Dr Leon Greene nde sceptic

#2
My impression is that we have covered everything he discusses at great length!

His first point seems particularly idiotic for a Christian:
1. The existence of a spirit has yet to be proven.

For many, the existence of the spirit is a foregone conclusion, but despite its popularity, it remains an extraordinary supernatural claim, one that requires equally extraordinary evidence (and not just anecdotal stories). If people really can exist apart from the bodies, this should be something that can be proven, and we need repeatable experiments that can demonstrates this claim.
His second point re alien abductions - well yes we generally take reports of alien abductions seriously too - for exactly the same reason - the many reports have a common theme.

His fifth point is perhaps the most interesting:
5. Who’s religious NDE should we believe?


The fact is that NDE's as reported in the West don't seem to conform to Christianity on the whole - precisely the reason why he doesn't like the concept!

It may be that reports in other countries have been distorted in some way, or it might be that a person is given a comforting death experiences corresponding to whatever he believes at that point. The real point is that exciting things happen, and the mind is clear just at a point when the brain is essentially shut down! At the very least materialists should expect that an NDE would fade as it progressed - but that is not what happens!

David
 
#3
Actually the sceptic who brought this point up was an atheist materialist and he got so desperate( because he couldn't refute the nde scientific evidence ) that he resorted to using a link from a fundamentalist site .
If your sceptical friend is willing to play fair (e.g. not try to trash discussions, or abuse people, or just talk in vague generalities), he would of course be welcome here! We seem to have ended up with very few sceptics who want to genuinely argue their case - I can't think why :)

David
 
#5
Hehe yea David i asked hm to come here but he's more comfortable on Twitter with his band of pseudo sceptics .

Ever since I started looking into nde research 6 years ago I find the scientific evidence for survival to be simply amazing and a huge headache for materialists .

I've never seen sceptics abandon science , reason and logic the way they do when confronted by nde evidence .
I suspect the evidence for reincarnation is also pretty strong - it is just that researchers have to go and look for it, rather than encounter patients who are reporting an NDE to the staff in a hospital.

Then there is this forum devoted to the subject of extraordinary things that happen around actual death:

http://allnurses.com/general-nursing-discussion/death-bed-visions-301825.html

This podcast was linked to within the above forum.


I just wish the guy would keep off scientific explanations for what is going on!

David
 
Last edited:
#7
I can't for the life of me understand why any human being would want to dogmatically want to not exist after physical death to the point that they would deny even the scientific evidence for survival

I'm completely baffled
Perhaps they want to be right more than anything else? Almost like some religious people, they're convinced they're right and will not or cannot admit anything which challenges their belief system. So it needs to be rationalised away - however tenuously. Once we adopt a particular belief as being definitively correct, we run the risk of looking for reasons to dismiss anything that might suggest we were wrong.

Somewhat paradoxically I think sometimes people take a very adverse stance because they actually want to be proved wrong. The trouble with this is that often they don't do any real research, and end up painting themselves into a corner. My personal view, is that it isn't possible to form a reasonable on the subject simply by engaging in discussion/argumentation without adequate reading, thinking or research.

Creating doubt in an area like this is very easy, doing actual research and balanced reading is too much like hard work for some. Plus it can be difficult to set aside one's preconceived ideas or religious programming.
 
#8
None of the materialist attempts to explain NDEs can really explain them. NDEs cannot be explained by: a lack of oxygen, a dying brain, hallucinations, religious expectations, cultural expectations, hearing about medical procedures after the fact, hearing during resuscitation, brain dysfunction, retinal dysfunction causing an image of a tunnel, brain chemicals such as ketamine, endogenous opioids, neurotransmitter imbalances, or hallucinogens including DMT, REM intrusions, epilepsy or seizures, psychopathology, unique personality traits, residual brain activity during unconsciousness, the experience occurring before or after brain activity stopped, brain activity during CPR, evolutionary adaptation, depersonalization, memory of birth, medication, naloxone, defense against dying, partial anesthesia, misuse of anecdotes, or selective reporting.
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/07/materialist-explanations-of-ndes-fail.html

see the link for details

Evidence of the afterlife:
http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/summary_of_evidence
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/p/62014-...-afterlife.html#articles_by_subject_afterlife
 
Last edited:
#9
Jim yes can you explain the term anecdote a bit more ? What constitutes an anecdotes and what doesn't constitute an anecdote ?
http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2013/07/materialist-explanations-of-ndes-fail.html#nde_explain_anecdote
Misuse of anecdotes:
Long
... the NDERF study that I presented in the book is certainly vastly beyond anecdotal evidence. We actually studied 1,300 near-death experiences. It’s certainly not just a limited number of case reports. And you’re right, our modern questionnaire is over 150 questions, so no doubt we have the depth of analysis, as well. And most of the research that’s published in the book was based on surveying over 600 near-death experiencers that filled out the most recent version of the questionnaire.

