#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
20/20 interview Dr. Alexander
I believe him
Side Score: 85
Winning Side! |
he's hallucinating
Side Score: 84
|
|
3
points
3
points
1
point
2
points
3
points
It is also scientifically impossible to live without a rain, yet there was a baby born and that lived to 2 I think or 1 that had no brain, just a stem. He had emotions and other characteristics that you need a brain for. All this tells me is that the people who study the brain need to study more, and that there is still tons more about it that we don't know. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
You got it wrong mate. The medulla is responsible for automatic responses of the body organs. It allows them to coordinate with each other. THe other parts are responsible for thoughts and understanding. To live without the cerebellum is possible (you are half dead, though) In Alexanders case however, he saw things he shouldnt because his brain part responsible for thoughts and vision shut down. He made his own research about it when he woke up. He even invited plenty of colleges just to prove him wrong. But in the end, they all reach the insane conclusion-his vision did not came from his brain Side: I believe him
1
point
1
point
2
points
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
And apparently you don't understand how the imagination works. Within your imagination time is nothing. One minute in reality can seem like an hour in your imagination. He could have experienced the whole thing within seconds so the brain activity would have subsided by the time they tested him with the machines. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1
point
Nope, it says so in the video 1. His brain damage denies any ability to conceive a visual image 2. His guide was from a deceased person 3. He was conscious throughout his whole experience He is a brain expert and he says it himself that such a phenomenon is simply impossible to be replicated using drugs Side: I believe him
1
point
1. As I said all of it could have happened within seconds before he was even on the machine. 2. His imagination could have created the image of the deceased person. 3. This doesn't prove that it didn't happen in his imagination. "He is a brain expert and he says it himself that such a phenomenon is simply impossible to be replicated using drugs" This is irrelevant. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1. how did you even get the assumption that that is what I meant? 2. Yes the imagination is limited to only what you have seen before, but you can take that prior knowledge and create something else that's how the imagination works. Example; Say you've seen a lion, a horse and know what fire is. Within your imagination you can create a horse with a lions head that is on fire. Now you haven't seen this before in reality, but you can create it in your imagination. He could have easily imagined a little girl. 3. because it's something that can happen in your imagination. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Sorry for the late reply. I practically missed your message from my conversations with others 1. how did you even get the assumption that that is what I meant? You are saying that his dream came before he woke up. If the answer was that simple, then he should have already thought of that as he is a neurologist. But instead, he converted. Gee, I wonder 2. Yes the imagination is limited to only what you have seen before, but you can take that prior knowledge and create something else that's how the imagination works. Doesnt explain how he got to meet his dead sister whom he never met 3. because it's something that can happen in your imagination. Read his wikipedia page. After waking up, he tested his experience over and over for an explaination. He even went to invite 9 colleges to help him in his quest. But they all came to the insane conclusion-his vission never came from the brain Side: I believe him
1
point
I can't give you an answer that I can prove. it gets into theories about the mind being able transcend into the 4th spatial dimension when evoked meaning you completely leave your body during this time. But I will admit I didn't watch the video until after our last few post. My crappy internet takes hours to load any video, but I wanted to debate. :p Side: I believe him
1
point
Well... In abnormal states of consciousness time perception can change dramatically. Minutes may feel like hours, hours like months. What he is experiencing can easily be explained as elevated concentrations of endogenous levels of the psychoactive compound DMT. It might perfectly well have happened in the last hours (or minutes for that matter) of his coma before regaining ordinary consciousness. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Obviously, he have thought of that theory. No, it's not obvious. It's only a possibility that he has thought about that hypothesis. Even if he has thought about it, we can't be sure he arrived at the right conclusion. The fact of the matter is that Dr. Alexander experienced a place he refers to as heaven. His hypothesis is that since he saw heaven, heaven must exist. On top of that he puts all sorts of useless rhetoric, for instance, it's mentioned that he used to be a skeptic, as if that is somehow going to validate his claim. In the end the only thing that motivated his hypothesis is that experienced this place he calls heaven. My hypothesis is better. It's based on scientific processes, his theory is based on gutfeeling. My hypothesis is testable, his isn't. Since my hypothesis is testable you simply can't reject it on the basis that 'he obviously has thought about'. No amount of thinking can reject a testable hypothesis - only testing can. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
No, it's not obvious. It's only a possibility that he has thought about that hypothesis. Funny, cause that is exactly what was written on his criticism page. Your statement is exactly what his critics said. And this was his reply: "My synapses—the spaces between the neurons of the brain that support the electrochemical activity that makes the brain function — were not simply compromised during my experience. They were stopped. Only isolated pockets of deep cortical neurons were still sputtering, but no broad networks capable of generating anything like what we call 'consciousness.' The E. coli bacteria that flooded my brain during my illness made sure of that. My doctors have told me that according to all the brain tests they were doing, there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact."[9] Alexander also responded, "I know that my experience happened within coma because of certain anchors to earth time in memory." After that, the critics/doctors stopped replying but he didnt stopped and further went on to explain: "If you would have asked me before my coma, How much will someone who is in coma for a week with a severe bacterial meningitis -- so severe that the sugar level ... around my brain, normally around 60-80 and in a bad meningitis maybe down to 20; in my case it went down to 1 -- to me, that's just one piece of evidence of how severe this was. If you'd ask me how much would that patient remember, I'd say nothing," he said. "They wouldn't remember a single thing. ...The severity of the meningitis would have prevented dreams, hallucinations, confabulations, because those things all require a fairly coordinated amount of cortex." Did I mentione that he also asked his colleges to test his findings? Side: I believe him
I think it's kind of farfetched to propose that he had 'certain anchors' to earth time in memory. Why? Because in the same quote he also wrote that "there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact.". It seems farfetched because he claims that he has some "anchor to earth time in memory" while at the same time claiming that he had no memory, logic or anything. He is contradicting himself. It may just be coincedental, but my point remains the same: How could he have a connection to earth time without a functioning brain? Did I mentione that he also asked his colleges to test his findings? Oh sorry for assuming his hypothesis was untestable. It's just that most metaphysical claims are, so naturally I assumed the same held for this case. How does he suppose we can test his findings? Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
It seems farfetched because he claims that he has some "anchor to earth time in memory" while at the same time claiming that he had no memory, logic or anything. He is contradicting himself. It may just be coincedental, but my point remains the same: You answered it already. It may just be coincedental Which is why he gave the second explanation The point is not about how he knows about time. The bigger question is how he got to have a vision despite the fact that his brain practically shut own It's just that most metaphysical claims are, so naturally I assumed the same held for this case. How does he suppose we can test his findings? His Wiki page did not say much. But just as any neurologist does, he probably made chemical and brain waves test. He is comparing his case with other people who suffered the same disease and wondered how he saw something so clear and vivid when it violates the rules that was taught to him Side: I believe him
1
point
2
points
I get your skepticism, but at what point would you consider something supernatural as a possible explanation The effects of supernatural events as they manifest in reality are testable. We may never be able to pinpoint an explanation, but we can determine that there is some unexplained phenomena that is worth looking into. Nothing worth looking into has arisen from any of the many people from many religions all having near death experiences that include the religion they are familiar with. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
Well isn't the fact that he had a flat EEG worth looking into. No, it's not as if he had those "visions" with no brain activity, they took place either before it went flat, or as he was coming to. Now if on the other hand he was talking, or doing something we could see with no brain activity, that would be something to look into. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
That is a big assumption. My assumption that brain activity only takes place when the brain is active? I think it is a very logical and well grounded assumption. Don't get me wrong i am aware that possibility of the supernatural is an equally big assumption As there has never been a demonstrated supernatural event, there is no more reason to assume it was supernatural than it was thought-gnomes. There is no reason to assume either, don't try to equate your unsupported guess to my well reasoned assumption. but shouldn't they try to do more testing on the matter before they simply right it off. Do all the testing you want, I encourage it. His body didn't go to heaven, so what did? A good place to start would be to prove something like a soul exists. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
1) Why is it that so many near death experiances reported by coma patients share a number of similar characteristics, and is it possible for such a vivid experiance to be conjured up in such a short time 2) A number of people have reported similar stories about experiencing an after-life, so while it is still out the as an unexpected possibility, it is more likely the the "Thought-gnome" theory. 3) Actually the tests i were thinking of were more clinical, like studying the capabilities of brain power to see if as you were saying, the brain can create such imagery under varying conditions, or to see what other parts of the brain could potentially play a role in the visions that might not be recorded by the EEG. Side: I believe him
1) Why is it that so many near death experiances reported by coma patients share a number of similar characteristics, and is it possible for such a vivid experiance to be conjured up in such a short time If near death experiences are associated with brain trauma, and comas are also associated with brain trauma, one would expect to find overlap. They have similar characteristics because peoples brains are similar and people have similar experiences in life. We cannot know the extent of detail in his visions or when he had them, I don't have the numbers, or the qualifications to determine how much reality someone can model per minute, although that would be interesting to look into. 2) A number of people have reported similar stories about experiencing an after-life, so while it is still out the as an unexpected possibility, it is more likely the the "Thought-gnome" theory. Each claim of near death experience has been unfounded, so they cannot be used as evidence for near death experiences. If someone gained some special knowledge, or their body disappeared, of we had reason to think some part of us exists outside the brain, then the idea of an after life would have some merit. If I had a tv show where I told people that thought-gnomes steal your dreams, and got actors to claim it happened to them, soon I would have real people on my show claiming that thought-gnomes are real and stole the family secrets from their thoughts. 3) Actually the tests i were thinking of were more clinical, like studying the capabilities of brain power to see if as you were saying, the brain can create such imagery under varying conditions, or to see what other parts of the brain could potentially play a role in the visions that might not be recorded by the EEG. I fully support that, but even if we never come up with an answer, there is no reason to assert an unsupported guess. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
1) I think we agree on some level with this. I think we could both say that more studies on the brain activity of coma patients so that we could get more exact numbers would be beneficial. If nothing else, this might help us treat comas 2) I think that might make for an interesting social experiment 3) there may not be a logical reason to believe it, but for me it is a humane one. I think deep down i want there to be a afterlife. And until i can see proof that there isn't i will continue to have faith there is. I have not been arguing this debate for the sake of convincing anyone, i want my beliefs to be challenged to make me reconsider my stances on issues. they have not changed, but i am hopeful that we can see more of where the other side is coming from. Side: I believe him
I think deep down i want there to be a afterlife. And until i can see proof that there isn't i will continue to have faith there is. You are free to believe whatever you wish. I choose to live my live with the goal to believe as few false things as possible, believing anything that hasn't been disproved opens the door to believing anything anyone makes up. For three easy payments of $49.99, I will sent you a Gnome-Away Sleeping Cap, because there is no proof that thought-gnomes don't exist. Side: I believe him
1
point
2
points
1
point
You just returned the question but oh well. 1. His brain damage denies any ability to conceive a visual image 2. His guide was from a deceased person 3. He was conscious throughout his whole experience He is a brain expert and he says it himself that such a phenomenon is simply impossible to be replicated using drugs Side: I believe him
You just returned the question but oh well. You're asking me to prove it wasn't supernatural, but supernatural events cannot be proven by definition. You have the burden of proof to demonstrate that anything supernatural has ever happened. You might as well have asked me to prove it wasn't thought-gnomes. 1. His brain damage denies any ability to conceive a visual image He can see now, that means he can conceive a visual image. 2. His guide was from a deceased person If he had woken up and said it was her and said the name of the sister he never knew he had, that would have been impressive. 3. He was conscious throughout his whole experience What do you mean by "conscious throughout his whole experience"? Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
but supernatural events cannot be proven by definition Nope, if it cannot be explained using logical ways, it belongs to the term supernatural He can see now, that means he can conceive a visual image. No, you got it wrong the part of the brain responsible for vission is different from the part resposible for imagination. According to him and his doctors (a brain expert) with what he suffered, he shouldnt have dreamt of anything If he had woken up and said it was her and said the name of the sister he never knew he had, that would have been impressive. You failed to disprove my claim What do you mean by "conscious throughout his whole experience"? Conscious as in he knows what he is doing and has full control of his body. You cannot do that in the REM state of sleep Side: I believe him
Nope, if it cannot be explained using logical ways, it belongs to the term supernatural That is just an argument from ignorance. Just because you can't come up with an explanation doesn't mean you can assert any other cause. No, you got it wrong the part of the brain responsible for vission is different from the part resposible for imagination. According to him and his doctors (a brain expert) with what he suffered, he shouldnt have dreamt of anything Most likely the "visions" took place before the state of minimal brain activity, of as he was coming to. If you would like to claim that brain activity took place when the brain wasn't active, you will have to demonstrate that. You failed to disprove my claim You're claim doesn't add anything to your argument because it doesn't demonstrate anything.He has failed to demonstrate he gained any special knowledge from these "visions", so there is no reason to believe that was really his sister. Conscious as in he knows what he is doing and has full control of his body. You cannot do that in the REM state of sleep REM sleep induces a form of paralysis to prevent us from acting out our dreams, what does that have to do this his claim? Was he walking around while in a come? (That would also be impressive.) Side: I believe him
1
point
That is just an argument from ignorance. Just because you can't come up with an explanation doesn't mean you can assert any other cause. But still, if it cannot be explained, it belongs to the category of supernatural phenomenon. Most likely the "visions" took place before the state of minimal brain activity, of as he was coming to. If you would like to claim that brain activity took place when the brain wasn't active, you will have to demonstrate that. You do realize that brain activity is different from activity of thoughts, right? You're claim doesn't add anything to your argument because it doesn't demonstrate anything.He has failed to demonstrate he gained any special knowledge from these "visions", so there is no reason to believe that was really his sister. uhh....what? It said so on the video that he was an adopted kid who had no knowledge of his siblings. It was after his tragedy that he found out about the identity of his long lost sister. What are the chances that you will meet her in a dream? much less have an intellectual conversation with her? REM sleep induces a form of paralysis to prevent us from acting out our dreams, what does that have to do this his claim? Was he walking around while in a come? (That would also be impressive.) I am saying that people in dreams has no idea that they are dreaming. It is possible to be trained as a lucid dreamer. But in a lucid dream, everything has to go according to what you want. But he didnt, everything he saw was something he never expected (including his guide) Side: I believe him
But still, if it cannot be explained, it belongs to the category of supernatural phenomenon. Nothing has been demonstrated that isn't explained by brain malfunction. There is nothing left needing an explanation here. You do realize that brain activity is different from activity of thoughts, right? Yes, these visions may not have taken place while he had minimal brain activity, but instead right before, or right after, when his brain was active. What are the chances that you will meet her in a dream? much less have an intellectual conversation with her? He didn't know that the guide in his visions was his sister, he didn't wake up and announce I have a sister. Instead this visions was meaningful to him, so we went out and looked for a significant female that he hadn't' known about. He didn't gain any special knowledge from his visions. If he had that would be impressive, worth looking into, and would require the label "supernatural". Only meaning beyond scientific understanding, not necessarily beyond the laws of nature. I am saying that people in dreams has no idea that they are dreaming. It is possible to be trained as a lucid dreamer. But in a lucid dream, everything has to go according to what you want. But he didnt, everything he saw was something he never expected (including his guide) Lucid dreaming allows one to be aware in their dreams like you said, but they don't have the control you say they do, instead they can act within the modal reality they experience. If you see a ball you can pick it up, but you can't necessarily conjure a ball, or influence a ball that you don't recognize yourself as touching. Side: I believe him
1
point
Nothing has been demonstrated that isn't explained by brain malfunction. There is nothing left needing an explanation here. Nope, the video says that with the malfunction of the brain, its just not possible to have a clear dream. Hence, its supernatural Yes, these visions may not have taken place while he had minimal brain activity, but instead right before, or right after, when his brain was active. So what are you saying? He didn't know that the guide in his visions was his sister, he didn't wake up and announce I have a sister..... Nope, it said on the video that it due to his curiosity of why that girl became his guide instead of Jesus or God (as what most near death experiences say) He was brought back to searching for his birth family. Where he found a shocking discovery You can reject this as coincidence though. But as a believer, I wont Lucid dreaming allows one to be aware in their dreams like you said, but they don't have the control you say they do, instead they can act within the modal reality they experience.... Correction: A lucid dream is when the dreamer has full knowledge that he is dreaming. Hence he is the God of his dream and everything goes according to how he wanted it But what do you call it when you know you are not on Earth but you know that its not a dream either? Side: I believe him
Nope, the video says that with the malfunction of the brain, its just not possible to have a clear dream. Hence, its supernatural Even if we couldn't explain what happened, there is no reason to assert anything beyond "I don't know". If you want to call that supernatural that's fine, but that doesn't demonstrate that anything outside nature occurred. So what are you saying? That brain activity occurs when the brain is active. His brain was active before and after the coma, there is no reason to assume anything other than the visions occurring during one of those two transitions. You are trying to suggest that he had this visions while his brain wasn't active, that would be something you would have to demonstrate, and if you did that would be something to support his claim. You can reject this as coincidence though. But as a believer, I wont You are free to be gullible, no one can stop you. If during this vision she has said to him that she was his sister, or said her name I might believe it was more than a coincidence, but we have no way to know if that was really his sister, or if he just attributed his sister's identity to the girl in his vision after the fact. Correction: A lucid dream is when the dreamer has full knowledge that he is dreaming. Hence he is the God of his dream and everything goes according to how he wanted it This is a non sequitur, please provide a link to support this claim. But what do you call it when you know you are not on Earth but you know that its not a dream either? I call it being mistaken. Did his brain disappear? If no, then what are you suggesting wasn't on Earth? And where do you suggest that thing went? Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Even if we couldn't explain what happened, there is no reason to assert anything beyond "I don't know". If you want to call that supernatural that's fine, but that doesn't demonstrate that anything outside nature occurred. Which brings us back to the question: What makes you think everything can be explained in a logical way? That brain activity occurs when the brain is active. His brain was active before and after the coma, there is no reason to assume anything other than the visions occurring during one of those two transitions. It was discussed in his critics page#Criticism) "My synapses—the spaces between the neurons of the brain that support the electrochemical activity that makes the brain function — were not simply compromised during my experience. They were stopped. Only isolated pockets of deep cortical neurons were still sputtering, but no broad networks capable of generating anything like what we call 'consciousness.' The E. coli bacteria that flooded my brain during my illness made sure of that. My doctors have told me that according to all the brain tests they were doing, there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact."[9] Alexander also responded, "I know that my experience happened within coma because of certain anchors to earth time in memory." After that, the critics (doctors) no longer responded You are free to be gullible, no one can stop you. If during this vision she has said to him that she was his sister, or said her name I might believe it was more than a coincidence,but we have no way to know if that was really his sister, or if he just attributed his sister's identity to the girl in his vision after the fact. But nevertheless, his curiosity about the identity of the girl in his vision led him to a discovery too outstanding for a coincidence. This is a non sequitur, please provide a link to support this claim. I used Wikipedia "In a lucid dream, the dreamer has greater chances to exert some degree of control over their participation within the dream or be able to manipulate their imaginary experiences in the dream " I call it being mistaken. Did his brain disappear? If no, then what are you suggesting wasn't on Earth? And where do you suggest that thing went? It was also mentioned on Eben Alexanders wikipedia page. After waking from coma, he went to test his vision to prove that it was a mere hallucination from drugs. But all evidences says otherwise. Not content, he went to invite some colleges to test his findings over and over. Only to reach the same conclusion-his vision did not came from his brain Side: I believe him
What makes you think everything can be explained in a logical way? I never suggested that, I'm saying there is nothing about Dr. Alexander experience needing the label supernatural. My doctors have told me that according to all the brain tests they were doing, there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact."[9] Alexander also responded, "I know that my experience happened within coma because of certain anchors to earth time in memory." If his brain wasn't active when he was in a coma, then he was no way to determine anchors to Earth time in his memory. This is a claim he is making, he believes his Near Death Experience took place during his coma, but he cannot demonstrate it. There is no reason to assume anything other than his Near Death Experience took place during the brain shutting down before the coma, or as his brain started up again, after the coma. But nevertheless, his curiosity about the identity of the girl in his vision led him to a discovery too outstanding for a coincidence. He was 55 when he had his Near Death Experience, then he went and looked for his birth family. The chance that he had an unknown female family member who was dead when searching through his entire adoptive family tree isn't very low. That doesn't even matter anymore, because I just watched one of his lectures, this is me paraphrasing what he said: After my experience I was reading a book about a girl who learned about an unknown brother from her Near Death Experience. Back in 2000 (eight years before his Near Death Experience), I had learned about my birth parents and that they had three children, I also learned that their daughter had died, and that is why I couldn't reconnect with them at that time. Then in 2007 (one year before his Near Death Experience) I reunited with my birth family, but it was bitter sweet because my sister died in 1998. "In a lucid dream, the dreamer has greater chances to exert some degree of control over their participation within the dream or be able to manipulate their imaginary experiences in the dream " That is what I said, it is possible to have full control during a lucid dream, but not necessary. After waking from coma, he went to test his vision to prove that it was a mere hallucination from drugs. I never suggested it was drugs, my position has always been his Near Death Experience was caused by the brain malfunctioning when shutting down, or starting up.
Supporting Evidence:
If my response it too long, just watch this Lecture by Dr. Alexander
(youtu.be)
Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
I never suggested that, I'm saying there is nothing about Dr. Alexander experience needing the label supernatural. Dr. Eben is a neurologist with years of experience. If theres anything that isnt supernatural in his case, he would be the first to know about. If his brain wasn't active when he was in a coma, then he was no way to determine anchors to Earth time in his memory. Good point. Which is exactly why he gave his next explanation "If you would have asked me before my coma, How much will someone who is in coma for a week with a severe bacterial meningitis -- so severe that the sugar level ... around my brain, normally around 60-80 and in a bad meningitis maybe down to 20; in my case it went down to 1 -- to me, that's just one piece of evidence of how severe this was. If you'd ask me how much would that patient remember, I'd say nothing," he said. "They wouldn't remember a single thing. ...The severity of the meningitis would have prevented dreams, hallucinations, confabulations, because those things all require a fairly coordinated amount of cortex." The point was never about how he can recal the essence of time. But how he got to have a vision despite the fact that it should not have allowed him. Not even capabilities to store memories He was 55 when he had his Near Death Experience, then he went and looked for his birth family. The chance that he had an unknown female family member who was dead when searching through his entire adoptive family tree isn't very low. Correction: that is entirely low. A man on the age of retirement is a man who is already content. A man curiosity and wilingness for answer occurs mostly around 20+. But of course, its not impossible, just coincidencial, I guess That is what I said, it is possible to have full control during a lucid dream, but not necessary. Aye, but in a lucid dream, the dreamer should have awareness that its a dream. But in Ebens case, he knew it isnt. I never suggested it was drugs, my position has always been his Near Death Experience was caused by the brain malfunctioning when shutting down, or starting up. But he never had a fully functioning brain. Even when he recovered, he should have been still in vegetable state and suffer slight amnesia. And his experiments proved it Side: I believe him
1
point
I'm going to just assume that you didn't read my entire post and didn't watch my attached video. I even did that thing where the video starts right at the good part. We can't discuss anything else until you respond to this. Alexander publicly states that he knew about his dead sister eight years before his coma. WATCH ME!!!
Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1. His guide was his birth sister who died without seeing him Ever had a dream where you saw a person you've never met before? Well, you have met them... or at least seen them. It may have even been for a brief second at the grocery store. I find it hard to believe that this man didn't see at least one picture of his sister before the incident. He may not remember it, but his brain can still bring that person's image into his dream... because somewhere deep down in his brain, he still has that memory. 2. He saw visions which shouldnt have been possible because his brain damage forbids it Like I said, scientists recently debunked the theory that people in a coma and vegetative states don't possess any brain activity. This discovery could apply to Dr. Alexander as well. 3. He was conscious throughout his experience Refer to my response to number two. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Ever had a dream where you saw a person you've never met before? And may I hear your explanation for their intellectual conversation which is impossible in a dream state? Like I said, scientists recently debunked the theory that people in a coma and vegetative states don't possess any brain activity. This discovery could apply to Dr. Alexander as well. Watch the video mate. It explained at 4:00 that the part of the brain responsible for imagination was damaged, hence, hallucinations is an impossibility Side: I believe him
And may I hear your explanation for their intellectual conversation which is impossible in a dream state? It's not impossible. Watch the video mate. It explained at 4:00 that the part of the brain responsible for imagination was damaged, hence, hallucinations is an impossibility It obviously healed. Do you think he woke up the second his brain activity returned? Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
It's not impossible. Proof? It obviously healed. Do you think he woke up the second his brain activity returned? It was already discussed on his criticism page "My synapses—the spaces between the neurons of the brain that support the electrochemical activity that makes the brain function — were not simply compromised during my experience. They were stopped. Only isolated pockets of deep cortical neurons were still sputtering, but no broad networks capable of generating anything like what we call 'consciousness.' The E. coli bacteria that flooded my brain during my illness made sure of that. My doctors have told me that according to all the brain tests they were doing, there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact."[9] Alexander also responded, "I know that my experience happened within coma because of certain anchors to earth time in memory." After that, the critics no longer respond and pointed out on his histories of mischief Side: I believe him
I'd also like to point out that Dr. Alexander has a number of malpractice lawsuits against him and he didn't perform any surgeries a year before the incident occured. He has also been exposed for fabricating parts of his book. He has made millions of dollars as a result of this "experience". It has to make you wonder if he's just doing it for the money. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
It proves that he has a reputation for being dishonest. He was also exposed for fabricating parts of his book, which obviously occured AFTER the incident. Here's what I think... he was going through a difficult time in his life. He was wrapped up in multiple lawsuits and he hadn't worked in a year. He needed money. Being the smart guy that he is, he knew that a self-proclaimed athiest neurosurgeon with a near-death experience would be a money maker. So he wrote a best selling book and appeared in multiple interviews. Now he's a millionaire. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
It proves that he has a reputation for being dishonest Give me a person who has none He was also exposed for fabricating parts of his book, which obviously occured AFTER the incident. Practically every single attempt was just jumping on the flag that he wrote it based on memories. I can see the reason for doubt, but come on, he is a neurologist who knows exactly how the people will react to an obvious lie. But where is the lie in the fact that after his vision, he found his long lost sister? Here's what I think... he was going through a difficult time in his life. He was wrapped up in multiple lawsuits and he hadn't worked in a year. He needed money. Being the smart guy that he is, he knew that a self-proclaimed athiest neurosurgeon with a near-death experience would be a money maker. So he wrote a best selling book and appeared in multiple interviews. Now he's a millionaire. Im afraid that cant work 1. Give me a proof that he is going through a difficult time 2. He is a neurologist who should know that making a story about his memories will not sell. 3. He is a doctor, not a novelist. If your skills are for medicine, you cannot control the masses. Psychology does not work that way 4. He made money out of medicines not literature. How exactly can he assume that he will make millions out of his first book? 5. If it was a lie, he wouldnt be checking out his colleges to create 9 logical theories to entertain his experiences. (which all failed) Side: I believe him
Give me a person who has none Someone who doesn't have a reputation for lying? Me. A surgeon who consistently lies, obviously isn't a very moral individual. Practically every single attempt was just jumping on the flag that he wrote it based on memories. I can see the reason for doubt, but come on, he is a neurologist who knows exactly how the people will react to an obvious lie. But where is the lie in the fact that after his vision, he found his long lost sister? There isn't any FACT that he saw his sister in his "vision". All we have is his word. Im afraid that cant work Yes it can. 1. Give me a proof that he is going through a difficult time Multiple malpractice lawsuits and no work in over a year doesn't sound like a difficult time to you? You must be a very optimistic person. 2. He is a neurologist who should know that making a story about his memories will not sell. But it did sell... actually, it was a best-seller. 3. He is a doctor, not a novelist. If your skills are for medicine, you cannot control the masses. Psychology does not work that way You know just as well as me that you do not have to be a novelist to make a best-selling book. 4. He made money out of medicines not literature. How exactly can he assume that he will make millions out of his first book? He knew that there was a possibility his book could make millions. He's probably made millions on interviews alone. 5. If it was a lie, he wouldnt be checking out his colleges to create 9 logical theories to entertain his experiences. (which all failed) That doesn't prove anything. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Someone who doesn't have a reputation for lying? Me I can see that A surgeon who consistently lies, obviously isn't a very moral individual. Wont you agree that everyone deserves a second chance? There isn't any FACT that he saw his sister in his "vision". All we have is his word. But we have evidence that his curiosity of his vision is what lead him to the identity of his long lost sister Multiple malpractice lawsuits and no work in over a year doesn't sound like a difficult time to you? He was in coma on 2008, got back to work at 2009. Published the book at 2012. What are you saying again? But it did sell... actually, it was a best-seller.You know just as well as me that you do not have to be a novelist to make a best-selling book.He knew that there was a possibility his book could make millions. He's probably made millions on interviews alone. Thats not my point. I was saying that if the foundations of his plan is an obvious lie, he should know it well that it wont work and do something else. It takes courage to do something so foolish. And the only way to succeed in the art of persuation is to say the truth That doesn't prove anything. Did you read the Wiki link I gave you? Before writing his book, he first made research about his experiences. He assumed that it was a hallucination caused by drugs but his experiments says otherwise. He asked help from his colleges but they all got the same conclusion- the vision did not came from his brain Side: I believe him
|
I didn't watch the video, but I've seen an interview with him before. Didn't he say he died and went to heaven? From what I remember, the Bible says nobody has gone to heaven yet. They must wait until "Judgement day"... so he's contradicting his own religion. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
1
point
Christians can't come up with their own conclusions. All they have is the Bible to support their religion. If he truly did experience this event and he really was in the afterlife, then it would be safe to assume that what he witnessed was not related to Christianity. Side: he's hallucinating
2
points
1
point
1
point
I made some research Dr Alexander is not a Christian (At least not in spiritual sense) And that concludes our discussion Side: I believe him
2
points
1
point
1
point
"Although I considered myself a faithful Christian, I was so more in name than in actual belief. - Dr. Alexander He is only a Christian by name End of story Side: I believe him
Maybe you should read the entire article before you start claiming your victory: "As a scientist, he could not believe certain things, he said, such as Jesus being anything more than a good man. But after seven days in a coma a few years ago, his views changed". Those were his beliefs BEFORE the incident. Your source sucks. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Luke 23:40-43 (NLT) '40 But the other criminal protested, “Don’t you fear God even when you have been sentenced to die? 41 We deserve to die for our crimes, but this man hasn’t done anything wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your Kingdom.” 43 And Jesus replied, “I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise.”' Jesus took the man to temporary heaven. He took him up into a temporary heaven. Side: he's hallucinating
Thanks for pointing out that possibly contradictory verse in the Bible. By the way, nowhere does it say that there is a "temporary heaven". Also, I'd like to point out that Jesus said "today" but he may have actually meant that he "assures him today, that he will meet him in paradise". In other words, Jesus is promising the criminal that he will eventually ascend to Heaven. Genesis 2:17 "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Obviously Adam and Eve didn't die the day they ate the fruit. They lived to be about 900 years old. Did God lie? Probably not. He was saying that the day in which they eat the fruit, they will no longer be immortal. Same goes for Jesus' use of the word "today" when speaking to the criminal. On the day the criminal died, he was given Jesus' word that he will eventually be in Heaven. Side: I believe him
1
point
You are arguing with a person that believes the bible in inaccurate. That is futile. By the way, nowhere does it say that there is a "temporary heaven The bible also never says "rapture" or "Trinity". Know why? Because it is a simple implication. You haven't found a contradiction and you know it. Enoch is most likely in temporary heaven. Reading the bible would alert the reading that there is a temporary holding place. How did Lazarus end up in "Hades"? Also, I'd like to point out that Jesus said "today" but he may have actually meant that he "assures him today, that he will meet him in paradise". In other words, Jesus is promising the criminal that he will eventually ascend to Heaven. Today is today. Not tomorrow. Not eventually, but today. Jesus made the promise for Today. Obviously Adam and Eve didn't die the day they ate the fruit. They lived to be about 900 years old. Did God lie? Probably not. He was saying that the day in which they eat the fruit, they will no longer be immortal. Same goes for Jesus' use of the word "today" when speaking to the criminal. On the day the criminal died, he was given Jesus' word that he will eventually be in Heaven Incorrect. Today is a implication of a time. "You will die" offers no time scale for measurement. Today means today. This should be obvious to you but nice try. Side: I believe him
You are arguing with a person that believes the bible in inaccurate. That is futile. Then you contradict yourself. The bible also never says "rapture" or "Trinity". Know why? Because it is a simple implication. You haven't found a contradiction and you know it. Enoch is most likely in temporary heaven. Reading the bible would alert the reading that there is a temporary holding place. How did Lazarus end up in "Hades"? Let me make clear that I am an Agnostic, I don't believe the Bible either. I'm only pointing out what it says... because that is the only supporting evidence for Christian beliefs. The Bible DOES mention rapture, maybe they don't use the word, but it does speak of a day of judgement where believers are transported to Heaven during the second coming of Jesus. There you go... that is the definition of "Rapture". A temporary heaven is something you made up. A conclusion you drew yourself. If you don't go by the specific details, then you don't have any supporting evidence for your theory. Today is today. Not tomorrow. Not eventually, but today. Jesus made the promise for Today. Jesus made the promise on that day. There is a difference. Incorrect. Today is a implication of a time. "You will die" offers no time scale for measurement. Today means today. This should be obvious to you but nice try. "the day in which they eat the fruit". Does that not offer a time scale? "Today means today" is a lazy argument. Side: I believe him
1
point
Then you contradict yourself. I never told you, specifically, what I deem as inaccurate. The Bible DOES mention rapture, maybe they don't use the word, but it does speak of a day of judgment where believers are transported to Heaven during the second coming of Jesus. There you go... that is the definition of "Rapture". A temporary heaven is something you made up. A conclusion you drew yourself. If you don't go by the specific details, then you don't have any supporting evidence for your theory. I gave you the verse. It speaks of a temporary heaven and hell. Again, where dis Lazarus go? Jesus made the promise on that day. There is a difference. That doesn't change the fact that today is today. Jesus said today. He meant today. That is his own words. ". Does that not offer a time scale? "Today means today" is a lazy argument. You cant understand the simplest way of formatting it so I put it in child like terms foe you. Die: To cease existing, especially by degrees; fade. This definition should set the basis for the bibles vagueness. Side: I believe him
I gave you the verse. It speaks of a temporary heaven and hell. Again, where dis Lazarus go? John 11:11-14 “These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead”. Psalms 146:4 “His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish”. Job 14:12 “So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep”. Lazarus died. He did not speak of Heaven after he was brought back to life by Jesus, nor did anyone ask him about it. Job 7:21 “And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity? for now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be”. It is made very clear in the Bible that none shall enter heaven until judgement day. 1 Thessalonians 4:16 “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first” You cant understand the simplest way of formatting it so I put it in child like terms foe you. Die: To cease existing, especially by degrees; fade. This definition should set the basis for the bibles vagueness. Oh, you're simplifying it for ME? Lol alright then. Me too dumb to know what you talk about... Give me a break! All of your arguments are simplified. I wouldn't be suprised if you really are a child. Side: I believe him
Hey! I'm back from you banning me from all of your debates and blocking me from your messages! I'm really not going to leave you alone until you provide some evidence as to why you are right and I am wrong. Simply saying you are right, isn't going to persuade me... or anyone for that matter. I don't know why you get offended by things that shouldn't offend you, but it's really sad. There is absolutely no verse in the Bible that speaks of a "temporary heaven". It mentions a Heaven but not a temporary one... at least that I know of. Maybe you should prove me wrong! Hurry, before my confidence grows any bigger! Side: I believe him
1
point
Its not my fault you cant identify the implications guven in verses that point to a temporary heaven. Yep, heaven itself is temporary. Abraham’s bosom, paradise, and heaven are temporary realities. They all are metaphors for the same place (Matt. 6:9; Luke 24:51; Acts 7:55-56) where God most fully makes known his presence to bless. This is where people go when they pass on here from earth. They go immediately into God’s presence (2 Cor. 5:8; Phil. 1:23; Luke 23:43; Heb. 12:23). On a side note, the Bible does not teach purgatory, soul sleep, or that heaven is some sort of state of mind that can be achieved here on earth. Heaven, Abraham’s bosom, Paradise, and other words used are actually referring to what is called the intermediate state, the place where believers go before the glorious second coming of Christ when God will raise the dead, judge the earth through Jesus, and reign forever. Christians often talk about living with God forever “in heaven,” but the biblical teaching is that there will be a new heavens and a new earth, a renewed creation. Isaiah said “”For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind. (65:17; again in 66:22).” Peter said, “But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. (2 Pet. 3:13).” John picks up on the Isaiahan metaphor when he envisions, “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. (Rev. 21:1).” God plans to renew creation and dwell forever with his people. His people will dwell with them after receiving their promised resurrection body (1 Cor. 6:14, 15; 2 Cor. 4:14; 1 Thess. 4:13-17). Side: I believe him
Whoa... hold on there! We are not talking about the real heaven being temporary... but rather a 'temporary heaven' before we go to the real Heaven. I understand that the "current" Heaven is supposed to cease to exist... but I also understand that before Christ's death... people didn't go to any Heaven. Lazarus, for example, did not go to Heaven. He just simply died and was then resurrected by Jesus. It seems to me like you are learning more about your own argument, than you did before. Side: I believe him
1
point
2
points
I have bacterial meningitis and I have experienced something like this. (It happened about 3 months ago) Except it was a demonic screaming at me "You're going to die tomorrow!".(Most likely because I was having thoughts that I was going to die) Which forced me out of the semi conscious state were I thought I was going to die. Because it scared the sht out of me...or the life back into me...which ever you prefer :) When I "came back" the immense pain was still there, but I got over it the next day. And I'm still alive today sooo. In the end it's just a hallucination controlled by your DMT and other chemicals in your brain which control vividness and imagination. The bacterial meningitis must have been having some effect on his brain chemicals. He must of also been feeling really great during this moment to make him feel like it was real. serotonin I would also like to add that your brain contains the same chemical in shrooms. shrooms just forcefully trigger the chemicals to cause the hallucination/vivid reality. (just giving you an idea.) Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1
point
He says that his "guide" is this girl. Should it be Jesus who is guiding you and not that girl? See a lot of people who have this near death experiences and say they saw Heaven or of some sort they always say that the first thing they see is a loved one or some other person but not Jesus. Jesus is the one who is suppose to be your guide because He is the one who created Heaven and He should be the one speaking to you and not anybody else. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
2
points
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1) Never dis I claim that Christianity had a perfect description if an afterlife. So why are you even asking me this? 2) Is there another faith that stands the test of time? 3) Heaven is specific and unique to its religion so asking for which one is a more accurate account is idiotic. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1. But you supported Scrom's so your implying that you agree with him 2. I dont get whats that supposed to prove 3. Exactly, they are all unique. Which why I ask why you believe that Christianity's version is the most accurate and everything should go according to how it was written there Side: I believe him
1
point
1) Srom? I agreed with him yes. What does that have to do with anything? 2) Thats sad. 3) You are asking me what religion has an accurate account of heaven even though nobody has seen it? That is like asking car conpanies which one of them has the most accurate car. It makes no sense. They are all unique to each other and we have no comparative basis to weigh in this debate. That is why I deem your question as idiotic. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
"You shouldn't quote scripture with me. I do not believe the bible is extremely accurate." Scripture is the ENTIRE Bible. You were suggesting that I shouldn't quote anything from it, because you don't find it accurate... yet you quote it yourself! Seems kind of hypocritical. That is childish What is childish, is your arguments. Enoch is in temporary heaven. That should be obvious. Where in the Bible does it say that God created TWO heavens? What would be the purpose of a temporary heaven? The Bible says that believers go to heaven and non-believers go to hell. We're talking about Christianity, not Buddhism. There is only one heaven, according to the Bible. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
1
point
You do realize that when Jesus is saying this He is alluding to the fact that He is God, not that no one has gone to heaven from earth. It is a reference to Deuteronomy 30:12, which reads like so: "It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’" The context of both of these passages is that of referring to the spiritual baptism and obeying the Lord our God. There is no issue here with what Jesus has said and Elijah going to heaven in a chariot of fire. If anything it proves the Bible even further; and within Christian communities it proves Calvinism. Side: I believe him
How do you know what Jesus looks like, in the 300 versions of the bibles those books have Jesus looking 50 different ways, some say a white guy with blond hair blue eyes, others say Jesus was a black man with an afro, and some say he looked arabic? Also wouldn't a God like man called Jesus be able to be seen as anyone or thing, even an animal if need be? Side: I believe him
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
You're missing the point. Science doesn't know everything about the brain. Things that we think we know, can be almost completely tossed out the window with a new discovery. What that man having hallucinations even though they said he shouldn't have has told me is that we have a new discovery and the brain is capable of more. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
Aye, science is open for new discoveries in the brain. But his brain totally shut down without any space for any capacity nor energy to formulate thoughts. Eben Alexander is a nuerologist with years of experience. If theres anything that is not supernatural in his case, he would be the first to know Side: I believe him
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
-2
points
2
points
The baby without a brain still has the medulla oblangata (brain stem). It is the part responsible for automatic responses and coordination of the internal organs. It is possible to live without the cerebellum and cerebrum. But not as a human being. I fail to see how that disproves Dr. Alexander's case Side: I believe him
1
point
1
point
Dr. Eben is a neurologist with years of experience. If theres anything that isnt supernatural in his case, he would be the first to know about. He even left this explanation: "If you would have asked me before my coma, How much will someone who is in coma for a week with a severe bacterial meningitis -- so severe that the sugar level ... around my brain, normally around 60-80 and in a bad meningitis maybe down to 20; in my case it went down to 1 -- to me, that's just one piece of evidence of how severe this was. If you'd ask me how much would that patient remember, I'd say nothing," he said. "They wouldn't remember a single thing. ...The severity of the meningitis would have prevented dreams, hallucinations, confabulations, because those things all require a fairly coordinated amount of cortex." Which proves that his vision did not came from his brain. I wonder where Side: I believe him
1
point
Actually, no, it doesn't prove anything really. I suggest you do some research on DMT, even if he only dreamt or hallucinated for a few seconds it would have seemed like years, especially the amount that is released in these kind of situations. Also, I thought this was common sense but apparently it isn't, just because you can't get a definitive answer on why something happened doesn't mean that the magic spaghetti monster was involved. Side: he's hallucinating
1
point
DMT has nothing to do with his case. Because he said it himself that his meningitis has been so severe it should have completely shut down his brain and take away all of his capabilities to formulate any thoughts not even memories. His wikipage even says that he invited 9 colleges just to test his experience. But they all came to the same conclusion-it did not came from the brain. Like what I said: He is a nuerologist with years of experience. If theres anything that is not supernatural in his case, he should be the first to know Side: I believe him
1
point
|