There IS life after DEATH: Scientists reveal shock findings

[haseeb ahmed]

according to religious beliefs much of the people believe that there is life after death.but no one ever thought about that science will prove it one day,because in much of cases science differentiate from religious thought.it is a shocking news

[Racey]

So you neurons are firing longer than they initially thought after your heart stops.

You class that as living?

Seems just like a slightly longer descent into nothingness to me.

^
This is the correct answer.

Always people a looking for everlasting life, what happens when a slug dies?
Same thing that happens to us, isn't it just rotten  that we rot away, we don't live on at all.
No one can ever prove it, they never have never will.

[ðºÞæ]

Nothing gets created nor destroyed only converted to something else.

[qwik2learn]

Some people in this thread are mistaken: The neurons are not firing at all after 40 seconds of cardiac arrest. There has never been brain activity recorded on the EEG that lasts longer than 40 seconds after arrest, and brain activity is not restored until blood flow is restored (CPR does not provide sufficient oxygen to restart the brain after cardiac arrest). Mainstream scientists have always maintained that brain activity is required for consciousness.

The patient had memories that were apparently formed independently of any brain function, so therefore there was consciousness without the brain and a record of the events was left in the patient's consciousness.

There is no materialistic explanation for veridical perception and the memory record without a working brain.

I conclude that the record maintained by the body passes away while the record at the soul-level continues to present itself in consciousness.

Since this man's mind did function without a working brain, it is therefore proven that mind and brain are independent. Philosophical materialism must now be discarded because it holds to the false premise that the mind is generated by the brain. We must now admit that Consciousness drives evolution.

It is more elegant and far easier to accept as a working hypothesis that sentience exists as a potential at the source of creation, and the strongest evidence has already been put on the table: Everything to be observed in the universe implies consciousness.

Furthermore, No one can ever prove that awareness descends into nothingness after death because that assertion is based on the premise that awareness is generated by the brain, and this case presents a counterexample that refutes the premise.

[Wilikon]

Some people in this thread are mistaken: The neurons are not firing at all after 40 seconds of cardiac arrest. There has never been brain activity recorded on the EEG that lasts longer than 40 seconds after arrest, and brain activity is not restored until blood flow is restored (CPR does not provide sufficient oxygen to restart the brain after cardiac arrest). Mainstream scientists have always maintained that brain activity is required for consciousness.

The patient had memories that were apparently formed independently of any brain function, so therefore there was consciousness without the brain and a record of the events was left in the patient's consciousness.

There is no materialistic explanation for veridical perception and the memory record without a working brain.

I conclude that the record maintained by the body passes away while the record at the soul-level continues to present itself in consciousness.

Since this man's mind did function without a working brain, it is therefore proven that mind and brain are independent. Philosophical materialism must now be discarded because it holds to the false premise that the mind is generated by the brain. We must now admit that Consciousness drives evolution.

It is more elegant and far easier to accept as a working hypothesis that sentience exists as a potential at the source of creation, and the strongest evidence has already been put on the table: Everything to be observed in the universe implies consciousness.

Finally. Someone got it. No. Brain. Activity.

[qwik2learn]

Finally. Someone got it. No. Brain. Activity.

It's time for atheists to admit that this study has given a satisfactory counterexample to the unsupported idea that awareness ends at death:

Furthermore, No one can ever prove that awareness descends into nothingness after death because that assertion is based on the premise that awareness is generated by the brain, and this case presents a counterexample that refutes the premise.

[BADecker]

There is a lot of talk about atheist this and that, but some people miss the reality.

Everybody has a "god". It is a psychological reality. If you want to know what a person's god is, which should not be your business anyway, you do not ask, you observe.

In analytical psychology, Jung wrote extensively of what he called the archetypal "Self", i.e., the "god" of a person. You can look for its footprints, its shadow, its droppings etc, but you will never actually see it, name it or whatever.

When somebody says they are an atheist usually what they are saying is "I recognize the bullshit in you and I decline to inhale the same nonsense". Does that mean they have some higher truth? Or some lower truth?

Yes. I mean No. Wait. What was the question?

This is similar to formal, theistic religions. Nobody in any religion believes in God exactly the same way as anyone else. This doesn't mean that the real God hasn't given us a partial description of Himself.

[Wilikon]

We all agree something is going on... Or not?

[qwik2learn]

When somebody says they are an atheist usually what they are saying is "I recognize the bullshit in you and I decline to inhale the same nonsense". Does that mean they have some higher truth? Or some lower truth?

When someone says they are an atheist usually what they are saying is "I believe that evidence for the supernatural is lacking". Specifically, an atheist is always someone who believes that supernatural concepts are lacking coherency and/or supporting evidence. But does that belief match the reality?

This study is evidence for the supernatural because the result (a documented case of veridical perception) strongly suggests that there is more to the mind than the brain (physical).

Therefore, atheists are missing the reality by ignoring the powerful evidence that has been presented in this very thread:

It is more elegant and far easier to accept as a working hypothesis that sentience exists as a potential at the source of creation, and the strongest evidence has already been put on the table: Everything to be observed in the universe implies consciousness.

On the other hand, the physicalist claim that awareness "descends into nothing" is presented without ANY scientific evidence. Such rhetorical opinions are presented as if they were scientific by pseudo-skeptics who often think they have no burden of proof.

So you neurons are firing longer than they initially thought after your heart stops.

You class that as living?

Seems just like a slightly longer descent into nothingness to me.

^
This is the correct answer.

Always people a looking for everlasting life, what happens when a slug dies?
Same thing that happens to us, isn't it just rotten   that we rot away, we don't live on at all.
No one can ever prove it, they never have never will.

[qwik2learn]

Everybody has a "god". It is a psychological reality.

Jesus said that too, his words "the kingdom of GOD is WITHIN YOU" and "I am not our master" and many others clearly point to enlightenment as a state of consciousness.

If you want to know what a person's god is, which should not be your business anyway, you do not ask, you observe.

Specifically, you observe the results of the person's actions, just like you can know a tree by observing the fruit that it yields.

In analytical psychology, Jung wrote extensively of what he called the archetypal "Self", i.e., the "god" of a person. You can look for its footprints, its shadow, its droppings etc, but you will never actually see it, name it or whatever.

You cannot actually observe GOD (Self), and you cannot say "look, here it is" because GOD is WITHIN YOU.

Yes. I mean No. Wait. What was the question?

No one who has meditated extensively upon Self, and realized Self through such methods, whether Eastern or Western, ancient or modern, has ever ONCE stated that "this egoic experience is the only experience that we have ever had and shall ever have". The East has "neti neti", the West has "know thyself"; it is hardly surprising that true wisdom escapes such easy summation. A good "enlightened" thinker (expert) is Deepak Chopra, he has many valuable books and articles and lectures on these subjects AND on the topic of mind-body HEALING, another class of phenomena that lends evidence to the idea that mind is something other than natural brain/body phenomena. I have read the writings of some who I believe to be enlightened, and if you want to understand modern enlightened thought then besides being familiar with Jesus and Buddha and Mohammed, you have to be intimately familiar with the concepts described by Chopra and also these other eminent thinkers:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers

[Goms]

There is consiousness after brain death.

No one can prove that consiousness stops at brain death NEITHER can you prove that consiousness continues.

But we know there are facets of the universe that science cannot yet explain.

Facets like dark matter and dark energy. They can't be seen or measured, but their effect resonates through all of outerspace.

Ever thought that kind of facet applies to man as well?

[Daisy14]

Hey guys you all need to read this: http://www.near-death.com/religion/christianity/kenneth-hagin.html


For those of us who do not know Kenneth Hagin, he was a very respected man in the society. He finally died at 86.

[qwik2learn]

No one can prove that consiousness stops at brain death NEITHER can you prove that consiousness continues.

