Near-death experiences and consciousness

an eeg only measures electrical activity where the electrodes are located.

quite.

The Sabom reference isn't a paper, its a book called 'Light and Death'. I have already provided a link to a post from the old JREF boards with extracts from the book, search for 'page 37' to find the relevant post in that thread.As well as these the book is available as part of the google book project, you will need ti sign up for google's services to access this. The relevant section is chapter three, beginning at page 37. The account makes it quite clear that anything that might be considered a veridical observation occurred before Miss Reynolds body temperature was lowered and the blood drained. The only experiences which miss Reynolds' account places during the periof her EEG was flat are the traditional NDE ones of a tunnel of light and encountering dead relatives, experiences one would be hard put to verify.TTFN,WK

WK, that links doesn't open to the book, and I cannot find it. Obviously, Van Pommel feels the account is an excellent example of veridical perception while the brain is not active as details about the surgery were included.You think otherwise, but it appears without having the book on hand, it's hard to independently verify that.The editors at Lancet, by the way, did not ask Van Pommel to correct this claim in the article.

oh, i see. this doesn't look good at all.from the amazon.com review:

quote:

---

And he scrutinizes near-death experiences in the light of what the Bible has to say about death and dying, the realities of light and darkness, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

---

doesn't sound like a peer reviewed science paper one bit.so we have a third-hand surgeon's anecdote that went throught a decidedly fundamentalist christian and pseudoscience filter, misreported in a peer reviewed paper?i must say, i'm losing faith in this whole "peer reviewed" thing.

---

אָרַח

i think that statement says more about van pommel than the data. and sadly, i think that's a mark against the lancet. seriously, third-hand anecdotes in a science article?

quote:

---

What completely goes beyond you is that such overstatements "for effect" are no sober, reasoned, objective analysis and have no place in science education and presentation.

---

---

אָרַח

Which link? Do you seriously think the reviewers of a paper, let alone the editors of a journal, read through the source of every single reference to make sure that it supports the usage made of it?TTFN,WK

Did the google book project link work for you Arachnophilia?TTFN,WK

I don't think anyone questions that point. What that does say though is that Van Pommel has a very low threshhold when it comes to what he is willing to consider as evidence and that he could not find anything that would approach even a minimal standard of what might be considered scientific evidence.The report is, at the very least, a third hand account of an assertion wrapped in rumour.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

With something as controversial as this, yep!

if you go to books.google.com and then search for 'Light and Death' and then search for '37' in that book you can read page 37 and beyond of the book.

Then your ideas about how journals work are severely out of kilter with reality. Any luck finding the reference yet, Modulous has given you step by step instructions should you not be able to get the link to work.TTFN,WK

yes, takes you right to the front cover. you need a google account to read it, which i have; so no problem there. i'm not gonna read much of it, but i did skim the relevent passages in your other post.

---

אָרַח

Don't let Randman lead you into bad habits, the author's name is van Lommel. This is just one more fact that Randman can't be bothered to get straight, along with the name of the journal.TTFN,WK

yeah, my faultThat's what happens when you don't always read back far enough

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion