Robert A. Monroe.

Whilst listening to Binaural beats and meditating.... presumably Robert A. Monroe contacted a spirit being which took him through time and space and he met other humans and..... yes.... aliens. This is in his book "Ultimate Journey"

Fantastical... no?

One would definitely question one if not many and all parts of these supposed OBE's.....

Thinking that in fact they could be just simple IMAGINATION....


So... I would say, for the general public and for general proof of an OBE we would logically ( as the Vulcans would say ) be looking for some sort of VERIFIABLE proof, no?

Well, according to one test, I read that Monroe and some others attempted to read a 4 or 5 digit or so number which was kept in a different room. ( so they had to OBE and read the number while OBE. )

Scientifically, this does seem like an acceptable test as long as everything is secure.

All attempts failed....except....

Supposedly Monroe got the number correct ONE time and was unable to repeat it.

(Science usually dictates that an experiment must be repeatable.)

So there is my story....

My question on this topic does still stand though....


The question is:

How do you Scientifically prove you have had an OBE?

Does scientific laboratory testing of OBE's exist?

i personally looked at a clock.

Here's a thought.

experience one yourself..using whatever evidence you need to suffice.

Have a productive evening.

Supermodel,

       I cannot.

wrote on Aug 19^th, 2010 at 12:18am:

Supermodel,        I cannot.

:-/ Sorry. I experienced one myself by paying attention to the clock near my bed.

When I "returned", I quickly looked at my clock (Was facing the other way) and the time was the same.

I was absolutely amazed. I wasn't aware of what happened at first, but the minute I tried washing the few dishes in my sink and I couldn't manipulate the knobs, it gave me a clue.  :)

Jehovah,

I think scientific proof is irrelavant and a misguided focus.  If you had one person who could claim they went out of body and verified a 5 digit number, what would that be proof of?  And if they did so, to say they "had to be out of body in order to do it" is false logic.  You'd only have proof of the correct numbers but not proof of their subjective experience.

The reason I say it's irrelavant is because to "go out of body" isn't a physical experience.  You are assuming that we are "in" our bodies and that an OBE means to go out of that body.  Try thinking of the concept of OBE differently.  The mind and consciousness are not physical things.  They are not contained inside the physical body.  You could say they are focused there, but they are not contained there.  Going out of body is nothing more than switching your focus of mind and consciousness from the (idea of) the body to some other area.  The classic definition contains the concept of being able to experience something that you could not have experienced through normal physical senses.

Do you see where the false logic is coming into play now?  You are wanting to prove one thing by a demonstration of something completely unrelated.  Getting the 5-digit number doesn't prove you left your body, and it doesn't prove you are ever "in" your body.  All it proves is that you gained the correct information of that 5 digit number. 

Supermodel,

I'm laughing that you manage to have an OBE and all you did was want to wash dishes!!  I'm just kidding.  I have the same kind of experiences.  It's those little things that happen in them, like not being able to work the knobs, that give us a clue to the nature of our reality.  Did you immediately awaken after you realized you were out of body?

Vicky

Poor Jehova,

I emphasize with you, but posting this across numerous forums will not help. You will always have to believe what people tell you - or try experience something yourself.

I thought you have "spoken" to Cindy? At least you posted something along the lines in the TMI forums.

I hope you can find some purpose in life and some light even without 100% hard scientific proof, which is not available. Only a lot of hints - and that is something, isnt it?

Chrwe

@vicky

Just the virgo in me I suppose. A pet peeve is dishes in the sink. I remember passing the kitchen seeing a black bowl and a fork so I tried to turn the knobs.

Nothing happened and that confused me so I said forget it. I got back in bed, looking at the clock.

Thats when I jolted back in my body, facing the wall. I immediately turned to the clock and it was the same time.

Later I went to the kitchen and what do you know, the same items in the sink in my  OBE were in the sink physically.

My daughter eats late at times so I'm sure she did that after I went to bed for the evening.

Supermodel, that is really cool!  And speaking of proof, I wouldn't need anything more than that...what you saw and saw again in two different states of being ought to make anyone experiencing it believe it.  If not, well, then some choose not to believe anything...   

chrwe...your faith is refreshing! Your light is showing...

usetawuz wrote on Aug 19^th, 2010 at 2:11pm:

Supermodel, that is really cool!  And speaking of proof, I wouldn't need anything more than that...what you saw and saw again in two different states of being ought to make anyone experiencing it believe it.  If not, well, then some choose not to believe anything...

Supermodel,

I agree, that's a neat experience with enough external proof to validate it.   

I notice a lot of brief OBEs of either getting out of bed or returning to bed, and seeing my bedroom thinking I'm awake.  But then I physically wake up and realize I was having an OBE. 

I don't do it anymore, but many years ago used to sleep wearing a sleep mask to keep the light out.  And I used to notice more OBEs that way just because of the fact that I'd be "awake" and aware lying in bed and had full visual ability of my bedroom, and I'd just lie there for a few moments thinking, not wanting to get up yet.  Then I'd physically awaken and realize that I still have my sleep mask covering my eyes!  Of course that told me I was having an OBE.  It's funny how we have to sift through logical thinking before we can arrive at these types of things sometimes because the experience is so much just like physical waking consciousness. 

Vicky   

Thanks guys.

Vicky--that's pretty awesome about the sleep mask over your eyes. I wish I could OBE more often. Now that I KNOW what it is, I may try to have some fun with it this time!

Hi Jehovah,

Around twenty years ago after getting my hands on TMI's Gateway Home Series and using the tapes (CDs weren't invented or in circulation yet ::)) as instructed, I started having OOB dreams: One had me simply staring at my dirty dishes in the kitchen sink for over a minute (Supermodel I'm not kidding! ;D), one had me inside my brain watching hundreds of massive bolts of lightning and electrical charges going off (the noise was something you tend not to forget) and one had me re-entering my sleeping physical body backwards (my nonphysical eyes were momentarily looking out through my physical feet!.. it felt like what it must be like wearing a straight jacket or something...and I then righted myself and awoke instantly to a good laugh). Because I experienced these while in an unconscious or sleep state, although I was having a blast I still wasn't quite convinced of their validity.

