There have appeared multiple reports at divulgation of Science magazines of “new” findings about “Life After Death” (LAD). We intent to expose the fallacies in these reports.
Let us begin by the observation that what they effectively do is to make two independent assertions:
1 The experience of the patients with cardiac arrest were near the state of death and in “slight” contact with “something supernatural”.
2 The souls exist, and because of that, the patient was able to see or hear some events that were real in the medical environment of their resuscitation.
As a matter of fact, the term “After Death”, which is used in too much of the titles or bodies of the press reports that reference to the original article, is wrong, because the patients never were dead. We think that this misuse of the term is intentional, and has the effect of stealthy reassuring some readers, that their beliefs in the existence of the soul is rational. We have to take into account that organized religion had a huge income per year until recently, and therefore, have too much direct or indirect power, which, by the way, will sustain for decades. What would you do if your main business is dacaying?
In regards with the assertion 1, let us say that this is questionable. We think that it is scientifically acceptable to define death of a multicellular organism as the state from which the organism can not reestablish itself to a normal living state. Usually, death for an individual cell implies the destruction of its membrane or walls or the destruction or loss of the cytoplasm. Then it is clear that “death” is well defined for a single cell. But it is clear too that it can not be defined something as “near death” for a single cell. And then, for us it is doubtful that we can advance a non trivial meaning to the term “near death” for a multicellular organism. The writers of the article are not defining the term. We think that what they are trying to do it is to inadvertently plant the idea in the readers that the event of a patient under cardiac arrest is kind of a slight contact with God, or some “spiritual beings”, or “The Supernatural”, and that by doing this stealthy, they pretend to be able to convince the reader more easily. Of course, a trivial definition of “near death”, given as an example, is that is an state in which the probability to die in the following 20 minutes is more than 70%.
Not always in Nature we can define proximity to certain quality or state. By exemple, no matter how much speed we could observe that a massive particle has in comparision with the light, for the particle itself the light has exactly the same very high speed as for us. Read about Special Relativity for more details. Other exemple is that observing some particular isotope we can never say what is its proximity to radioactive decay, we can only speak of the probability that it will decay by unit of time.
In regards with proposition 2 it is very important to see that a) We would have to accept the word or testimonies of several persons to believe that the patient perceived some real events in its surroundings while at arrest b) That the only way to have had these perceptions are the direct perception by his soul of the described events.
The assumption a) is highly uncertain, given that the ruling elites govern the majority of the people by means of religion and a few other instruments, and given that the ruling elites and the main religion hierarchies are very powerful and rich.
The assumption b) is evidently wrong, because if we accept the phenomenon of telepathy, then we could say that some perceptions of the people present during the cardiac arrest resuscitation were telepathically transmitted to the patient and received by the living neuronal cells in his brain. Of course, other explanation is that the patient could have perceived acoustically some signals and his brain was able to construct visual images from them. We are not saying that the only explanation is telepathy but that the existence of the soul is not the only explanation of the claimed perceptions.
Therefore, we have proved that the recent articles on LAD, in spite of alluding to hundreds of resuscitations, don´t prove the existence of the soul nor that the patient was in contact with “supernatural Gods or agents”.
We in ddxinet don´t believe in the existence of the soul and we are convinced that to believe in telepathy and in “naturally produced strange and not understood phenomena” is more scientifically acceptable then to believe in “Gods or things that disobey the laws of Nature” or “in the existence of the soul”.
Even if we are naive enough and believe in the testimonies of the patients and medical personnel described in the articles of LAD, a much more simple explanation than the existence of the soul is that what happened were natural phenomena like subliminal perceptions or, perhaps, telepathy.
Links to articles that try to prove LAD:
Largest study on resuscitated patients hints at consciousness after death
… BEC CREW
… WEDNESDAY, 08 OCTOBER 2014
Consciousness After Death: Strange Tales From the Frontiers of Resuscitation Medicine
… BY BRANDON KEIM 04.24.13 | 12:23 PM | PERMALINK
First hint of ‘life after death’ in biggest ever scientific study
Scientists Say ‘Life After Death’ May Be Possible, In A Way
Here is why is irrational to believe in the existence of the soul:
1 Nobody has shown ever, clearly for the skepticals, a simple soul. And a lot of people has made fortunes deceiving others with this. This is remarkable because according to the claims of some religions, it is possible to infere there should exist around 7 billions of souls of the dead “somewhere”. Not even one have appeared clearly to some of the billions of cameras around.
2 The belief in the souls is one of the foundations to believe later in the assertions of some very powerful and rich religions that control the people, “casually” very much at the advantage of the ruling elites.
3 Even the defenders of the existence of the soul have not ever tried to make a clear definition of “soul”. They know that they would get in trouble. They let the masses to “sense” their own definitions. This is common of the deceivers. They will never present a clear target to the skepticals.
4 If the soul were the residence of the intelligence and the memories, then
Why a damage to the brain damages our intelligence and memory?
Why do we need brain?
Why doesn´t one of the Supreme Priests or Monks of the main religions of the world command his immense medical staff to remove his brain with the sole intention to continue living as if nothing and so demostrate that the soul exist? This would shut off the allegations of those that claim that the soul does not exist. I know htat this action would be somewhat exagerated and dramatic. Maybe even if this Supreme in Something limits the experiment to the neocortex he would still convince de sceptics.
It is very easy and cheap to talk, cry, turn the eyes up or thrown onself over our belly simulating an airplane, but it is hard to demonstrate real magic.
5 How could exist a brain made of whatever substance is the soul, given that the soul is so thin and “ethereal” ?
6 How could the brain of the soul be so stupid or brilliant in exact correlation to the genes of the “natural” body of the person?
7 What bonds the soul to the bodies? Why people don’t loose their souls to a breeze? Are there “spiritual” breezes?
8 Does the souls interact gravitationally with common barionic matter? If this is the case, given that the souls pass through everything, Why are not all the souls at the center of the Earth?
9 Do the souls have organs?
10 Are the souls dressed, and which material is what makes their clothes?
11 Do the souls have eyes and ears, and if that is the case, what for?
12 What exactly is the mechanism by which the souls see or hear? How could the souls see or hear given that they are passed through by every single particle of common matter?
13 If the interaction between souls and ordinary matter is so weak or inexistent, why the mind of the souls is so tightly identical to the mind of our brains in every instant? Or is it the case that the mind of the soul is quite uncorrelated to what we perceive as our brainish physical mind?