two ideas of God both living outside of time and having patience which wears out, if words have meaning, are incompatible. They cannot both be true. If you continue to hold to both of those claims about your God, then that's proof that he doesn't exist as you describe him.

If we're using terms like "tangible evidence", then I assume we're talking in scientific terms. If we're talking scientifically, then you need phenomena, a theory to explain them, and ways of testing that theory. "I would say..." isn't a scientific statement. What qualifies as "tangible evidence" has to be easily understood and agreed upon by everyone. If people don't agree that something is evidence of something, then it's meaningless. Like, if I suggest that graphite pencils are electric insulators, and you say that's bollocks, we can create an electric curcuit with a light bulb. We both agree that if the light bulb turns on when the electric circuit passes through a graphite pencil, then it's definitely not an insulator, regardless of our initial positions. So if the world at large doesn't agree that NDEs are necessarily evidence of God, then it's a meaningless argument. When you theorize God, it doesn't flow logically that when people are near death that they will necessarily see God. You can look at evidence and say, "This fits in with a theory of God." That's fair, but calling it evidence is not scientific. NDEs also fit with my theory that people seek ultimate authority the the worse and worse their living conditions are. I don't claim that it's evidence that I'm right, just that it supports or "fits" my theory. In other words, it proves nothing at all.

I confess I didn't watch the whole thing (I guessed where it was going once it trailed away from logical enquiry, and so far I haven't heard any surprises -- if there's anything new and interesting in this particular story, lemme know where and I'll watch).

About the mother praying at that moment. It's possible that there is some connection between mother and child that hasn't been properly measured, that only occurs when children are under extreme stress, and even then, only in rare cases (most mothers don't report "knowing" their children were suffering or dying when they hear the news later). That doesn't require Yahweh, or even any God. It's just a phenomenon that we don't know about. And again, "We can't explain it," isn't evidence of God any more than fully explaining the phenomenon is proof that God is fake.

If you cannot provide a test whose conclusion we both agree on for God's existence, then by scientific definition, you have no theory at all. When I press you, the only test you provide is me givnig myself fully to God, and the proof will be that he will contact me eventually if I do it well enough. There's so many loopholes in that to begin with, that no matter how long I did it without result, you'd be able to say why it didn't work. Also, even if it did have a result, I wouldn't agree that the result is proof of God. My theory is that if someone wants to believe something hard enough, and if they bend their will to believing it, they can come to beleive anything they want. It's widely dismissed as "self-delusion" or "choosing to live in a fantasy world" if you're talking about anything other than religoius faith. Some, including myself, also include religious faith in that category. No matter how real it seems, if you convinced yourself of it, that's a good reason to believe you might be deluded. Bottom line, there's no test that we generally agree on, so there's no theory, just your faith that it's true.

About the mother again. All of that could have been wishful thinking/guilty conscience. Mothers often feel guilty when horrible things happen to their children, and one way of "making up for it" in their own minds (or socially) is to tell themselves (or others) that they were suffering too at the same time, and even at a distance were praying for God to intercede.

So I can't explain what happened, but I can provide two decent theories that don't require God.

I'm not sure why, but to people of faith, there seems to be a fear that everything unexplained, if not explained by their God, is somehow a strike against him. That's not at all how science or logic work. There is no phenomenon that requires God to be responsible for it, except the ones he is specifically described as having done himself in the Bible. There's nothing in the Bible that says people's experiences when suffering extreme mental trauma must be caused by God. If they're explained some other way, your theory of God stands just as strong as before. It's when you go attributing everything that YOU don't understand to God's hand that you get yourself into trouble because when those things are later objectively explained another way then you have to change your story. Better to think critically from the begining, and say with authority what God definitely is and isn't, and what God definitely is and isn't responsible for. Then, if any single one of those things is disproven, then you can simply agree that your description of God is wrong.

