Poll: Poll: Do you believe in an afterlife?

Do you believe in an aferlife?

  • Yes

    Votes: 102 17.5%
  • No

    Votes: 380 65.2%
  • undecided

    Votes: 101 17.3%

  • Total voters
    583
  • Poll closed .
Not really main stream science. I would expect that if he had proof that people could talk to the dead or what ever his claim was it would be in nature. It is a pretty big find.

It does say he has some books published and an award but they are equally as bad.

Anyway, my point is you can't use research from pseudo-science to back up life after death.
There is a longer list of lets say more venerable researchers/scientists along with other examples but you didn't really need me to tell you that though did you.

Just because science can't explain everything doesn't mean you can fill all the gaps with fairy stories.
You wouldn't accept or recognise a paranormal event if it slapped you in the face. That's not to say that everything science cannot explain is a fairy story either.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how they can be linked together?

Science has shown how the brain behaves as it dies... Mis-firing all over the place, explaining near death experiences. It has also shown how it dies in bits... So to sustain a solid conciousness is not physically possible.

Could you link me to the peer reviewed research paper(s) that show this? And which therefore supports your position. Genuinely interested.

As far as i am aware NDEs and OBEs havent been explained yet. There is a difference between explaining something(which adds to knowledge) and explaining away something (which merely brushes the topic under the proverbial carpet)
 
Last edited:
Well if it is in a respected journal link me and I will read the work. Otherwise I think we will have to agree to disagree.

Well you might be aware of an article that found itself in the Lancet to do with one in ten cardiac arrest survivors having experienced emotions, visions or lucid thoughts while they were clinically dead. In medical terms they were “flatliners” or unconscious with no signs of brain activity, pulse or breathing. I am unable to link to that.


However, there might be something of interest to regarding the work of a Dr. Sam Parnia, previously an assistant professor of critical care at State University of New York, Stony Brook. I think he is now working In Hammersmith Hospital. Dr Parnia has previously studied near-death experiences. Two years ago his work was published in the prestigious medical journal Resuscitation. Dr Parnia’s team rigorously interviewed 63 cardiac arrest patients and discovered that seven had memories of their brief period of ‘death’, although only four passed the Grayson scale, the strict medical criteria for assessing near-death experiences. Parnia is particularly rigourous in his work to counter sceptical objections etc.
 
Well you might be aware of an article that found itself in the Lancet to do with one in ten cardiac arrest survivors having experienced emotions, visions or lucid thoughts while they were clinically dead. In medical terms they were “flatliners” or unconscious with no signs of brain activity, pulse or breathing. I am unable to link to that.


However, there might be something of interest to regarding the work of a Dr. Sam Parnia, previously an assistant professor of critical care at State University of New York, Stony Brook. I think he is now working In Hammersmith Hospital. Dr Parnia has previously studied near-death experiences. Two years ago his work was published in the prestigious medical journal Resuscitation. Dr Parnia’s team rigorously interviewed 63 cardiac arrest patients and discovered that seven had memories of their brief period of ‘death’, although only four passed the Grayson scale, the strict medical criteria for assessing near-death experiences. Parnia is particularly rigourous in his work to counter sceptical objections etc.

I can't find the Lancet paper, but my search terms were probably way out.

As for Dr Parnia's work, I found five of his papers in Resuscitation (I have no background in medicine or life science so I don't if this is good or not. However, it is in Elsevier which is OK), but none appear to give any proof of life after death or out of body experiences etc that I could see. Perhaps you can give me a specific article of his? I agree a google search of Dr Parnia gives plenty of hits relating to the above, but nothing publish that I could find.

Bed for me now anyway..
 
Bit definitive aren't you? It might be that millions of people have already discovered there is an afterlife but with no means of communicating it to those still on this mortal coil.

I'm undecided and for that matter uncaring about about it - either there is an afterlife and I'll have to deal with it once I die or there isn't and this is it. Either way it would appear that there's nothing I can do about it just now so there's no point in me worrying about it.