That's not true; if you assert that something "does not stop" and I prove you wrong then it is evident that something "does not continue". Similarly, if I have a counterexample (or many counterexamples) to the statement "consciousness stops at death", that is equivalent to proving that "consciousness does not stop at death", so therefore "consciousness continues".

Specifically for this thread, No one can ever prove that awareness descends into nothingness after death because that assertion is based on the premise that awareness is generated by the brain, and this case presents a counterexample that refutes the premise. Since the veridical perception was documented and timed, it would be absurd to deny that this patient had a consciousness that continued beyond death.

[Viyamore]

That was great ! I also believe on this matter .i don't know if it is written on the bible but based on so many stories that i know life after deathnand have been watch i believe now.

[penduko]

... He finally died at 86.

Finally, huh. The waiting is over.

im about to say this when i read the post. haha
anyway. All i can say is, the only way to know if there is a life after death is by being dead. i dont believe those scientist who just gather data from there computer and tell "That is it there is life and dead the computer says it etc. etc.". as i have said the ONLY way to know is you being dead.

[qwik2learn]

All i can say is, the only way to know if there is a life after death is by being dead. i dont believe those scientist who just gather data from there computer and tell "That is it there is life and dead the computer says it etc. etc.". as i have said the ONLY way to know is you being dead.

According to the medical staff, this patient experienced death for himself just like you are describing.
It seems absurd, but according to modern medicine, this patient WAS dead and then came back to life; he remembers feeling NO PAIN (when shocked) and yet he was able to have a perception of a sound and remember it. His brain could not possibly have produced any sort of awareness BECAUSE HIS BRAIN WAS DEAD, yet HE was AWARE of a sound which actually took place during such a time period. The study author, Dr. Parnia, calls these "actual death experiences" because they cannot be explained by modern physicalist neuroscience. However, there are already some emerging theories of consciousness which can help scientists to understand what is going on, for example:

New developments in quantum physics show we cannot know phenomena apart from the observer and how the observer plays a supreme role in creating reality. Arlice Davenport has challenged the hallucination theory of NDEs as outmoded because the field theories of physics now suggest new paradigm options available to explain NDEs. Mark Woodhouse says the traditional materialism/dualism battle over NDEs has already been solved by Einstein. Since matter can now be viewed as a form of energy, an energy body alternative to the material body can now explain NDEs. This is also supported by Melvin Morse who has described NDEs that are able to realign charges in the electromagnetic field of the human body and wiring of the brain. He reports on patients having NDEs who recover from diseases such as pneumonia, cardiac arrest, and cancer (Transformed by the Light, pp. 153-54) suggesting the brain acts more like a receiver of information much like a television, radio, or cell phone. Signals, such as voice or music, in the form of electromagnetic waves, are received by the brain and processed to make them audible to the senses. At death, the brain (receiver) dies; but consciousness (the signal), in the form of electromagnetic waves, continues to exist (in the airwaves).

More reading: Quantum Theory Supports Concepts Found in NDEs

The patient had valid memories that were apparently formed independently of any brain function, so therefore there was consciousness without the brain and a record of the events was left in the patient's consciousness.

There is no materialistic explanation for veridical perception and the memory record without a working brain.

I conclude that the record maintained by the body passes away while the record at the energy level continues to present itself in consciousness.

[qwik2learn]

... He finally died at 86.

Finally, huh. The waiting is over.

I didn't think that your joke was witty; it was in bad taste.

I am still waiting for someone to present an adequate defense of physicalism in this thread.
Most atheists are physicalists, but enlightened individuals (like Einstein and Gödel and many others) are telling you to look at non-physical things...

[qwik2learn]

"neti, Neti" was the phrase I could not remember.

"Know thyself" is the phrase that Western society completely forgot; an attentive, silent, open heart is more important than many words and "those who speak, rarely know; those who know, rarely speak". The ancient wisdom teachers all understood and accepted that the non-physical plays an important role in human life and self-actualization.

Deepak Chopra reminds me of that famous Taoist boner master, I forget his name, also Rajneesh/Osho. All very competent students of their respective philosophies but excellent businessman primarily.

It is foolish to judge Chopra by some pretended superficial resemblance to others, and it is dangerous to ignore wisdom (and evidence) without examining it. It is well-understood by many that business and spirituality are related topics. You should check out Chopra's videos on business; they are excellent (IMO) and his work is loved by many shrewd businessmen (like Russel Simmons). Chopra is actually giving you excellent wisdom so I highly recommend his videos & etc. "Making money is a pedestrian activity. The challenge is in creating a product or service that the world really needs." The world needs to find Self and understand Self so that mankind can avoid his own self-destruction, therefore Chopra is serving this planet well by explaining to you that Consciousness is what drives evolution.


As I mentioned earlier, atheists are missing the reality by ignoring LITERALLY ALL the powerful evidence that has been presented in this very thread:

It is more elegant and far easier to accept as a working hypothesis that sentience exists as a potential at the source of creation, and the strongest evidence has already been put on the table: Everything to be observed in the universe implies consciousness.

As for "god" this and that, "kingdom of 'god'" etc, my belief is that it is a mistake to discuss "god" except to help people understand that it is a mistake to discuss. It is a very arcane subject though, mistakes have as much value as anything in the long run.

Mistakes can be as valuable as anything? I would prefer that you avoid a wrong turn sooner in your journey, and that is why I bring these topics to your attention; anyone who is rational will intelligently assess these new ideas when presented, so let's think clearly about this evidence that has dramatically overturned physicalism. I note that Chopra has the advantage of a solid understanding of quantum mechanics whereas the physicalists DO NOT.
Since consciousness is what drives evolution and man's mind can exist beyond the brain (physical), what do YOU think is the goal of all of this evolution?

[qwik2learn]

... He finally died at 86.

Finally, huh. The waiting is over.

I didn't think that your joke was witty; it was in bad taste.

I am still waiting for someone to present an adequate defense of physicalism in this thread.
Most atheists are physicalists, but enlightened individuals (like Einstein and Gödel and many others) are telling you to look at non-physical things...

Well, I stand defeated, utterly conquered by your superior intellect.

I will bow out of this discussion and slink away in shame.

Good day sirs.

Why would you do that when there is so much more to discover and observe?
By bowing out, you would be behaving just like the atheists who are missing the reality by ignoring or discarding LITERALLY ALL of the powerful evidence that has been presented in this very thread. By asking questions, you and I can both gain a better understanding of the mind/brain relationship.
It would be much better for our rational discussion if you were to think clearly and intelligently assess the source that you were making fun of or otherwise choose another source to reply to.
After all, I did recommend some helpful resources for you to study about consciousness and the quantum connection.
I hope that you jest about my "superior intellect" and that our chat does not irritate you, for I truly do not think of our conversation in that way; I am solely interested in presenting the results of Dr. Parnia's study and the related lines of evidence and finding out the best arguments against that evidence.

Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.

[Lethn]

It's time for atheists to admit that this study has given a satisfactory counterexample to the unsupported idea that awareness ends at death:

It's time for Thiests to admit that even if their is an afterlife they have absolutely no fucking clue what they're talking about and are just completely making up what the actual truth of the matter is and that it may be unlike anything we've ever encountered before, much like if all of a sudden we discovered genuine alien life that can communicate with radio signals like us.

The difference between Athiests and others who don't believe in God or worship the prick is that none of us are arrogant enough to declare one way or another whether we actually know, what the fuck is wrong with that? Why do you insist on trying to shove your religion down peoples throats? You're completely full of shit, I notice the "Why do athiests hate religion?" thread is over 200 pages long, well this is exactly why people who don't believe in god hate religion, it's because you fuckers insist on trying to forcefully convert us all into your fucking cults when the answer isn't going to be as simple as what you'd have gullible people believe.

Just leave me te fuck alone, I'm more than content on living my life the way I want to and finding out after I die what the answer is if it will never be found out while I'm alive, nevermind the fact that religious people often end up living like miserable cunts because of their religions' rules to begin with.