So, after still not having a classic OOBE for several months and thinking I never would, I decided one evening *to pretend* to have an OOBE. Why not? What did I have to lose? I would just *use my imagination* and have some fun. So, with eyes closed I used my mind's eye and watched myself (in a long, narrow mirror on the wall where there's usually a headboard) slowly rise upward, leaving my body to hoover up near the ceiling. I watched my body below, no big deal...I looked around my apartment, everything appeared normal, crystal clear...until I saw a milky white human form move towards the dining room window. I instantly knew who it was and what was on their mind. I knew the person's physical body was actually asleep elsewhere and what I was seeing was their 'OOB body'. I was so astonished I instantly zapped back into my physical body and woke up (when did I fall asleep?) and later verified with that friend the information I had received while we apparently had both been 'OOB' (what that person had been thinking). I did not previously know and could not have known such info without the 'OOB' experience. The friend was so rattled by what I knew that they wouldn't talk to me for over a year, but oh well ::). It turned out to be the only OOBE I've ever had at will, while fully conscious. Did it convince me, finally? Yes. It's wasn't a new belief...it was and is a Knowing which can only come from personal experience.

Fast forward to 2001 and I find Bruce Moen's discoveries on the internet: The OOBE is not required to explore alternate states of consciousness; using the imagination with his technique called Focused Attention (Bob Monroe called it Phasing); gathering previously unknown and verifiable info from directly experiencing the afterlife yourself (don't have to rely on others and their beliefs) to get your own proof. And I went for it. I had a gold mine! Although I was unsure of how to go about it, after reading Bruce's book I decided that if he could do it, so could I. And sure enough, I began a journey which eventually led to a retrieval situation, at the behest of my deceased Mom, and received information I had not previously known. And it's happened many times since.

So, Jehovah, go for it. Why not? What have you got to lose?

Much love ;),

Ginny

It's late and my brain is contorting itself. Please bear with me.  :-X

This is the closest thing I've seen so far:

"The VERITAS Research Program of the Laboratory for Advances in Consciousness and Health (formerly the Human Energy Systems Laboratory) in the Department of Psychology at the University of Arizona was created primarily to test the hypothesis that the consciousness (or personality or identity) of a person survives physical death." From the website.

Dr. Gary E. Schwartz founded this lab, if memory serves. He's authored a few books on the subject.

Another is IONS (The Institute of Noetic Sciences).

I think Consciousness Studies is the field that is trying to approach the general subject area from a scientific perspective. As far as I can tell it's still on the fringe.

As I understand things, and I'm not a scientist, science is five-sensory. Multisensory perception is beyond its domain and capabilities. Since there's a requirement that something (here an experience) be observable, repeatable and then subject to peer review, I don't think we'll get anywhere using the scientific method as our means and standard of proof. That science has made great progress for all of us in the physical domain is to be respected, but in modern times it has asserted itself as the arbiter of secular (or all) truth, or at least that's the status that people have given it. Such authority as it seems to extend to things beyond the five senses is, I think, beyond its mandate and no longer pure science as I understand it, but "scientism," a belief system in itself.

As we are dealing with experiences that are radically subjective, proof must be had on that basis, subjectively. Using your reason and through repeated experiences of the same kind, along with partnering with others whenever possible, should prove to you that your experiences are real (or not). This is empirical in the philosophical sense, if not strictly scientific, and is the best any of us can do for now.

From Wikipedia:

"In philosophy, empiricism is a theory of knowledge that asserts that knowledge arises from evidence gathered via sense experience. Empiricism is one of several competing views that predominate in the study of human knowledge, known as epistemology. Empiricism emphasizes the role of experience and evidence, especially sensory perception, in the formation of ideas, over the notion of innate ideas or tradition.

In a related sense, empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes those aspects of scientific knowledge that are closely related to evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world, rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation. Hence, science is considered to be methodologically empirical in nature."

Again, note the emphasis on sensory experience, which means five-sensory, not multisensory. If we substitute multisensory for five-sensory, then i think our approach through experience and observation is empirical. I think TMI and Bruce have proven that such experiences are repeatable. But for now our proof is subjective and inter-subjective, and that's the best we can expect.

Hope this helps!  :)

Rob

Along a similar line to the oroginal post, I downloaded some of these binaural programs for my iPod. Assuming they work is there any way I can help them along, so far I haven't had much success, does it take time?

Jehovah, I've had five major hits so far.

One was when I saw the BST where (at least some) Islamic suicide bombers go when they die.  I described it as being rectangular, and longer than it was wide; and Berserk showed me an excerpt from a book by Emmanuel Swedenborg, from the 1700s, where he described it the same way.  This was the secret garden of paradise described by Marco Polo; the original hashashin, when drugged and woken there, believed they had died and gone to heaven, even while still alive, and that BST developed as a result.  As a result of this, and another experience involving a prayer to Allah, I have been reconciled with Islam, although I am still not Muslim.

The second was when I went to the individualised BST that was inhabited by the spirit of Jay Van Andel, one of the late co-founders of the Amway Corporation.  I had not seen a recent photo of Van Andel prior to the dream, and was able to verify his appearance via a Google search, after I woke up.

http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/legacy/Press/NewsReleases/images/jayvanandel.jpg

The third was when I performed an open-handed evocation of the archangel Raphael, and described him as having been around 12 feet tall.  This was corroborated by a fellow magician who had seen him as having that height, and was also partly verified by Google artwork as well.  Raphael is a very effective healer, and very friendly.

http://www.pyracantha.com/images/raphael.jpg

The fourth was when, initially viewing this image on a magazine cover, I was able to correctly identify it as the archangel Michael, before reading who it was, as a result of a couple of brief evocations I have done with him, as well.  Michael is a wonderful angel.  His offices are evocation and exorcism, and he also often meets members of Judaism in Near Death Experiences.  He is a large presence, and very powerful, but he exudes much calm and solar energy, as well.
http://www.thefaeriesandangelsmagazine.com/resources/Michael72CR.JPG?timestamp=1245284737682

The fifth was when, reading a book on remote viewing, the book began to describe a building that I correctly identified as Auschwitz, two pages before the name was mentioned.  I had a very strong sense of negative energy from the description, and had not, to my knowledge, seen imagery of Auschwitz prior.

http://www.krakow-poland.com/image_magic.php?title=x&imgid=becc&width=gaa&height=a&ext=jpg

These might be considered small things, perhaps; but they add up over time.

Jehovah,

Your own experience is the only evidence that will convince you.   For those of us who have experienced OBEs no other evidence is necessary.  If you want to check out some published scientific inquiries  here's a list you could start with at http://obebibliography.info/science.htm

It only covers some of the scientific inquiries between 1834 and 2003 but  I'm sure a little Googling would find more for you to study.

Bruce

Thanks for the posts....

Don't get me wrong, I WANT proof. I want to prove to myself that this is real. I DO.

I just have very strict rules for my acceptance of anything this off the wall.

By the way, the scientific explanation for OBE's which can actually be triggered by manipulating the brain:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/afterlife/science-life-after-death.htm/printable

"Blanke determined that by electrically stimulating the woman's angular gyrus, a part of the temporal parietal junction, he could induce her OBEs. What's remarkable is that the patient experienced an OBE each time her angular gyrus was arbitrarily stimulated."

Edit: The above testing proves (sadly) to me scientifically that OBE's are completely normal, natural, and directly connected to the body

Hello Jehova,

one really has to learn to apply the same strict rules of proof to science as you do to religion.

This means, in case of this article:

1) Be sure that producing an "NDE" through stimulating the angular gyrus is exactly the same as an NDA which, according to articles I read, it did not, it was "just" similar. It is well known that you can induce parts of NDE`s with various methods. This fact alone should let you doubt that ONE explanation fits all. Note also there is absolutely no explanation in this article how the angular gyrus should be stimulated in the various kind of death situations people find themselves in.

2) examine the sources and read through the actual experiment. Source: New York Times? Would you ever quote the New York Times in an article you write to your professor? I know my teachers would have thrown something like this right in the bin as "unscientific way of presenting evidence".

3) read the end of the article too and quote it - it is not scientific to leave out the fazit

"NDEs may be a result of REM intrusion, triggered in the brain stem. But OBEs are controlled by a region of the higher brain, which is clinically dead when NDEs occur. What's more, it seems logical to believe that the higher brain must still function in order to interpret the sensations produced by the REM intrusion triggered in the brain stem.

Even though combining the University of Kentucky and Blanke theories does not produce an explanation for NDEs, it does not mean that either theory is wrong. Research in one area often leads to a breakthrough in another. Perhaps we will find out that an organic function is indeed behind NDEs.

If neurology does come up with the definitive explanation for NDEs, the mystery may still remain. Science could explain the "how," while leaving the "why" unanswered. Discovering an explanation for NDEs may reveal a door to the metaphysical world, which could possibly be unlocked -- and explored -- by science.

As physician Dr. Melvin Morse wrote, "Simply because religious experiences are brain-based does not automatically lessen or demean their spiritual significance. Indeed, the findings of neurological substrates to religious experiences can be argued to provide evidence for their objective reality" [source: Morse]."


To cut the above short: The thing something is MADE OF is not identical to what the thing IS.

wrote on Sep 5^th, 2010 at 8:27am:

"Blanke determined that by electrically stimulating the woman's angular gyrus, a part of the temporal parietal junction, he could induce her OBEs. What's remarkable is that the patient experienced an OBE each time her angular gyrus was arbitrarily stimulated." Edit: The above testing proves (sadly) to me scientifically that OBE's are completely normal, natural, and directly connected to the body

Something to realise here is that, (to quote a Native American I once read) "the how does not necessarily explain the why."

Science can, and very likely will, eventually come up with explanations for many of these processes, that will satisfy it.  I truthfully would not want it any other way.  Verifiable Magick is not anti-Scientific, in the least; rather it is the utilisation of principles that mainstream Science has not always caught up with, in its' own thinking.  It can be beneficial, here, to remember what Science's roots were.

The utilisation of methods such as Ginny's, and Bruce's, will eventually lead to the accumulation of verifiable data and knowledge, which you will come to realise were unknowable by any conventional means.  Once that happens, very simple logic will dictate that the process described here, must be legitimate.  Bruce's method *is* Scientific according to the core definition of the word; it is verifiably reproducible, although not necessarily by strictly *mechanical* means, and that is where certain types of skepticism can get tripped up.

Bruce has mentioned coming from an engineering background himself, and I thus know that he would not tell you to throw the left hemisphere of your brain completely out the window.  It is, however, necessary to learn to use both in tandem, and that can take some time.

From memory, Bob Monroe once wrote about some experiments that were conducted with him, that involved a Faraday cage, as well.  You may find reading those to be interesting.  They to some extent implied that OBEs do have at least a partially electromagnetic component.

Jehovah,

It appears from the reference in your last post that you are looking for proof that we continue to exist after physical death, and that for you, proof that OBEs are real is a way to get that proof?

Personally, for me, proving that OBEs are real could never do that because the OBEer is physically alive and so there will always be alternative "brain" explanations.  However, in many of the OBE cases in the literature it is mentioned that the OBEer claimed contact with people who were known to be deceased.  In my view this claim can be tested based upon information the deceased might provide.

Specifically, if the OBEer receives verifiable information he/she has absolutely no way of knowing, accept by contact with the deceased, we have evidence the deceased person continues to exist.  Such evidence will not provide proof to anyone but the experiencer until scientists get serious about rigorous, large scale, controlled studies.  Unfortunately, scientists working in this field are opposed by other scientists who believe such studies to be taboo.

For my part I just focus on teaching anyone interested a simple set of concepts, techniques and exercises that provides a method anyone can use to directly experience evidence gathering.  I've been witness to success by workshop participants in countries around the world
 
If a left-brained engineer can do it, anyone can do it.

Bruce

Bruce Moen wrote on Sep 5^th, 2010 at 12:58pm:

If a left-brained engineer can do it, anyone can do it.

