Near Death as NON evidence for survival?

[Alexander1304]

[really?]

From what I've seen discussed on the Skeptiko forum the evidence people argue proving an afterlife remains as over reaching hopeful speculation. There are no facts for NDE's=afterlife. Ask yourself this. Where is the incontrovertible factual evidence NDE's are evidentiary of an afterlife?

[Alexander1304]

It is long story shot,but at least I got e-mails from some well-known NDE researchers/authors sending them the quotes from above quotes.Not going about discussing about afterlife, at least I got the same points from those responses that his treatment of NDE grossly wrong on the major points, especially in the light of recent data.
As for NDE as evidence for an afterlife- there are interesting certain types of cases, that are difficult to explain.This I know from my own research.Especially "Peak in Darien" cases.
And no,there is something going on beyond the mere speculation.Also,see my another thread

[really?]

[Alexander1304]

We all present our arguments - pro and con. If You think that con arguments are stronger - that's also just Your opinion, other see more strength in pro arguments. Kai is not the only smart person out there.And sometimes plays simply as "denier". Ah,sorry Kai/Doomsayer are right only becase they are ultr-skeptics,right? There are other smart persons too, who have different take on things than him. Many simply ad hoc arguments.Anyway,putting aside "life after death",whatever is in my opening post. Well known researchers pointed out that his(Kastenbaum) take on NDE is simply wrong in most respects.Also,I see no reason why I should value Kai's opinion more that Bruce Greyson or Jeff Long,and take on mediumship.,say,of Stephen Braude.I know,You are ultra-skeptic,so,You naturally support Kai and Doomsayer.I take another point,based on my own research/experience.BTW,Doomsayer is banned.
Now,go ahead and explain "Peak in Darrien" NDE cases. But not with ad hoc/made up theories

[SydneyPSIder]

[Alexander1304]

[Arouet]

[really?]

[Alexander1304]

What "incontrovetial evidence" is relevant to NDE? It is spontaneous phenomenon, experienced on the personal level. As for some people claim NDE=afterlife,first sometimes is it gross exaggeration.Some(many) researchers simply claim that for certain features of NDE afterlife hypothesis is the most straightforward. I also don't see the reason how the concept of "incontrovercial evidence" in any lessens the real experience of NDE survivors.They experienced it,they survived it, and all this talsk about "incontrovetial evidence" is just academic exercise for them - and rightly so.
So, again, "really?" ,you are in your style - even here you try to impose what "should" or awhat "shouldn't" matter,while in reality it is up to individual.
I just don't get - if you are so dogmatic,so closed,so intolerant to the ideas of paranormal/afterlife - stay aside,read and laugh.But no - you are going to enter discussion,to promote your dogmatism,to impose your view on what "hould/shouldn't" matter.what are you looking here for?
UPDATE:One famous NDE survivor(Rene Jorgensen) movet to the town I live,suggested to meet personally.Would be interesting

[really?]

[Alexander1304]

[SydneyPSIder]

[really?]