But if you look more closely at their paper they have a lot of A is like B therefore A may be B. They do not have a "scientific cause", they have an untested hypothesis in which some of the effects (such as the bright tunnel) are like known effects that might be associated with dying, and others are associated with "brain pathologies" (no explanation of how these brain pathologies arise when the brain is shutting down). "For example, dopamine and opioid systems become
active when an animal is under predatory attack." is invoked to explain a feeling of peace. The UK Medical Council did not get their money's worth.
About the only thing that seems to be new is a breakdown showing ratios of near-death experiences: those who didn't get them, those who did, and those who did even though they weren't at risk.
"If you squint hard enough, any two things can look similar."
ReplyDeleteI wonder. The only reason I believe in an afterlife is that Christ told me to. He didn't provide any explanation or details, so presumably He felt they weren't important to the main issue, which is to love and obey God and do my duty. I don't have a clue what eternity means or what it will be like. I do have an uncomfortable sense that it's not a good idea to try to figure it out on the basis of the physiological experiences of people whose brains came very close to shutting down during a near-death experience.
ReplyDeleteBy the same token, I don't see the point in scientists' trying to "debunk" the afterlife by these means.
Agree 100%.
ReplyDelete