damn I missed it, I was at work
Greetings Gandalf,
I don't usually watch any TV, but my eldest son, who is 12 years, and who is immensly interested in these issues, bought it to my attention.
I saw the end of the program where the businessman who was a complete materialist, is now living a frugal life giving to humanity as a result of his NDE.
There was also a woman who had been totally blind from birth, who, from what I could gather, suffered a car accident and was clinically dead for a time. During that time she had an NDE and saw everything including her own body - which she had never seen before - and beings of light in the Astral.
The scientist at the end of the program seemed in no doubt that the mind is indeed separate from the physical brain, and that one day this could revolutionise the way people viewed things.
I can only hope that the organisations of creed and dogma do not attempt to repress these facts to suit their own control of their congregations and followers.
With best regards,
Adrian.
Gandalf!
You didnt by chance record it did you? Im doing my research paper in philosophy on that exact topic. If consciousness exists after death (which of course im arguing it does) That would be an excellent source! Strangely enough the reason im writing this now is because i just woke up from a dream in which i got shot and was in the process of what i thought was dying [|)]. Ive been having a lot of death dreams lately...anyway just thought id ask...time to go back to sleep [:)]
Sorry Micron, I didnt recrord it, but it might be worth asking at your department as often they tape tv programs that may be relevant to their subject, they do at my university at least.
About your death dreams - I used to get them now and again, I find it usually relates to change, that I am worried about change in some way. For example when I first started university I got a few of these dreams, indicating my concern and worries about sudden change. Of course, as it turned out the change was for the best, but I find that such concerns get manifested in my dreams by themes of death which is a metaphor for change and transformation.
In my one I looked inside a coffin and saw myself, in another I was gunned down!
I used to worry that these were premonitions that I was going to die but then I realised the highly symbolic nature of dreams!
Douglas
Fascinating! Are there any more details of the program you could tell us about? I would love to have seen it myself.
What was the exact date of the showing and the name of the programme please?
The program was called 'The day I died'.
I'll try and find the exact air date and let you know!
Douglas
Any more luck on finding out where we can get this anyone?
Sorry, I can't find any more details about it. maybe I should just type in the title into a search site?
Douglas
I found this reference on a web site:
'In a BBC TV documentary of 5th February 2003: "The Day I Died", more patients related similar experiences
Pim van Lommel concludes: "NDE pushes the limits of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind-brain relationship."
I don't know how you'll go about tracking the program down however, unless someone reads this who happened to tape it.
Regards,
Douglas
Further to the above comments. I saw this program too, and one of Susan Blackmore's comments mentioned above about the OBE being an illusion caused by firing neurons when the brain is shutting down. I saw her some years ago on TV, she is one of the few scientific types to actually have an astral projection, and yes she believes it is all illusion.
But a neuroscientist in the program said that neural activity ceases after 8 seconds after clinical death - I don't know if that is always the case. So the argument in the documentry was whether the OBE happens before the neural activity ceases or not.
They introduced an american woman who had an operation to remove an anuerism from her brain. Her brain was stopped for an hour - no neural activity at all. Yet she saw during this time the tools used for the operation. They were specialist tools that she never saw - her eyes were taped shut, and she was aneathetised before the tools were taken out of their boxes which themselves were hidden under sheets.
The fact she could describe these tools, and that her brain was inactive for an hour but she saw the whole operation, would suggest that OBEs are not caused by the dying moments of the brain, but are real experiences.
quote:
Originally posted by stephen~
Further to the above comments. I saw this program too, and one of Susan Blackmore's comments mentioned above about the OBE being an illusion caused by firing neurons when the brain is shutting down. I saw her some years ago on TV, she is one of the few scientific types to actually have an astral projection, and yes she believes it is all illusion.
But a neuroscientist in the program said that neural activity ceases after 8 seconds after clinical death - I don't know if that is always the case. So the argument in the documentry was whether the OBE happens before the neural activity ceases or not.
They introduced an american woman who had an operation to remove an anuerism from her brain. Her brain was stopped for an hour - no neural activity at all. Yet she saw during this time the tools used for the operation. They were specialist tools that she never saw - her eyes were taped shut, and she was aneathetised before the tools were taken out of their boxes which themselves were hidden under sheets.
The fact she could describe these tools, and that her brain was inactive for an hour but she saw the whole operation, would suggest that OBEs are not caused by the dying moments of the brain, but are real experiences.
1) not possible, theres no technology available to seize brain function other than killing someone.
2) death would occur straight away if even a large percentage of the brain siezed to function.