Let me start out with sort of a basic scientific overview, and that is what’s real is consistently observed. So we’ve observed evidence of the afterlife and near-death experience is not only in the vast number of near-death experiences studied in tremendous depth in my own study, but all my major findings are corroborated by scores of prior scholarly studies. We’re way beyond what could reasonably be called anecdotal. We’re really in very hard-core evidence based on my work and the work of many others.​
More here:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_fallacies#skeptical_fallacies_anecdotes_reliable

These fallacies are refuted at the link:
Anecdotal evidence is not reliable.
Anecdotal evidence is unscientific because it is not repeatable.
Anecdotal evidence is unscientific because it cannot be disproved.
Anecdotal evidence is the result of people who are in emotional turmoil and is therefore unreliable.
Anecdotal evidence is not meaningful without a statistical basis for understanding it. Anecdotes may be due to chance coincidence.
 
#10
"Anecdote" is a general term. Sometimes you just have a story where you don't know the origin or who reported it or when. They can't be verified and are not very useful. But if you have a systematic study by a cardiologist who interviews his patients after they have a heart attack and you know the name of the patient and his medical records exist so an independent researcher can verify the reports of experiences ... those are high quality anecdotes and you can analyze them scientifically.
 

Brian_the_bard

Lost Pilgrim
Member
#11
His first point seems particularly idiotic for a Christian:
Not necessarily. Apart from a few highly interpretable passages, the bible speaks of a physical resurrection and not of a seperate soul or spirit. The terms "soul" and "spirit" are used a little differently in the bible to the way we tend to use them.
 
#12
Not necessarily. Apart from a few highly interpretable passages, the bible speaks of a physical resurrection and not of a seperate soul or spirit. The terms "soul" and "spirit" are used a little differently in the bible to the way we tend to use them.
Very many years ago, I used to be a Christian, and I never got the idea that people would be physically resurrected - what would that even mean when the atoms of which a person might have been made would have been scattered and maybe been part of a number of people over time!

David
 

Brian_the_bard

Lost Pilgrim
Member
#13
Very many years ago, I used to be a Christian, and I never got the idea that people would be physically resurrected - what would that even mean when the atoms of which a person might have been made would have been scattered and maybe been part of a number of people over time!

David
I wonder if you have read the new testament yourself or whether you trusted your leaders too much. ! Corinthians 15:42 says for example "42So will it be with the resurrection of the dead: What is sown is perishable; it is raised imperishable. 43It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power.…" If you search any online concordance in the New Testament for "resurrection" you will see many many bible passages about it. Having said this I have relooked at your post and noticed that he doesn't believe in the supernatural. Now that is bizarre for a christian! I don't know how resurrection would work in practice but I wasn't arguing for its reality. I don't wish to preach on this forum.
 
#14
4. Why do NDEs vary with culture?

'In my fathers house are many mansions'


13. Why don’t only Christians have positive NDEs?

many Christians are not very Christlike..
& plenty of those of other religions or none are.
 

Brian_the_bard

Lost Pilgrim
Member
#15
4. Why do NDEs vary with culture?

'In my fathers house are many mansions'


13. Why don’t only Christians have positive NDEs?

many Christians are not very Christlike..
& plenty of those of other religions or none are.
I am not contending for my faith. I am not refuting NDE evidence. If somebody proves me wrong to my satisfaction I will gladly admit my error and change my mind. Please don't be angry - I would rather be friendly with people of ALL persuasions.
In my Fathers house are many mansions is a good point and I will be thinking about it for some time but it doesn't entirely negate my point. The word "resurrection" is everywhere in the New Testament.
 
#16
Very many years ago, I used to be a Christian, and I never got the idea that people would be physically resurrected - what would that even mean when the atoms of which a person might have been made would have been scattered and maybe been part of a number of people over time!

David
I've read that something like 98% of the human body's atoms are replaced every decade or so. A sort of ongoing "resurrection"?
 
#17
I am not contending for my faith. I am not refuting NDE evidence. If somebody proves me wrong to my satisfaction I will gladly admit my error and change my mind. Please don't be angry - I would rather be friendly with people of ALL persuasions.
In my Fathers house are many mansions is a good point and I will be thinking about it for some time but it doesn't entirely negate my point. The word "resurrection" is everywhere in the New Testament.
My post wasn't a reply to yourself , but to the OP link I'd been browsing through - & saw some questions easily answerable.(IMO)

I think I just happened to post near yours time-wise. In fact I hadn't seen your one till I checked my own post.

All the best :)
 

Brian_the_bard

Lost Pilgrim
Member
#18
I've read that something like 98% of the human body's atoms are replaced every decade or so. A sort of ongoing "resurrection"?
That is an interesting point. I have thought before that this is evidence that we were made to live forever. As far as I am aware though, brain cells don't get replaced when they die.
 

Brian_the_bard

Lost Pilgrim
Member
#19
My post wasn't a reply to yourself , but to the OP link I'd been browsing through - & saw some questions easily answerable.(IMO)

I think I just happened to post near yours time-wise. In fact I hadn't seen your one till I checked my own post.

All the best :)
You are welcome.:)
 
#20
I've read that something like 98% of the human body's atoms are replaced every decade or so. A sort of ongoing "resurrection"?
I think it's a lot quicker than that. The whole body is replaced . So I've heard.

The atoms we currently have in our body once belonged to all sorts of characters in history. I wonder if that accounts for some of our moments of advancement and some of our times of regression..;)
 
Top