You missed my comment above about God and patience. You've said elsewhere that God lives outside time, and looks at the history of the universe like a movie that he can browse and interfere in at will. But then you also say that he has "patience" which can "wear out". "Patience", by definition, means being forced to wait, and "wearing out" means eroding in time, both of which requrie living in time. These two ideas of God both living outside of time and having patience which wears out, if words have meaning, are incompatible. They cannot both be true. If you continue to hold to both of those claims about your God, then that's proof that he doesn't exist as you describe him.>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^messenger:
Yet another example of a numinous experience caused by severe mental trauma. This is exactly what I theorise happened to you, as I mentioned in one of our previous conversations. This lends some support to it. We are genetically predisposed to seek guidance from authority figures, and the worse our condition, the more we seek it out. Being at death's door is the weakest condition possible, and add to that mental trauma, and the brain makes up whatever idea it needs to survive at that moment, and it seems real.
Also, if God wants us to know him so bad, why does he have to attack us with jellyfish first? He can either let us know outright he's there, or leave us a few clues and hope we put the pieces together ourselves. There's no need for torture.

If it's a numinous experience, how do you explain his mother interceding for him in prayer at the exact moment all of this is taking place?
God doesn't have to attack you with jellyfish, but he will use some means like that to get your attention if you continue to fail to respond to the 100 other ways He tried to reach you. Most often, men are so prideful and stubborn that it takes a full realization of their mortality, or a hitting of rock bottom, for them to realize how much they need God. When you're young and healthy, you feel so strong and self-assured, but it's an illusion..you are at the mercy of forces you don't understand each and every moment of each and every day. Life is fragile, but arrogance lends a false sense of security. They think they don't need Him, that they're getting along just fine on their own. It's only because they don't realize they are a heartbeat away from deaths door, and its only His mercy that keeps them there.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'pilot fainting dead prank flying fly plane near death experience' to 'pilot, fainting, dead, prank, flying, plane, near death experience' - edited by luxury_pie

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Grandma slips out of parachute harness' to 'near death, negligence, skydive, skydiving, chute' - edited by messenger

From a cotton farm in Turkey Scratch Arkansas to the very pinnacle of the music world. 71 year old Levon Helm will soon be gone. Thought I'd post this tribute song written by Elton John from his 1971 album "Madman Across the Water".

Story here. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Entertainment/Music/6474166/story.html

From the above story "Born May 26, 1940, in Turkey Scratch, Arkansas, the son of cotton farmers, he learned to play guitar and drums as a child. By 17 he was appearing in honky tonks in and around nearby Helena and taking in performance by such southern legends as Conway Twitty, Elvis Presley, Bo Diddley, and Ronnie Hawkins.

He joined Hawkins’ rockabilly band The Hawks just before they moved to Canada in the late 1950s.

In the early 1960s, Helm and Hawkins recruited Canadians Robbie Robertson (guitar), Rick Danko (bass) and pianist Richard Manuel and organist Garth Hudson. They left Hawkins and toured as Levon and the Hawks before backing Bob Dylan in the mid-60s. Fans weren’t initially receptive to Dylan’s switch from acoustic folky to electric folk-rocker, and Helm headed back south, working on offshore oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico for a couple of years until bassist Rick Danko asked him to rejoin the group that would become known around the world as, simply, The Band"

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/Levon+Helm+near+death+wife+daughter+with+videos/6474166/story.html#ixzz1sLwHMdvM

I made an attempt to translate the lyrics to English. Like any text it flows better in its native form and is open to several interpretations. Lyrics that rhyme smoothly in their own language often come across as clumsy when you try to approximate them in another language. This is my first attempt at lyric translation, I welcome other interpretations.

Your embraces
They shattered me like saber blows
Your eyes were like razors
I was devastated and overwhelmed with tears
The flame of your mouth was red and crazy
it burned me and blew me away

I will begin a new life
A puzzle that I have to put together
Far away from your influence
This cruel sweetness that invaded me

Your promises grew like weeds
like the sadness inside of me
Your meanness took me by surprise
you are very skilled at hurting
Your caresses seemed so delicious
but bad news, they were pure evil

I will begin a new life
A puzzle that I have to put together
Far away from your influence
from that madness that twisted my faith

I no longer want to run after you
I no longer want to scream your name

Far away from your influence
From the near-death that was your love
I will begin….

>> ^wax66:

I counted 2. One would be where they are in that nasty brown water in the first place, and the second was when I nearly died watching that dude strip.
Other than that, it just looked like a HELLUVA lotta fun. I wanna party with these folks.