3) if the brain seizes to function for longer than 5 minutes then if the person is revived they will have brain damage.
1) not possible, theres no technology available to seize brain function other than killing someone.
Not true, Dr Robert A. Solomon performed a new procedure called Hypothermic Cardiac Arrest, where the patient is essentially put to death. The body temperature is lowered to 60 degrees, heartbeat and breathing are stopped, brainwaves flattened and blood drained from the head. The procedure is called 'Standstill' for short. In the case of Pam Reynolds (the subject in the documentry) she was clinically dead for one hour using this technique.
2) death would occur straight away if even a large percentage of the brain siezed to function.
Death did occur straight away, but she is still here, and not brain damaged.
3) if the brain seizes to function for longer than 5 minutes then if the person is revived they will have brain damage.
This is a myth, neurons cease to function, but they do not quickly reach a state where they cannot recover:
From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med,sci.life-extension,sci.cryonics
Subject: When DO Neurons Die Without Oxygen? Not When You Thought.
Date: 19 Feb 1998 04:54:24 GMT
For a long time there has been the idea that neurons "die" in 4 to
6 minutes without oxygen. Just what exactly "death" means on a cell
level, however, has been a bit of a sticky thing to define. It's not
as though a little ghost, shaped like a semi-formed neuron but with
blank holes for eyes, comes out of each cell at the moment it crumps.
So what does happen? The cells of the brain, even the neurons,
look much the same for some hours after death. But how are they
functionally? We now know that resuscitation can be acomplished as
long as 20 minutes after cardiac arrest, even at normal temperatures.
But what are the ultimate limits?
A short research letter published just this week in Lancet gives
some clues. Some of the letter follows:
LANCET 351, Feb 14, 1998 pp. 499-500
Recovery of axonal transport in "dead neurons"
Jipei Dei, et al.
It is generally believed that a neuron is highly sensitive to hypoxia
or glucose deprivation and that cerebral ischaemia of more than several
minutes results in irrevelersible brain neuron damage. This view has
been challenged [1], and we now present evidence for survival of human
brain neurons up to 8 hours after death such that they still have the
potential for recover their functions of energy metabolism and axonal
transport.
The evidence was obtained from our study of more than 30 postmortem
human brains. Postmortem delay is usually 3-6 hours. Brain tissues,
ranging from a slice of 400 um to a block of 3 x 2 x 2 cm, from
different areas (cortex, hypothalamus, and brainstem) were preincubated
in modified artificial cerebrospinal fluid at 0-4 C. for 2-3 hours.
[Two tracers were added which can be taken up and transported only
along living neurons. After incubation, tissues are fixed, cut, and
viewed. Transport of tracer was seen only in the presense of oxygen and
glucose, demonstrating active process]
"Our findings indicate that with suitable in-vitro treatment so-called
dead neurons recover oxidative metabolism, energy production, and
axonal transport. There appear to be some mechanisms that protect
neurons from death and, to some extent, their function may recover. ...
Which is exactly what happened to the clinically dead Pam Reynolds, she recovered fully because of the techniques used in the operation.
No offense Stephen but that is typical Science "smokescreen" and I will explain why.
Most here know that the first stages of a NDE and a OBE are very similiar. You exit the body and can witness you're enviorment in real time. That is where the sharing experiences end. From Joe the aithiest to Jack the christian experience something alike. That is usually a life review as well as meeting some form of light they refer to as "God, or ultimate consciousness" who inform's them they are not ready for death yet. Now tell me how is that Joe or Jack having never studied NDE cases all have similiar experiences?
The illusion is also again bunk. If that was the case then how exactly would someone witness real event's? How can anyone who has had more then one OBE learn to verify? So a firing neuron let's a blind woman see? Cell's still existing allow a person to transport NEW memories that can be verified into the brain to be able to relate?
I could go on and on but you get my drift. Typical science ... let's try to prove one thing maybe wrong in hopes it makes people not look ar the rest. Some cell's still kicking around has nothing to do with the issue. The brain is dead and after all the brain is how we function, remember, and experience everything. Not by some cell.
Have a good one and excuse typo's.... 6am
I don't think you read my post properly Gelfling.
The science 'smokescreen' as you put is supporting OBE/NDE not trying to disprove it. It is simply saying that, in this case, an hour elapsed from the time her brain was functioning. With no neural activity she couldn't have possibly have witnessed her own operation or stored a memory of it IF neural activity IS consciousness, because there was none.
