Showing posts with label parapsychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label parapsychology. Show all posts

Friday, May 9, 2014

Para-Pseudo-Skeptics


I have previously written about the harm done to individuals and to society by pseudo-skeptics who don't believe in the evidence for psi and the afterlife. But there is a special kind of pseudo-skeptic who does believe in psi but who thinks that the evidence for the afterlife is caused by unconscious psi from living people. In essence, these para-pseudo-skeptics, as I call them, who are often parapsychologists (scientists who study paranormal phenomena), believe that people who have experienced afterlife phenomena are self-deluded fools who can't tell reality from fantasy. This prejudice against experiencers is an example of the arrogance of scientists who hold ordinary people in contempt because the scientists believe that scientists are the only people capable of discerning the truth. Some people may try to defend the para-pseudo-skeptics by saying that they don't have as much information about afterlife phenomena as the experiencers. However, ignorance is not an excuse for prejudice, it is a cause of prejudice. No persecuted minority has ever won the respect and rights they deserve without demanding them. Therefore, when para-pseudo-skeptics advance these disgraceful hypotheses about afterlife experiencers, they should be confronted with the truth. As I shall explain below, psi cannot explain the evidence for the afterlife and there are good reasons to believe it is the para-pseudo-skeptics themselves who have problems telling fantasy from reality because they would rather believe any number of absurdities than believe the evidence for the afterlife. And while the para-pseudo-skeptics assert that the experiencers have unconscious motivations to fabricate evidence for the afterlife, the para-pseudo-skeptics unconscious motives are, in fact, highly suspect and may lead them to biased interpretations of the evidence.

In fact, there are many, many reasons to doubt the para-pseudo-skeptics ability to tell fantasy from reality, and to question their unconscious motivations for denying the evidence for the afterlife. These reasons are the many, many independent lines of evidence which show that the afterlife is real, that it cannot be explained by psi, and that the para-pseudo-skeptics are wrong:

Afterlife experiencers know the evidence better than any para-pseudo-skeptic. Mediums live with afterlife phenomena every day and know all the fine details of it that don't get published in books and parapsychology papers. They often also experience psi and can tell the difference between psi and spirit communication. Mediums know the phenomena infinitely better than para-pseudo-skeptics who often know the phenomenon only from reading the reports of other people. Also, near-death experiencers say their experiencers are real. To the experiencer, a near-death experience seems realer-than-real, and their memories of the experience are more detailed than normal memories. The the para-pseudo-skeptics disregard the opinion of non-scientists experts, the experiencers, who know more about the phenomena than they do. This attitude of the para-pseudo-skeptics is caused by their absurdly arrogant false belief that they are the only people who have the ability to discern the truth.

Since para-pseudo-skeptics believe that people who have experienced afterlife phenomena are self-deluded fools who can't tell reality from fantasy, the para-pseudo-skeptics should understand that it is only fair for their own rationality to be disputed. For example, it is very likely that para-pseudo-skeptics themselves suffer from perceptual bias (which they are not shy about accusing mainstream scientists of suffering from). Because these para-pseudo-skeptics spend so much time studying psi, they see psi everywhere, even where it is not present. Because of this, para-pseudo-skeptics do not have the ability to make an objective assessment of the facts, this causes them to suspend logic in order to allow them to maintain their mistaken belief that the brain produces consciousness and ESP. The result is that they believe absurd things. For example, para-pseudo-skeptics may believe that quantum entanglement can be established between two human brains separated by miles in order to produce telepathy, and that the neuronal patterns in a human brain, the result of a lifetime of varied and unique experiences, and constantly changing due to neuroplasticity, can have meaning to the consciousness of another person. Or that consciousness which consists entirely of subjective experiences, which can never be measured objectively, can be the product of fundamentally different measurable objective phenomenon such as neuronal activity through some unexplainable means. Or that NDEs, where dead people have lucid conscious experiences that seem realer than real and which produce memories that are more detailed than normal memories, are produced by the brain when electrical activity in the brain is entirely absent or barely measurable which by all theories of brain function should not permit the brain to sustain consciousness or produce memories. Or that poltergeist phenomenon that does not depend on the presence of any one individual is caused by some unknown PK master who could be located anywhere and anytime in the universe. Or that multiple mediums unconsciously cooperate to produce characteristics of communication that depend on the spirit not the medium or sitter, and they unconsciously conspired to produce the cross correspondences. Or when poltergeist phenomena that cause multiple successive tenants to flee a home is stopped by the intercession of a psychic medium, that the medium used her PK abilities to produce the phenomenon even before she consciously knew the house was haunted. Or that fetuses are capable of unconscious PK that enables them to be born with birthmarks at the sites of injuries sustained by some random person they will later impersonate the reincarnation of. Etc, etc,

The para-pseudo-skeptics have no respect for the intelligence of many, many people who have experienced afterlife phenomena, such as near-death experiencers, people who have had contact with spirits including many evidential mediums, and people who remember past lives. However, the para-pseudo-skeptics should be willing to receive the same type of psychological analysis that they perform on afterlife experiencers. For example, one of the excuses the para-pseudo-skeptics give for their biased beliefs is that experiencers have unconscious motivations to simulate afterlife phenomenon and use psi unconsciously to fulfill that motive. If the para-pseudo-skeptics are going to bring up the subject of unconscious motives, the para-pseudo-skeptics should also consider the possibility that they have unconscious motives themselves that influence their beliefs. For example, It is possible that they have some type of unconscious motivation to discredit the evidence for the afterlife. There are probably as many motivations as there are para-pseudo-skeptics. In some cases the motive might be the desire to appear to be a serious philosopher so they can write books and papers. In some cases it might be to inflate the powers of psi so they can magnify the importance of studying it. In some cases it might be fear of punishment in the afterlife. In depressed individuals it might be the desire for the end of suffering that will come with extinction at death. In some parapsychologists it might be fear of attacks by pseudo-skeptics. Or, some para-pseudo-skeptics may be misanthropes who hate the fact that knowledge of the afterlife eases grief and reduces the incidence of suicide so they try to discredit the phenomenon of mediumship because they want people to suffer mental anguish over the loss of their loved ones. Or, para-pseudo-skeptics might feel so much envy for the power of pseudo-skeptics who publish nonsense about psi that the parapsychologists have to refute over and over, that the para-pseudo-skeptics want to exert a similar power over afterlife researchers.

The para-pseudo-skeptics rarely consider that those who experience afterlife phenomena are real people, and that the experiencers know the phenomena infinitely better than the para-pseudo-skeptics. By spreading their metaphysical faith disguised and scientific possibility, the para-pseudo-skeptics risk harming real people and making it harder for them to get accurate information that can help them make sense out of their experiences. For the para-pseudo-skeptics it is an academic question but there are real people going through real experiences and having real problems. People take immense comfort from mediumship when it eases their grief. People who experience spirit contact can go through real trauma, they may be ostracized at school or their family may think they are demonic or crazy and send them to a psychiatric facility. NDErs may keep their experiences to themselves if they are told the experiences are not real and it is much healthier for them if they feel they can talk about their experiences with others. The para-pseudo-skeptics should stop spreading their misinformation. They should recognize that they are prejudiced by their perceptual bias and unconscious motivations which causes them to believe all sorts of absurd things. Para-pseudo-skeptics think afterlife experiencers are self deluded fools who can't tell fantasy from reality but it is that para-pseudo-skeptics who are fooling themselves. Some people may try to defend the para-pseudo-skeptics by saying they don't have the same information as experiencers. But ignorance is not an excuse for prejudice, it is a cause of prejudice. No persecuted minority ever obtained the rights and respect they deserved without demanding it, and afterlife experiencers should speak out against the prejudiced, and deluded, misinformation being spread by para-pseudo-skeptics.


Copyright © 2014 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

Saturday, April 26, 2014

Update: ESP is not Produced by the Brain.


Update to the update: Additional updates have been made. Please see ESP is not produced by the brain. for the most up-to-date version.


