tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post7545967342070503739..comments2024-03-25T14:09:59.347-05:00Comments on Augoeides: Questioning Eben AlexanderScott Stenwickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-71551015717826118692014-08-19T12:14:53.572-05:002014-08-19T12:14:53.572-05:00My point is not that Alexander necessarily remembe...My point is not that Alexander <i>necessarily</i> remembers his experience wrong, just that because it was written so long after the fact and memory is so fallible it <i>might</i> not have happened as he recalls. So his account cannot be considered "proof" of anything.<br /><br />I personally believe Alexander most likely did have a legitimate near-death experience. His account contains features that match those of many others, and we know that significant percentage of individuals have such experiences. But there's nothing that makes Alexander's account better than many others that have been widely reported in the paranormal literature.<br /><br />It's no surprise to me that Alexander got carried away with the "specialness" of his experience. Those who have them generally describe them as incredibly significant, and on top of that neurosurgeons tend to be pretty arrogant. I mean, you have to be, to be willing to open up somebody's brain and start cutting. Absolute confidence is essential, and you can't second-guess yourself.<br /><br />But when that same arrogance mixes with religiosity, you get a title like "Proof of Heaven" - when nothing he experienced suggests that the Christian model of heaven is more correct than all the others, and nothing in his personal subjective account constitutes any sort of proof. Evidence, sure, but not proof.Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-48224054889899371822014-08-19T05:10:57.237-05:002014-08-19T05:10:57.237-05:00No you do not NEED RAIN to have a RAINBOW. The DEW...No you do not NEED RAIN to have a RAINBOW. The DEW can create a rainbow. Please do check on google for pictures of the rainbow. I did and not far from Eben's place was a double rainbow. And there are pictures of it.<br /><br />So he is telling the truth about it.<br />Maybe the weatherman should go study again how the rainbow will show and why. I had as a child a rare experience. Our garden had a fence. Out of that fence was raining but inside the fence not 1 drop. Was like somebody just cut the cloud so precise that the drops will only fall out of the garden and not in the garden. If that is possible.........the same cloud can make the rainbow show. The weatherman in my village did not see that cloud....but I felt the drops. Makes you think doesn't it?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10577192844166171850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-13648102585613601902013-04-22T09:25:03.341-05:002013-04-22T09:25:03.341-05:00As I see it the biggest problem with Alexander'...As I see it the biggest problem with Alexander's book is that it was written months after the fact. Memory, especially of events experienced in an altered state of consciousness, is not fixed and is profoundly subject to change as the events in question are remembered and re-remembered. Anyone familiar with neuroscience has to understand that, and yet, Alexander puts his experience forth as though his recall of it is perfect and accurate. Maybe he remembers that there was a rainbow, there just wasn't one.<br /><br />The marketing angle is a secondary concern to me, but an important one. He calls his book "proof of heaven." Why? There's absolutely nothing in his account that would support any particular sectarian interpretation of what happens in the afterlife. He sees the tunnel and white light, senses the presence of some sort of divine consciousness, and really that's about it. The book more accurately could be called "Evidence of an Afterlife" - which it is, even though there are a lot of questions about the accuracy of the account. But my guess is that title wouldn't have sold nearly as many books. Scott Stenwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12389664381513219613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7294505416127496842.post-31180859609964564712013-04-20T21:21:01.495-05:002013-04-20T21:21:01.495-05:00I have just read Eben Alexanders book and I am ver...I have just read Eben Alexanders book and I am very uncomfortable with both the inconsistencies you mention among others<br /><br />-http://www.salon.com/2012/11/26/dr_eben_alexanders_so_called_after_life/ re the non fuctioning cortex<br />-Here is an amusing comment from an Amazon reviewer<br /><br />"As a meteorologist I was fascinated, particularly when reading Chapter 21 The Rainbow, at how wonderfully the weather seemed to change according to the stages of his illness. I wouldn't have thought about it that much, had it not been stressed several times in the book. It was a lovely sunny day, the day before he went into hospital, then it rained solidly while he was in a coma, then Ta-da! a rainbow popped out shortly before he awoke. I thought, how wonderful, but surely this is too good to be true! Sadly it was too good to be true.<br />Out if interest I contacted Lynchburg regional airport and asked if they had records for Lynchburg for November 2008. Yes they did. It is true that the day before he went to hospital was sunny. However the day when he said it started raining was cloudless. The next day was also sunny and dry. And the next day was foggy but...dry! Then it did rain significantly for two days (not five as said in the book).<br />Now the day of the rainbow is interesting. It was clear and frosty in the morning (30F) and then a fine and sunny DRY day. No rain at all! Now dont you need rain to get a RAINbow?<br />Anyway given these, well, large distortions of the truth regarding the weather, I would place serious doubt on his Heaven testimony. Maybe he exaggerated all that as well? It is very likely. In a courtroom his credibility would be destroyed by this point.<br />As a scientist I need the whole truth and nothing but the truth to believe in someones "story". It seems that the scientist Dr. Eben got a little bit carried away with his beautiful dream."<br /><br />Apart from that I find the whole Evangelical tone - his constant repetition of his, his experience and his diseases- 'specialness' as worrying."<br /><br />Also his apparent lack of psychological self awareness as evidenced in several anecdotes not least the description of his depression where he continually puts the resposibility of awareness of his condition onto his loved ones as if he was a confused adolescent needing reparenting.<br /><br />and then of course the whole marketing stratergy /New Age chat circuit-Oprah et al..<br /><br />Ive been interested in NDE for several decades but Im really concerned by people such as these muddying the waters or researchers such as Melvin Morse, who are clearly disturbed http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/08/melvin-morse-waterboarding_n_1757884.html<br />Rachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00840418081783191234noreply@blogger.com