how do you comunicate with the dead?

[Laika]

You don't. It is called cold reading. Anyone can do it, who is willing to learn.

You most certainly do. The phone tariff I'm on gives me 50 free minutes a month to the other side. Offpeak.

 

[heliocentric]

To provide evidence for the notion that consciousness persists after death... well you sort of have to be dead right? If you're not dead then at best you might be looking at the notion of consciousness persisting while dying.

Oh course, my point was by imposing a 24 hour rule youre ignoring almost all of the after-life experiences out there (since most occur within a shorter time span than the one you proposed).
Now im not saying youre wrong atall to self-impose your own criteria that needs to be met. But im glad i asked before hand otherwise i would have wasted alot of time posting up compelling evidence for NDE/OBE's that would actually fall outside of your personal criteria.

Agreed. Now it's time for that compelling evidence.

What form of after-death communication with the living would you accept to begin to reasonably speculate that actual communication with the 'dead' has taken place?
What medium would the deadperson have to communicate through? or would there not need to be a medium atall?
What about direct communication? i.e. a direct manifested form (ghost/spirit) communicating with a living person?

Im really just asking so as not to waste my time posting evidence that might fall outside of your own personal criteria.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

But if you want a genuine answer to a non-genuine question, 'yes' i do know the various medical/philosophical/everyday meangings of the word death.
What do you want to talk about now?

I'd like you to point out where exactly, in any of the responses you've made in this thread to date, you've actually demonstrated this alleged "understanding" (as you allude to it) of the term "Death" - because frankly I haven't manged to discern any such understanding on your part demonstrated whatsoever.

Hence, my asking the question in the first place.

 

[heliocentric]

I'd like you to point out where exactly, in any of the responses you've made in this thread to date, you've actually demonstrated this alleged "understanding" (as you allude to it) of the term "Death" - because frankly I haven't manged to discern any such understanding on your part demonstrated whatsoever.

Hence, my asking the question in the first place.

Where in my posts do you believe ive demonstrated a lack of understanding in relation to the concept of death?
You seem to have a very strange way of tip-toeing around the central issue in all of your posts to me, i wish youd simply state your opinions on this topic so things could move forward one way or another.
Otherwise this is a complete waste of time, and i really do not see the point.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Well, let me see now.... quite a pickle. Bear with me - Oooo, I know! How about the use of the phrase "after life", for starters?

 

[heliocentric]

*edited to read as a real opinion

I dont believe that it can ever be reasonably speculated that consciousness might persist after death

I disagree.
In the future i think it would be far more worth your while to clearly state your position early on to save both your time and mine btw, makes life alot of easier than posting insinuations and subtle jibes no?
Unless you actually derive some sort of pleasure from the latter 'debating' method, which (if that is the case) im frankly at a loss to understand.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Helio' old chap - would you mind terribly posting a direct post number link to that particular "quote" you're referencing there - I seem to be having some difficulty locating it within this thread except in your quote.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Oh course, my point was by imposing a 24 hour rule youre ignoring almost all of the after-life experiences out there (since most occur within a shorter time span than the one you proposed).
Now im not saying youre wrong atall to self-impose your own criteria that needs to be met. But im glad i asked before hand otherwise i would have wasted alot of time posting up compelling evidence for NDE/OBE's that would actually fall outside of your personal criteria.

NDEs/OOBEs are reproducible now and have been shown to be nothing more than hallucination. Additionally, natural operating room OOBE's have been under test at several hospitals by placing glaringly visible computer images in places that can only be seen when floating from above. Not one OOBE experiencer has known that the picture was even there; hence, more evidence that it's just hallucination. The evidence is pretty conclusive.

What form of after-death communication with the living would you accept to begin to reasonably speculate that actual communication with the 'dead' has taken place?

Visual and verbal would be a good start. You have got to figure that with tons of dead people floating around, they would be typing on everyone's computers at the very least.

What medium would the deadperson have to communicate through? or would there not need to be a medium atall?

Any medium that can be recorded, tested, and falsified.

What about direct communication? i.e. a direct manifested form (ghost/spirit) communicating with a living person?

You bet. That's good stuff there.

Im really just asking so as not to waste my time posting evidence that might fall outside of your own personal criteria.

It's so easy to convince me. Simply produce a real instance of whatever it is.

 

[heliocentric]

NDEs/OOBEs are reproducible now and have been shown to be nothing more than hallucination. Additionally, natural operating room OOBE's have been under test at several hospitals by placing glaringly visible computer images in places that can only be seen when floating from above. Not one OOBE experiencer has known that the picture was even there; hence, more evidence that it's just hallucination. The evidence is pretty conclusive.

Reproduciblity doesnt equate to hard evidence of hallucinations, we can trigger them now yes, but thats about all we can say, we still have very little idea of how they work. Infact Some researchers have concluded that OBEs are far too consistant/specific in their nature and context to be adequately labeled as hallucinations.
Although this is of course all immaterial as i dont know of any recent OBE's or studies involving OBE's that fall within your 24 hour period of death criteria.

It's so easy to convince me. Simply produce a real instance of whatever it is.

Well youve certainly given me a well rounded idea of what you would and wouldnt consider as compelling evidence. I think now we've got OBES out of the way, its worth looking at recorded phenomena of after-life communication.
I find personal accounts/reports to be incredibly usefull also, especially when you have consistant experiences/sightings by unrelated people in regards to a single location. However thats probably going beyond what youre likely to treat as evidence so we'll leave that be as well.
The difficulty now is simply picking one instance from a mountain of recorded data, i shall try and choose wisely.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Reproduciblity doesnt equate to hard evidence of hallucinations, we can trigger them now yes, but thats about all we can say, we still have very little idea of how they work. Infact Some researchers have concluded that OBEs are far too consistant/specific in their nature and context to be adequately labeled as hallucinations.
Although this is of course all immaterial as i dont know of any recent OBE's or studies involving OBE's that fall within your 24 hour period of death criteria.

It's not the reproducibility that is the hard evidence that OOBE's are hallucination. It's the intentional and clear placement of information in the environment that is never seen by the OOBE experiencer that is hard evidence the experience is hallucination. It's not very far fetched to consider that a brain not receiving adequate resources to operate correctly is going to produce some funky results and if consciousness happens to be mildly operational then it's going to perceive some interesting things.

Well youve certainly given me a well rounded idea of what you would and wouldnt consider as compelling evidence. I think now we've got OBES out of the way, its worth looking at recorded phenomena of after-life communication.
I find personal accounts/reports to be incredibly usefull also, especially when you have consistant experiences/sightings by unrelated people in regards to a single location. However thats probably going beyond what youre likely to treat as evidence so we'll leave that be as well.
The difficulty now is simply picking one instance from a mountain of recorded data, i shall try and choose wisely.

I find personal accounts very useful. Not as evidence for a fantastic claim but as evidence for various psychological phenomenoa. But yes, testimony about a fantastic objective event with no corresponding objective isn't credible.

Look forward to seeing what you come up with

 

[heliocentric]

It's not the reproducibility that is the hard evidence that OOBE's are hallucination. It's the intentional and clear placement of information in the environment that is never seen by the OOBE experiencer that is hard evidence the experience is hallucination. It's not very far fetched to consider that a brain not receiving adequate resources to operate correctly is going to produce some funky results and if consciousness happens to be mildly operational then it's going to perceive some interesting things.

I seem to remember hearing about a small study conducted, triggering OBE's
using some sort of neon lettering/symbols in a hidden area of the cieling that yielded some positive results. I'll try see if i can find any further information ot it.

I find personal accounts very useful. Not as evidence for a fantastic claim but as evidence for various psychological phenomenoa. But yes, testimony about a fantastic objective event with no corresponding objective isn't credible.

Look forward to seeing what you come up with

Yes i predicted that would be your position on personal accounts, i'll post some recorded data up at some point this week anyway..

 

[Nickelodeon]

Yes i predicted that would be your position on personal accounts, i'll post some recorded data up at some point this week anyway..

What, here?

 

[Sauna]

deleted

 

[heliocentric]

Forgot about this thread, i did actually make a short list of compelling evidence, i'll post some stuff up after newyear when i can be arsed and the booze and drugs have worn off.