That may be true, but with absolutely no way of ever knowing people will have to just learn to forget, apart from the people who have belief in it.

I personally have no care about it, if there is fair enough, if there isnt, oh well.

Im a very relaxed person :p
 
I used to believe there was something and have experienced things that are classed as paranormal however since having my daughter 7 months ago I've developed a deep seated fear that when you die, there's nothing but blackness, it just ends.

That thought, for some reason scares the **** out of me.
 
Well if it is in a respected journal link me and I will read the work. Otherwise I think we will have to agree to disagree.

There are plenty of examples of NDE Research that are peer reviewed.....NDE Research itself is simply part of the medical sciences of Psychiatry and Psychology......people like Dr Kenneth Ring, Prof Bruce Greyson and Elisabeth Kübler-Ross all contributing to such research.

http://www.iands.org/publications/journal-of-near-death-studies.html
 
That may be part of the problem right there, do we have any real sciences that are looking in to it? :D

http://xkcd.com/435/

Are psychiatry and medicine not real sciences?

I find it amusing that people will dismiss something as 'not real science' yet rely on it or it's related fields elsewhere......Psychology or Cognitive Neuroscience for example.

And is science not basically the application of scientific method to a problem?

Besides NDE research is interdisciplinary, it includes a gamut of disciplines from psychiatry to psychology to neuroscience.....
 
Last edited:
Are psychiatry and medicine not real sciences?

I find it amusing that people will dismiss something as 'not real science' yet rely on it or it's related fields elsewhere......Psychology or Cognitive Neuroscience for example.

And is science not basically the application of scientific method to a problem?

Besides NDE research is interdisciplinary, it includes a gamut of disciplines from psychiatry to psychology to neuroscience.....

It was a joke...
 
There are plenty of examples of NDE Research that are peer reviewed.....NDE Research itself is simply part of the medical sciences of Psychiatry and Psychology......people like Dr Kenneth Ring, Prof Bruce Greyson and Elisabeth Kübler-Ross all contributing to such research.

http://www.iands.org/publications/journal-of-near-death-studies.html

I don't have time for a long reply right now, but we are not talking about NDE research. We are talking about showing statistical proof/scientific evidence that an afterlife exists. See my first post and ethans reply etc.
 
That may be part of the problem right there, do we have any real sciences that are looking in to it?
Will real people do ;)

Dr Peter Bander, Dr Julie Beischel, Professor John Bockris, John Logie Baird, Professor J.W. Crawford, Dr Robert Crookal, Professor Arthur Ellison, Dr Peter Fenwick, Professor Festa, Dr Edith Fiore, Professor David Fontana, Dr Amit Goswami, Professor Gustav Geley, Professor Ivor Grattan-Guinesss, Professor Stanislav Grof, Dr Arthur Guirdham, Dr Glen Hamilton, Professor Charles Hapgood, Professor Sylvia Hart-Wright, Professor James Hyslop, Professor William James, Dr Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, Drs Jeff and Jody Long, afterlife investigator Mark Macy, Engineer George Meek, Dr Raymond Moody, Dr Melvin Morse, Dr Morris Nertherton, Dr Karlis Osis, Dr Peter Ramster, Lawyer Edward C Randall, Dr.Konstantine Raudive, Drs J.B. and Louisa Rhine, Nobel Laureate Professor Charles Richet, Dr Kenneth Ring, Lawyer Dr Aubrey Rose, Professor Archie Roy, Dr Michael Sabom, Dr Hans Schaer, Professor Marilyn Schlitz, Dr Ernst Senkowski, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, Judge Dean Shuart, Dr Ian Stevenson, Dr Claude Swanson, Emmanuel Swedenborg, Dr Charles Tart, Professor Jessica Utts, Dr Jan W Vandersande, Dr Pim Van Lommel, Professor Wadhams, Prof. Alfred Wallace, Dr Helen Wambach, Dr Carl Wickland, Dr Carla Wills-Brandon.
I'll admit I have yet to exhaustively check their work.

Interesting NDE study here which involved 344 cardiac paitents who were successfully resuscitated after cardiac arrest in ten Dutch hospitals.


We are talking about showing statistical proof/scientific evidence that an afterlife exists.
Regarding this it is fair to say it is early days. If it is to come I would rather expect it to do so within the next 50-100 years. There are of course a number of mitigating circumstances as to why the info is not yet conclusive or readily available, though I would expect sceptics to conclude these to be excuses. A (lengthy) reply from you when you have the time would be a good way to guage your thoughts. I believe studies like the one proposed above in the Lancet will eventually settle this discussion once and for all.
 
Last edited:
Will real people do ;)

I did mention that was a joke...

I'll admit I have yet to exhaustively check their work.

Interesting NDE study here which involved 344 cardiac paitents who were successfully resuscitated after cardiac arrest in ten Dutch hospitals.



Regarding this it is fair to say it is early days. If it is to come I would rather expect it to do so within the next 50-100 years. There are of course a number of mitigating circumstances as to why the info is not yet conclusive or readily available, though I would expect sceptics to conclude these to be excuses. A (lengthy) reply from you when you have the time would be a good way to guage your thoughts. I believe studies like the one proposed above in the Lancet will eventually settle this discussion once and for all.

Why do you feel that the studies into NDE are in any way related to the existence of an afterlife?

I found the fact that it is somewhat age dependent interesting, almost as if your exposure to popular culture had something to do with what you experienced when near death. Similar to how UFO sigthings all started to be saucer shaped after the various movies with saucer shaped UFOs.
 
I did mention that was a joke...
It was an (assumed subtle) attempt at humour that failed. I was aware you were joking.

Why do you feel that the studies into NDE are in any way related to the existence of an afterlife?
You mean as opposed to them being hallucinatory or as a consequence of something else?
 
I only know one name on that list off the top of my head - John Bockris. He was a very important electrochemist (assuming it is the same person) and a clever guy. I have read a few of his books. Unfortunately he also went a bit off the rails towards the end of his career as he was a big supporter of cold fusion which turned out to be wrong. I think what killed him off the most was his claims he could turn cheap metals into gold. :) To be clear, this is why i used "was important" above, he is not dead that I know of, just not as respected anymore.

Anyway, probably a different scientist, but it is a funny story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bockris

I wouldn't let his later work put you off reading his books however, he writes very well.
 
Last edited:
Regarding this it is fair to say it is early days. If it is to come I would rather expect it to do so within the next 50-100 years. There are of course a number of mitigating circumstances as to why the info is not yet conclusive or readily available, though I would expect sceptics to conclude these to be excuses. A (lengthy) reply from you when you have the time would be a good way to guage your thoughts. I believe studies like the one proposed above in the Lancet will eventually settle this discussion once and for all.

Well it is clear I don't think such proof will ever come. But I am not against the idea of an afterlife, I just see no reason to suggest such a thing exists. Given the option I would go with eternal life :)

In the interests of a more rounded discussion, I do believe even if proof could be obtained it would not be accepted anyway as most respected academics would not even bother to give it the time of day.
 
How can there be an "undecided", separate from the yes and no answers? If you haven't decided whether or not you believe in something, then you don't believe in it. You may change your mind later, but at the time you're undecided then you don't believe it.
 
In the interests of a more rounded discussion, I do believe even if proof could be obtained it would not be accepted anyway as most respected academics would not even bother to give it the time of day.

That would depend entirely on how it is presented.....given the often outlandish hypothesis of some Quantum and Theoretical Physics you would think a similar reaction would apply.....it doesn't, simply because of the way it is presented.....

Any self-respecting scientist would, or should consider anything that is presented according to scientific methodology, has a proven framework and can be independently verified.
 
Back
Top Bottom