Here we go again: Science has "proven" there is no life after death

[ant]

or at least some people believe this is evidence.

the increase in neural activity in rats experiencing cardiac arrest is evidence enough.

http://www.livescience.com/38817-electr ... brain.html

However, there do remain a few pertinent questions, one of which the article mentions in passing:

Finally, the study can't explain how people can correctly recollect what happened to them minutes after their brain activity has flatlined and CPR has been started, Parnia said.

Once again we have certain people that bring conclusions to the data that the data does not address

No one can confirm or deny that life continues after death because the line boundary between the two remains too fuzzy.
A "near death" experience may be just that "NEAR" death. Science is unable to determine what constitutes death and what constitutes the beginning of conscious "life" as we understand it.

We should not push absolute materialism onto the masses just to impose a worldview. It's totally dishonest.
The only reasonable position to take here is an agnostic one. Either/Or is essentially guess work or faith in things unseen.

[LanDroid]

The only reasonable position to take here is an agnostic one.

Now there's some progress.

FWIW, Dr. Parnia is mentioned in that article several times, but wasn't part of the study. He wrote this book about advancing the capability to resuscitate patients, now stretching into hours after brain death...

http://www.amazon.com/Erasing-Death-Sci ... sam+parnia

<=There's gotta be a better resuscitation procedure.

[ant]

The only reasonable position to take here is an agnostic one.

Now there's some progress.

FWIW, Dr. Parnia is mentioned in that article several times, but wasn't part of the study. He wrote this book about advancing the capability to resuscitate patients, now stretching into hours after brain death...

http://www.amazon.com/Erasing-Death-Sci ... sam+parnia

<=There's gotta be a better resuscitation procedure.

Right,
The Atheist is really an Agnostic in denial.

[Interbane]

or at least some people believe this is evidence.

It is evidence that NDE's are naturalistic. I'm one of the "some people" that believe this. Do you have a real life 'strawman' who believes science has "proven" there is no life after death? You claimed it, show me the quote from this person. The article doesn't entail it.

Right,
The Atheist is really an Agnostic in denial.

Says who? My choice of one of the two labels depends on how long of an answer I want to give. Regarding this post, there simply isn't enough information. The only reasonable position to take is an agnostic one regarding life after death. (yet your title reads "science has proven") Way to misrepresent the scientists.

[ant]

It is evidence that NDE's are naturalistic.

I didn't read where the study claimed the rats reported seeing dead family relatives speaking to them after walking down a tunnel of light. Nor did I read if they asked any of the rats if they could recollect what happened minutes after their brain activity completely flatlined.

I'd like to read an interview with one of the rats.
Can you provide a link?

Oh the hell with it.., if you say the rats experienced all the above, I'll believe you. That's enough for me.

[Interbane]

I didn't read where the study claimed the rats reported seeing dead family relatives speaking to them after walking down a tunnel of light. Nor did I read if they asked any of the rats if they could recollect what happened minutes after their brain activity completely flatlined.

I'd like to read an interview with one of the rats.
Can you provide a link?

And what would any of that (impossible to attain)information change? Are you saying that it is evidence of nothing? Remember that evidence is not proof. Nor is a single piece of evidence enough to form a conclusion. But it is evidence, whether you're willing to admit it or not. It is not compelling evidence on it's own, and even one of the scientists admits it isn't enough to shift our position from 'agnostic' on NDE's. But it is evidence. If you truly don't understand how or why, I'll explain it to you.

[ant]

And what would any of that (impossible to attain)information change? Are you saying that it is evidence of nothing?

It is evidence of something.
There are often many theories that are "compatible" with evidence. In this case I do not know of any other theories related to this particular study that have been published or were refused publication. Are you, or is this the only theory that you know of you are willing to give full credence too?

What might have been the cognitive experience of the rats at the time of cardiac failure? Might it have been euphoric?
What evidence is there that would clarify such a question?

It is not compelling evidence on it's own

Oh. BINGO!
Hurrah for you and thanks for backing me up on this one.

[Interbane]

Oh. BINGO!
Hurrah for you and thanks for backing me up on this one.

What does your position have to do with interviewing rats? I was agreeing with the scientists in the article, not you. I don't support your claim that science has "proven" anything. Neither do the scientists in the article. I also don't think interviewing rats is a viable option. You imply that the findings aren't evidence, which I also disagree with(and you seem to have backpedaled from). Your sarcastic shenanigans translate to nothing at all. What is the point of your original post?

Are you, or is this the only theory that you know of you are willing to give full credence too?

What theory are you talking about? I didn't see a theory.

[ant]

I don't support your claim that science has "proven" anything. Neither do the scientists in the article.

Oh please.., studies like these are always infected with theories that because there's an event like a spike in neurological activity, it explains an NDE experience and supports a conclusion that there is no possibility of life after physical death.
The blogosphere lights up with atheists adding in their two cents (BT atheists excluded). There's always the grand inferential leap when studies like this surface.

But you and I know that science is not in the business of making metaphysical claims (or shouldn't be).

I wonder, really.., if there are any studies that found a spike in neurological activity after cardiac arrest in which the subject(s) did NOT have an NDE. Meaning, they didn't come back from near death with any claims of meetings with deceased relatives or knowledge of anything related to medical procedures during their cardiac arrest.

Also, their have been cases where a subject had an NDE experience and described what was happening beyond their immediate treatment area. And, there have been reported cases in which the subject had information about a deceased person they could not have possibly had during their lifetime and was later confirmed as fact by an older relative.
I wonder, if these stories are true, how the brain activity spike event would explain them away.

[Interbane]

The blogosphere lights up with atheists adding in their two cents (BT atheists excluded). There's always the grand inferential leap when studies like this surface.

Then post a link to such a blog, and criticize that blog. None of the accusations you've posted stick to anything in the article you linked. You're railing against people whose writing we've never read, whose opinions we don't know. How do we know you're not making it all up?

Also, their have been cases where a subject had an NDE experience and described what was happening beyond their immediate treatment area. And, there have been reported cases in which the subject had information about a deceased person they could not have possibly had during their lifetime and was later confirmed as fact by an older relative.

There are also talking horses, people who talk to ghosts, children who see ghosts, and mermaids attacking our oil rigs. Anecdotes are untrustworthy for good reason, especially second hand. Post the transcript of the interview, unedited. We at least need these anecdotes first hand, rather than five links removed on the grapevine.