Near Death Experiences Of Children

[dibby]

Research has shown that if blood flow is cut off to the occipital lobes subjects will experience intense bright light

Where is the light coming from for them to experience it?

Their mind. What they perceive as light does not have to come from an actual light source.

 

So an absence of blood to this area causes them to see light. How?

How are they perceiving light where there is no light?

[NotBlinded]

Research has shown that if blood flow is cut off to the occipital lobes subjects will experience intense bright light

Where is the light coming from for them to experience it?

Their mind. What they perceive as light does not have to come from an actual light source.

 

So an absence of blood to this area causes them to see light. How?

How are they perceiving light where there is no light?

Hi dibby,

 

I don't know how it works, but I know when I used to faint, I used to see everything turn really bright (yellow bright) before it went dark and I passed out. Kind of like my avatar.

 

*These quote functions don't work like they should*

[white_raven23]

So an absence of blood to this area causes them to see light. How?

How are they perceiving light where there is no light?

 

Please "see" my last post.

[Dave]

Research has shown that if blood flow is cut off to the occipital lobes subjects will experience intense bright light

Where is the light coming from for them to experience it?

Their mind. What they perceive as light does not have to come from an actual light source.

So an absence of blood to this area causes them to see light. How?

How are they perceiving light where there is no light?

I'm sorry. I answered in plain English. You twisted it into something else. I can't help you.

[euphgeek]

You're right that certain aspects of the NDE have been successfully replicated in the lab, but no one has successfully reproduced all aspects of the NDE. From the article you quoted,

Effects that extreme g-forces have on the brain produce NDE like symptoms.

While it may or may not be an entirely physical phenomena, the NDE has not quite yet been fully explained.

 

So which specific 'aspects' of the NDE have not been successfully replicated?

Well, the whole experience of actually meeting, interacting with and talking with beings. A life review. Looking down at one's own body. Describing medical procedures being done on one's own body while the brain has no blood flowing to it. Predictions of the future, accurate or otherwise. Viewing the Earth from outer space.

 

What scientists have done so far is a start, but a bit more work needs to be done before they can declare they definitely know what it is.

[KT45]

So which specific 'aspects' of the NDE have not been successfully replicated?

Well, the whole experience of actually meeting, interacting with and talking with beings. A life review. Looking down at one's own body. Describing medical procedures being done on one's own body while the brain has no blood flowing to it. Predictions of the future, accurate or otherwise. Viewing the Earth from outer space.

 

What scientists have done so far is a start, but a bit more work needs to be done before they can declare they definitely know what it is.

Well this hasn't been explained (the whole looking down on the body or out-of-body experience) but it has been reproduced. Read here

http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/conte/pdfs/...ng_TICS2003.pdf

Blanke et al. recently described a preoperative epilepsy patient who reported spontaneous out-of-body experiences during electrical stimulation of her right angular gyrus [1].This study is both interesting and important because it addresses the problem of whether brain activity inducedby local stimulation can elicit familiar experiences only,novel combinations of familiar experiences, or experiences that are entirely novel.The 43-year-old woman in the study suffered complex partial seizures and had temporarily implanted subdural electrodes to identify the epileptic focus. Stimulation attwo specific electrode sites over the angular gyrus at theparietal-temporal junction elicited novel vestibular illu-sions of falling or floating (Fig. 1a). Initial stimulation ledto sensations of ‘falling from a height’ or ‘sinking into the bed’. Higher amplitude stimulation led to the report of an apparent out-of-body experience. She reported that ‘I see myself lying in bed, from above, but I only see my legs and lower trunk’. In actuality, the patient was lying in bed withher upper body supported at a 45-degree incline.

it's not perfect because she didn't see her whole body so I'll see if I can find a better study.

[StewartP]

So an absence of blood to this area causes them to see light. How?

How are they perceiving light where there is no light?

In the same way that sufferers of tinnitis are perceiving sound when there is no sound.

In the same way that people having hallucinations percieve babies crawling on the ceiling when there are no babies crawling on the ceiling.

In the same way that amputees percieve pain in missing limbs when there is no limb to give pain.

In the same way that when you take an asprin, the asprin "knows" how to go to your sore thumb, but doesn't numb your whole body.

 

You see?

It's the brain. The brain recives input and interprets it. And when its "wires get crossed" it does crazy things. And then, because it is the brain, it often believes the crazy things as being reality.

[KT45]

Well, the whole experience of actually meeting, interacting with and talking with beings. A life review. Looking down at one's own body. Describing medical procedures being done on one's own body while the brain has no blood flowing to it. Predictions of the future, accurate or otherwise. Viewing the Earth from outer space.

 

What scientists have done so far is a start, but a bit more work needs to be done before they can declare they definitely know what it is.

Here is another article that attempts to explain NDEs. This one is the latest study on NDEs created in Oct 2006. Recents studies state that it is merely an REM (you'll learn after you read it).

 

For Joe his near-death experience (NDE) was a very real preview of what is in store for him after death. Science has a different take: NDEs are real, but they have nothing to do with the afterlife. Instead, they are illusions created by a fading brain. But despite numerous attempts, no one has been able to scientifically explain all the elements of an NDE.

 

Now one researcher thinks he can. For Kevin Nelson, a neurophysiologist at the University of Kentucky in Lexington, NDEs may be little more than dream-like states brought on by stress and a predisposition to a common kind of sleep disorder. If he's right, as many as 40 per cent of us could be primed to see the light.

read more here

Light_at_the_end_of_the_tunnel.txt

[euphgeek]

Interesting read, Taylor. Thanks. I think that studies of NDEs should be taken on with neither the idea of proving life after death right or wrong, but objectively so that we can get the best idea of what the phenomenon is. Believers jump to conclusions too quickly and pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

[KT45]

Interesting read, Taylor. Thanks. I think that studies of NDEs should be taken on with neither the idea of proving life after death right or wrong, but objectively so that we can get the best idea of what the phenomenon is. Believers jump to conclusions too quickly and pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

Well the first article was pretty unbaised. The last one I sent seemed very baised (like they already found the answer or something). But it also said they need to do more studies. If anything thing pops up I'll be sure to post it.

[Dave]

....pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

And some, showing ignorance based on arrogance, actually believe that if they don't know enough about the topic themselves that science must continue studying it. They ask moronic questions based on seeking a perfection that is not humanly possible. They do that so that they can see themselves as "better" than others.

[euphgeek]

Interesting read, Taylor. Thanks. I think that studies of NDEs should be taken on with neither the idea of proving life after death right or wrong, but objectively so that we can get the best idea of what the phenomenon is. Believers jump to conclusions too quickly and pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

Well the first article was pretty unbaised. The last one I sent seemed very baised (like they already found the answer or something). But it also said they need to do more studies. If anything thing pops up I'll be sure to post it.

Sounds good. Thanks. I admit that I am biased, since I believe in an afterlife, but it's only a belief. If it can be conclusively shown that my belief is wrong, I will gladly change it.

[Zetetic]

....pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

And some, showing ignorance based on arrogance, actually believe that if they don't know enough about the topic themselves that science must continue studying it. They ask moronic questions based on seeking a perfection that is not humanly possible. They do that so that they can see themselves as "better" than others.

I don't think it's arrogance so much as fear...although I think arrogance is most often caused by fear.

[Dave]

I don't think it's arrogance so much as fear...although I think arrogance is most often caused by fear.

That's true. Some fear death so much that they make up fanciful tales about it. That's what religion is all about. They cling to those tales with the fervency of a religious belief. And as you've seen here, they even use the same arguments.

[Poonis]

Do a google search on near death experiences of children. Look for the ones that have had no opportunity to be programed or taught in any way. They are quite amazing. It is probably the one thing that really lets you know there is something there. Go on and try it.

 

yes, children speaking about the afterlife should obviously be believed, but not when they say there is a monster in their closet.

[Dave]

yes, children speaking about the afterlife should obviously be believed, but not when they say there is a monster in their closet.

They're in the closet too? I thought they were just under the bed. We're doomed.

[The Sage Nabooru]

Interesting read, Taylor. Thanks. I think that studies of NDEs should be taken on with neither the idea of proving life after death right or wrong, but objectively so that we can get the best idea of what the phenomenon is. Believers jump to conclusions too quickly and pseudo-skeptical cynics discount important evidence or fail to study it closely enough.

 

That's a big problem I see, too. At present it seems that whenever a so-called "study" is "researching" NDEs, or really any other kind of "supernatural" phenomena, its intended goal is to prove or disprove. Thus, the "researchers" go into the study already arrived at their conclusion, and any and all "studying" will be manipulated towards that.

 

I've read studies done by skeptics who simply denied certain claims or experiences because they were simply impossible from their point of view and thus deserved no attention, which actually kind of makes me feel that they're uneasy about looking into anything that might contradict their own purposes, and others written by "believers" who make me wonder why they don't start a church of Tylenol because this compound mysteriously cures headaches. Since all those scientists are lying when they say it's the chemical makeup, man.

[SwissMiss]

Isn't all this just doing what human beings have been doing for thousands of years? If we can't understand it, we supernaturalise it.

 

I did read somewhere (I can't recall where) that, as a coping mechanism at the point of death, the brain releases endorphins which can produce that sense of euphoria that many people who have had an NDE report. It would seem highly reasonable to suggest that the brain would work in a similar fashion in a child as it does in an adult. It does NOT prove the existence of an afterlife in any way, shape or form. I realise that, post-NDE, some people claim to suddenly have knowledge of things "they couldn't possibly know otherwise", but no one can provide empirical proof about what a person should or should not know and can not, therefore, categorically state that the person in question "couldn't possibly have known". Even children overhear things, they may never mention it but they might still remember and utilise it in an NDE.

 

My apologies if I'm repeating something someone else has said.

[DarthOkkata]

Do a google search on near death experiences of children. Look for the ones that have had no opportunity to be programed or taught in any way. They are quite amazing. It is probably the one thing that really lets you know there is something there. Go on and try it.

 

As much fun as it is to burst someone's bubble, we've been able to duplicate NDE phenomenon in a scientific environment.

 

NASA has done it. In a certain percentage of astronauts who pass out in the centerfuge heavy G training simiulator. [That big machine with a little pod on the end of an arm that spins you in a circle real fast.]

 

The subjects all passed out due to blood loss in the brain, and reported seeing a tunnel of light, and halucinations of their life, and people they knew who had died. The experiences were all similar, and while disoriented, no one was in danger of death, or even serious injury.

 

It's basically your brain restarting after trauma, such as a heavy blow, or the loss of circulation.

 

Kind of like when you reboot your PC.