Quote from: qwik2learn on November 29, 2017, 07:32:07 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 28, 2017, 11:22:39 AM

Quote from: qwik2learn on November 28, 2017, 06:47:41 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 27, 2017, 11:07:01 PM

For instance, if everyone who ever died and was brought back to life in a hospital told the exact same story about what they saw, it would be considered strong evidence about the nature of the afterlife, heaven and hell, and they could tell the same story about meeting Jesus or the devil too. But instead they tell stories based upon what they already believe.

Hasty generalization fallacy: this author has failed to consider the full body of evidence, and falsely suggests that the experience of being near-death has no consistency across cultures and is therefore merely a "story". Also, Dr. Ian Stevenson studied reincarnation cases of children across many cultures and concluded that "culture and belief" alone is inadequate, i.e. low explanatory power. Is this author prepared to address the full body of evidence with an open mind? Or is he committed to his "story" explanation regardless of the evidence?

Childrens Experiences.
The NDEs of children, including very young children who are too young to have developed concepts of death, religion, or NDEs, are essentially identical to those of older children and adults. This refutes the possibility that the content of NDEs is produced by preexisting beliefs or cultural conditioning.

Worldwide Consistency.
NDEs appear remarkably consistent around the world, and across many different religions and cultures. NDEs from non-Western countries are incredibly similar to those occurring in people in Western countries.

Carl Becker examined four ways in which NDEs may be considered objective:
1.   Paranormal knowledge that is later verified
2.   The similarity of deathbed events in different cultures
3.   Differences between religious expectations and visionary experiences
4.   Third-party observations of visionary figures, indicating that they were not merely subjective hallucinations.
https://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a07

Chopra presents answers to such questions as: who you meet in the afterlife and how your experience there reflect your present beliefs, expectations, and level of awareness. In the here and now you can shape what happens after you die. Chopra opens up immense new areas of insights where ultimately there is no division between life and death - there is only one continuous creative project.

Oh yea Dr Ian Stevenson LUL. Do you have any source that is not a complete fraud?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson

http://skepdic.com/stevenson.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/pjdg3/ian_stevensons_reincarnation_research/

Give me a break. With Chopra do you mean Deepak Chopra?? https://www.quora.com/I-have-heard-that-physicists-call-Deepak-Chopra%E2%80%99s-claims-%E2%80%9Cwoo-woo%E2%80%9D-What-do-physicists-think-of-Deepak-Chopra-Does-Deepak-really-understand-quantum-physics

He is a total nut job, there is an interview of him debating richard dawkins, you should watch that and have a good laugh.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You show no ability to evaluate new ideas when presented, you pick and choose your facts so that you can make hasty generalizations without providing any evidence of your own, just like the author you quoted. The fact is that NDE and reincarnation cases have similar features across cultures, your author has chosen to mischaracterize the evidence to suit his agenda. The consistency of these experiences is different from what the author hopes for in his desired proof of the afterlife but the reality of that consistency is ignored. In any case the NDE is a part of being human and was recognized even in ancient times, it is misleading to claim that all.NDE is a mere story when it is factually an experience.
Also, Chopra wrote papers with Hameroff, a briiant QM researcher, so if all.you have is cherry picking and old videos then your argument is totally incomplete.

''The fact is that NDE and reincarnation cases have similar features across cultures'' Thats a fact? ROFL. ''my author'' I posted several sources, I don't know what you mean by my author. Ian Stevenson is a known fraud. Somehow you believe what he says after I presented evidence that he is a fraud, gets to show who is the guy who has an agenda here. You never research against your own, small, small sources. I can find hundreds of different sources pointing out that Ian Stevenson is a fraud and didn't perform the experiments how he should have, yet you will still believe him because that's what you do, you believe these nut jobs for some reason.

You always talk about research and you never do it. Google is there for you, you just need to type: Deepak chopra fraud or Ian Stevenson fraud.