Copyright © 2014 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

Friday, April 25, 2014

Near-death Experiences and Afterlife Phenomena


Recently I have learned of some beliefs about near-death experiences and afterlife phenomena which I disagree with. In this post, I provide information to support my own beliefs on these issues.

Contents

ESP or veridical perceptions that occur during an NDE are best explained by out-of-the-body consciousness.

During a near-death experience, sometimes people with no brain activity perceive something happening around them or they may perceive something they could not perceive with their normal senses even if they were conscious such as a vision of the operating room looking down from the ceiling, or a vision of a distant location. When the events in these perceptions can be verified as true, they are called veridical perceptions. These veridical perceptions are best explained by out-of-the-body consciousness. Some people may call these perceptions ESP, but they are still best explained as out-of-the-body consciousness.

Many NDEs occur during cardiac arrest. Residual brain activity is not sufficient to explain memories or conscious experiences that occur during cardiac arrest. And cardiac arrest causes amnesia and confusion shortly before and after the event.

Some people may suggest an abnormal brain state during the onset or recovery from cardiac arrest may produce clairvoyant visions of events that occur during cardiac arrest. If this is true, the clairvoyance must still be due to out-of-the-body consciousness. The same argument by which NDE researchers conclude that the lucid conscious experience of the NDE cannot be explained by it occuring before or after cardiac arrest can be used to conclude that clairvoyance occurring at the onset or recovery from cardiac arrest must be due to out-of-the-body consciousness. That argument is that the brain activity that occurs at the onset to, or recovery from, cardiac arrest is not capable of supporting lucid consciousness or memories. Any lucid conscious memories, such as those characteristic of NDEs, that occur anytime from the onset to cardiac arrest through the recovery from cardiac arrest, whether psychic or mundane, must be due to out-of-the-body consciousness.

In other words, if anyone is going to suggest that an abnormal brain state induced by cardiac arrest is responsible for producing ESP, that ESP must be due to consciousness existing out-of-the-body because the abnormal brain states that occur at the onset, duration, and ending of cardiac arrest are not capable of producing memories or supporting the lucid consciousness that is experienced during an NDE. At other times than the onset, duration, or ending of cardiac arrest, the brain is functioning normally and there is no abnormal brain state that might be attributed to the production of ESP. If ESP can produce conscious experiences that do not require the brain, then ESP must be due to out-of-the-body consciousness. In fact, in a subsequent section it will be shown that the best explanation for all forms of ESP is that ESP is not produced by the brain but is a capability of non-physical consciousness. In consideration of this and of all the evidence (below) that the mind can exist separate from the brain, the best explanation for veridical perceptions during NDEs is the spirit leaving the body and retaining memory of the event.

No physiological explanation can fully explain NDEs. Nothing that produces an abnormal brain state that can produce ESP, such as natural brain chemicals, or states of relaxation can produce experiences like NDEs. So it is not credible that veridical perceptions in NDEs could be caused by abnormal brain states that are known to cause ESP.

In most abnormal states the experiencer knows he is hallucinating or experiencing clairvoyance, but NDErs consistently say their experience is real. Those states in which hallucinations are mistaken for reality do not share significant characteristics with NDEs. Those states in which ESP is mistaken for out-of-body experiences involve hypnosis, self-hypnosis, or some type of induction technique. However NDEs are not induced, they are spontaneous, and they are not caused by anything remotely like hypnotic induction such as religious expectations, or cultural expectations.

Joe McMoneagle is a highly regarded parapsychologist, a remote viewer, and a near-death experiencer, and his statements on the subject indicate he believes that NDEs show that the afterlife is real. NDEs demonstrate, he says, "..that consciousness continues, and you don't really cease to exist as an individual..."

Back To Contents

ESP is not produced by the brain.

There is ample proof that ESP is real. However it is not possible for ESP to be caused by the brain because none of the laws of physics, including quantum entanglement, can explain how the brain might produce ESP. And in the case of telepathy, the unique structures in one brain will be meaningless to another brain. The existence of ESP is consistent with and mutually reinforcing to many other lines of reasoning that lead to the conclusions that consciousness is not produced by the brain and that consciousness can exist separate from the body.

No physical mechanism in the brain has been demonstrated to cause ESP. ESP has been shown not to be limited by time and distance. ESP can reach into the past and future and is just as strong over short distances as it is for long distances. None of the known laws of physics can explain this. It has been hypothesized that quantum entanglement could explain ESP, because when two particles are entangled, determining a property of one particle will also determine a property of the other instantly, independent of distance between the two particles. However, quantum entanglement can not be the mechanism by which ESP occurs because for entanglement to occur, there has to be some mechanism by which entanglement is established. In lab experiments on entanglement, the entangled particles are created deliberately at the same time in the same location and then separated to demonstrate entanglement effects. While entanglement can occur in biological systems, as is seen in photosynthesis, in a biological system like photosynthesis, a mechanism for establishing entanglement is easy to explain because it occurs in a very small region at a specific time. However in the case of ESP, there is no mechanism by which entanglement between objects at separate locations could be established to produce forms of ESP such as telepathy and clairvoyance. Microtubules in brain cells have been proposed, by Stuart Hammeroff, as a mechanism for producing consciousness. It has also been proposed that quantum entanglement in that system could explain ESP, but again there is no way entanglement could be established between separate individuals.

Furthermore, even if there were some way to entangle a physical structure in one brain with, for example in the case of telepathy, a structure in another brain, there would be no correspondence between the meaning of those two structures to the consciousness of the individuals. The patterns in one person's brain will not make sense to any another person's brain. The pattens of neurons in the brain develop differently in each person according to their genetics and environment, and those patterns change over time due to neuroplasticity. The meaning of a physical structure or pattern in the brain of one person will be unintelligible to another person. Entangling two structures in different brains would not be able to convey any meaning to either person. Therefore, telepathy cannot be produced by the brain by means of quantum entanglement or any other physical means. The very existence of telepathy, therefore, is evidence that ESP is not produced by the brain, and also that consciousness is not produced by the brain i.e. that conscious is non-physical.

There are also several other independent lines of reasoning that lead to the conclusion that consciousness is non-physical and not-produced by the brain. One of these lines of reasoning, for example, is based on the fact that that consciousness is a subjective phenomena that cannot be measured objectively and therefore cannot be produced by physical processes since all physical processes are, in principle, measurable. The only way to know what is in the mind of another person is through ESP, such as telepathy, or telempathy, both of which are themselves subjective and unmeasurable by any objective physical means. Since consciousness is subjective and non-physical and cannot be measured by any physical process, ESP which can perceive aspects of another consciousness, must also be non-physical, and cannot be the result of any physical process in the brain.

People who believe that ESP is produced by the brain believe that some quantum effect must cause ESP because ESP is independent of time and distance. But there is a much better explanation for ESP that also explains why ESP is independent of time and distance. That explanation is the filter model of the brain. According to the filter model, consciousness is not physical and the brain does not produce consciousness but only filters it. The filter model explains all the facts that are explained by the production model such as the correlation between mental states and brain states, and the loss of functions due to brain injury. But the filter model also explains ESP and why it is not dependent on time and distance. According to the filter model, ESP is the means by which non-physical consciousness naturally interacts with its environment and because consciousness is non-physical it is not subject to the laws of physics or limited by physical parameters such as time and distance. The filter model also explains acquired savant syndrome where brain injury causes new talents to be uncovered and why brain injury sometimes result in development of ESP. These two effects are caused by brain injury that is like a hole in the filter that allows new aspects of consciousness to pass through it. The filter model explains loss of function injuries, such as amnesia, as being like a clog in the filter. The filter model also explains the unfiltered consciousness experienced by NDErs that includes veridical perceptions, 360 degree vision and colors not seen while in the body.

Philosopher Chris Carter believes consciousness is not produced by the brain and that the brain transmits consciousness. Parapsychologists who do not believe in survival have to explain afterlife phenomena as the result of ESP produced in the brain of a living person. Chris Carter's work demonstrates that those theories are pseudo-science.