That was the debate of the program afterall, whether consciousness is able to seperate from the body, it has everything to do with cells as those are where the 'non-believers' if you like think consciousness is located. The arguments and example of Pam Reynolds put in the program suggested very strongly that neural activity was not the be all and end all of consciousness, and that she was able to consciously leave her body when she had no neural activity. Therefore NDE/OBEs are not likely to be the illusion of misfiring neurons that ceased functioning 60 minutes previously.
The above poster seemed to be suggesting that she could not have been clinically dead for an hour (which would mean then that the NDE could still be an illusion caused by neural activity), but that is refuted by the science and I was merely backing up that with evidence that such circumstances do occur where brain function is stopped. The 'Standstill' clinical procedure and the case of Pam Reynolds are well documented, as is the potential for neurons to survive substantial amounts of time after clinical death.
Yeah evidently the time of the morning and my quick reading confused me. I am still confused. Granted I am no scientific mind. I have a degree in computer animation and that is a far cry from what we are speaking about here.
I have however read countless book's on NDE's and had a fair share of debate. I was born dead *not breathing* for over 12 minutes. I was very lucky in the fact I suffered no brain damage. I know for a fact the brain can be "dead" and survive fully working. I had a normal life. I have however felt very different in some aspect's. I have a very strong sense of empathy. Just watching someone crying can cause my eyes to water. Watching someone in distress can affect me. I have always felt a very strong energy in my hand's. I was raised in a usual Christian home and never heard about any new age theory until I got up into my late teen's. It was then I started reading and talking.
What I have found myself from the "religion" of science is a deep seated fear or disrespect for anything out of the norm. I have read more then my fair share of articles where scientist X comes upon a conclusion that is not "approved of". The result is scientist x getting pushed out almost. Reminding me much of a way a cult acts. Let me make it clear that science in general has great value. I am speaking of the die hard aithiest segment who will do just about anything to disprove ANY kind of soul/spirit/seperate consciousness including fraud.
All that said I think in the end we can never really understand it as a observer. NDE cases are interesting read's and it is a clear difference from inducing a OBE. I was reading about a group of people who would meet and induce projections in mass. They would all attempt to project and meet up. Not everyone or everytime was a success but they did have some. Here they are walking around some plane and experiencing it together. I myself had my dream effected by someone projecting in the same house. It was a friend from college who turned me on to the whole subject. What does all this tell us? That we all belong to some collective consciousness? That a whole world or plane is out there untouched and for the most part ignored? What are we missing exactly?
Anyway sorry about that.. it was 6am and I was half awake. My apoligies
Greetings Gelfling,
Thank you for your post.
You are correct, many people meet in the Astral for many reasons. Some just to explore and socialise, others to attend Spiritual schools, and there are Astral Temples to attend etc.. Whole organised activities take place in the Astral.
As I have said before, scientists seem only, for the most part, capable of willing to comprehend that which fits in with their education or own physical experiences. I believe that they are afraid to investigate or even consider anything else for fear of throwing themselves into turmoil. It is easier to stick with what they know. A particular example is the evolution of mankind where scientists/anthropologist simply will not accept anything beyond the current evolution theories, and that there have been many highly advanced races in places such as Atlantis, Mu (Lemuria), not to mention the other evidence in central and south America - e.g. the Ica stones.
I don't have a problem with scientists - I used to be one in my early twenties.
With best regards,
Adrian.
I agree with what ur saying Adrian, although I'm not sure about the atlantis mythology.. I can't get my head around that one.
Douglas
On a related note - something to look out for -
Just to let you know there in a Horizon program on BBC2 on 20th March at 9.00 called God on the Brain.
It's about this bloke who says he can induce spiritual experiences by applying magnetic fields to someone's brain. Transcdendence at the touch of a button! Should be worth a watch.
AJ
I wish I could get the BBC here where I live. It seems like they're always doing interesting documentaries. It seems like they're also more open to dealing with subjects like NDE, OBE, and spiritual stuff.
Nice one boomy boomy, i have set a reminder so i can watch it! Thanks again, i would never have known.
as
this just popped in my mind reading this but have any of you ever seen "flat liners" its not a true story or anything but an interesting Movie on induced NDE
Bastard BBC cancelled tonight's God on the Brain program for war coverage. I've emailed them asking when it will be shown and I'll let you know if I get a reply.
I found a weblink if you want more info on it...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrain.shtml
AJ
That would be good boomyboomy, i was up last night with my video recorder on standby waiting for it to start...But disappointment [:(]
"God on the Brain" program postponed until 17 April.
Got to try and remember that!
quote:
Originally posted by boomyboomy
On a related note - something to look out for -
Just to let you know there in a Horizon program on BBC2 on 20th March at 9.00 called God on the Brain.
