Evidence of the Afterlife by Jeffery Long, MD
Very compelling.
Posted on 01/23/2010 3:48:39 AM PST by Biggirl
Is there life after death? Theologians can debate all they want, but radiation oncologist Dr. Jeffrey Long argues that if you look at the scientific evidence, the answer is unequivocally yes. Drawing on a decade's worth of research on near-death experiences — work that includes cataloguing the stories of some 1,600 people who have gone through them — he makes the case for that controversial conclusion in a new book, Evidence of the Afterlife. Medicine, Long says, cannot account for the consistencies in the accounts reported by people all over the world. He talked to TIME about the nature of near-death experience, the intersection between religion and science and the Oprah effect.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
>”No, it’s fade to black when you go.”
I’m one of those people that experienced going “someplace else” as I lay dieing from a massive heart attack at 46. The first thing I asked myself was “Is this a dream? NO! It’s not!” AT that point I KNEW where I was, and also that I was being given the choice of going back or not. Obviously, I chose to come back. Having been fascinated by reports of this in the past, I can assure you, you go somewhere, and, to the best of my knowledge, you are awake and cognizant of where you are and what is going on. At least, I was.
Is there, however, life after dinner?
The entire euthanasia and assisted suicide lobby is built on the unwaivering leap of faith that the experience of being dead is overall and always positive or neutral, never negative, for the dead person.
But what's the evidence for that?
Experiences like the ones you describe can be duplicated by stimulating certain parts of the brain. Hypoxia, something you probably experienced due to your condition, can also lead to hallucinations.
A commentary based on the book, you might find it of interest.
To me, Stephen Hawking’s quantum physics theory on information loss comes extremely close to proving life after death.
It only seems logical. (How does one "impose death"?) If one has religious faith, that takes the argument to another level. With someone like myself, there simply is no argument to be made. But obviously that doesn't stop YOU from believing it, and my standards of logic say you're wrong, just as your standard of belief says I am.
The entire euthanasia and assisted suicide lobby is built on the unwaivering leap of faith that the experience of being dead is overall and always positive or neutral, never negative, for the dead person. But what's the evidence for that?
This is the first time I've heard of that, so I can't say.
Could you elaborate.
http://www.skepticreport.com/newage/stevensonbook.htm
We'll all find out sooner or later.
>”Experiences like the ones you describe can be duplicated by stimulating certain parts of the brain. Hypoxia, something you probably experienced due to your condition, can also lead to hallucinations.”
I know. Myself, I always figured that was PROBABLY what it was, and if anything was to come afterwards, you probably wouldn’t be coming back to talk about it. Of course, that was before I experienced what I did. It was nothing like what I had read, there was no tunnel with a bright light, but rather, instantly, I became aware that I was in a room along with someone else. On the opposite side of the room, the door was open and yes, it was just pure light coming through. I have never had a dream where I asked myself if I was dreaming, so that part really stunned me, even when I was asking myself that question. When my options had been made clear to me (I think by the person in the room), and I made my decision, boom, I was back and opening my eyes. Going over this in my head (as I have done ALOT) from the spiritual AND scientific aspects, all I can say is this was certainly no exercise in loss of O2 or anything else for that matter, other than my conciseness was transported to somewhere that we do not normally have access to. Very, VERY weird, but I am certainly glad I was given the opportunity to experience what I did.
Good for you Scooby. Sounds like a wonderful experience.
All past and future moments are composed of the current moment..
As Jesus said, "Let tomorrow take care of itself"..
Live "the moment" as if, it was your last..
because the truth is, whatever is... "IS", and whatever ain't..... "AIN'T"..
Be true to what you "see".. not what somebody else "sees"..
Science fiction MUST be logical, or no one would care..
Reality need not be logical at all.. (nothing to prove)..
IMO, it is unknowable and unprovable.
Evidence of the Afterlife by Jeffery Long, MD
Very compelling.
A great story. Where can I read more about this?
I didn't say you were wrong. I asked:
(1) What is the evidence that death is not a status change from life? And,
(2) If a status change, what's the evidence that that change is positive or neutral in terms of what the dead person is experiencing?
My point is that people with your view are deluding themselves that, with people like them (i.e., as you said, you), "there simply is no argument to be made."There is always an argument to be made. Conclusions always have a basis, whether or not recognized or articulated.
The conclusion that there is no life after death, or that death brings a big nothingness, or WHATEVER is just as much a leap of faith as concluding that life continues in some way after the body changes to what we call "dead."
Regardless of one's views on what happens upon bodily death, ALL views on this subject are based on faith -- because there is no direct, hard evidence for either conclusion.
The link I provided goes into detail about how the entire euthanasia and assisted suicide lobby is, in my words, built on the unwaivering leap of faith that the experience of being dead is overall and always positive or neutral, never negative. If you read the article, I'd like your reaction to it.
Basically, people argue it's okay to kill (euthanasia) or help kill (assisted suicide) people because death is better than life, at least in some circumstances. That assumes an awful lot.
What else does it mean when people argue that it's okay to kill people because death "alleviates suffering"? How in the world do they know that?
They don't. They just believe it on faith, just the same as people who believe deat, in some cases, actually may usher in eternal suffering.
Related article: Death, Dying and the Afterlife: Has the idea of what it's like to be dead become an urban legend?
Basically, Hawking's "information paradox" starts with the idea that the entire universe is made of information, and information can never be lost. That is, that no matter how much it is cut up, pulverized, scattered, whatever, the information never actually goes away (i.e., it never actually becomes nothing).
So, as I understand it, the Q.P. theory of information is that something can never become nothing. It may change into a form that looks like what we perceive as "nothing," but it's not actually nothing because information cannot be lost (i.e., it cannot completely go away).
Think about the mass of a log you burn: some of it becomes gas, particles in the air, ash that goes into the ground, etc. It stops being a "log," but it's mass just redistributed.
This theory of information led to the "information paradox." Hawking then found through quantum physics that, despite theoretical calculations demonstrating that information could not be lost, information did seem to go away, leave the universe, be lost. This created a great paradox (heresy!) that threatened the physicist's concept of what is "real."
Again, as I understand it, this led Hawking on a great quest to prove the theory of information either wrong or reconcile it with the apparent "loss" of information. This led to mathematical proofs that information --- remember this means the very essence of all physical and even "mental" matter (memories, for example) in the universe --- is not lost but changes form at the very edge of black holes and, he said, passes into a parallel universe.
So, according to this Q.P. proof, information is not "lost," it merely changes form and is retained in a separate but connected universe.
I'm sitting there watching two long documentaries on Hawking and this debate, and, to me, there was no escaping the similarity between what Hawking said quantum physics proved about the information paradox and what Christians believe about the status change we call "death" and how a person's "information" passes to a parallel universe (what Christians view as the spiritual or heavenly realm).
Hope that was neither too jargon-y nor too simplistic. Just throwing it out there for starters. Again, I am not a physicist, so can't debate the fine points of Hawking's calculations. Thanks for asking.
A related article: Quantum Physics and "Them Dry Bones."
It's = its.
Sigh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.