Actually, brown != nasty. This little creek is at flood stage and the brown is mud from the banks.

You had better get right with God and stop messing around. You know God exists, and you're rejecting Him. A very unwise position to be in. The only reason we move and breath is due to His providence and mercy. He is patient with you, because He desires you come to repentence. But you aren't guaranteed a single day. Don't count on His patience to last forever.

>> ^A10anis:
>> ^shinyblurry:
So, you had an out of body experience and you know you have a spirit, yet you keep denying God anyway. Incredible. This is what is meant by this verse:
Romans 1:18-19
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
Do you realize that when you stand before God you will have no excuse?
>> ^A10anis:
Oh dear. Another "near death" experience. Near death means exactly that. You may appear dead but, you're just near it. At times of great stress neuron activity increases, this is simply the body trying to survive. I had an out of body experience when hit by a car, all sorts of weird thoughts went through my mind in slow motion. I attributed my survival to many factors, none of which were god. Of course the gullable will be rejoicing and saying; "see, god exists." So, how long before the book, cult following, and his evangelical ministry? Ignorance is not a blessing from god, it's a debilitating disease.


I am truly sorry for you. you are a brainwashed moron.Get educated, and try to think for yourself.

>> ^shinyblurry:

So, you had an out of body experience and you know you have a spirit, yet you keep denying God anyway. Incredible. This is what is meant by this verse:
Romans 1:18-19
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
Do you realize that when you stand before God you will have no excuse?
>> ^A10anis:
Oh dear. Another "near death" experience. Near death means exactly that. You may appear dead but, you're just near it. At times of great stress neuron activity increases, this is simply the body trying to survive. I had an out of body experience when hit by a car, all sorts of weird thoughts went through my mind in slow motion. I attributed my survival to many factors, none of which were god. Of course the gullable will be rejoicing and saying; "see, god exists." So, how long before the book, cult following, and his evangelical ministry? Ignorance is not a blessing from god, it's a debilitating disease.


I am truly sorry for you. you are a brainwashed moron.Get educated, and try to think for yourself.

So, you had an out of body experience and you know you have a spirit, yet you keep denying God anyway. Incredible. This is what is meant by this verse:

Romans 1:18-19

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.

Do you realize that when you stand before God you will have no excuse?

>> ^A10anis:
Oh dear. Another "near death" experience. Near death means exactly that. You may appear dead but, you're just near it. At times of great stress neuron activity increases, this is simply the body trying to survive. I had an out of body experience when hit by a car, all sorts of weird thoughts went through my mind in slow motion. I attributed my survival to many factors, none of which were god. Of course the gullable will be rejoicing and saying; "see, god exists." So, how long before the book, cult following, and his evangelical ministry? Ignorance is not a blessing from god, it's a debilitating disease.

Oh dear. Another "near death" experience. Near death means exactly that. You may appear dead but, you're just near it. At times of great stress neuron activity increases, this is simply the body trying to survive. I had an out of body experience when hit by a car, all sorts of weird thoughts went through my mind in slow motion. I attributed my survival to many factors, none of which were god. Of course the gullable will be rejoicing and saying; "see, god exists." So, how long before the book, cult following, and his evangelical ministry? Ignorance is not a blessing from god, it's a debilitating disease.

No, I didn't forget agenesis of the corpus callosum. While partial absence is more common, agenesis is only present in 1/3 of cases and I can find no evidence that this is the case with the civil servant.

As usual, you conveniently misunderstand the arguments against your position. Firstly, you are the one claiming the brain is unimportant with regards to consciousness and that the case of the French civil servant is proof of this. This is clearly false, as he has all the biological faculties for not only consciousness but the faculties allowing him to lead a relatively normal life.

It's not clearly false, we don't have the medical information. But we do have evidence from other cases:

http://www.rense.com/general63/brain.htm

The subject on that page was said to be scoring 126 on IQ tests, and was about to have graduated with a degree in mathematics. He had virtually no detectable brain what so ever:

"Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column."

Secondly, the video makes no claim that someone without a textbook brain can't live a normal life. In fact the video is overwhelmingly of a larger scale - referencing humanity as a whole as opposed to individuals and individual brains. So his brain does not refute the claims of the video at all.