Oh no!! :(  Bruce, I'm sorry!  That really wasn't meant to be a put down at all!  I just know that you wrote that you did have a lot of trouble getting rid of the Interpreter, as you called it, for a while, and truthfully I have had that difficulty as well.

Getting past the part of ourselves which is that analytical does seem to be difficult for most of us.

Petrus,

Hey, no offense taken.  Ask my wife and she will tell you I am still a logical, rational, literal-to-a-fault engineer type  :-/.  It has it's advantages in the complex techy world, and, disadvantages in the emotional and social world but  I'm comfortable with it!

Bruce

Well, the list of possible proofs for the afterlife mostly fall into one of these categories:

1. Ghosts
2 & 3 OBE / NDE (different but grouped together regardless as being similar)
4. Psychic Mediums

IF either of these can be taken in a laboratory set up and tested to come out successful in a repeatable experiment under controlled settings, a scientist would be forced to admit the after life is more than just a theory and could very likely be true.

1. I rule out ghosts simply because it is the least testable and provable of these choices. So let's throw that one out the door.

2. In order to test OBE and proof it's not imagination we need a precise test. Not something that is likely to be successful... therefore, OBE can also be thrown out the window because it cannot effectively be tested. Something psychical in real life like an image of something happening or numbers read of is simply a MUST due to the possibility of anything less simply being human imagination...

3. NDE, we have a lot of information, but first we need a fool proof system to scan and determine for a fact that this is happening while dead and not in a split second of an actual functioning body. So first we have to have the technology to ensure that part first... Then we need to be able to monitor people as they are dying for the test to be accurate. This is not something we are able to do with our technology.
NDE's can be scientifically thrown out, not because it is guaranteed that they are fake mind you, but due to the fact that science has strict guidelines that must be followed.

4. Psychic mediums seem to be the most testable of all of these subjects. I have personally tested two mediums and kept myself completely aloof and both have been completely unable to give me any accurate information, and they attempt to play this off as they're spirit guides not telling them anything. I AM willing to put more mediums to the test however, yet, most of them charge an arm and a leg.

Testability of a phenomenon in a laboratory is not the sole basis for making inferences about the nature of reality.

Speaking very generally, the development of the science of astronomy has been based on observation - extraterrestrial phenomena are of course too vast and remote to test under controlled conditions.  We can try to find observable astronomical situations that vary in ways that isolate one variable or another, which is at least a similar approach to the variation of isolated parameters in laboratories.

Subjective experience is also a difficult aspect of reality to test with instruments, since instruments are extensions of our physical senses and function within the objective, consensus, measurable world.  Even if we could have equipment set up in various medical establishments to verify that no brain activity was occurring at the time a particular NDE was reported to have been experienced - a tall order - we must still rely upon the testimony of people who are describing their subjective experiences. 

This is okay, though.  It is actually scientifically allowable to rely on the testimony of human beings to make inferences about the nature of reality.  We can discuss the compelling features of NDEs as related by those who have experienced them if we need to, but here I just wanted to point out again that reported experience need not be dismissed because it can't be subjected to electron microscopy or spectrally analyzed.

Mediumistic work has been going on since the foundation of the Societies for Psychical Research in the late 19th century.  I cannot claim to have made a comprehensive review of the literature.  Nonetheless, other scientists have concluded that at least some information received in the course of their investigations cannot be accounted for by ordinary physically-mediated transmission as at present understood, and must at least involve telepathy, sometimes of an extraordinary "super" type not limited to the present time.  The Windbridge Institute is also currently conducting research with mediums: http://www.windbridge.org/

Apparitions of the dead (sensory automatisms) and After-Death Communications should also not be ruled out evidentially, because they too are historically abundant and sometimes involve the communication of veridical information not otherwise known to the percipients.  Also, some of the experiences involve multiple simultaneous percipients.

The only things that we can know are just saturated with conscious awareness; it is inseparable from any identifiable phenomenon.  In ordinary consensus reality, in order to adequately prove to ourselves that an experience is real rather than imaginary, we must basically agree with others that we have shared the same experience.  (Note that in the case of the NDE, and surely other extraordinary experiences as well, for the person experiencing it, no proof beyond the experience itself is required - they know the reality of it as completely as they need to, in a way that we might well wish for ourselves.)  But so much of what we accept as real is based on trust in the testimony of others.  I suspect only a relatively small portion of our trustingly-accepted reality can be traced directly to a foundation built on laboratory testing - all of the news, for example, is a highly selective reporting of events, but we accept a lot of it as the reality of our world today, and allow it to shape our opinions, emotions and actions.

I'm getting long-winded again.  Suffice to say, I really think  there is a place in science for the judicious acceptance and use of human testimony.

James

James, technically, any of the topics in regards to the afterlife are acceptable as long as they can be scientifically tested effectively...


A REPEATABLE scientific experiment which shows that one of these options is a real phenomenon is a necessity for my acceptance of an afterlife, and life itself having more of a meaning than the simple instincts inherent in all life.

Ghosts are testable with certain devices but the data seems highly corruptible and untrustworthy which makes them currently unprovable with any certainty. Audio recordings are a perfect example of people hearing what they want to hear... magnetic frequencies could be happening for any number of reasons... etc.

OBE/NDE like I said is currently unprovable with our current technology for monitoring brain activity, due to our inability to interpret the data of the brain activity. We would need to know for sure the experience has nothing to do with the brain and prove that it is happening while the brain is not functioning vs happening while the brain is functioning, even if it is for a split second. Let's face it, in the brain, a huge dream can be simply a blink of an eye.... a blink of an eye... while the brain STILL functions.

Mediums still seem the most likely potential scientific proof. Even the fail rate of the medium can potentially be explained but the simple fact that they are alive and attempting to contact something dead/different which would definitely explain a certain amount of failure.

However, science would still require a fairly high success rate from the medium to be able to officially state that these people are connecting with "something" and receiving information. It could not say the spiritual answer is 100% correct but it does seem one of the simplest answer if one could rule out mind reading through data even the sitter does not know yet can verify.

A "scientific" argument for the afterlife which I think  we can mostly agree, is a non physical reality is impossible since the superset (non physical) cannot be explained by the subset. Only subjective experience is going to explain it because the brain is not the source of consciousness. If the brain were the source consciousness could be explained. Just because the manipulation of the brain seems to effect perception does not mean it is the cause anymore than a television produces its own signal.

The scientific argument is only appearing viable from within the subset because the superset cannot be explained within it anymore than organs within our bodies can understand where our food comes from.

That's how I see it anyway. I would suggest checking out My Big TOE by Thomas Campbell if you want to refute the limited scientific view of the afterlife.

Yours,
Beau

Jehovah,

You seem to assume that the scientific method deals in absoulte truths, when in fact each of our individual experiences in consciousness may be different.  The scientific method involves setting up an experiement in which given certain rigorous predefined criteria, a reproducible phenomenon may be observed and agreed upon.  Yet if you explore the scientific method - really delve into it - you find that the idea that we are getting purely objective data is illusory.

It has been shown and described by scientists and some of the brightest minds, including Einstein, that the observer in any experiment is, in fact intimately tied into the outcome of the experiment.  Some quantum physicists even have posited scenarios whereby an experiment could be in either state (positive or negative) until the exact moment that an observer focuses their consciousness on the experiment and "observes." (This is the famous Schrodinger Cat paradox) 

The point behind this is, that somehow, in this Western world of ours, we make assumptions about the scientific method, and lose ourselves  - in the blind worship of reproducible observation (science).  Science is then worshipped as the only "truth," and our true perception  - which centers on who/what we really are, becomes secondary or doubted.

Anyone who searches this problem long enough eventually gets into the big issues that Descartes wrote about, and comes up with his conclusions "Cogito ergo sum," -  I think therefore I am. 

The afterlife really deals with the realm of thought.  A realm you live in right here and right now, albeit greatly restricted in the world of matter.  We look at commonly agreed on "laws" of the universe (gravity, laws of motion), and assume that these commonly agreed upon laws allow us to then describe everything that is "real" or "true" if we only apply the scientific method to the situation.  Except, when things get tricky and it is found that physics and reality are really best described by quantum states, and that this quantum theory is based upon probabilities rather than absolutes. 

In the end then, when all is said and done, I am left with my conscious perception as the only thing that is true, that is nonreducible.  In deep meditation we become aware of this - that we simply are.  We perceive.  We are part of everything, and at the same time separate from it.

If you could design experiments to prove NDEs or OOBEs are real, someone would poke holes into the theory.  Death defined as cessation of brain function on an EEG or the heart beating.  Oh really?  The heart is routinely stopped during open heart surgery and there are those who have been clinically brain dead and returned.  So as you gather reproducible data, your doubters will redefine what "death" is.  The theories for how the experiences of NDEs have formed these memories will also expand, as the fantasies of an oxygen starved mind.

And yet, through it all, there is you and I, the individual pinpoints of perception thinking and existing, a "mind" in a material world.  Those of us with personal experience would say that the mind is not truly confined to the body or produced by the body, that the mind is primary, and exists and interpenetrates this reality.  My friend Dave-MBS who was one of the most brilliant minds on this board (who I only recently learned passed away suddenly in 2008), would call this theory - "the prmacy of consciousness." 

Those led astray by worshipping the scientific method believe in the primacy of physical reality, and write off consciousness/awareness as a secondary phenomenon, dependent on neurochemistry, etc.   Those who believe in the "primacy of consciousness," believe that we, in our essence are thought/spirit, and that spirit decides to express itself in the physical world, coupling this thought to a brain (a receiver), and a physical body.  Many of us then get confused and lose our way, seeing only the physical, and denying our true nature.


Matthew

In conclusion, you are all stating that the afterlife is not scientifically provable.

Therefore, I will not accept the afterlife as a fact, ever.
Furthermore, life itself has no meaning, except the very base meaning of attempting to keep oneself alive, which has no real depth.

In conclusion, life itself is completely meaningless and does not need to exist.

Thanks! I feel comforted in times of need!

I`m sorry for your pain. It is sad the mediums you sought could not help you. I do not agree with your arguments, but I hope you can take comfort in the fact that at least people here tried to show you a point.

However, you do as the Chinese proverb goes "The listener, in the end, only hears the "No"" - regarding long explanations.

One rather big issue that you may want to think about. Science improves - and changes totally - all the time. What is not provable now may be provable in 200 years. Does this make it less true now?

I am not saying there IS an afterlife. I have my own doubts. But you have to admit that one simply cannot say either position is true at the moment, after carefully weighing the evidence.

Even if there is no afterlife, this existence can still have meaning. You matter in the here and now. You are part of the big whole, of this fascinating story of life. You are the universe thinking about itself.

The price of death is very high for existence and I can only hope the people saying there is an afterlife are right. But to say existence is meaningless without seems to me like you can only allow for one kind of meaning, the "supernatural" so to say.

Anyway, love to you. You arent alone in your fear and you arent alone in your pain. Sentinent beings have it hard.

Open Minded Skepticism is, IMHO, the only way to find a proof of a larger existence; that and practice. Clinging to mainstream science will always point to "no" as it doesn't have the rule set to question a larger system with different rules of existence. The objective will very rarely if ever prove the subjective experience. If you are not willing to seek then not finding is a  foregone conclusion.

Yours,
Beau

Jehovah,

The point is not that only the afterlife is unprovable, it is that the scientific method is flawed and not a source for absolute truth.  The conclusion you draw however - that life has no meaning - is unsubstantiated, and does not emerge from the evidence that I and others presented.

Great religions, mystics and explorers on this site,  including Bruce have described in their own terms, how the "meaning" of the universe, as arising out of and being to experience and express love (PUL).  How is that possible, you say, in a seemingly random and cruel world?  It is simple.  It is your choice.  It is your thought.  It is your purpose.

My take on things (as I've said before) is that you are a point of perception in the universe.  You think, you feel.  In the physical world, you find that your thought takes on meaning in the world around you.  With introspection, you will find that thought attracts like to like.  Those who project love and light find it returned to them.  Those who project selfishness and hate, find, to their dismay that they experience selfishness and hate.  Some curse this experience and call it karma.  Others find an "aha!" moment from these experiences and take home the realization  that by changing their thought and pursuing loving thought and actions, they receive more love, and find a path back to God (the source).

As we find that we can create things in the physical world, we can see that our ability to create is part of our divine potential.  Use it as you will, but you are given plenty of teaching regarding this.  Not just from the great religions of the world  (with the "golden rule" - do unto others....) but also with your own experience as to what you bring into your life.  You are meant not to rant at the hardships but to connect the dots, and see how your inner state attracts certain things into your reality. 

These are tough concepts, but on another level so basic, and so easy to understand if you examine your own life and your own mind long enough.

Matthew

Jehova,

"In conclusion, life itself is completely meaningless and does not need to exist.
Thanks! I feel comforted in times of need!"

The overt use of guilt doesn't tug at my heart strings, and I'm not sorry if the answer evades the expected. Why don't YOU do the exploration yourself? This is the only thing I can promise you: this event will not be repeated in a lab environment.

At the end of the day, compressed and condensed.. your life is what you make it to be.

I like Beau's descriptions and analogies.

And Matthew I agree with you and enjoy the way you formulate your posts.  You say what I want to say but more eloquently and intelligently. 

Yes, no amount of scientific proof will be good enough for everybody, and there will always be something you can poke a hole into and then you are back to looking for more scientific proof.  Ultimately the focus of the experiment becomes more on the physical science and equipment than it does on the true heart of the experiment. 

I agree too with Bruce...always saying that his method is easy for anyone to learn and it gives you the kind of proof you need and are looking for, without losing focus on what's important.

To further that, I can add my own findings.  I'm always working on improving my psychic abilities and recently have been having tremendous results.  What I'm also finding is that I truely believe in what they say, that we all have psychic ability and that we all can learn to use it.  Like Bruce says of his afterlife contact method...anyone can learn and use it.

Same with OBEs, anyone can learn to do them but of course the will and desire have to be there.  I obviously would not condone anyone trying to prove they themselves can have a NDE, although I'm playful enough to always joke that if I could survive with no damaging effects, I would love to get struck by lightning, die, and then come back to tell what I experienced.  I wouldn't even care if no one really believed me because I know that I trust my own consciousness about what I experience.  I've had countless OBEs with incredible proof of things I had no normal means of knowing, yet they were not "scientifically" proven in a lab so no amount of what I say will satisfy those who want such rigid guidelines of what they believe proof means to them.

Science is becoming less rigid than it used to be.  More and more is coming out that shows there's more to life than what we can prove scientifically.  Did anyone see the recent episode of Secrets of Your Mind where the neurologist studies the brain scans of sociopathic killers?  Their brains actually look different from normal brains.  But when the scientist himself saw his own brain scan, he found that his brain looked like that of a sociopath.  Why then is he not a murderer?  Will he snap one day and become one?  No.  The difference between him and the murderers is that he has love.  He can feel and experience, give, and receive love.  He was raised in a loving family and raised his own family lovingly. 

So can we scientifically prove love exists?  There are certainly some ways of doing that, like showing how the body and brain respond to thoughts of love.  But then again, you are dealing with thoughts, emotions, feelings, memories...all things are that nonphysical.  All these things are part of consciousness, not part of the brain.  There is always a conscious component playing a role, and that is what is the heart of any experiment or measurement.

So like I said, even science knows that you cannot take the mental and emotional out of the equation when you value your results.  Our consciousness really is our best tool.  If someone really wants to be satisfied with adequate proof, the only way to find it is to use your own conscious awareness to experience something for yourself.  I can write on and on about the experiences I've had that prove to me we survive death, but there is always some component that I cannot describe to a full enough extent that would satisify everyone.  There is a feeling that goes with the experience of an OBE, and no doubt it exists in NDEs too, and it's a feeling of being "not connected" to the physical.  There's really no way to understand it unless you have your own experience of it. 

Jehovah, I'm sorry to see you feel life is meaningless and I hope you continue to search for other ways to find satisfaction.  Keep looking for other ways to prove it to yourself. 

Volu wrote on Sep 6^th, 2010 at 11:08am:

Why don't YOU do the exploration yourself? This is the only thing I can promise you: this event will not be repeated in a lab environment.

Every day, Every night I sleep and dream, I test and seek the afterlife.

Every day, the answer is the same.

Life is a one shot, miracle existance.

The afterlife is a make believe-joke.

This IS the result of my daily outlook and thoughts on the afterlife.

AND IF YOU DOUBT THAT I THINK ABOUT DEATH AND THE AFTERLIFE EVERYDAY YOU ARE WRONG.

The result is simply the same.

Hi great Jehovah... life is a miracle, you got that right, no doubt whatsoever. Although I cannot prove to you that an 'out of body' experience is 'real', I am certain that there are unlimited depths which remain yet unexplored within yourself. This is true of you, and of everyone. You will find a way. That is all I can promise. There is a way, and it is yours, unique, and beautiful.

love, be

Jehovah, clearly all the cogent posts on this thread will never convince you of the existence of the afterlife.  But how about playing the odds?  Consider the afterlife as experienced by Bruce Moen, Robert Monroe and others:  a multi-layered, multi-faceted nonphysical reality (NPR) where human (and other) spirits exist, either between physical incarnations or after a single physical incarnation, take your pick.  What layer a spirit exists in seems to depend largely on their beliefs and actions in their last experience in physical matter reality (PMR).  You believe death is the end, you end up experiencing that in the afterlife (i.e., eternal sleep) unless someone is able to retrieve you from that and take you to a different layer.  Following Matthew's like attracts like, spirits with strong beliefs in PMR end up in a belief system territory (BST) along with others with the same beliefs where they live in the world that fits their views, which can certainly be what some of us would think of as a hell.  Folks who believe in and practice an openminded lovingkindness in PMR, whether you call it PUL or something else, end up in what Bruce and Bob called Focus 27, the Park, the Reception Center, etc.  where many good experiences, learning, loving, etc. await.

OK, you don't believe in any of this.  But let's say you decide to play the odds and follow the PUL, lovingkindness approach to life, just in case.  Then you die.  If the afterlife exists in anything like the form Bruce and Bob experienced, you just won the lottery!  If it doesn't, you've still had a more rewarding life in PMR, doing the right thing for yourself and others with lots of lovingkindness returned to you, i.e. a good life by most views.  You still won the lottery!

hi jehovah  i have had an out of body experience,so i have my own proof,i saw my spirit,it was beautiful,it was a shade of pale yellow.

life is a path you walk until you have reached the end,then theres a brilliant light of god's love there and when you walk through it,you are at peace for eternity

love and god bless  love juditha

TO prove or disprove OOBEs requires funding and scientists to develop the framework of a program that can be used. The people involved in running the experiment would have neutral beliefs on whether OOBE's are real or not.

Perhaps there are such programs already, but if not now then later. Plucking a figure from the air suggests £2 Million should be enough.

Even if it was proven, there would be such a magnitude of doubt towards it due to people's beliefs.

Ideally it would involve scientists with some standing in the various communities across the world, but who would risk this?

And as has been stated, the nature of the concept that is to be tested and the absence of tools to record information are a handicap to any experiment. (So far)

Until that all changes, experiental evidence and verification of key information is the way.

Really excellent post and points Pat E.  Couldn't agree more with that approach.

Jehovah, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter so much what specific beliefs you have or don't, even if you don't believe in the nonphysical...it's how you treat others, self, and the creation outside of you which really matters and determines the degree of inner happiness or lack.  I believe all humans on some level are seeking happiness either consciously or unconsciously.

  For most of us here, we just know from experiences we've had, that this continues into other dimensions besides this one. 

Maybe it would be more helpful to think in terms of different dimensions of which plenty physicists and mathematicians are fairly sure and say there exists many more than just 4. 

  If they are correct that there is more than the 4 we are aware of and use to, maybe then it is just a matter of tuning out of these 4 some and tuning into the other ones in order to perceive and experience them?

  Voila, not so outside one's current belief systems after all.

  If one tries to apply all the rules of the 4 dimensions we know and more consciously perceive to the other dimensions we don't tend to, it may be a fruitless effort for it's reasonable to assume that maybe not all the rules that apply in the dimensions we are conscious of, apply at all or in quite the same ways in those other dimensions. 

  You know, things like gravity, slower than light travel, etc. or even trying to measure & quantify  these other dimensions by physical means and gauges.

Justin, what dimensions are you referencing?

I firmly believe that time does NOT exist.

Time is a man made concept used to explain a phenomenon of past, present, and future.

Just like cold.

Cold does not exist.

Cold is a man made word used to explain the phenomenon of an object which lacks heat. Heat IS something, Heat exists. Cold is simply a word used to describe something which does not exist.

hi jehovah cold does exist,because cold is a feeling,if we did not feel cold,then the word cold would mean nothing,every word has a meaning

or, we would all be as confused as the cavemen,that just communicated by saying to each other   "urr urr,ugg ugg".

love and god bless  love juditha

Juditha is right, in my humble opinion.

Renee Descartes went through this in his writings about existence.  What we come up with is the inability to prove that anything in the physical world truly exists (though it sure seems like it does), except for our own conscious thought or perception. 

The one thing Descartes couldn't find any problem proving was that he could think.  He reasoned that even if their were a grand deceiver, and all of his assumptions about what was "real" were proven to be a deception, that in the end he could still think/perceive.  That is when he came out with the famous line "I think, therfore I am."  No one could take that away from him.

And whether you have a physical body or not, if you find that you can think, than you too have a form of proof of your existence through thought.

To say that heat is real, but cold is not misses this "big picture."  Any sensation you experience is through your senses (sight, touch, hearing, taste).   But what you are experiencing isn't the actual reality itself, but your physical senses being interpreted by........yes, you get it.........your thought/perception.

It may sound crazy that if a lit flame burns your skin, that it is not proof of the existence of the flame.  But in reality, you are interpreting sensations from your 5 (6?) senses, and then stating would you, the thinker/perceiver call the result. 

It does happen that in the physical plane, we human beings agree on much of our shared perceptions.  As such, it appears that these things are more "real."  We can all identify the color red on sight (well, ok most of us).  But do we all actually see the same thing through our perceiver, and is what we see proof of a "reality," or merely a shared experience.

This is pretty heady stuff.  Too early in the morning for it. 


Matthew

One subject that (I think) we haven't touched upon here is the variety of psi or ESP experiences.  Laboratory tests have been and are being conducted in this area, and are worth looking into.

Telepathy and remote viewing (clairvoyance) are difficult to fit into a model of consciousness that attempts to reduce it to a (still mysterious and unproven) byproduct of neural activity limited to the interior of the human organism.

You might enjoy a recent DVD called "Something Unknown Is Doing We Don't Know What."  I just finished watching it today, and thought it was interesting and a lot of fun.  It might help pry up some of the edges of the despair of feeling that we are pointless automata.  It has some nice interviews with scientists doing work with psi.

(Spoiler alert  :)  Charles Tart, who was the scientific adviser for the movie, has a sign that shows up in the film, "Don't believe everything you think."  I loved it!)

And -- try to relax a little!  The rumors of the completion and closure of human knowledge have been greatly exaggerated.  I think the posts in this thread have shown really well that there is so much out there and in here that has not been accounted for just yet.  That's part of the pleasure of the scientific endeavor, learning about the wonders of a universe that hasn't been completely understood from the depths to the heights.  And, judging by the clues found here and in similar experiences elsewhere, maybe even the most solidly-established truths of our received knowledge can be looked at with a fresh eye, with a very strong likelihood of finding something new, more spacious and more free.

In spite of occasional appearances, chains have never been appropriate for humans, or for any other forms of life.  Of course it's good to have some reliable things to hold on to (thank you, planet Earth!), but it's also good to set sail now and then, for the joy of the soul.  We've been given a lot of room for just that.

James

Awhile ago, I published a post which lamented the lack of  interaction and community feeling on this board. Obviously, I just had not stuck around long enough to see the real community of  minds flex it's collective muscles. Thanks to you Jehova, and all of the rest of the folks here, including Bruce, for caring enough to explain, again and again if needed, their insights into non-physical reality. I have been energized and enlightened (again).

James, I haven't watched that DVD, but I will.  For years my license plate holder has had "Don't Believe Everything You Think" on it.  I still get the occasional question or comment about it.  I first heard the expression at a Pema Chodron weekend meditation retreat seven or eight years ago.  I had the holder specially made via the internet.

Bardo, I agree completely. 

Pat

Pat -- fantastic!

:)

James

hehehehe Matter doesn't exist either.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread456806/pg1

James,

I ordered the DVD from Amazon. I had never heard of it. I'm looking forward to checking it out.

Beau

Read some OBEs from this site:http://www.nderf.org/
This has helped my sister a great deal, as our mother was quite ill and at death's door. My sister had a difficult time to accept that Mama could die at any time now (still holding on, but her gall bladder could expolde at any time).  After reading some true accounts of NDE's (near death experiences) my sister was more at ease.
There will come a day when OBE's will be scientifically proven--- and seen with the use of brain waves/and or body temperature hot spot readings.  The hemi-sync method has already been "proven" with brain wave activity being monitored.
It is currently subjective.  Carl Sagan tried to disprove anything that he couldn't "prove" with scientific accuracy.  I often wonder if he will "come back" and show us his proof, NOW.
Love Carol Ann

Beau,

I hope you like it.  I'm trying to remember where I heard about it; I think it might just have been in Amazon's "Recommended for you."  Sometimes some good stuff shows up there!

Carol Ann,

Best wishes for your mother, yourself and your family.

James

Well, I am willing to give it a real shot here. I really think I need the hemi-sync or binaural beats though, and I don't have money for it right now.

I am currently working 12 hour days struggling to support me and my wife which lost her third job now.... - yeah.. it sucks.


So I really want to make this happen, seriously.

I will of course keep a notebook by the bed at all times and attempt to set aside a half hour for meditation. Still, I think it will be hard to achieve anything without the audio assistance..?

wrote on Sep 13^th, 2010 at 7:47pm:

Well, I am willing to give it a real shot here. I really think I need the hemi-sync or binaural beats though, and I don't have money for it right now. I am currently working 12 hour days struggling to support me and my wife which lost her third job now.... - yeah.. it sucks.

  I could probably send some of my Hemi-sync CD's your way free of charge if you live in the U.S. 

  Might take a little while (till my next check deposits & i pay off some bills, cause currently i have a negative balance).   

Thanks Justin, sounds like it would be a bit too much trouble for you though. I hear you about it being hard, I am not in the negative but I sure am close all of the time. I could download hem-sync mp3's but I read that since it's a lossy format it would lose it's effectiveness. Not sure how accurate that is. I mean, an mp3 encoded at 128 kbps has a noticeable (to my ears) downgrade in quality. But once you encode the mp3 to about 192 kbps I stop being able to notice any loss in sound quality.

wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 10:03pm:

Robert A. Monroe. Whilst listening to Binaural beats and meditating.... presumably Robert A. Monroe contacted a spirit being which took him through time and space and he met other humans and..... yes.... aliens. This is in his book "Ultimate Journey" Fantastical... no? One would definitely question one if not many and all parts of these supposed OBE's..... Thinking that in fact they could be just simple IMAGINATION.... So... I would say, for the general public and for general proof of an OBE we would logically ( as the Vulcans would say ) be looking for some sort of VERIFIABLE proof, no? Well, according to one test, I read that Monroe and some others attempted to read a 4 or 5 digit or so number which was kept in a different room. ( so they had to OBE and read the number while OBE. ) Scientifically, this does seem like an acceptable test as long as everything is secure. All attempts failed....except.... Supposedly Monroe got the number correct ONE time and was unable to repeat it. (Science usually dictates that an experiment must be repeatable.) So there is my story.... My question on this topic does still stand though.... The question is: How do you Scientifically prove you have had an OBE? Does scientific laboratory testing of OBE's exist?

Hi Jehovah: You've got a serious problem that could take millenia to unravel... you are weaving a cocoon of belief system webs that will be very difficult to overcome... here is why from the writings of Frank Kepple - http://focus-4.es.tl/QUESTIONS-AND-ANSWERS-ABOUT-PHASING.htm

However, if the questioning comes about as a result of Doubt, then you need to be ever mindful of the fact that any release of thoughts of Doubt - while within the Astral - will instantly lead to you experiencing circumstances that support whatever level of Doubt you are feeling.

Then, just like in my release of fear example above, finding yourself all of a sudden in a situation where your doubts are justified, will normally have the effect of making you feel even more doubtful; so your circumstances will instantly become such that your doubts are reinforced all the more; which in turn makes you doubt all the more still; and so on, and so on.......

Tho he is talking about the power of the Astral to intensify this descent into oblivion... it also applies to the physical.

S.

For left, right, and middle brain seekers - sometimes it is a matter of redefining the questions to find more proper answers. It is not the question "how do you prove it", but "what do you prove" doing your experiment. The "what do you prove" answer is divided in two sections: 1) experiment (concrete settings, concrete results), 2) conclusions (including assumptions). From that point - you may begin to create a wider model of whatever. If you focus only on one direction, you always end on one pole, having polarized opponents on the other side of your topic.

Modern internet and remote operations - as an explanation of  OBEs - are a good example to show the complexity of this and other subjects. All you can prove are the correlations between nodes of a topological network. Does the OBE exist - sure, "somehow" exists. But what really IS the OBE, that you are trying to prove? Is the virtual reality (similarize the internet to other wirtual realities like emotional ones, mental ones and so forth) real? Sure it is, but in which way?

When you redefine your strategy of thinking, you can focus on other directions. If you ask for the "general sense of life", the answer will be probably some nonsense if there will be any answer. But if you change your question, if you just ask for the "sense of your own private portion life" - then - you'll find everything. "What kind of skills do you require instead of your outdated imagination of OBE"? To get answers without physical connection (that I know in everyday life), to get colorful inner experiences, to get shared experiences with other people, and so on and so forth.

(-;