Near Death Experience – Held by White Light
March 282010
For more information on near-death experiences (NDEs), go to the website of the International Association for Near-Death Studies at www.iands.org. The website offers a wealth of information on NDEs, local groups that meet to discuss NDEs and their ramifications, and the most current research. You can become a member for a small annual fee to receive regular updates on new research, different perspectives on the implications of NDEs for our lives and the world, and breaking news relating to near-death experiences.
Duration : 0:8:10
[youtube WOhtjodjiQE]
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
I want a near death …
I want a near death experience… with her. Mmmmmmm!
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
bangable are u …
bangable are u serious u need to get a life with your immature bet if she was fine chick with AIDS you wouldnt bang her would you no thought so
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
So i guess everyone …
So i guess everyone who has had a nde is lying your an idiot millions of people on this planet have said the exact same thing she has again shut up
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
your going to hell
your going to hell
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
u have problem man …
u have problem man in ur brain so best for u is SSTTFFUU
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
I’m sorry you feel …
I’m sorry you feel that way… but I still Love you. You are obviously angry and I trust your anger comes from injury, and for that I’m sorry. Yes, I am fat by many standards and no, I’m not the smartest person ever, but neither of these points addresses your earlier statments against Michaela. If it makes you feel better to vent your anger against me, so be it, but please don’t attack others and potentialy cause that anger to spread. Imagine a world of people who treat you as you treat others.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
Ah, great question. …
Ah, great question.
I just wrote a 2 hour email about this.
Whyat we have to understand is subjectivity and bias.
Some say recent findings prove “god”. Some say “no god” some say “something that we don’t call god but is” some say “who’s god there is only nature”
“energy of karma” etc etc etc.
On and on and on.
ALL subjective.
When WHO is interpreting the evidence decides the “truth” then it’s no longer SCIENCE
No, not science.
Human understanding is what’s down the toilet.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
I concede the …
I concede the scientific process is ill equipped to study this topic, but why is it that so many scientists feel the need to weigh in on it then? That aside, what is the scientific paradigm ever capable of drawing conclusions about? I don’t mean to be contrary or argumentative, but just bewildered as to why it is the only source of truth for so many when it itself seems to undermine any potential for it to define truth with certainty. Is science nihilistic in nature leading to a downward spiral?
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
In that light yes, …
In that light yes, they’re the same.
In fact, however, if you mix red and green up at stoplights…
Hmmm.
Please, it’s a dynamic vortex that you can’t crawl out of. Waste of time. That path of thought is. Completely. Non-productive.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
Look, Goose,
…
Look, Goose,
Time wasn’t necessarily always in existence.
Same goes for space.
And energy may have other forms were unaware of. Likely.
So when I say “other than” in quotations, it’s because the isue is unclear.
And no, “other-than” is not “here” or anywhere attached to “here”.
If space is expanding there there is a speed one can reach to catch up and surpass.
This makes expansion unclear.
Goose, if you say.
blue and red are both the same they are both color. Fine.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
I must have …
I must have misunderstood then, as I sometimes do, and for that I apologize again. I admit that it is refreshing to have a conversation involving science and reality that does not cite the bible or recall science class from the fourth grade. I don’t consider myself a scientist as much as a philosopher that dabbles in the spiritual, but that might just be from being frustrated by all religious dogma including that of science. My scientific knowledge is limited, but I do try to stay up-to-date.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
For the sake of …
For the sake of clarity, I will tell you that I believe in the uni of universe, and that there is only one universe relevant to any study or conjecture. When I spoke of higher dimensions, I was talking about those of our universe and not “parallel dimensions” or any alternate quantum realities. I was talking about our reality and not sci-fi… even if knowledge of a greater than visible reality is normally classified as such. I propose for your consideration that it is just as real.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
OK, I admit I’m …
OK, I admit I’m lost as to your paradigm. I said and meant dimensions, and I’m lost as to the source of the “other-thans”. Just as something has length, bredth, and height, it can extend to yet higher dimensions. All dimensions that touch something are real to it and part of it’s world, but I’m wondering if your “other-thans” statement implies that you at least don’t see them as an extention of the physical world. That what is not seen must be alien and “other-than”, not more of the same?
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
I give you much …
I give you much credit for finding words that encapsulate what I know is the truth. Thank you and bless you. It is no small feat considering how alien these concepts are to this world which spawned all languages. Words almost always fail to convey the greater order of things, so kudos again.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
Careful now, I do …
Careful now, I do believe that reproduction in a shallow gene-pool falls under the topic of evolution and natural selection, and I’d hate for you to loose your membership by endorsing such theories. Why do you even post your statements if you don’t answer questions and well meaning comment with anything but a repetition of your earlier statement with different phrasing? It make it appear that you are incapable of holding a dialog and are just repeating what was preached at you.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
shes cute
shes cute
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
It would be …
It would be completely imprudent to chase waterfalls here.
Goose, within sciencetific theorem, it can behoove and benefit to chase waterfalls, don’t get me wrong, but because of this catch 22 paradox, it’s not practical.
Alien theories, gov’t theores, god theories no god theories, 220 dimensional theories 10 dimensional theories, no dimensional theories and that’;s just getting warmed up.
Goosed, we CANT concern ourselves with the matters you’re discussing.
YOU STATED THE REASON YOURSELF.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
See, Goosed, allow …
See, Goosed, allow me the head of the class for 20 seconds here.
It’s not that these issues of entaglement etc aren’t interesting. They are. Very much so
The problem with them are that subjective seepage, opinionative bial, vial putrid belief (and don’t hink for a SECOND that I exclude the atheist from ’said’ sample group), take over and the findings are strew about. 2+2=5,6,7 and 8
We look at these issues, but science can’t draw conclusion. We need more data. (which you say we can get)
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
You need not …
You need not clarify about how scientists conduct themselves and which tools they do and do not have to ensure perfect objectivity and true north.
I have more plum-lines, anchors, compasses, calculators and sundials than I’ve ever read about existing.
And no, we do not ignore the uncomfortable truth.
If I am to state, or prove, that NOTHING IS FOR CERTAIN….then the paradox arises wherein MY VERY CLAIM TRUNCATES IT’S MEANING.
“Nothing is 100%, would be another.”
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
My annoyance of you …
My annoyance of you is unclear.
You don’t annoy me now whatsoever, in fact enjoy your aquaintence.
This is not to say you won’t find me in a pissy mood wherein I seem completely impersonal. Opposite of now.
For those times I apologize.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
“…do you mean ” …
“…do you mean “outside?” our physical universe?…
Quotation marks + Question mark. Around the word “outside”.
Of course the idea of “outside” our universe it fickle when taken as a literal proposition. Same with “before?”.
No, we can’t have a hair of certainty about these issues but we should at least understand that the
so -called “dimensions” or “other-thans” are likely not as they are now. ie, when and where are non sequiturs “here”; but, they are simple non starters “there”.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
Most of these …
Most of these experiences are glimpses of the true nature of reality. What we experience in life is a dream that dissolves when our mind believes itself to be dead. That state is like existing as all possible things at all possible times and trying to rationalise it is like trying to give form to the formless.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
“These people are …
“These people are lying and they know it.”
No. You think they’re lying, there’s a difference.
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
stfu u fat u …
stfu u fat u r stupid
March 28th, 2010 at 12:27 am
As one of “these …
As one of “these people”, I feel that I must ask what makes you think that we are lying, and that we know nothing of the sort. No offence meant to our Jewish siblings, but your accusations are the sanhedrin all over again. I could only match opinion for opinion if you were to merely claim that we were wrong, but for you to claim that we are knowingly lying demands a response. What makes you challenge my honesty?