Lacking any hemispheres at all, how could anything in this video apply to that person? It clearly shows it up to be the fever dreaming of militant materialists.

Further, I would argue that my analogy of the circulatory system, while not perfect, makes the point I intended (which you conveniently ignore again). The heart sends and receives the blood, the brain sends and receives electrical signals and chemicals. Not only are these physical, but they can be measured. A conscious mind can be differentiated from an unconscious one with the use of medical equipment like electrocardiogram and MRI. Recent research has even come close to "seeing" conscious thoughts with fMRIs.

There are innumerable cases of people who reported being conscious during periods of unconsciousness. It is a false analogy because consciousness is not proven to be physical and is therefore not analogous to blood. Chemicals and electrical signals are also not proven to have anything to do with consciousness itself, especially considering people experience consciousness during brain death: http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a1.

As for your free will response, I'm not even going to bother. Free will can be explained, and explained away a hundred different ways. From Foucaultian post-modernism to Hobbes' determinism this is a problem that wont be resolved here to anybody's satisfaction.

If you want to concede the point, that is up to you. You'll note that I didn't ask you to explain it away, I asked what you believe.

>> ^Skeeve:
You forgot agenesis of the corpus callosum, which means it is only partially formed or completely absent. Which means that his brain operates much differently than normal (obviously).
I never said he couldn't have consciousness if his brain was jumbled up. I was saying that his brain does not have the structure described in this video. Since we know he was a normal guy able to hold down a job and have proper relationships, it refutes the assertions that it made.
No, I didn't forget agenesis of the corpus callosum. While partial absence is more common, agenesis is only present in 1/3 of cases and I can find no evidence that this is the case with the civil servant.
As usual, you conveniently misunderstand the arguments against your position. Firstly, you are the one claiming the brain is unimportant with regards to consciousness and that the case of the French civil servant is proof of this. This is clearly false, as he has all the biological faculties for not only consciousness but the faculties allowing him to lead a relatively normal life. Secondly, the video makes no claim that someone without a textbook brain can't live a normal life. In fact the video is overwhelmingly of a larger scale - referencing humanity as a whole as opposed to individuals and individual brains. So his brain does not refute the claims of the video at all.
Further, I would argue that my analogy of the circulatory system, while not perfect, makes the point I intended (which you conveniently ignore again). The heart sends and receives the blood, the brain sends and receives electrical signals and chemicals. Not only are these physical, but they can be measured. A conscious mind can be differentiated from an unconscious one with the use of medical equipment like electrocardiogram and MRI. Recent research has even come close to "seeing" conscious thoughts with fMRIs.
As for your free will response, I'm not even going to bother. Free will can be explained, and explained away a hundred different ways. From Foucaultian post-modernism to Hobbes' determinism this is a problem that wont be resolved here to anybody's satisfaction.

>> ^Fletch:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Huh, so you see a tunnel of light when you approach c, I find this intriguing.
Yeah, just like when you drive through an actual tunnel. Does that intrigue you too? Maybe the road to heaven leads under the Hudson River. Who knew Weehawken, NJ was Paradise?


More that certain studies of mind have shown a seeming quantum nature to thought, specifically conciseness. That mind could be an entanglement of many different, yet simultaneous locations in space and time. What that all means, fuck if I know, just find it interesting that traveling the speed of light approximates certain peoples near death experiences. Not saying it is significant, only interesting. Or as Spock would say "fascinating". My mind sorts information of "likes" first and "relevance" second.

Study DMT.

>> ^lantern53:

There is far more evidence that God exists than that God does not exist.
Study near-death experiences.

>> ^lantern53:

There is far more evidence that God exists than that God does not exist.
Study near-death experiences.


Yes, more feeding of the troll. Still after studying near death experiences (NDS's) here's what I think:

For obvious reasons, people who experience NDE's tend to "envision" their own religious figures. For example, Africans don't "envision" Jesus any more than Americans "envision" Zeus. So does this prove all religions exist independently? Or do the shared similarities in the NDE's of people from different religions suggest they are all inherently the same? Another interesting tidbit I picked up while studying: Agnostics/Atheists who have NDE's do often become more spiritual; however, religious folks who come close to death and do NOT have NDE's can actually become LESS spiritual over time.