Back To Contents

None of the materialist explanations can explain any of the many anomalous characterisitcs of NDEs such as how people are conscious when their brain is not functioning.

All of the materialist attempts to explain NDEs fail to explain any of the many anomalous characteristics of NDEs. NDEs cannot be explained by a lack of oxygen, a dying brain, hallucinations, religious expectations, cultural expectations, hearing about medical procedures after the fact, 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, evolutionary adaptation, depersonalization, memory of birth, medication, defense against dying, or partial anesthesia.

Dr. Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon who experienced an NDE and he believes NDEs are are genuine afterlife experiences and that because of the way the brain is wired NDEs cannot be produced by the brain. He said, "...consciousness outside of the brain is a fact. It’s an established fact."

NDErs report their experiences seem more real than real, and memories of near-death experiences are more detailed than normal memories. This is the complete opposite of what you would expect from the fact of severely reduced or zero brain function during the NDE. NDEs due to cardiac arrest cannot be explained by residual brain activity during cardiac arrest or by having occurred before or after cardiac arrest. This demonstrates that NDEs involve a state of consciousness that is independent of the brain.

"The most important objection to the adequacy of all ... reductionistic hypotheses is that mental clarity, vivid sensory imagery, a clear memory of the experience, and a conviction that the experience seemed more real than ordinary consciousness are the norm for NDEs. They occur even in conditions of drastically altered cerebral physiology under which the production theory would deem consciousness impossible.

- Bruce Greyson

A listener to a radio interview with NDE researcher Dr. Sam Parnia paraphrased his statements, "We now routinely overcome death, and the people he’s studying are 'like astronauts – we send them out to explore this other dimension' – they are going to the other side, and they’re able to tell us what they’ve experienced on the other side of death"

  • Interview of NDE Researcher Dr. Pim van Lommel
  • Interview with NDE researcher Dr. Melvin Morse.

    Back To Contents

    There are multiple independent forms of evidence which show that mind does not require matter for its existence.

    Evidence for the Afterlife.

    Neither ESP nor Super-psi can explain the evidence for the afterlife.

    • The evidence for the afterlife cannot be explained as super-psi.
      • Guy Lyon Playfair, William Roll, and Ian Stevenson all thought some poltergeist phenomenon were caused by spirits. They knew about unconscious PK but thougth survival was a better explanation when the phenomenon did not depend on the presence of a single individual.
      • Drop-in communicators demonstrate spirits have initiative and problem solving ability.
      • Cross-correspondences demonstrate spirits have initiative and are able to plan complex projects.
      • Others (see above link).
    • The Mediumship of Mrs. Piper
      • Certain characteristics of spirit communication vary with the spirit independently of the medium or the sitter. This is evidence that mediumship is due to communication with spirits and not a form of unconscious ESP. Some of these characteristics were: the speed at which the spirit learned to communicate, the spirit's skill at communicating once they learned to communicate, ability to communicate names. Many more of these characteristics are explained at the link.
    • Philosopher Chris Carter's work demonstrates that super-psi is pseudo-science. In an interview on SubversiveThinking.blogspot.com he says:
      In my work I present the evidence that provides a prima facie case for survival; demonstrate that alternative explanations, to the extent that they are testable, have been proven false; and then argue that to the extent these alternative explanations are not testable (such as elaborate fraud scenarios, or super-ESP) they are pseudo-scientific excuses for refusing to accept an otherwise straightforward inference from the evidence.
    • Mediums live with afterlife phenomena every day. They know all the fine details that do not get published in books and parapsychological studies. Many also experience other forms of ESP and they can tell the difference between spirit communication and ESP. Mediums say they perceive and communicate with spirits. They are the foremost experts in spirit communication and there are no better qualified experts on ESP and survival.

    The Cosmological Argument for a transcendent designer of the universe or multiverse shows that the universe or multiverse was designed by a mind that existed before there was any matter or even space itself. Our universe is so finely tuned to support life that it seems to have been designed. This was accepted by astronomers and cosmologists and caused them to invent multiverse theories. However in those theories the multiverse would have to be fine tuned so it doesn't really solve the problem. The conclusion is that a mind capable of design existed before any matter existed. This argument is so convincing to astronomers it converted many materialists to believers including astronomer Fred Hoyle. Albert Einstein also believed the universe was designed, as did Charles Darwin.

    Materialism Cannot Explain Consciousness

    Max Planck (Nobel Prize for Physics)

    Erwin Schrödinger (Nobel Prize for Physics)

    Back To Contents

    There is ample evidence that memory can be stored outside the brain.

    The facts of this have been covered above. Veridical perceptions that occur during NDEs, the evidence that NDErs are conscious when their brain is not functioning, all the evidence that mind does not require matter for its existence, and all the evidence for the afterlife all demonstrate that memory can be stored outside brain.

    Back To Contents

    Consciousness, mind, or spirit is required for matter to exist.

    Those who believe that mind requires a brain to exist, such as parapsychologists who mistakenly believe that ESP is produced by the brain are confounded by the results of quantum mechanics that show consciousness is required for matter to exist. You can't have any matter or any brain without consciousness first. In order to avoid this problem they may postulate an undeveloped awareness existed to bring matter into being. However if the facts are understood correctly, that, as shown above, that mind does not require matter for its existence, then there is no reason to postulate anything as unparsimonious as undeveloped awareness. In fact the founders of quantum mechanics , Max Planck (Nobel Prize for Physics) and Erwin Schrödinger (Nobel Prize for Physics), did not believe in undeveloped awareness, they understood that consciousness, mind, spirit was what caused matter to come into being.

    Another reason that undeveloped awareness is an unnecessary complication is that the cosmological argument demonstrates that the universe was designed by a mind. So there already exists a mind that could cause the matter of the universe to come into existence.

    Back To Contents

    Scientists are fallible. Alternative sources of truth exist.

    Scientists are fallible.

    Science is not a licensed profession. And scientist are not the only people who have the ability to discern truth. In fact, perceptual bias is a chronic problem that may cause Dr. Scientist to misjudge things that Joe Sixpack can assess objectively.

    I have long suspected that within the parapsychological community there is some prejudice against afterlife phenomena. Parapsycholoigst Dr. Carlos Alvarado confirmed my suspicion in an interview published at aspsi.org. The interview does not seem to be on the internet currently, but the link was: http://www.aspsi.org/feat/life_after/tymn/a076mt-a-Dr_Carlos_S_Alvarado_interview.php

    Dr. Alvarado said:

    For many workers in the field, survival research is not a main interest. To some extent this is academics as usual. People specialize in some areas and develop interests due to personality traits, life experiences, training, and employment opportunities, and parapsychology is no exception. Then there are concerns such as getting tenure and the belief that the area has many methodological difficulties. However, I believe that in some cases there is more than this. In some circles it is more “respectable” to conduct ESP experiments than working with survival-related phenomena such as apparitions or mediumship. I still remember how the director of a parapsychology unit within an university, wanting to keep a conservative image, discouraged students from pursuing topics such as apparitions for dissertation research.

    Because of this prejudice, one may be justifiably suspicious of the views of those parapsychologists who may deny the genuineness of afterlife phenomena and claim they may be caused by ESP.

    Some people may try to excuse this prejudice as being due to ignorance. However ignorance is not an excuse for prejudice, it is a cause of prejudice. And I am less concerned with the feelings of parapsychologists and other pseudo-skeptics than I am concerned for the well being of experiencers that may be harmed by this prejudice. No persecuted minority ever won the rights and respect they deserve without fighting for them. And in our society, experiencers of afterlife phenomena are a persecuted minority. And this is one reason I am writing this post. To explain the seriousness of misinformation about afterlife phenomena, and the harm caused by claims that afterlife phenomena are due to ESP.

    It is unfortunate that in addition to the pseudo-skeptics who refuse to recognize the validity of any paranormal phenomena and who are preventing some sectors of society from accepting the evidence for the afterlife, there are also some parapsychologists who are muddying the waters with claims that ESP is the cause of afterlife phenomena. These parapsychologists ought to know from their own experience when someone from outside their field who is dreadfully ignorant about ESP publishes some pseudo-skeptical nonsense, how it creates unnecessary distractions for them because they have to constantly refute the same old canards. Yet the same parapsychologists are creating confusion and spreading misinformation and causing distractions for genuine afterlife researchers, such as those studying NDEs, and they are hindering the progress of the spread of the truth of the afterlife throughout society. Whether some parapsychologists do this intentionally to create greater appreciation for the capabilities of ESP and magnify the importance of their chosen field of study at the price of discrediting survival research, or because they are blinded by perceptual bias, it is harmful to individuals and society as will explained in a subsequent section.

    Alternative sources of truth exist.

    When deciding the best explanation for a phenomenon, the beliefs of experiencers must be considered. They are there on the spot. There is no one more qualified to asses their experiences than they are. NDErs consistently say their experiences are real and that is a strong argument in favor of the reality of their experiences. As shown above, none of the known causes of hallucinations or ESP can explain NDEs.

    The opinions of non-scientist experts should also be given due weight. The expertise of mediums is shown above in the links to different forms of mediumship. Mediums live with afterlife phenomena every day. They know all the fine details that do not get published in books and parapsychological studies. Many mediums also experience other forms of ESP and they can tell the difference between spirit communication and ESP. Mediums say they perceive and communicate with spirits. They are the foremost experts in spirit communication and there are no better qualified experts on ESP and survival of consciousness.

    Back To Contents

    Experiencers may be harmed by misinformation about afterlife phenomena especially if it comes from medical personnel.

    Misinformation about afterlife phenomena is harmful to experiencers like NDErs, people who experience spirit contact, and those suffering from grief. Misinformation published in medical journals can be particularly harmful. An NDEr who wakes up and starts to tell about her experience and is told, "it wasn't real it was just clairvoyance" will be harmed by that misinformation. Research shows that if the first person a near-death experiencer tells about her experience does not accept it as real, then it affects how she copes with it. She may keep it inside and not share it with other people. Feeling the need to keep secret something as awesome and life changing as a visit to heaven and meeting God can be painful. Sharing her experience with others is healthy for her and it also helps other people to learn about the afterlife.

    Mediums, like George Anderson, who during childhood are taken for psychiatric evaluation because they see spirits, are harmed if they are told their veridical perceptions are just ESP.

    It is very important for medical personnel to understand these experiences are real.

    I've seen many times the good mediumship can do. Even some parapsychologists acknowledge it may be therapeutic for those suffering from grief. I have been there at many Spiritualist church services where a grieving mother is given relief from the unimaginable distress caused by the loss of her child, when a medium brings through a communication from her child that shows her the child has not really died but is with Grandma in another realm.

    I've been involved in helping people experiencing spirit contact, children and adults, understand and cope with their experiences. I know the harm and confusion that misinformation about life after death causes. It is psychologically damaging for a person who is having these experiences, who may be ostracized at school, or who may have family members who thinks she is either crazy or satanic to be told her experiences are not real. When a person is having contact with spirits and she is getting veridical information and she exhibits no dysfunctions associated with mental illness, she needs accurate information about afterlife phenomena. Parapsychologists who should know better but won't admit the reality of spirits are part of the problem not part of the solution.

    Lastly, what could be more important to humanity than to know the universe was created and designed by an intelligence and that each human consciousness survives death?

  • The Harm Caused by Pseudoskepticism

    Back To Contents


    References:

    Back To Contents


    Copyright © 2014 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

  • Monday, April 21, 2014

    Perceptual Bias in Parapsychology


    Some parapsychologists suffer from the mistaken belief that ESP from a living person can explain the evidence for the afterlife. However, afterlife phenomena cannot be explained by ESP. One may wonder why some parapsychologists hold that mistaken belief, despite the strong evidence that ESP is produced by non-physical consciousness and that veridical perceptions during near-death experiences are best explained by out-of-the-body consciousness. The answer may be found in The Conscious Universe, a book by parapsychologist Dean Radin, which has a chapter Seeing Psi which discusses why some mainstream materialist scientists do not believe the evidence for psi (ESP). The chapter explains how a scientist's commitment to the mainstream scientific world view can cause a him to ignore the evidence for psi because it is not consistent with that worldview. This is a scientific way of saying that to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. But this same phenomenon might apply to parapsychologists who have spent a lifetime studying psi. They might be so committed to psi that they are unable to accept the evidence for the afterlife because they can only see it as psi. The title of the chapter Seeing Psi is about why some scientists can't see evidence for psi. But it might just as well be about why some parapsychologists are always seeing psi and are blind to the evidence for the afterlife.

    In this excerpt from The Conscious Universe, Dean Radin discusses this phenomenon:

    All this leads us to predict that a person's level of commitment to the current scientific worldview will determine his or her beliefs about psi. Because perception is linked so closely to one's adopted view of reality, people who do not wish to "see" psi will in fact not see it. Nor will they view any evidence for psi, scientific or otherwise, as valid. This effect should be strongest in people who are committed to a particular view, motivated to maintain it, and clever enough to create good rationalizations for ignoring conflicting evidence.

    ...

    [T]he expectations of the scientific elite actually put them more at risk for being swayed by perceptual biases than the general public. After all, the scientific elite have lifelong careers and their credibility is on the line. They are strongly motivated to maintain certain belief systems. By contrast, most members of the general public do not know or care about the expectations of science. So if Joe Sixpack and Dr. Scientist both witness a remarkable feat of clairvoyance, we can predict that later, when we ask Joe what he saw, he will describe the incident in matter-of-fact terms. In contrast when we ask Dr. Scientist what he saw he may become angry or confused, or deny having seen anything unusual at all.

    I have written elsewhere about the harm that denial of the afterlife can cause to individuals and society. Part of the problem is that individuals who are grieving or having difficulties with their own psychic experiences may turn to the parapsychological literature for information about the afterlife. It would be tragic if someone who turned to parapsychology for help was misinformed about the afterlife or the genuineness of mediumship. Health care providers also need accurate information on this subject. The way near-death experiencers are treated by medical staff can affect how they cope with their experiences, and sometimes people experiencing spirit contact seek help from psychiatrists because they may wonder if they are hallucinating.


    Copyright © 2014 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.


    Sunday, April 20, 2014

    Notable Near-death Experiencers Believe In Life After Death.


    I have updated my web page Eminent Researchers to contain entries on the notable researchers listed below. These individuals are the best qualified experts to determine if near-death experiences represent out-of-the-body consciousness because they have all had an NDE and they also have some other qualification or area of expertise that gives authority to their opinion on the subject. All of them believe that near-death experiences represent out-of-the-body consciousness.

    Joe McMoneagle was a military remote viewer and is a very talented psychic who is highly regarded by parapsychologists for his psychic abilities and who has also had a near-death experience. Because of his experience as a military remote viewer and talented psychic, he is highly qualified to determine whether veridical NDEs are due to out-of-the body consciousness or ESP. McMoneagle believes near-death experiences represent out-of-the-body consciousness and that consciousness and our existence as an individual continues after the body dies.

    Dr Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon who had an NDE. He believes, based on his knowledge of neuroscience, that his NDE could not be explained by any physiological means and his experience is proof of life after death.

    Carl Jung was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded analytical psychology. He had a near-death experience and believed it was a real phenomenon and that consciousness continues to have an existence beyond space and time.

    The updates to Eminent Researchers include the following text:

    Joe McMoneagle

    Joe McMoneagle worked for the US military as a remote viewer and he was involved in the research and development that led to the US military's remote viewing program. Joe also had a near-death experience which convinced him that death does not end consciousness and we continue to exist as an individual after death. The following excerpt from an interview with Jeff Rense shows his views on NDEs:

    JOE: One of the things that does occur somewhere in that six month period [after an NDE], you reach a bottom point in that depression where you suddenly realize that, well since you know that consciousness continues, and you don't really cease to exist as an individual, there's no real reason to be depressed about where you are.

    Dr. Eben Alexander

    Dr. Eben Alexander is a neurosurgeon who had a near-death experience during which he visited the afterlife. After his experience, he investigated how the brain is wired to see if he could find a physiological explanation for his NDE. Alexander concluded that his experience could only be explained if consciousness does not require the brain for its existence. He also concluded that biological explanations such as abnormal CO2 and oxygen levels or abnormal brain chemicals like DMT or ketamine could not explain his experience. He said that before his NDE he believed Neuroscience could explain how the brain produced consciousness, but after the NDE he understood that "mind and consciousness are independent of the brain". This is extremely significant coming from a neurosurgeon who combines what he knows about Neuroscience and what he learned from his own near-death experience. Dr. Alexander states, "consciousness outside of the brain is a fact. It's an established fact."

    Carl Jung

    From Wikipedia

    Carl Gustav Jung (26 July 1875 - 6 June 1961), often referred to as C. G. Jung, was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist who founded analytical psychology. Jung proposed and developed the concepts of extroversion and introversion; archetypes, and the collective unconscious. His work has been influential in psychiatry and in the study of religion, philosophy, archeology, anthropology, literature, and related fields.

    Carl Junk believed in ESP, synchronicities, ... that his near-death experience, when his consciousness left his body, was a real objective phenomenon, and that consciousness continues to have an existence beyond space and time.

    This excerpt from near-death.com quotes Jung writing that his NDE, when his consciousness left his body, was real. The source of the excerpt has a full description of Jung's
    experience in his own words.

    I would never have imagined that any such experience was possible. It was not a product of imagination. The visions and experiences were utterly real; there was nothing subjective about them; they all had a quality of absolute objectivity.
    This excerpt from thesethingsinside.wordpress.com quotes Jung writing that some forms of ESP are real and that consciousness is not dependent on space and time which he says means life continues to exist beyond space and time.
    ... we know that there are these peculiar faculties of the psyche - that it isn't entirely confined to space and time. You can have dreams or visions of the future. You can see around corners and such things. Only ignorants deny these facts. It's quite evident that they do exist and have existed always. Now these facts show that the psyche - in part, at least - is not dependent on these confinements. And then what? When the psyche is not under that obligation to live in time and space alone - and obviously, it doesn't - then to that extent, the psyche is not submitted to those laws and that means a practical continuation of life of a sort of psychical existence beyond time and space.

    Copyright © 2014 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Monday, May 20, 2013

    Powerless Pseudoskeptics


    The parapsychological community should stop worrying about pseudoskeptics and start lobbying congress to allocate funds for parapsychological research.

    For over a hundred years psychical researchers and parapsychologists have been trying to convince mainstream scientists that psychic phenomena are genuine by providing scientific proof. Despite the unambiguous proof that has been supplied over and over starting in the late 1800's, the reality of psychic phenomena are still not acknowledged by mainstream science. It should be obvious that trying to convince the pseudoskeptics who lead the scientific community is a waste of time.

    The pseudoskeptics are actually powerless. Spending time reacting to them is not necessary. In the US we have the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (wikipedia) which provides government funding for research in alternative medicine. The pseudoskeptics did not want this organization funded and they did everything they could to stop it. Everything they could do was, in fact, nothing. They were completely powerless to prevent it. This exposed them as impotent. Any power the pseudoskeptics have is ceeded to them by parapsychologists who respond to pseudoskeptics or consider them when setting research goals. Parapsychologists and others should recognize this example for what it is and they should not waste time reacting to pseudoskeptics nor should they let the pseudoskeptics set the agenda for parapsychology.

    Instead of constantly responding to pseudoskeptics, the parapsychological community should lobby congress for research funds. The current budgetary environment is not encouraging, but money could be reallocated to parapsychology from other areas. What could be more important to humanity that the huge gaps in our understanding of consciousness? What could be more important to science than the huge gaps in our understanding of the universe revealed by the evidence of parapsychology? Making the argument that parapsychology is more deserving of research funds than other branches of science should be very easy to do.

    Copyright © 2013 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Harnessing the Paranormal Community


    Harnessing the "Paranormal Community" by Loyd Auerbach is an article the current issue of Edge Science, the on-line magazine published by The Society for Scientific Exploration. In the article, Auerbach asks people who are knowledgeable about parapsychology to read internet forums on paranormal phenomena and post information on parapsychology. Auerbach explains that most people have a very poor understanding of what is known about paranormal phenomena because they get most of their information from television programs that are not reliable sources of information. Auerbach hopes that a better awareness of parapsychology in the paranormal community will result in more useful data being reported and greater support for parapsychology.

    I think Loyd Auberach is correct. I have been reading and posting to the reddit paranormal subreddits and occasionally to the Above Top Secret paranormal forum. I have seen many people who don't know where to go for reliable information and who have been misinformed by the television shows. My main interest on these forums is to help people cope with psychic experiences , and help people who have ghosts in their homes to help those spirits to complete their transition to the spirit world. But I have also been posting information on parapsychology, such as Evidence for the Afterlife, Proof of ESP, how materialist pseudo-skeptics spread misleading information, and after it was posted recently, Dean Radin's list of Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles on Psi.

    But, there are two sides to this divide between parapsychologists and the paranormal community. It is a good idea to educate ordinary people about what parapsychologists are doing. But parapsychologists should also recognize that ordinary people have played a genuine role in this field and it is equally important for parapsychologists to gain a better understanding of what ordinary people are doing. Ghost hunter TV shows mislead ordinary people about paranormal phenomena but they also mislead parapsychologists about what ordinary people know about paranormal phenomena. Botanists recognize the value of knowledge about the uses of plants gained through first hand experience by shamans. Parapsychologist should not dismiss the value of the knowledge ordinary people may have about paranormal phenomena.

    Some ghost hunters are just teenagers with EVP recorders out for a lark, but others are psychic or involve psychics and do serious work. Parapsychologists might benefit from identifying the more serious investigators among the ghost hunters and opening a dialog with them, not just to teach them about parapsychology, but to learn from them about the phenomena they study.

    I have had many paranormal experiences at Spiritualist churches taking classes in medumship and spiritual healing, and observing mediumship demonstrations that occur during the Sunday service. It is not just the experiences of doing mediumship but also the teaching methods, and stages of development that should be of interest to parapsychologists. Parapsychologists should learn about these aspects of psychic phenomena which ordinary people are involved in. They could do this by attending Spiritualist services, which welcome anyone regardless of their beliefs, or even by taking classes. Parapsychologists may learn as much from trying to develop their own psychic abilities as they can by studying the psychic abilities of other people. Anyone who has undertaken any large project will know that when you get involved in the details of doing something, when you get your hands dirty, you find out things you never imagined when you were only thinking about the subject in an abstract sense. Also, the most qualified person to identify conditions that are conducive to psychic perception is someone who is psychic, particularly if they developed their abilities through a systematic learning process. If parapsychologists want to obtain positive results, personal knowledge of what it is like to develop and use psychic abilities would be valuable.

    Furthermore, there are many psychics to be found at Spiritualist church services. They represent a potential pool of subjects who have developed psychic abilities and might be willing to participate in parapsychological experiments if they were personally familiar with the investigator. A lot of high quality evidence on mediumship could be collected (using appropriate blind protocols) if someone earned the trust and cooperation of an advanced class in mediumship at a Spiritualist church. Those students and the spirits of the relatives of their classmates have years of experience communicating. They are trained mediums and trained spirits who are all practiced at communicating with each other. As Richard Hodgson discovered many years ago when he studied Mrs. Piper, spirits improve their ability to communicate through mediums with practice. However, I am not aware of any studies on mediumship that tried to take advantage of this phenomenon.

    There are many independent Spiritualist churches as well as those that belong to these organizations:

    Copyright © 2013 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.


    Tuesday, May 7, 2013

    Study Suggests More People Willing to Believe in ESP When Told It's Been Scientifically Disproven


    An article on alternet.org published in 2010 discusses a scientific study that showed people are more likely to believe in ESP if they are told that it has been disproven by scientists. The experiment was conducted at the University of Maryland by a team led by sociologist Heather Ridolfo:

    Study Suggests More People Willing to Believe in ESP When Told It's Been Scientifically Disproven

    Newly published research on belief in ESP suggests a public disregard for -- and perhaps even hostility toward -- the scientific consensus.

    April 20, 2010 | Scientists wondering just how low faith in their field has fallen will get some uncomfortable answers in a study examining belief in Extrasensory Perception (ESP), recently published in the online journal Current Research in Social Psychology.

    The researchers wrote:

    “In fact, when participants believed that science rejected a claim, they moved in the direction of being more likely to accept the clam as true. This finding ran counter to our expectations, but is consistent with findings that trust in science is decreasing.”

    Why would people be so distrustful of science? There are for them to be:

    • Most published scientific research findings are false.

    • Many of the most important scientific discoveries, including some that eventually were awarded Nobel prizes, were initially ridiculed by scientists.

    • Many materialist pseudo-skeptics make misleading claims denying ESP and they incorrectly say that their claims are backed by science. This might create suspicion that science is not reliable.

    Most people believe in ESP and the afterlife. People with more education are more likely to believe in ESP and the afterlife and most doctors believe in the afterlife. They believe this way not because of what science says, but because of their own paranormal experiences and the experiences of others. And they are right to do so. They recognize that ordinary people can know truth that Science denies. There is a vast amount of valid evidence for ESP and the afterlife, including scientific evidence validated by replication and published in peer-reviewed journals.

    Whatever the reason, this research shows activist materialist pseudo-skeptics are hurting their cause when they try to spread their beliefs. It would be better for everyone if they stopped, because those beliefs can be harmful to other people.

    Copyright © 2013, 2015 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Sunday, April 28, 2013

    Selected Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications on Psi Research at deanradin.com


    Parapsychologist Dean Radin author of The Conscious Universe and Entangled Minds has created a list of Selected Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications on Psi Research. He explains why in his latest blog post.

    Critics are fond of saying that's there is no scientific evidence for psi. They wave their fist in the air and shout, "Show me the evidence!" Then they turn red and have a coughing fit. In less dramatic cases a student might be genuinely curious and open-minded, but unsure where to begin to find reliable evidence about psi. Google knows all and sees all, but it doesn't know how to interpret or evaluate what it knows (at least not yet).
    ...

    So I've created a SHOW ME page with downloadable articles on psi and psi-related topics, all published in peer-reviewed journals.

    The list of journal publications can be found at deanradin.com:

    Selected Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications on Psi Research

    Subjects include:

    • Healing at a Distance
    • Physiological correlations at a distance
    • Telepathy & ESP
    • General Overviews & Critiques
    • Mediumship & Survival of Consciousness
    • Precognition & Presentiment
    • Theory
    • Mind-Matter Interaction
    • Potential Applications
    • Recommended books
    • Other websites with access to articles

    Copyright © 2013 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Monday, April 15, 2013

    Proof of ESP: 1871 - 1997. Beating the Odds at Ten Million Billion Billion to One.


    This post reviews the history of ESP research from 1871 to 1997. It is based on information in The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin unless otherwise noted. (Many prominent pseudoskeptics, including Richard Wiseman, Chris French, Ray Hyman, Donald Hebb, and George Price, admit evidence for ESP meets the scientific standard of proof but they refuse to believe ESP is real because ... they don't want to.)

    Clairvoyance

    • In 1889, Charles Richet, winner of the Nobel prize in physiology and medicine, conducted experiments where hypnotized subjects were able to identify the contents of sealed envelopes with the odds against chance explaining the result of 25,000 to 1 (Reference: Entangled Minds by Dean Radin).

    Telepathy

    • In 1927 George Estabrooks at Harvard University conducted tests of telepathy between students in adjoining rooms. He obtained positive results that were highly significant. The odds against these results occurring by chance was greater than a million to one.

    • 1930: Mental Radio was published. In this book, Upton Sinclair described his wife's ability to duplicate a sketch that someone else had drawn without her having to see it. After the book was published, Dr. Walter Franklyn Prince did an independent analysis of the data and concluded the results could not be explained by chance or by any other natural means.

    • 1920s - 1965: Professor Joseph Banks Rhine and colleagues at Duke University conducted ESP tests using a deck of 25 cards with one of five possible symbols on each card. They found that subjects were able to guess the symbol on a card more frequently than could be explained by chance. One study of all similar card tests from various experimenters from 1882 to 1939 found the odds against chance were more than a billion trillion to one.

    • 1966 - 1972: Montague Ullman and Stanley Krippner conducted dream telepathy experiments at Maimonides Medical Center. In these experiments, one person looked at a picture while another person was dreaming. The dreamer was then awakened and described her dreams. The descriptions were judged and it was found that the picture was included in the dreams often enough so that the odds against chance explaining the results were 75 million to one.

    • Mid 1970s: Charles Honorton began the Ganzfeld experiments. In these experiments a subject was put into a relaxed state for a period of time while listening to white noise with translucent plastic covering her eyes to help reduce mental "noise". While this was happening, a second person looked at a picture. Afterward, the subject was shown four different pictures, one of which was the picture the second person had looked at. The subject was able to identify which picture had been looked at a frequency greater than could be explained by chance. When the results of several experiments were combined they obtained odds of ten billion to one against chance.

    Remote Viewing

    Remote viewing is a type of experiment where a subject attempts to mentally view a remote location.

    • 1973 - 1988: Edwin May reviewed all remote viewing experiments conducted at Stanford Research Institute (SRI). The experiments were successful overall, with combined odds against chance of more than a billion billion to one.

    • 1989 - 1993: Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) obtained positive results that could not be explained by chance.

    • 1978 - 1987: Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) remote viewing experiments produced positive results with odds against chance of 100 billion to one.

    Precognition

    • 1989: Charles Honorton and Diane Ferrari analyzed all "forced-choice" precognition experiments conducted by sixty two different investigators that were conducted from 1935 to 1987. In a these experiments, a test subject tried to predict which of a fixed number of objects would be selected at a later time. For these experiments, Honorton and Ferrari calculated odds against getting the same results by chance was 1025 or ten million billion billion to one.

    • Early 1980s: Holger Klintman conducted experiments where he showed a subject a color patch and asked the subject to name the color. Then the subject was shown a word for a color and asked to read the word. Klintman found that when the patch and the word were the same color, the reaction time for saying the color of the patch was faster even though the word for the color had not yet been displayed. He calculated the odds against chance for these results were 500,000 to 1.

    • Before the publication of The Conscious Universe was published in 1997, Dean Radin explored a similar phenomenon by measuring the skin conductivity of a person (which is an indicator of sweat gland activity) as a series of images were shown. Sweat gland activity always increased just before an image was shown to the subject as the subject was waiting to see the next image. However, Radin found that if the image was one that would produce an emotional reaction, sweat gland activity increased more than for other images. He called this phenomenon "presentiment". Professor Dick Bierman reported replicating this phenomenon in 1996.

    Psychokinesis

    • William Crookes tested the psychic Daniel Dunglas Home in 1871 and proved telekinesis is real. Crookes tested Home under laboratory conditions that prevented fraud. Crookes described these experiments in his book: Researches into the Phenomena of Modern Spiritualism.

    • 1935: J. B. Rhine, Lousia Rhine, and colleagues at Duke University began experiments to see if mental intention could influence dice rolling. In 1989 Dianne Ferrari and Dean Radin analyzed the combined results of fifty two investigators from 1935 to 1987. They found mental intention could influence dice rolling, and they calculated the odds against obtaining the result by chance was more than a billion to one.

    • 1959 - 1987: In 1987 Roger Nelson and Dean Radin combined the results of experiments in which a test subject tried to alter the results of a random number generator. They considered 832 studies (597 of which were conducted at PEAR) and found a positive result. They calculated the odds against obtaining this result by chance were more than a trillion to one.

    Psychic Healing

    In The End of Materialism Dr. Charles Tart writes:

    For many years, when talking about parapsychological findings, I referred to the "big four," the four psi phenomena for which there was so much accumulated evidence that we could take them as the foundational findings of the field: three forms of ESP (telepathy, clairvoyance, and precognition), plus PK. Each had hundreds of well-controlled experiments supporting its existence. In the last two decades, though, enough positive studies of psychic healing have been published (see www. stephanaschwartz.com for an extensive, current bibliography, with abstracts) that I now speak of the "big five."
    The bibliography Dr. Tart mentions is Therapeutic Intent/Healing Bibliography of Research Compiled by Larry Dossey, M.D., and Stephan A. Schwartz

    Copyright © 2013, 2015 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Wednesday, March 6, 2013

    Interview with Near-Death Researcher Sam Parnia


    On February 27, Dr. Sam Parnia was interviewed on the Coast to Coast AM radio program. Dr. Parnia is conducting the AWARE Study on near-death experiences (NDEs). As part of his research, he interviews patients who have suffered cardiac arrest. A summary of the interview was posted to a discussion forum by the member Wendybird.

    During the interview, Dr. Parnia said the patients he has studied are not just having "near-death experiences", they are having "actual death experiences". They have been clinically dead for "minutes if not hours". The fact that some patients have memories of what was happening around them during that time is proof that consciouses survives death. Wendybird commented that at the outset of the research Parnia seemed skeptical but while conducting this research he became convinced that the afterlife is real.

    ...

    Parnia refers to his cases in the AWARE study as “actual death experiences” (ADEs), because “they have objectively died for minutes if not hours”. He explains that these people “really were dead”, they were corpses, i.e., they had no heart beat, no brain function – they were actually dead, “not clinically dead, not nearly dead”, no playing around with the meaning of the words, as Parnia put it.

    Regarding reversing death, Parnia explained that the medicine has progressed so far that now the dead can be resuscitated “many hours” after death. The decay of cells is a process that begins after death occurs (both heart and brain function cease). There’s a window of about 8 hours in which “brain cells are still viable, but not functioning.” That’s the key here – brain cells are NOT FUNCTIONING. After that window expires, they are so damaged they cannot be revived again. Parnia realizes that if we’d had the technology and knowledge we do today to reverse the death process, that when the Titanic sank in 1912, we’d have been able to revive many of the 1500 that died in the freezing waters of the North Atlantic – especially because the cold temperatures slow the decay of brain cells and keep them viable for hours (when the rescue ship Carpathia arrived, those people had only been in the water for two hours, within the 8-hour window to get the brain functioning again).

    “We have millions and millions of people now who have essentially gone to the other side, beyond the threshold of death, they’ve entered what would have been considered the afterlife period, and they’re coming back and telling us what they experienced.” He compares it to our ability now to send men to the moon who can come back and tell us about it. We now routinely overcome death, and the people he’s studying are “like astronauts – we send them out to explore this other dimension” – they are going to the other side, and they’re able to tell us what they’ve experienced on the other side of death – “is there an afterlife and what shape does it take, and that’s a new science that’s evolving for us.”

    ...

    In Parnia’s interview on Skeptiko a year or so ago, prior to the AWARE study, he seemed still to be on the fence, a bit skeptical of NDEs, even hinting he thought it was some effect of the brain. He even had proponents wondering if Parnia was setting up AWARE to fail... However, from hearing the NPR interview and this C2C interview, after reviewing in depth the ADE cases in his study, Parnia now clearly is convinced that consciousness continues to exist in some form after the heart and brain have ceased to function.

    ...

    In addition to interviewing patients, the AWARE Study also involves placing some type of "target" in hospital rooms where they would not normally be seen, such as on the top of a high cabinet. The hope is that when interviewing the patients after cardiac arrest, they would have seen the target and could describe it, proving they had an out-of-body experience as part of their NDE. When I first heard this, I was concerned that people going through NDEs would not bother looking at pictures on top of file cabinets because they would be more concerned about what was happening down where their body was. I was afraid this was a poorly designed study that would lead to the false conclusion that NDE's were not genuine afterlife experiences. So, I am pleased to learn that Dr. Parnia has been whole-heartedly converted to belief in the afterlife from this work. I don't know if any of his patients have seen the targets, my impression is that his conversion has come from interviewing the patients about their experiences in the afterlife and their ability to describe what was happening around them while they were clinically dead.

    I recommend reading the whole summary.

    Copyright © 2013 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.

    Sunday, March 3, 2013

    Interview with Chris Carter by Jime of Subversive Thinking


    There is an excellent interview with Chris Carter, author of Science and the Afterlife at Subversive Thinking by the blogger Jime. The interview was on the subject of Carter's book, which is about survival of consciousness after death. In the interview, Jime, who believes in the survival, brought up one bogus criticism of survival after another and Chris Carter thoroughly rebutted each of them in turn. Carter has an advanced degree in philosophy and it showed in his explanations which were knowledgeable, well reasoned, and cut through to the core of the issues.

    The interview covered three subjects that I have blogged about here and discussed on my web site:

    • There are several independent forms of very strong evidence that prove the survival of consciousness after death is a fact.

    • Criticisms of survival after death based on arguments that it is unscientific are flawed.

    • Survival of consciousness after death is a much better explanation for the evidence than is super-ESP.

    The key points made in the interview are:

    • The strongest evidence for survival comes from mediumship because, in the best cases, the evidence is from the spirit's perspective, and it demonstrates more than just knowledge of the spirit but also characteristics like purpose, personality, and skills. Statements made by a medium and recorded are an objective form of evidence and not susceptible to "mistaken eye-witnesses testimony". However, there are additional very strong forms of evidence for survival including "near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who claim to remember previous lives", and "reports of apparitions". Carter points out that these are independent forms of evidence. This is an important point since multiple independent forms of evidence provide a much stronger argument than a single form of evidence.

    • Survival after death is a question of fact, it is not a theory. Therefore criticisms of theories such as unfalsifiability, inability to make predictions, or lack of explanatory power are not applicable to survival. However the survival hypothesis has been proved true by the evidence, it makes the prediction that consciousness survives death, and it is a very "simple", "straightforward" explanation for various paranormal phenomena.

    • Occam's razor, which says, in Carter's words, "do not add unnecessary causal factors to explanations", should be understood as saying that factors added to protect the theory from contradictory evidence should not be added. Because of this, survival is a superior hypothesis to super-ESP. While survival requires the inclusion of spirits as causal factors, these are a direct inference from the data. However, super-ESP has been extended again and again as telepathy, and then ESP, were shown to be unable to explain the evidence for survival. It is these greater and greater capabilities attributed to super-ESP that are added as a causal factors to protect the theory from falsification. These capabilities are unnecessary because the survival hypothesis provides a simpler more straightforward explanation without them. Therefore survival is a superior explanation of the evidence than is super-ESP.

    • Survival is a self-evident explanation for afterlife phenomena. Alternatives, when testable, (such as telepathy or ESP), have been shown to be false, and when not testable, (such as super-ESP or fraud), are "pseudo-scientific excuses for refusing to accept an otherwise straightforward inference from the evidence."

    For ease of reference, I have included below a list of objections to survival that were discussed in the interview with links to the section of this post that explains how they were rebutted by Carter. It is not a complete table of contents so if you want to read the whole post you must scroll through it rather than jump ahead with just these links.

    Below, I try to summarize what was said in the interview. However, I suggest you also read the full interview since it is probable that my summary and paraphrasing will be imperfect and I may inadvertently misrepresent some of what was said.

    Evidence for the Afterlife

    In the interview, Carter explains that the best evidence for the afterlife comes from mediumship and "near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who claim to remember previous lives, and from reports of apparitions". He points out that these are independent forms of evidence. This is an important point since multiple independent forms of evidence provide a much stronger argument than a single form of evidence.

    Carter also explains that mediumship is the strongest form of evidence for survival because in the best cases, such as trance mediumship, the evidence is direct evidence of the spirit, and it demonstrates the perspective, purposes, personality, and skills of the spirit. Statements made by a medium can be recorded so the evidence is also objective and not susceptible to "mistaken eye-witness testimony" as other form of evidence are.

    Is Survival a Good Explanation of the Evidence?

    Falsifiability

    In the interview, Carter also discusses whether the afterlife is a falsifiable theory. Falsifiability of a theory was identified by Karl Popper as necessary for a theory to be scientific.

    Carter explained that the question of the afterlife is not a theory, it is a question of fact. A theory is an expression of the relationship between facts or how facts "fit together". For example, gravity is a fact. If you drop a stone, it falls. However the theory of gravity is a mathematical formula that describes how the force of gravity depends on mass and distance.

    You can prove a theory is false by finding evidence that contradicts the theory. But you can never prove a theory is true because there is always the possibility that some day you will find an exception to it. For example, Newton's theory of gravity was believed true, until observations showed that Einstein's theory of gravity could explain a phenomenon that was not consistent with Newton's theory.

    However a hypothesis about a fact, such as the fact that consciousness can survive death, can be proved true with evidence. The evidence that proves consciousness survives death includes mediumship, near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who remember past lives, and reports of apparitions. Therefore, whether or not survival is falsifiable is irrelevant.

    Predictions and Explanatory Force

    Carter also discussed the question of whether a theory must make predictions that give it explanatory force in order for the theory to be scientific. One criticism of survival is that it lacks predictive power so has little explanatory utility and is therefore not scientific. Critics claim survival invokes "spirits" to explain phenomena whenever there is no other known natural explanation. The criticism is that survival is an ad hoc assertion rather than a theory that makes predictions.

    Carter pointed out that survival does make predictions, it predicts that consciousness survives death. He again pointed out that survival is a question of fact not theory. Carter also rejected the premise of the question, that scientific theories have to have "predictive power in order to have explanatory force". He explained that theories only have to be testable and that progress in science is made by testing hypotheses. What the hypothesis explains is a different issue he said. However, Carter asserted that survival does have explanatory force because it is a "simple and concise" explanation for mediumship, near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who remember past lives, and reports of apparitions.

    Anomalous Data

    Carter rejected the assertion that survival only relies on anomalous data, he asserted that the evidence is much more than anomalous data. I believe he was alluding the several independent forms of very strong evidence for survival that he previously mentioned in the interview: mediumship, near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who remember past lives, and reports of apparitions.

    Survival After Death is a Much Better Explanation of the Evidence than is Super-ESP

    Super-ESP is the hypothesis that the psychic powers of living persons are responsible for the evidence that is said to prove survival after death. For example, a medium might unconsciously use ESP to obtain information about a deceased individual and then simulate communications with the individual's spirit.

    Predictive Power

    Carter was asked if survival makes testable predictions that make it a better explanation of the evidence than super-ESP.

    Carter rejected the premise, that survival is a theory that should make predictions. He pointed out that survival is a "straightforward inference from the data". It is an issue of fact not an issue of theory and the necessity of predictive power is not applicable to facts, only to theories.

    Carter explained that survival has been consistently inferred from the evidence for thousands of years while super-ESP was proposed only in the late 19th century by those opposed to survival on ideological grounds. When proxy sittings proved mediumship could not be explained by telepathy, extra-sensory perception (ESP) was proposed as an alternative to telepathy as the explanation. When mediums demonstrated skills and personality of the spirit, which could not be explained by ESP, super-ESP was proposed as the explanation. This shows the lack of predictive power leading to the super-ESP hypothesis. Carter states that ESP or super-ESP cannot explain several features of evidence for survival. Carter then discusses experiments by Gary Schwartz which obtained results contrary to what super-ESP would predict.

    Equivalence of Theories

    The question of how to compare theories based on various characteristics was also discussed in relation to whether survival is a superior explanation of the evidence than super-ESP. Carter explained that when two theories make the same predictions, historically they have been equivalent theories. He stated that scientific theories must be testable so you should be able to distinguish a correct theory from an incorrect theory by falsifying the incorrect theory.

    However, the question of survival is not a scientific theory. In order to evaluate an explanation of the evidence for survival, Carter said, you need to consider "1) Does it solve a problem", 2) "Does it do so" in a simple manner, and 3) "Is it consistent with other beliefs" for which there are "good reasons to consider true". Carter explained that for survival you can answer yes to all three, but for super-ESP you can only answer yes to the first item.

    Survival solves the problem of how to explain mediumship and near-death experiences etc. Survival is a simple inference from the data. And there are several independent forms of evidence for survival so it is consistent with other beliefs for which there are good reasons to consider true. However super-ESP is a contrived explanation, it is not simple, and there is no independent evidence for it (see the next section below), so there is no good reason to believe it. Therefore, survival is a better explanation of the evidence than super-ESP.

    Is The Evidence for Survival is really Evidence for Super-ESP?

    Carter argued there is no independent evidence for super-ESP except where it is asserted to occur as evidence for the afterlife. If super-ESP was correct, there should be evidence of super-ESP doing more important things, like protecting people from actual harm, rather than just simulating evidence for the afterlife. Therefore there is no good reason to believe in super-ESP.

    Collective Hallucination

    Carter discussed the claim that collective hallucination could explain multiple witness apparitions. He pointed out there is no actual evidence of collective hallucination occurring among healthy people except for the cases of multiple witness apparitions.

    Independent Evidence

    Another criticism discussed was that the survival hypothesis does not rely on any independent reasons for believing in survival beyond the evidence for survival itself, just as super-ESP does not have any independent means of support beyond afterlife phenomenon. Carter pointed out that the different forms of evidence for survival, mediumship, near-death experiences, death-bed visions, children who remember past lives, and reports of apparitions, are independent reasons for believing in it.

    Carter then explained that the best evidence for survival is different in kind not in degree of ESP and therefore something different from ESP must be required to explain it. I believe he was alluding to the cases of mediumship, where the evidence demonstrates the spirits perspective, purposes, personality, and skills.

    Occam's Razor

    Next, Carter dealt with Occam's Razor as applied to survival and super-ESP. Occam's razor, which says, in Carter's words, "do not add unnecessary causal factors to explanations", should be understood as saying that factors added to protect the theory from contradictory evidence should not be added. If both survival and super-ESP involve ESP, then is super-ESP superior because it does not invoke spirits and so involves fewer causative factors? While survival requires the inclusion of spirits as causal factors, these are a direct inference from the data. However, super-ESP has been extended again and again as telepathy, and then ESP, were shown to be unable to explain the evidence for survival. It is these greater and greater capabilities leading to super-ESP that are added as a causal factors to protect the theory from falsification. These capabilities are unnecessary because the survival hypothesis provides a simpler more straightforward explanation without them. Therefore survival is a superior explanation of the evidence than super-ESP.

    Super-ESP

    Another criticism Carter dealt with is that if ESP cannot explain the evidence for survival it might mean that the capabilities of super-ESP are greater than currently understood and not that survival is true.

    I'll end my post with how Carter responded to this criticism:

    In my work I present the evidence that provides a prima facie case for survival; demonstrate that alternative explanations, to the extent that they are testable, have been proven false; and then argue that to the extent these alternative explanations are not testable (such as elaborate fraud scenarios, or super-ESP) they are pseudo-scientific excuses for refusing to accept an otherwise straightforward inference from the evidence.

    I highly recommend reading the whole interview.

    Copyright © 2013 by ncu9nc All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.