Sure it can. The anesthesologist ensures that you get enough oxygen to avoid brain damage, but that doesn't mean he ensures you get the normal amount. And some surgery involves lowering the body temperature so that the body needs/uses less oxygen.

Brent

On 4/4/2013 11:27 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote:
NDE during surgery cannot be due to lack of oxygen


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:

    On 4/4/2013 11:02 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:


    On Thursday, April 4, 2013 12:11:36 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:

        On 4/4/2013 8:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
        >
        > On 04 Apr 2013, at 15:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
        >
        >> 
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-03-memories-death-real-reality.html
        >>
        >> "Working together, researchers at the Coma Science Group (Directed 
by Steven
        Laureys)
        >> and the University of Li�ge's Cognitive Psychology Research 
(Professor
        Serge Br�dart
        >> and Hedwige Dehon), have looked into the memories of NDE with the 
hypothesis
        that if
        >> the memories of NDE were pure products of the imagination, their
        phenomenological
        >> characteristics (e.g., sensorial, self referential, emotional, etc. 
details)
        should be
        >> closer to those of imagined memories. Conversely, if the NDE are 
experienced
        in a way
        >> similar to that of reality, their characteristics would be closer to 
the
        memories of
        >> real events.
        >>
        >> The researchers compared the responses provided by three groups of 
patients,
        each of
        >> which had survived (in a different manner) a coma, and a group of 
healthy
        volunteers.
        >> They studied the memories of NDE and the memories of real events and
        imagined events
        >> with the help of a questionnaire which evaluated the phenomenological
        characteristics
        >> of the memories. The results were surprising. From the perspective 
being
        studied, not
        >> only were the NDEs not similar to the memories of imagined events, 
but the
        >> phenomenological characteristics inherent to the memories of real 
events
        (e.g. memories
        >> of sensorial details) are even more numerous in the memories of NDE 
than in the
        >> memories of real events."
        >>
        >> These results fully support a sense based model of physics. It makes 
a
        falsifiable
        >> claim that if NDEs are dreams, then they should be like all other 
dreams.
        While this
        >> could still mean that being close to death gives you massively 
potent dream
        for some
        >> reason, it still points to a universe where realism, matter, and 
public
        events are
        >> derived from a universal foundation which is sensory rather than 
logical.
        >
        > With comp, we already know that the physical is a construct of the 
mind (of the
        > universal numbers), so your point here is precisely not valid. Indeed 
you
        seem to need
        > some primary matter to distinguish the "sensory" based on carbon from 
the one
        which we
        > could be based on silicon, or numbers.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >> Reality is the dream of eternity made temporarily public, not a 
collection
        of objects
        >> making temporary illusions.
        >
        > The self-referentially correct universal machine agrees with this. 
100%. It
        is not
        > obvious at all, but that's what the UDA explains.
        >
        > On this you are more correct than many materialist, but you fit 
perfectly
        well with
        > comp. That is why I find a bit sad that you insist that comp is 
false. Keep
        in mind
        > that, unlike what many are thinking, comp is incompatible with even 
very weak
        form of
        > materialism. So much that physics should be entirely derivable from 
the
        global FPI on
        > arithmetic. The math confirms this up to now, if we agree with some 
rather
        standard
        > definition in the theory of knowledge.
        >
        > It would be interesting to see if some drug does not also produce 
more of the
        > phenomenological characteristics inherent to the memories of real 
events.
        Now, I have
        > not read those papers, and as you notice, it might only be more "potent 
dream".


        Dreams are not "pure products of imagination", and nobody has ever 
suggested
        they were.
        The researchers compared NDE reports to memories of real and imagined 
events,
        not dreams.
        But what does "memory of an imagined event" mean?  It means the 
researchers
        asked the
        subjects to imagine remembering something that didn't happen. They 
discovered
        that this
        did not have as much sensory detail as the memories of real events and 
NDEs.
         Dog bites man.


    But the memories of the NDEs are clearer than the real events. Common sense 
tells
    us that memories of imagined events or dreams would be less detailed.

    Common sense tells us that events that have a lot of emotional content 
(like being
    near death) are going to be remember in more detail.  That's why the 
researchers
asked the subjects to remember real and imagined events that had emotional content. But how likely are they to have had an emotional event comparable to nearly dying? And the real events were further in the past than the NDE. And as John Clark and
    others have pointed out the NDE stories never have any new information.  
All of this
    is easily explained by assuming that experience is produced by the brain 
and NDEs
    are dreams that occur during trauma and/or lack to oxygen.  Sensory-motive 
theory
    would predict that experience is independent of those merely physical 
brains.

    Brent
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Everything List" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
email to
    everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
    To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
    <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
    Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2013.0.3267 / Virus Database: 3162/6223 - Release Date: 04/03/13


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to