« “Wholly Spirit” searches for a plausible God | Main | “God’s Christian Warriors” shows crazy side of religion »

August 25, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

those experiments are pure genius! I haven't been keeping up with the Science Times, so thanks for the link.

In regards to your main point here, Real Live Preacher posted something quite apposite just yesterday: http://www.reallivepreacher.com/node/1400

I had been looking for this article for some time after I had a debate with someone about OBE.


Alright, hands up everybody who's actually had an OBE who thinks that what is being described in this bit of scientific news as an 'OBE' is anywhere close to what an OBE is actually experienced like?


Thought not.

Honestly, I think either the media or whoever should be more considered & responsible with their sensationalist reporting.

What is being described here is nothing AT ALL like an OBE as is experienced. At best, it would perhaps only explain/describe perhaps one very small aspect of many different parts of what makes up an OBE experience. At best.

And I'm almost entirely sure anyone who's had an OBE and understands this science report would agree. Which makes one wonder how do these people know this is like an'OBE'? Where the subjects of the experiment experienced OBE'rs? Hmmm, I seriously doubt it, which makes me seriously doubt the validity of equating this lab induced experience with the OBE phenomena?

Of course, the actual research is great and amazing. It's the reporting of it which is dubious.

For example, when this report came out initially on the BBC website, it quoted one of the scientists who conducted the experiment as clearly saying something along the lines of 'we don't know that what we have reproduced in the lab is neccessarily related to the OBE phenomena'. In a subsequent updated article on this story, BBC has ommited this caveat.

A sign of the (pro-atheistic) times? Who knows.

However, as an ex-OBE'er, I can state that what is described in this article is akin to equating an electic shock in the laboratory, to the electricity of hearing a beautiful piece of music live. No comparison except perhaps on a semantic level.....

The article stated: “they feel as if they have left their bodies.”

Brian stated: “Scientists have been able to induce out-of-body experiences in healthy people.”

The article stated: Scientists Induce Out-of-Body Sensation

Brian stated: “that science has pretty darn good explanations for almost everything that religious belief systems take on faith to be supernatural or metaphysical.”

First the induced out of body experiences. This experiment may have shown the human capacity of projecting feelings onto another object, which may describe sympathy (i.e. not compassion) in better detail. The headline is very misleading and sensationalism at its best but this is how journalists get their potential readers attention to read their articles.

As someone that has had a series of dreams that I later found out in my research are called garden dreams and visitations it leaves one with the strong impression there is more to this world than meets the eye. There appears to be an underlying reality beyond most scientists’ materialistic paradigm. The interesting part about this type of dream is one can remember them 17 years later as if they just happened 5 minutes ago and with such clarity it is beyond explanation. Most dreams I forget immediately after I wake up and these three dreams appeared more real and I might add more beautiful than my waking state.

If these dreams were just all within my brain and control, I would have them every night even during waking moments. Honestly: I would not even want to participate in this world. These did not appear to be hallucinations as I have studied those phenomena and those are usually drug induced. But experiences can be very very misleading so these dreams did not convince me of another reality (beyond doubt) but did give me food for thought.

Now the statement that scientists have explanations for just about everything religious folks take on faith. I am not going to defend religious beliefs here, as much is dogma, but the supernatural and the metaphysical. Spend time watching those ultra skeptics (who claim to understand the scientific method but show no evidence of it) that try to debunk everything from UFO’s to mediums and you will find that often they pick and choose parts of the phenomena to debunk. In their defense they find much fraud and illusionary thinking.

In my mind at least the ultra skeptics that do debunking are the best example in the world of materialistic paradigm paralysis.

I just saw a medium on TV last night and in my mind she was a joke. General statements like your dead son (committed suicide) says: he loves you and he is ok now. I could not detect one hit. In her defense I did not watch her other readings. But what was interesting in that one reading I did not detect a hit but her words brought such comfort to the grieving parents. We tend to believe what we want to believe in spite of the evidence.

William Crookes a great scientist and others found at least two mediums that were able to perform feats that were beyond materialistic explanations. And fellow scientists that lived within several miles of the phenomena would refuse to experience and verify/debunk these feats for themselves. So much for scientists being open to new discoveries.

A materialistic paradigm can be as restrictive as a religious paradigm. Maybe the key to effective research is to not get caught up in either one but this is exponentially easier to say than to do. We humans find it nearly impossible to be a witness to our own paradigms. It almost always takes a significant emotional event to shake us loose from our cherished beliefs.

This is the address for an interesting article that came to mind towards the end of your piece, where you're wondering about science and the final mystery. Somebody seems to think they've got it.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.