It's about this bloke who says he can induce spiritual experiences by applying magnetic fields to someone's brain. Transcdendence at the touch of a button! Should be worth a watch.
AJ
hmmm that sounds a little like the guy who wrote "the god part of the brain" im wonddering if its the same guy.
If it is i'd be very careful to watch what slant he puts on this. If its the guy im thinking of he says because there is action in a certain part of the brain when someone has a mystical experience it is fake and caused by the brain. Therefore he can induce "mystical or godlike experiences" by stimulating this part of the brain.
In other words he is using this theory to try to disprove there is any God out there or anything at all metaphysical or mystical.
There is one huge flaw in his theory though. There is a part of our brain that shows activity for everything. Every emotion will show an activity in the brain. When a person is feeling agression, love, anger or hurt. Does that make these emotions not real? Another thing is sometimes our brain might be triggers due to how we're trying to process an experience. It doesn't mean our brain created the experience but this guy makes it seem as though activity in the brain=a brain created event.
Im not sure this is the same guy, but if it is he'll make it clear right away he's trying to prove "God" only exists in the brain.
Its important to pay attention to the message some of these people who claim they can create an experience are really trying to convey.
vv
I think Goingslow is right, I've got a feeling it is about the DNA-man himself Francis Crick's theories on the brain and the nature of consciousness being explained as nothing more than neural activity. I read a book of his about 5 or 6 years ago in which he was beginning to shape these theories and recently I saw some article in a paper that he believed god is hard-wired into the brain. I could be putting two and two together and coming up with seven, but I think this is what that TV documentary will be about.
The documentary is another 'Horizon' documentary - the same program that made the documentary The Day I Died which put the case for OBE being real. They are usually very balanced documentries,so it will be interesting to see what they say. But they can't both be right, either the neuroscientists in the first program are wrong and Pam Reynolds is lying or deluded somehow, or Crick is wrong. I think most of us here know it's real and can't be arsed to wait for science to catch up and find out.
I also remember reading Crick's book: The Astonishing Hypothesis : The Scientific Search For The Soul. I really don't buy into the idea that God is hard-wired into our brain and mystical experiences are nothing more than neural activity. As far as biology goes, God does nothing to help ensure survival. There seems to be no reason to think that it would benefit a species in any way. It would most likely eradicate fear of death and be counterproductive to survival. And the idea that evolution would be concerned about how peaceful our final moments are is just difficult to believe. I'm no expert on evolution but I've read Crick, Dawkins, Dennett, and others, and I can't say I'm very convinced by their arguments.
OK - the BBC Horizon program that was meant to be on last month is on tonight at 9:00 on BBC2 - God on the Brain. Let's hope it's a balanced program!
Boomy
Hi everyone,
Hopefully, we'll get to see that BBC program at some point here in the States.
There was a made for tv movie here not too long ago based on the experiences of Dannion Brinkley who was struck by lightning and was dead for about a half hour. He was pronounced dead and taken to the morgue. By chance at the morgue, someone saw a little movement under the sheet they had thrown over him, and discovered he had come back to life. The movie had the same title as his book: Saved By the Light.
This link has some information if you're interested:
http://www.lightstreamers.com/dannion_brinkley.htm
Hi, I noticed the discussion on NDE and the research done by van Lommel here in the Netherlands. You can download the whole report with findings etc at :
http://profezie3m.altervista.org/archivio/TheLancet_NDE.htm#results
Kind regards,
Laurent
This was on at 9:00PM on Wednesday night (in the UK) I thought it was interesting as the program showcased the latest research to tell us what we already knew - that there does in fact appear to be some kind of separation between mind and body.
the sceptic Dr Susan Blackmore was on the show postulating her thesis about near death experiences being illusions caused by the dying brain but her theory couldnt account for the findings of more recent research of brain-dead heart attack patients (who had absolutly *no* brain activity at all) but who nevertheless described events during the recusitation procedure.
The program took the view that if someone could experience while the brain was totally non-functional then it led to the conclusion that there was something apart from the brain itself at work.
An analogy to a tv set was made where it may be the case that science has the wrong view of what the brain is. Up until now it was considered the origin of conciousness but perhaps it is actually the receiver of conciousness - a fundamental difference.
Its like a tv set, if you had know idea of the concept of how a tv worked you would assume that the tv signals/picture originated from the components of the tv itself - you would not understand that the tv actually is a device for receiving and displaying the signal, not the origin.
Regards,
Douglas