malf
Member
When Alex interviews "skeptics" there is always a similar refrain from proponents about the interviewee's lack of knowledge of the NDE research papers.
It is certainly frustrating. Why doesn't Alex supply the guest with 4 or 5 papers before the interview so that they can at least get idea from where, and how, Alex is informing his argument?
I have a suspicion that while there are some studies out there, they do not strongly endorse the interviewer's position (as vague as that is). Even on this forum, the proponent's strongest arguments appear to be in youtube form.
With that in mind, I wondered if forum members could suggest maybe 4 or 5 journal papers that Alex could supply to skeptics before recording of the show, to make for less painful listening :)
Links to the studies would be great so that we can examine how they could inform the discussion.
It is certainly frustrating. Why doesn't Alex supply the guest with 4 or 5 papers before the interview so that they can at least get idea from where, and how, Alex is informing his argument?
I have a suspicion that while there are some studies out there, they do not strongly endorse the interviewer's position (as vague as that is). Even on this forum, the proponent's strongest arguments appear to be in youtube form.
With that in mind, I wondered if forum members could suggest maybe 4 or 5 journal papers that Alex could supply to skeptics before recording of the show, to make for less painful listening :)
Links to the studies would be great so that we can examine how they could inform the discussion.
Last edited: