Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Paper: Spontaneous Creation of the Universe From Nothing

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Two thousand years ago the Epicureans believed that the world arose spontaneously. Their idea was that randomly veering atoms attained a great variety of configurations by chance, and would eventually find themselves forming stable, functional structures. And while this may seem unlikely, the immense universe provided a great many opportunities for those configurations to come about. In Cicero’s dialog, the Epicurean explains this to his stoic opponent:  Read more

Comments
That’s diplomatic BS. Every religion has a different story of how their God created the universe. There is no ‘oneness’.
Every religion lives in the same Universe therefor it talks about the same Creator, i already said a paradigm, the one with the Architect and the people living in the house he built, there is one Truth for the Architect even if there are different opinions, this truth is accessible from humans since we are His images, that's why Jesus was called the Son of Man because through Him (his teachings) we are restoring our lost image of God. Please tell me how something infinite can have plural?
No. As I said in the other thread, the only objective methodology of the study to prove NDE, is “placard message recognition”. Either you can say the methodology of the study is wrong, hence the entire study is wrong, or you should accept that the study debunks NDE.
Again, my keys are in front of me all the time but many times i can't see them even if someone points at them, it doesn't mean that i am dead or that i am hallucinating, it means that i didn't noticed them. The study proved that patiences had mental recollections when their brain had no oxygen, if consciousness is a product of a broken brain then we would observe random memories, random hallucinations and blackouts, here the patiences until the last second of their lives had awareness and their recollections worked perfectly just like when they were alive. A broken machine has consequences.
The patient was aware of the surgery, not how many steps doctors and nurses took in various direction! Awareness during anesthesia may be experienced by 1 or 2 cases out of every 1000 patients. Analysis of ASA Closed Claims Project shows intraoperative awareness accounted for up to 2% of all claims.
No, the patience observed his surgery and described it to the doctors he wasn't just aware of it, that's why he is on its own category from the study. Here we have 46% cases that had some kind of awareness during their surgery, that means almost 500 out of 1000 and if we count the people that forgot these experiences because of the amnesia drugs the numbers are climbing higher. "2 per cent exhibited full awareness compatible with OBE's with explicit recall of 'seeing' and 'hearing' events." "One case was validated and timed using auditory stimuli during cardiac arrest. Dr Parnia concluded: "This is significant, since it has often been assumed that experiences in relation to death are likely hallucinations or illusions, occurring either before the heart stops or after the heart has been successfully restarted, but not an experience corresponding with 'real' events when the heart isn't beating. In this case, consciousness and awareness appeared to occur during a three-minute period when there was no heartbeat. This is paradoxical, since the brain typically ceases functioning within 20-30 seconds of the heart stopping and doesn't resume again until the heart has been restarted. Furthermore, the detailed recollections of visual awareness in this case were consistent with verified events."
Among the cocktail of drugs is Ketamine or its derivatives (BTW, Ketamine is used by thousands of teens to get Out of body experience pretty much everyday OBE is achieved when they hit the k-hole state.).
Ketamine experiences are often frightening, producing weird images and most ketamine users realize that the experiences produced by this drug are illusory. In contrast, NDErs are strongly convinced of the reality of what they experienced. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130327190359.htm Furthermore, many of the central features of NDEs are not reported with ketamine. That being said, we cannot rule out that the blockade of NMDA receptors may be involved in some NDEs. Plus to that the testimonies of people that had NDE and tried Ketamine say its not the same. I have found a forum discussion recently that deals with it. People that had OBE experiences describe things that could not possibly know, if we could replicate them with drugs we wouldn't say that these are hallucinations because of the drugs, we would say that these drugs somehow move your Consciousness above your material self and access information that you can't know when you are in your body.JimFit
March 8, 2015
March
03
Mar
8
08
2015
06:33 AM
6
06
33
AM
PDT
JimFit @ 54
God is one because He is Eternal, you can’t use plural on something infinite it is both stupid and illogical. An Architect builds a house, in the house there are lots of people that wonder about the character of the Architect, some people .....
That's diplomatic BS. Every religion has a different story of how their God created the universe. There is no 'oneness'.
The place-cards and the Out of body experiences were second to the research, they were not the main subject of the study.
No. As I said in the other thread, the only objective methodology of the study to prove NDE, is "placard message recognition". Either you can say the methodology of the study is wrong, hence the entire study is wrong, or you should accept that the study debunks NDE.
This can be true only if this patient did know every person that worked in the hospital and of course he couldn’t because he was not a doctor neither worked for that hospital. To say that somehow knew all the movements of the doctors and the nurses when his eyes were closed its ridiculous
The patient was aware of the surgery, not how many steps doctors and nurses took in various direction! Awareness during anesthesia may be experienced by 1 or 2 cases out of every 1000 patients. Analysis of ASA Closed Claims Project shows intraoperative awareness accounted for up to 2% of all claims. In an emergency situation ,the anesthetist has little time to monitor and achieve a Bispectral index of 40-60 to ensure full unconsciousness. So if a patient is one among the 1000 who requires a higher dose of anesthetic, it is more likely that he will be anesthesia aware during the surgery than not. Combine this fact with the fact that Clinically dead is still controversial term, and you will find that the 3 minutes 'clinically dead' patient being aware of surgery is not significant at all. Now, in the light of all above facts, let's look at a veridical NDE: Amid the blaring of sirens, you (or your enemy) are wheeled into the ER of a hospital. The ER doctor administers basic first aid and intubates you. Among the cocktail of drugs is Ketamine or its derivatives (BTW, Ketamine is used by thousands of teens to get Out of body experience pretty much everyday OBE is achieved when they hit the k-hole state.). You are wheeled by emergency personnel to the surgery room. They talk about your case or some other patients or the blue shoe on the 2nd floor ledge or the weather- all these info is being recorded by your brain. You are next being prepared for the surgery. The anesthetist injects drugs to induce general anesthesia. He is not aware that you are 1 among the 1000 people who needs extra dose of anesthesia to achieve a Bispectral index of 40 to 60. Meanwhile surgeons and nurses stream in. They talk about the surgical procedure, they use technical terms too, may be they talk about their kids or cats and dogs , about some article in some journals, use each other nick names etc. The ketamine in you takes you to the k-hole state. You are now 'out of body' and are intraperation aware. You hear the conservation while having a OBE. Suddenly in the middle of the surgery, your heart flatlines. The doctor declares you dead - too soon - a clinically death proclamation needs to be made only after 38 minutes of trying to resurrect. The doctors frantically do whatever needs to be done and 'resurrect' you. You make a full recovery. You are overwhelmed- you had an out of body experience, you are aware of seemingly secret info of the surgical procedure , you can recall something about a shoe on the ledge so you truly believe you went out of body, floated around, met God and came back. You just had a veridical NDE.Me_Think
March 7, 2015
March
03
Mar
7
07
2015
11:21 PM
11
11
21
PM
PDT
Box: "What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer?" picture http://cdn-4.spiritscienceandmetaphysics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/harvardd-2.jpg :)bornagain77
March 7, 2015
March
03
Mar
7
07
2015
02:05 PM
2
02
05
PM
PDT
You_Don't_Think_A_Lot said
it was about which God created universe.
God is one because He is Eternal, you can't use plural on something infinite it is both stupid and illogical. All religions talk about the same Creator since all religions live in the same Universe and in the same planet. You confuse Theology with God. An Architect builds a house, in the house there are lots of people that wonder about the character of the Architect, some people think that the Architect is evil, some others that the Architect is rich, some others that the Architect is good, because there are lots of opinions (theologies) it doesn't mean that the Architect obeys to every opinion or that opinions somehow clone the Architect to many Architects, yes there is one Truth that applies to His images as well, us the humans. You also said
Did you notice that in the AWARE study, not a single patient – out of over 2000 -saw the placards which were placed in strategic locations to verify NDE?
I am conscious but there are much things around me that i don't notice in my everyday life even if someone points a finger to them, does that make me dead? That's not really an argument neither the study claimed it was essential to prove awareness after "death". The study wanted to prove that awareness exists in a brain drained from oxygen, the aware study proved that it does, 46 per cent experienced a broad range of mental recollections WHEN THEY HAD A DYING BRAIN! The place-cards and the Out of body experiences were second to the research, they were not the main subject of the study. You then continue
The lone man’s experience is not significant. The lone patient who recalled nurses could easily have been recalling memory from the time he was not ‘clinically dead’.
This can be true only if this patient did know every person that worked in the hospital and of course he couldn't because he was not a doctor neither worked for that hospital. To say that somehow knew all the movements of the doctors and the nurses when his eyes were closed its ridiculous, even the greatest magicians can't do this trick without an assistant. You then said that
Note that Clinically dead is still controversial term, so the 3 minutes is not significant. There are cases when..
WELL OF COURSE IT IS! If as you showed a woman can revive from a heart attack after 3 minutes WHAT EXACTLY IS DEATH? We say he is dead because his heart doesn't work, what if he is alive with his heart stopped? Your own argument can turn against you.JimFit
March 7, 2015
March
03
Mar
7
07
2015
01:39 PM
1
01
39
PM
PDT
Wallstreeter43: Atheists like me-thinks pray long and hard for life not to have any meaning and will deny any evidence that favors meaning.
Yes, it seems to be very important to them that life has no meaning whatsoever. The question is: if this is not due to mental illness then what is the reason?Box
March 7, 2015
March
03
Mar
7
07
2015
10:28 AM
10
10
28
AM
PDT
wallstreeter43 @ 51
Now how about u answer why ur hero dittrich lied aboit almost everything in his article ? ... Now what are you going to do next dude? Call the er doctor a liar , his head doctor a liar, his family liars and his friends liars ?
First off, journos (including Luke Dittrich ) and philosophers can never be my 'hero'! Ebener’s friend Chuck told the truth - there was no parachute jump. Ebener changed his stance and said it was some other friend but refused to name that some other friend Dr.Potter has stated that
she does remember that she intubated Alexander more than an hour before his departure from the ER. Could he have shouted anything, let alone something clearly heard? "No," she says . Her subsequent statement about 'being misrepresented' makes no sense given the fact that all patients are intubated in ER!
so, again Eben lied. Robert Mays is an NDE researcher he was nowhere near the hospital! No other doctor came forward to be interviewed after the incident. Refutation of report is by Holley Alexander and her friend Sylvia White - of course they support Ebener, who else do you think they will support? No doctor lied. Dr.Potter told the truth, other doctors didn't offer any comment. All that Ebener has in his support is Holley Alexander and her friend Sylvia White statements, which could ( as I can't accuse them of lying) be biased. At the end of the day what you have is a lot of hearsay and no scientific proof of NDE (remember AWARE study debunked NDE, as not a single patient out of over 2000 passed the Placard test). I pointed out in an earlier comment that thousands of teen Ketamine users have OBE and all kinds of weird visions when they hit the k-hole . In case you haven't guessed the connection- ketamine is used medically as induction agent in traumatic cases, so it's not like there is no sane reason for OBE. Continuing to claim Eben Alexander met God and came back is just supporting a charlatan. Now let's see Dalai Lama video. Luke Dittrich did lie about the dialogue but not about wagging the finger - Dalai lama did wag his finger. In hide sight, watching the video, it is clear to us that he called upon his translator to translate, but it would definitely not be clear for someone watching as an audience - even the translator was confused for a second (48:14-48:15) but of course that doesn't mitigate Luke Dittrich lie. The only IDer / creationist I admire is Frank Tipler. Although he had egg on his face when he debated 'Physics of Christianity' (in which he tries really hard to defend Christianity scientifically) with Krauss, there is little doubt that Tipler is a fine gentleman. Show me someone of his ilk claiming NDE and I will believe you.Me_Think
March 7, 2015
March
03
Mar
7
07
2015
01:08 AM
1
01
08
AM
PDT
Me think , first of all he didn't get his liscence revoked and second he's no saint and never claimed to be and yes doctors have malpractve suits all the time, Even has talked about all of this . What u didn't do was answer all the lies of the esquire article , and yet yoir claiming that I have cognitive dissonance ? Now it wasn't eben just that debunked the esquire article. It was robery mays, his ER doctor and the witnesses that were there that day . All key witnesses backed ebens side of the story . Nice try as far as poisoning the well my friend ;) Now how about u answer why ur hero dittrich lied aboit almost everything in his article ? Answer why dittrich lied about what the Dalai Lama said ? U have done everything you could but deal with the facts if the case . Notice I won't even bring the aware study into this because that would totally destroy your argument . I'm gonna do this alone on the eben Alexander nde . Now what are you going to do next dude? Call the er doctor a liar , his head doctor a liar, his family liars and his friends liars ? If anyone reads the facts they will know that eben was telling it like it is and dittrich was the liar. But then again ur atheist champion gets a free pass . Again eben talked about all of this . It's not anything new . We both know that u won't deal with dittrichs lies ;)wallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
10:04 PM
10
10
04
PM
PDT
Some great points in this thread, all ignored, of course, by the "skeptics." One can only pine for the days of Elizabeth Liddle et. al. What ever happened to skepticism? When did it get replaced by boastful ignorance?Mung
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
08:30 PM
8
08
30
PM
PDT
wallstreeter43 @ 47
Notice that instead of researching this honestly and getting to the full story me-thinks glorifies dittrich as an honest reporter and vilifies iands as obvious liars because they exposed this editor as a hack .
It is you who need to do a lot of research. Eben Alexander was kicked out of every hospital he worked in. He settled 5 malpractice cases in as many years. In two of the cases, he didn't even know the difference between c4 and c5 vertebrae - he fused the wrong vertebrae and fudged records. His surgical license was cancelled. The last job he held was in a non-profit run by his friend. Forget about medical claims in his book, he even lied about simple incident when he said Chuck opened the parachute under him. When chuck stated no such incident happened, Ebener said it was some other friend and not Chuck. He refused to disclose the name of the friend and he couldn't recall any other friends who could corroborate the incident. So when such a person says he met God and came back, you need to be skeptical. I don't blame you for being so naive - you are just trying to reduce your cognitive dissonance. If you are in touch with reality, you will know thousands of teens have Out of Body experience every day- all they need is ketamine to reach the k-hole state.Me_Think
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
07:09 PM
7
07
09
PM
PDT
Harry, as you recognise, I am speaking to the logic of being and cause. Nothing -- non being -- is like an empty chalkboard. Then, erase the board, make it and its wall vanish then also the space in which it was. A genuine zero, or what rocks dream of. Such non-being has no causal capabilities and if there ever was an utter nothing, there would not be causal capacity for anything to follow. There actually is something, so there was something that always was, a necessary being. 100 years go it was imagined that the physical cosmos was that -- the Steady State model. It failed and the observed cosmos strongly appears to have a beginning. That points to something beyond it. As to what that is, that is a much bigger question than Science . . . which studies the world around us . . . is equipped to answer. To Philosophy. And that is a really hard thing for those unduly influenced by an age that has put science up on a pedestal to to accept. And, phil has its own methods as it addresses hard questions and perspectives, on comparative difficulties. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
02:51 PM
2
02
51
PM
PDT
Box for people that have an atheistic , materialistic worldview good and evil is purely subjective and for dittrich he makes a nice little payday from this article as he does what he does best, spread lies, falsehoods and gossip to smear the name of another man. Why would such a person care to bring hope into the lives of others when he can make easy money like this. Notice that instead of researching this honestly and getting to the full story me-thinks glorifies dittrich as an honest reporter and vilifies iands as obvious liars because they exposed this editor as a hack . Atheists like me-thinks pray lomg and hard for life not to have any meaning and will deny any evidence that favors meaning . This is the definition of pure insane thinking . Ebens nde has brought amazing hope to many others . I met the sweetest old lady in SAMs club when I was making my rounds there and she opened up to me about her own nde as she was in a terrible car wreck that left her in a coma for weeks . She didn't leave her body or go anywhere but during the whole time she was in a coma she sensed a presence surrounding her with an incredible peace . I could sense she was telling the truth and was very rational . She had no reason to lie to me aboit it either . She said that she doesn't care if these hardcore skeptics believed her or not , that she now knows there is a God be used she experimecd his pretense first hand . She gave me a hug before leaving and it was the most amazing hug I ever got full of warmth and soul.wallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
02:32 PM
2
02
32
PM
PDT
And how does Luke Dittrich account for his actions? What is the "good cause" that makes lying acceptable? The stories of Eben Alexander and others can bring hope and comfort to many. Why is a person like Luke Dittrich so determined to destroy that hope; willing to lie and distort? What exactly is the goodness of Luke Dittrich that underlies all this?Box
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
12:40 PM
12
12
40
PM
PDT
As we can see , Nde's clearly scare atheists like me-thinks enough to make him have to resort to lying and cherry picking in order to avoid dealing with the implications of Nde's like even Alexander's nde. The in receive part of eben Alexandera nde is that it was not only a veridical nde but an extremely rare and special veridical nde in which he brought back information from heaven about a sister that he never knew he had which was validated by his real parents (he was adopted) when he found them . Sam Harris also tried to do the something with doctor alexander but when eben alexander challenged sam Harris to out his money where his mouth is and take him on in a debate , suddenly sam Harris pulls a typical atheist maneuver and says he is too busy to debate him lol. Me-thinks if your comfortable with your atheistic /materialistic cult like blind faith , please stay away from addressing Nde's. You won't like where the evidence goes ;)wallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
12:14 PM
12
12
14
PM
PDT
And then the esquire editor dittrich finishes his hatchet job by saying that the DALAI LAMA called eben Alexander a liar . Watch how dittrich inserts words into the DALAI LAMA's mouth to make him say things he never said . This is what dittrich said http://iands.org/images/stories/pdf_downloads/esquire%20article%20on%20eben%20alexander%20distorts%20the%20facts.pdf "Coda: The Dalai Lama pronounces Eben Alexander unreliable and a liar Luke Dittrich is an excellent writer, producing finely crafted, award-winning journalism. He saved the best pronouncements of Eben Alexander's character and veracity to the end—from the Dalai Lama no less, a person of great spiritual insight who is held in high esteem throughout the world. So important were these pronouncements that the Esquire editors emblazoned them in an all-caps pull quote in the article: THE DALAI LAMA WAGS A FINGER AT ALEXANDER. WHEN A MAN MAKES EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS, HE SAYS, A "THOROUGH INVESTIGATION" IS REQUIRED, TO ENSURE THAT PERSON IS "RELIABLE," HAS "NO REASON TO LIE." The quote might just as well have said: THE DALAI LAMA INVITES EBEN ALEXANDER TO SPEAK AT HIS COLLEGE'S CONVOCATION IN ORDER TO PRONOUNCE HIM UNRELIABLE AND A LIAR. Luke Dittrich had laid the case out well against Eben Alexander: an instance of altering medical records to cover his medical error, a failed career as a neurosurgeon, and a story of "heaven" so clearly built on fabrications and embellishments that its very heart and message cannot be trusted."" Again dittrich says this is what the Dalai Lama says " 47:46] "For that also, we must investigate," the Dalai Lama says. "Through investigation we must get sure that person is truly reliable." He wags a finger in Alexander's direction. When a man makes extraordinary claims, a "thorough investigation" is required, to ensure "that person reliable, never telling lie," and has "no reason to lie." (emphasis added)"" This is a blatant lie because the Dalai Lama never said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences and never wagged his finger at eben Alexander . Lets now see at the Dalai Lama really said shall we. Of course me-thinks conveniently forgot to investigate the truth fullness of the esquire article be used he is a religious atheist only interested in cherry picking and lying to make his case ;) "[47:46] [DL] And for that also you see, we must investigate. Through investigation we must get sure that person is truly reliable and his experience is something not just illusion of these things. [48:02] Through then thorough investigation, that person is reliable, never telling lie – and in this particular case this is no reason to tell lie – therefore, [translator] so then one can take the testimony to be credible. [translator] So the point I'm trying to make is that with respect to science and its scope for discovering knowledge, we need to make a distinction about the fact that there might be certain types of phenomena which are beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. (emphasis added) Did Luke Dittrich miss the highlighted phrases? Let's compare how Dittrich interprets this part versus what was actually said: He wags a finger in Alexander's direction. When a man makes extraordinary claims, a "thorough investigation" is required, to ensure "that person reliable, never telling lie," and has "no reason to lie" "His Holiness did not wag his finger at Alexander and he did not say "when a man makes extraordinary claims". No, His Holiness was referring to "extremely obscure phenomena" which do not require "extraordinary proof", as the saying goes, but only a determination that the person is reliable, never telling a lie, with no reason to lie. Luke Dittrich probably concluded the following: not only has he (Luke) demonstrated that Alexander lied in many places in his account, but Dittrich has also exposed the many reasons Alexander has to lie—financial gain, prestige, the adulation of "guruhood". Therefore in the Dalai Lama's eyes—if His Holiness only knew what Dittrich knows with certainty—Eben Alexander would be judged unreliable and a liar. But that's Luke Dittrich's conclusion, not the Dalai Lama's. For His Holiness, Eben Alexander has no reason to lie and therefore one can take Alexander’s testimony to be credible. And His Holiness goes on to show his acceptance of the validity of Eben Alexander's experience: [49:12] [DL] Among the scientists so far as I notice, the later part of the twentieth century, they [created] a sort of knowledge or field, they carried a sort of research about the brain – quite subtly. [49:30, pointing to EA] At a more deeper level there is still more mysterious things. (emphasis added)"" So clearly methinks posted this lie of an article and showing his amazing dedication as an atheist to finding the truth conveniently forgets to research the veracity of the editors lie of an article , cause if he did he would have found out that the editor fabricated many key facts in his hatchet job. Me-thinks is just too emotionally uncomfortable with the implications of eben Alexander's nde to give us the full truth and the real facts about it. Again, atheistic truth seeking in action ;) Special thanks to BA77 for bringing up the refutation link to the esquire lie article . I haven't seen that in about a year :) "wallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
12:09 PM
12
12
09
PM
PDT
Born again, notice that the esquire article blatantly lied on many points especially about what the doctors said about this. So was Eben Alexander conscious during his stay in the hospital? Dittrich describes the key question: I ask Potter whether the manic, agitated state that Alexander exhibited whenever they weaned him off his anesthetics during his first days of coma would meet her definition of conscious. "Yes," she says. "Conscious but delirious." (emphasis added) There it is: for Dittrich, conclusive proof that Eben Alexander was conscious, although severely sick, and was maintained in a medically induced coma by administration of anesthetics. And Eben Alexander failed to disclose that key fact in his book. This is the final incontrovertible evidence Dittrich needed to complete his exposure of Eben Alexander as a fraud. He probably reasoned that, at best Alexander's experiences of the "heavenly realms" were just hallucinations brought about by his illness, whenever the doctors reduced his sedatives and he regained a kind of dream-like consciousness. The fact that Alexander did not disclose the real cause of his unconscious state—we can't really call it "coma" because it was readily reversible—just underscores that he is a fraud. This is a crucial conclusion for Dittrich to make: it exposes Eben Alexander clearly as deceptive and fraudulent or, at best, delusional. An accusation of fraud against an individual is serious and ought to give a journalist some pause. But Dittrich's evidence is clear and incontrovertible. An experienced doctor, who had observed Alexander over several days, declared that Alexander was definitely "conscious but delirious." And an intermittent delirious state would explain fully Eben Alexander's internal experience, from the "Earthworm Eye View"—under anesthesia—to the Spinning Melody—starting to come out of anesthesia—then to “The Gateway” and beyond—a dream-like state. A perfect fit. Explaining a fully hallucinatory experience. Once again, why investigate further? There's no need for corroboration, no need to check with other experts about all the indications that his brain was severely damaged by the bacterial infection. After all, the experts weren't there in the ER and the ICU. And the other doctors who were involved with Alexander's case refused to be interviewed. The one doctor who was present is certainly sufficient. And the other doctors would undoubtedly corroborate Dr. Potter's assessment. But what about the overwhelming evidence for severe meningitis? The data all come directly from Alexander. He could easily have exaggerated, embellished or even fabricated them—a very good reason for Alexander to insist that his medical records be kept confidential. Did Luke Dittrich attempt to corroborate Dr. Potter's assessment with anyone else who was involved? No. It would have been very easy to ask Holley what the other doctors had been telling her. After all that's supposedly where Eben had gotten the story. But Holley could have colluded with Eben. In any case she was not asked. Holley's friend Sylvia White, who was also present for these consultations, could have been asked, but she, too, was not. Were Luke Dittrich or his editors at all concerned that the very heart of their portrayal of Eben Alexander as a fraud was based on the sole assessment of one doctor? Apparently not. Were they concerned that Luke Dittrich might have misheard Dr. Potter or possibly misinterpreted what she had told him? Apparently not. Dittrich did not recheck with Dr. Potter and did not show her how he was quoting her. Had he done so, he would have gotten a surprise. Members of the Alexander family circle have told me that Dr. Laura Potter expressed to them concern after she was contacted by the press when the Esquire article first appeared, and subsequently expressed her alarm about the way her remarks had been twisted. She felt that Luke Dittrich had misrepresented what she had told him and taken her words out of context. She felt that he had led her to say certain things. So Luke Dittrich's portrayal of the events regarding Alexander's illness is inaccurate. Dittrich took Dr. Potter's statements out of context, twisted them and misrepresented them. And what are the facts regarding Eben Alexander's coma state? If Luke Dittrich had read Proof of Heaven with any care, he would have found a definitive statement of the facts about Alexander’s coma in Appendix A, from Alexander’s infectious disease specialist Dr. Scott Wade: Dr. Alexander had become ill quickly with flu-like symptoms, back pain, and a headache. He was promptly transported to the Emergency Room, where he had a CT scan of his head and then a lumbar puncture with spinal fluid suggesting a gram-negative meningitis. He was immediately begun on intravenous antibiotics targeting that and placed on a ventilator machine because of his critical condition and coma. ... Despite prompt and aggressive antibiotic treatment for his E. coli meningitis as well as continued care in the medical intensive care unit, he remained in a coma six days and hope for a quick recovery faded (mortality over 97 percent). (p. 183, emphasis added) Did Luke Dittrich read this part of Proof of Heaven? It’s an Appendix that gives the statement of the lead doctor on Eben Alexander’s case. Dr. Wade states clearly that Alexander was in a coma in the ER and remained in a coma for six days."""" So methinks it is clear that luke dittrich lied and twisted Laura potters words and not only that but he clearly did not reference the lead doctors statement that clearly shows even alexander was in a coma , not a chemically induced coma but a true coma before he was given the sedatives . Your blatant cherry picking and ignoring the true facts shows that your a blind faith end atheist who isn't interested in the truth The esquire article was a hatchet job that was done to suppress the truth and show show far atheists would go in ignoring and avoiding the truth.wallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:47 AM
11
11
47
AM
PDT
kairosfocus @2
The issue is, that nothing -- non-being -- can have no causal powers, material, efficient, purposeful, whatever. So, if ever there were an utter nothing, nothing would forever obtain. This means, as there is something now, that something always was, independent of other things . . . a necessary being. The real issue is to identify and warrant which is best candidate.
If the natural Universe -- space, time, matter and energy -- had a beginning, which it now appears it did, dismissing theories that are based on no physical evidence whatsoever, then the "necessary being" which, as you point out, necessarily always was, is a non-material, supernatural reality, yet one with the power required to bring the natural Universe into existence out of nothing -- "nothing" in terms of the non-existence of space, time, matter and energy, and do it such that life would a possibility. (I am sure you are aware of Roger Penrose's calculation of the odds of the Big Bang producing by chance a universe capable of supporting life, which he concluded was 1 in 10^10^123, which makes that happening mindlessly and accidentally a virtual impossibility.) To do that required intelligence as well as power. So, the primary reality is non-material, and is essentially not a "what" but a "who." As Thomas Merton once put it, "God is pure Who," which, when you think about it, is how God explained Himself to Moses: "I AM WHO AM."harry
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:45 AM
11
11
45
AM
PDT
"What do you think the curvature of space in General relativity explains",, curved space-time can't 'explain' anything because curved space-time is not an agent with the causal power to explain anything. It takes an agent to 'explain' But as to what 'curved space time' reveals to us, Special relativity and General Relativity reveal two very different eternities just as predicted in Christian Theism: Two very different ‘eternities’: Special Relativity, General Relativity, Heaven and Hell https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_4cQ7MXq8bLkoFLYW0kq3Xq-Hkc3c7r-gTk0DYJQFSg/editbornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:37 AM
11
11
37
AM
PDT
I answered this on the other thread: Did you notice that in the AWARE study, not a single patient – out of over 2000 -saw the placards which were placed in strategic locations to verify NDE? The lone patient who recalled nurses could easily have been recalling memory from the time he was not ‘clinically dead’. Note that Clinically dead is still controversial term, so the 3 minutes is not significant. There are cases when.."" Again your totally wrong . As parnia stated the man recalled everything that happened during his resasitation and accurately recalled it all happening . Me thinks, your cherry picking is amazing lol. It wasn't just seeing the hospital staff, it was recalling what they were doing during that time . On top of that he was having these experiences without a functioning brain as it was timed as having happened 2.5 minutes even after the 30 second deep brain surge.he also recalled the instrument bleeping 3 times as well as seeing it, and he had no access to this before . You simply want to discount all this info out of your pure religiously motivated atheistic worldview . The reason why u didn't mention all this dude is because you don't have a materialistic explanation for it . This ladies and gents is how an atheist stays an atheist lolwallstreeter43
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:17 AM
11
11
17
AM
PDT
How is 1+1 =2 related to God’s existence ? Kurt Gödel - Incompleteness Theorem – video https://vimeo.com/92387853 Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing - Incompleteness Theorem and Human Intuition - video https://vimeo.com/92387854 "Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine" Kurt Gödel THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS - DAVID P. GOLDMAN - August 2010 Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel's critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes. http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians In regards to the incompleteness of math It is also interesting to note that 'higher dimensional' mathematics had to be developed before Einstein could elucidate General Relativity, or even before Quantum Mechanics could be elucidated; The Mathematics Of Higher Dimensionality – Gauss and Riemann – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6199520/bornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:16 AM
11
11
16
AM
PDT
Here are thorough refutations of an 'hatchet job' article that tried to discredit Dr. Alexander: Esquire Proof of Heaven Expose Debunked, Dr. Eben Alexander Prevails – Interview with Robert Mays reveals a disturbing pattern of misrepresentation and distortion in Luke Dittrich’s Proof of Heaven expose published in Esquire Magazine. http://www.skeptiko.com/220-esquire-proof-of-heaven-expose-debunked/ audio: http://www.skeptiko.com/upload/skeptiko-220-robert-mays.mp3 In supplement to the skeptiko article and audio, for a even more thorough rebuttal of the Esquire article see: Esquire article on Eben Alexander distorts the facts - August 2013 http://iands.org/images/stories/pdf_downloads/esquire%20article%20on%20eben%20alexander%20distorts%20the%20facts.pdfbornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
11:13 AM
11
11
13
AM
PDT
bornagain77 @ 34
Top brain surgeon who claims he saw heaven while in a coma reveals the stories of others who say they have had similar life-changing experiences By Dr Eben Alexander – 19 October 2014
He is one of those notorious Neurosurgeon I was talking about:
Esquire magazine reported (August 2013 issue) that prior to the publication of Proof of Heaven, Alexander had been terminated or suspended from multiple hospital positions, and had been the subject of several malpractice lawsuits, including at least two involving the alteration of medical records to cover up a medical error. The magazine also found what it claimed were discrepancies with regard to Alexander's version of events in the book. Among the discrepancies, according to an account of the Esquire article in Forbes, was that "Alexander writes that he slipped into the coma as a result of severe bacterial meningitis and had no higher brain activity, while a doctor who cared for him says the coma was medically induced and the patient was conscious, though hallucinating."
He apparently paid another magazine to carry his false refutationsMe_Think
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
09:36 AM
9
09
36
AM
PDT
bornagain77 @ 31
Neither can the ‘mechanism’ of Gravity be explained ‘scientifically’,, does that make Gravity unscientific? “to say that a stone falls to earth because it’s obeying a law, makes it a man and even a citizen”
What do you think the curvature of space in General relativity explains ?!!Me_Think
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
09:33 AM
9
09
33
AM
PDT
bornagain77 @ 29
1. If God did not exist the applicability of mathematics would be a happy coincidence. 2. The applicability of mathematics is not a happy coincidence. 3. Therefore, God exists.
How is 1+1 =2 related to God's existence ?
But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects
That's a classic - a mathematical construct capable of interacting ?! I wonder if he has put out a mathematical proof.Me_Think
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
09:31 AM
9
09
31
AM
PDT
Of supplemental note to Near Death Experiences: Top brain surgeon who claims he saw heaven while in a coma reveals the stories of others who say they have had similar life-changing experiences By Dr Eben Alexander - 19 October 2014 Excerpt: A man named Pascale wrote to tell me about his father, who had a PhD in astrophysics and was ‘100 per cent scientifically minded’ — in other words, a complete atheist. Pascale’s dad (we’ll call him Pierre) was a heavy drinker. He’d suffered a succession of emotional blows, and he used hard drink to numb the pain — so much that his organs started one by one to pack up. Kidneys, liver and then lungs gave way, and Pierre succumbed to double pneumonia. He was not expected to live, but to give his body the best chance of repairing itself, the doctors placed him in an induced coma. After three months in intensive care, he started to come round — and all this hard-headed scientific man wanted to talk about with his son were his experiences of heaven. He had seen the after-life, just as I did. And he brought back the same message: there were angel-like beings who loved us more than we could imagine, and they would help us, if only we would let them. Pierre faced a major challenge. He could never drink again. One glass would be enough to tip him back into alcohol abuse, and the end would be inevitable. Somehow, he found the strength to beat his demons. For the next four years, Pierre didn’t touch a drop. But after his initial burst of spiritual fervour in the hospital, he stopped talking about heaven. Pascale sensed that his dad, an intensely shy man, was embarrassed by the massive contradiction between the atheism he had always preached, and the heaven he had experienced during his coma,,, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2799385/glimpses-life-brain-surgeon-told-saw-heaven-coma-today-reveals-stories-say-ve-similar-life-changing-experiences.htmlbornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT
The Epicureans cheated by assuming atoms. Atoms are not nothing. They even assumed a universe of atoms. Whence all the atoms? Or their ability to form chains? Or the other rules that govern their behavior? Or gravity? Or math? Or anything? The talk about having answers for the origin of species allowing for the existence of intellectually-fulfilled atheists always cracks me up. Really? It was the origin of species that was the real hurdle? Not the origin of life? Matter? Physical laws? Logic? Information? Consciousness? Morality? Anything at all? I suppose those are the easy questions, right?Phinehas
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
07:14 AM
7
07
14
AM
PDT
Bornagain77, Thank you for your excellent exposé of the inadequacies of materialism as a rational concept. One can not help but wondering how much wiggle room is left to keep the debate going.Box
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
07:07 AM
7
07
07
AM
PDT
Me_Think you state: "God can’t be a scientific explanation because His mechanism can’t be explained scientifically." Neither can the 'mechanism' of Gravity be explained 'scientifically',, does that make Gravity unscientific? "to say that a stone falls to earth because it's obeying a law, makes it a man and even a citizen" - CS Lewis A Professor's Journey out of Nihilism: Why I am not an Atheist - University of Wyoming - J. Budziszewski Excerpt page12: "There were two great holes in the argument about the irrelevance of God. The first is that in order to attack free will, I supposed that I understood cause and effect; I supposed causation to be less mysterious than volition. If anything, it is the other way around. I can perceive a logical connection between premises and valid conclusions. I can perceive at least a rational connection between my willing to do something and my doing it. But between the apple and the earth, I can perceive no connection at all. Why does the apple fall? We don't know. "But there is gravity," you say. No, "gravity" is merely the name of the phenomenon, not its explanation. "But there are laws of gravity," you say. No, the "laws" are not its explanation either; they are merely a more precise description of the thing to be explained, which remains as mysterious as before. For just this reason, philosophers of science are shy of the term "laws"; they prefer "lawlike regularities." To call the equations of gravity "laws" and speak of the apple as "obeying" them is to speak as though, like the traffic laws, the "laws" of gravity are addressed to rational agents capable of conforming their wills to the command. This is cheating, because it makes mechanical causality (the more opaque of the two phenomena) seem like volition (the less). In my own way of thinking the cheating was even graver, because I attacked the less opaque in the name of the more. The other hole in my reasoning was cruder. If my imprisonment in a blind causality made my reasoning so unreliable that I couldn't trust my beliefs, then by the same token I shouldn't have trusted my beliefs about imprisonment in a blind causality. But in that case I had no business denying free will in the first place." http://www.undergroundthomist.org/sites/default/files/WhyIAmNotAnAtheist.pdf A Professor's Journey out of Nihilism: Why I am not an Atheist - 2012 talk University of Wyoming J. Budziszewski http://veritas.org/talks/professors-journey-out-nihilism-why-i-am-not-atheist/?view=presenters&speaker_id=2231 Moreover, science is impossible without God as a basis for reason. i.e. Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism! Why No One (Can) Believe Atheism/Naturalism to be True (Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism) - video Excerpt: "Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not concerned with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life." Richard Dawkins - quoted from "The God Delusion" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4QFsKevTXs Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism by Alvin Plantinga - video https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL80CAECC36901BCEE Content and Natural Selection - Alvin Plantinga - 2011 http://www.andrewmbailey.com/ap/Content_Natural_Selection.pdf of related interest to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism: Quote: "In evolutionary games we put truth (true perception) on the stage and it dies. And in genetic algorithms it (true perception) never gets on the stage" Donald Hoffman PhD. - Consciousness and The Interface Theory of Perception - 7:19 to 9:20 minute mark - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dqDP34a-epI#t=439bornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
04:06 AM
4
04
06
AM
PDT
Me_Think, that you would discount millions of testimonies from people who have had NDEs and wholeheartedly accept Neo-Darwinian evolution for which you have ZERO observational evidence shows how philosophically biased you are. The evidence for the reality of NDE's, comparatively speaking, completely blows the evidence for Darwinism out of the water!bornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
04:01 AM
4
04
01
AM
PDT
Me_Think you ask: "Do you really want me to derive law of conservation from noether theorem and gauge symmetry for you ?" So you want to use math to prove materialism true? Funny! Mathematics and Physics – A Happy Coincidence? – William Lane Craig – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF25AA4dgGg 1. If God did not exist the applicability of mathematics would be a happy coincidence. 2. The applicability of mathematics is not a happy coincidence. 3. Therefore, God exists. Moreover,,, "The term gauge refers to redundant degrees of freedom in the Lagrangian. The transformations between possible gauges, called gauge transformations, form a Lie group—" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_theory and yet: An Interview with David Berlinski - Jonathan Witt Berlinski: There is no argument against religion that is not also an argument against mathematics. Mathematicians are capable of grasping a world of objects that lies beyond space and time …. Interviewer:… Come again(?) … Berlinski: No need to come again: I got to where I was going the first time. The number four, after all, did not come into existence at a particular time, and it is not going to go out of existence at another time. It is neither here nor there. Nonetheless we are in some sense able to grasp the number by a faculty of our minds. Mathematical intuition is utterly mysterious. So for that matter is the fact that mathematical objects such as a Lie Group or a differentiable manifold have the power to interact with elementary particles or accelerating forces. But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects. http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/found-upon-web-and-reprinted-here.htmlbornagain77
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
03:57 AM
3
03
57
AM
PDT
bornagain77 @ 27 As I stated @ 20 : The lone man's experience is not significant. The lone patient who recalled nurses could easily have been recalling memory from the time he was not ‘clinically dead’. Note that Clinically dead is still controversial term, so the 3 minutes is not significant. There are cases when..
.. a woman was erroneously declared dead after having a heart attack and wound up freezing to death in a body bag in the morgue. Another woman gave birth to a baby three months after she technically died. Then, there was a case of a skier who became submerged under freezing water for hours, but was revived and suffered no brain damage Doctors can also declare people dead if their heart stops beating and won’t start up again on its own. But hearts can sometimes be restarted after they stop beating, so the call is tricky. “The question is, how long does the heart have to stop beating before you can call someone dead?” Bernat said.Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can revive people many minutes after their heart stops beating, often with no lasting brain damage, so doctors should perform CPR for at least 38 minutes, a 2013 study presented at the American Heart Association meeting found. Doctors can issue a death certificate before that point, and often do if a patient has a do-not-resuscitate order. But sometimes, CPR is not performed for long enough. That raises the possibility that some revivable patients die when they didn’t have to
Me_Think
March 6, 2015
March
03
Mar
6
06
2015
03:56 AM
3
03
56
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply