"If you saw your wife cheating on you, you'd behave differently than hearsay, right?"
Arguably. I'd first question if I was hallucinating or dreaming.
"to me it kinda strong suggests it."
It suggests it about as strongly as doing LSD. It's just easier to believe it's real since it's trigger wasn't self-induced.
"I've encountered people who've had NDEs and had taken LSD and such and say it's a totally different thing."
It's like comparing marijuana and cigarettes I'd imagine.
"Plus even if you believe in the hallucination theory, it still cannot explain the video I posted."
It's just a story. There's tons of stories and claims out there. Confirmation Bias is a dangerous thing.
"There have been SO many cases where people see things during their NDE that are impossible for their body to have seen."
Easier to accept it as coincidence until more promising evidence is provided.
"Also, there's a common theme in most, that life is about love."
When you hear about it all the damn time and it hangs on the coat tails of our own procreative instincts, that becomes no surprise. There's other drugs that seem to promote such things in a similar fashion without even requiring hallucinations.
"Why not hate, or fear, or indifference"
Some I'd imagine coming out with a vision of indifference, seeing insignificance in things they once gave value. Otherwise, the chemicals responsible for NDEs more than likely promote feel good vibes.
"To me, there's just too much miraculous stuff that happens during them that cannot be explained"
Just because we can't explain it yet does not mean that it cannot be explained.
"and so that mixed how the common theme of life being about love, mixed with the teachings of religion and whatnot being the same type message, is a pretty strong case."
Sounds more like an explanation of convenience if you ask me.
"I mean, why does it feel good when someone compliments you?"
It validates your ego. It makes you feel like you actually matter in a cold and unforgiving world.
"And why don't you get that same feeling when someone insults you or a family member or friend or whatever?"
It confirms self-loathing or is a shocking occurrence, and even then it only hurts if you aren't prepared for it.
"So maybe there isn't a sure fire way to prove they are real, but I think that's kinda the point of life too, to still need to depend upon faith."
Even relying on our own memories is putting faith into something, since how could we truly know that our memory is something that we can trust? Life is about faith, but what we put that faith into is unlikely to lead us to answers of value beyond the value we individually ascribe to it.
"Otherwise, if we knew the answer, why would we even be here?"
Knowing any answer just brings about more questions.
"And so, to me, that's some pretty damn good evidence"
You must be easy to convince of happy things. Are you certain you aren't just trying to cling to this to make life seem more worth living?
"Now, I realize this is really hard to do if you're a sociopath"
I'm not one. 
"when I smoke MJ I somehow transform, not really as much into a sociopath, but I can mold any situation to my favor."
So you admit to being an unreliable narrator, just like the rest of humanity. Good.
"based on people experiencing things that are unexplainable with the body and brain, suggest this is true."
The body and brain are often unreliable. If I trusted half the things I'd seen and "known" I'd be in a very different world.
"The only reason I have come to this study to discover this is honestly bc I've suffered so much in my life."
So you even admit that you cling to these ideas to keep yourself sane? Are you sure you can use yourself as a reliable resource? You just gave a motivation for not trusting your "faith".
"But no matter how you view the world or how big your ego or small your ego, it doesn't change the reality of life, or what seems to be the reality based on what these NDEs point to."
You've proven nothing except why you believe these things.
by JohnnyBoy1Do you think they are real or not?
There are countless cases of similar experiences from those who were pronounced clinically dead, before, recovering in astonishment. None of these people have any interest in turning a profit over it, while NDE's of millionaires had them give away everything only to take on some kind of job that involves social work or assisting others.
The experiences are always the same themes, which has to do with self speculation or judgment, encounters with beings that either love them or love to hate them, and the experiences are always based on what the beholder inflicts on themselves. Those who expect to be punished in the event anything they never believed is real, find themselves in some deep shit, until "they" themselves request for God or Christ to save them. In the cases where the person is saved, the descriptions are usually the same. Dark entities back the fuck off when you so much as call for, him.
In those cases that involve God, either it's the case of being saved or going directly to him, all depict or illustrate God in the same way.
I personally find it irrational to assume how this is a malfunction of the brain, and to pass the reoccurring themes of the countless cases as coincidence displays incredible blindness, or an ego that would be so devastated to be wrong in their own doubts, assuming these similar cases which are collectively the same content to be a coincidence, actually seems like an intelligent explanation to them.
by Turncoat"If you saw your wife cheating on you, you'd behave differently than hearsay, right?"
Arguably. I'd first question if I was hallucinating or dreaming.
-Lol.
"I've encountered people who've had NDEs and had taken LSD and such and say it's a totally different thing."
It's like comparing marijuana and cigarettes I'd imagine.
-Again, I actually just spoke with someone who had an NDE and has taken LSD, and they said it's nothing alike. They said LSD is of the mind and was very obviously a cerebral experience in comparison to their NDE.
"Plus even if you believe in the hallucination theory, it still cannot explain the video I posted."
It's just a story. There's tons of stories and claims out there. Confirmation Bias is a dangerous thing.
- I fail to see the upside outweighing the downside for creating this "story". It would require all the staff at the surgery being in on it, otherwise the doctor would be labeled a liar. You must think it's awefuly unlikely for this "story" being just a story and not reality, if you'd like your reasoning to be seen as rational.
"There have been SO many cases where people see things during their NDE that are impossible for their body to have seen."
Easier to accept it as coincidence until more promising evidence is provided.
- I understand the skepticism, I was too, but I've been researching these for a while now and have found them to be overwhelming likely to be true.
"Also, there's a common theme in most, that life is about love."
When you hear about it all the damn time and it hangs on the coat tails of our own procreative instincts, that becomes no surprise. There's other drugs that seem to promote such things in a similar fashion without even requiring hallucinations.
- Again, people who have taken drugs before, say it's much different. Also, there are MANY people who've never heard of NDEs reporting the same themes as others who've had them, love.
"To me, there's just too much miraculous stuff that happens during them that cannot be explained"
Just because we can't explain it yet does not mean that it cannot be explained.
- This is why it's important to analyze the best information that exists to for a well informed opinion. The trouble with this is it removes faith. Joe Rogan has what's called "fart theory" which is that if someone doesn't have a sense of smell and someone farts, they can't detect it, yet it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And so there could be an infinite amount of things in existence that the human body can't detect and never will be able to, the sound and light spectrums are kind of examples- not totally but you get the point, just bc we can't detect it, doesn't mean it's not real.
"-Lol."
No, really, I have to worry about that sort of thing.
"-Again, I actually just spoke with someone who had an NDE and has taken LSD, and they said it's nothing alike. They said LSD is of the mind and was very obviously a cerebral experience in comparison to their NDE."
Have you tried Marijuana and Cigarettes? They are pretty different from each other. Different chemicals cause different effects, and conviction is hardly a gauge for accuracy.
"It would require all the staff at the surgery being in on it, otherwise the doctor would be labeled a liar."
It's not malpractice to gab about silly beliefs, and what, you've never seen how likely people are to lie or believe silly tales? Come on.
"You must think it's awefuly unlikely for this "story" being just a story and not reality, if you'd like your reasoning to be seen as rational."
My understanding is that it's people taking a natural body high much too seriously. I've seen and felt some crazy shit, but I do not trust myself enough to see those experiences as real.
"- I understand the skepticism, I was too, but I've been researching these for a while now and have found them to be overwhelming likely to be true."
Yet you seem quick to believe in it being accurate before harder evidence can be presented beyond witness testimony. People can't be trusted.
"- Again, people who have taken drugs before, say it's much different. Also, there are MANY people who've never heard of NDEs reporting the same themes as others who've had them, love."
Ecastacy promotes feelings of love too, as do many other drugs. Sure you say it gives a sensation that is unlike drugs at our disposal, but that is only until it can somehow be chemically synthesized. Just because no drug matches it yet doesn't mean it cannot be done, nor does it mean that this natural high is something to be taken seriously (at least until superior evidence is presented).
"The trouble with this is it removes faith."
Bullshit. Everything is faith, even Science. The difference is that someone in the field of Science will aim to actually prove what they see as opposed to just lazily "take it on faith". Science can be disproven, and even prides itself on that, compared to religion which seldom is willing to take in other perspectives and possibilities.
"Joe Rogan has what's called "fart theory" which is that if someone doesn't have a sense of smell and someone farts, they can't detect it, yet it doesn't mean it doesn't exist."
But that can be measured.
"And so there could be an infinite amount of things in existence that the human body can't detect and never will be able to, the sound and light spectrums are kind of examples- not totally but you get the point, just bc we can't detect it, doesn't mean it's not real."
It's not worth wasting time venturing what could be out there if we cannot prove it, until we can or a means of seeing how we could is presented. If it's case cannot be convincingly said, then it's just venturing what-ifs, which can be fun, but aren't productive.
Someone who believes in crazy talk better be able to prove it or else it's no better than that.
by Turncoat"-Lol."
No, really, I have to worry about that sort of thing.
-totally.
"It would require all the staff at the surgery being in on it, otherwise the doctor would be labeled a liar."
It's not malpractice to gab about silly beliefs, and what, you've never seen how likely people are to lie or believe silly tales? Come on.
-If you watch the video all the way through, you'd see it's not only him, it's other people in the operating room with him who experience something. Malpractice isn't what I'm talking about, I'm talking about there being 2 instances that explain it: He made it up, or, it's a story he likes to believe, and I'm saying both are unlikely. Why? For the first, it would mean ruining your reputation as a doctor if this were fabricated and people found out, and to what benefit does he incur for this fabrication- doesn't seem very smart, and so this is very unlikely? And so then it it would mean it's a story he believes, but it would be one that he, along with his staff, and along with many other surgeons believe. So, this one means, you'd be more in favor of the incredible event of everyone in the operating room feeling something they cannot explain, a presence, just in the very second a miracle occurred- this he explains at the end of the vid. So, your belief in this event falls into the category of these INCREDIBLE theories of it being a story, which is based on a guess with no real evidence, as opposed to the idea of a NDE occurred that has evidence in the form of, people saying it's not like drugs, people report the same type experience despite not knowing what a NDE is, people experiencing things that are impossible to have been experienced by the physical body? I realize what your answer will still be, but the idea of ignoring all this, most importantly, people experiencing things that their physical body couldn't, is kinda almost unscientific to me, in the sense that it's ignoring data.
"You must think it's awefuly unlikely for this "story" being just a story and not reality, if you'd like your reasoning to be seen as rational."
My understanding is that it's people taking a natural body high much too seriously. I've seen and felt some crazy shit, but I do not trust myself enough to see those experiences as real.
-And your understanding is based on...what again?
"And so there could be an infinite amount of things in existence that the human body can't detect and never will be able to, the sound and light spectrums are kind of examples- not totally but you get the point, just bc we can't detect it, doesn't mean it's not real."
It's not worth wasting time venturing what could be out there if we cannot prove it, until we can or a means of seeing how we could is presented. If it's case cannot be convincingly said, then it's just venturing what-ifs, which can be fun, but aren't productive.
Someone who believes in crazy talk better be able to prove it or else it's no better than that.
-Here's the problem with your theory on this- it's impossible to prove, only possible to disprove. There could be attempt after attempt after attempt throughout 1000's of years, and if they all fail, there will be someone like you saying, well there's no proof it's real- despite all the evidence stacked in my arguments favor. So really, it's silly to argue with you about it. All I'm trying to do is open people's eyes to this strong possibility before they are opened for them, again doesn't matter what you believe come the day you pass on. I have no doubt life is a test, and I think sociopaths have a difficult path to walk, so that's why I come here. And I understand that "Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still." But I choose to share this information despite obvious ridicule and disbelief from others. If you'd like to look it up, I don't know how reliable the source is, but Here someone claims to be a sociopath whose had a NDE. Perhaps it would help change your mind, but I'm guessing nothing short of you experiencing one would lol.
"-totally."
No, really.
"-And your understanding is based on...what again?"
Some healthy skepticism while I await a non-mystical answer, a fair deal of Nihilism, the assumption that every experience produced by the human body can be explained through chemicals within it, and the assumption that not enough research has been done. They've found that DMT is related, and there may be other natural factors in play as well. With time, most things have a non-magical answer.
Witness testimony tells me nothing when it's something like this.
"And so then it it would mean it's a story he believes, but it would be one that he, along with his staff, and along with many other surgeons believe."
Why is it so hard to believe that crazy can be believed by a group of people once it's suggested? Memory and gullibility are funny things. At the very least it still demands further evidence.
"as opposed to the idea of a NDE occurred that has evidence in the form of, people saying it's not like drugs,"
Again you turn toward witness testimony over data.
"DMT is able to cross the human blood-brain-barrier, allowing it to act as a powerful hallucinogenic drug that dramatically affects human consciousness."
When your consciousness is affected, is the data even something that can be trusted anymore? Sure the medical practitioners are willing to confirm the story, but without harder evidence it's just talk. You'd need to have been there to prove more than their word, and even then you'd be just as subject to the risk of believing in crazy through a list of coincidences. Correlation does not mean causation.
"it's impossible to prove, only possible to disprove."
With enough time anything can be proven. We just haven't spent enough time on it yet. Why accept answers that are only half-given?
"there will be someone like you saying, well there's no proof it's real- despite all the evidence stacked in my arguments favor."
But you see, people like that are good. They are the ones that challenge people to prove themselves. Once enough evidence is found, then they won't have anything left to debunk. Without people to question things, we'd be believing all sorts of madness.
"So really, it's silly to argue with you about it."
But is it as silly as thinking hallucinations are real? 
I have a form of schizophrenia and understand that people are gullible (especially when confronted with a case where "no answer" is the only logical one), so it's going to be difficult to convince me that what you see from a natural body high is anything more than just that, since I see, smell, hear, and feel things of my own that, as real as they might feel in the moment, are not.
"I have no doubt life is a test,"
If that's what helps you sleep at night. I have to be extra careful what I believe, otherwise I risk it tainting my thought processes with crazy.
"But I choose to share this information despite obvious ridicule and disbelief from others."
Just because others don't believe you does not make it "ridicule" (disbelief though yes). Stop being so dramatic and find more proof than "he said she said" if you want to be taken seriously. This isn't some crazy you against the world conspiracy, this is two people discussing the legitimacy of a topic.
"If you'd like to look it up, I don't know how reliable the source is, but Here someone claims to be a sociopath whose had a NDE."
Why would a sociopath be any more believable to me? They are still people, and it's still witness testimony.
"but I'm guessing nothing short of you experiencing one would lol."
Even experience would not convince me. My reality is a fragile one, and I know that well in advance. I need data, because I am still "people". Seeing is not believing for me.
by Turncoat
"-And your understanding is based on...what again?"
Some healthy skepticism while I await a non-mystical answer, a fair deal of Nihilism, the assumption that every experience produced by the human body can be explained through chemicals within it, and the assumption that not enough research has been done. They've found that DMT is related, and there may be other natural factors in play as well. With time, most things have a non-magical answer.
Witness testimony tells me nothing when it's something like this.
-Healthy skepticism is fine, I was a skeptic too, that's why I researched it and researched it to try and prove myself wrong. I thought the perfect way to test if NDEs ARE out of the body, meaning we truly aren't our body and brain, then we wouldn't be limited by our brain and body during an NDE, and so I looked to see if I could find anyone who was blind since birth who had an NDE and sure enough they were able to see during their NDE. You might question how they knew they were seeing, but people say that during their NDE they have a knowingness and that our life here isn't the same as there. There are MULTIPLE people who say that they communicate just by thought- that would be a crazy theme of hallucination, I mean I don't dream those sorts of things.
I actually have been inteersted in seeing if DMT was linked to it, and for whatever reason never looked it up, but just did and someone says the same thing, just like LSD, DMT wasn't anything like their NDE.
"it's impossible to prove, only possible to disprove."
With enough time anything can be proven. We just haven't spent enough time on it yet. Why accept answers that are only half-given?-'Half-given' is an opinion, just like mine. Basically there's no way to prove who's right, but I know I've researched it a lot and my opinion is pretty tried and tested.
"there will be someone like you saying, well there's no proof it's real- despite all the evidence stacked in my arguments favor."
But you see, people like that are good. They are the ones that challenge people to prove themselves. Once enough evidence is found, then they won't have anything left to debunk. Without people to question things, we'd be believing all sorts of madness.-They ARE good, yes. BUT you have to understand that my idea cannot ever be proven, I mean how can it? You could ALWAYS make the argument that we haven't tested something that explains it or a combo of things, like the right game genie code of chemicals.. It's silly.
And so I base mine off of people saying: Not LSD, DMT, or any hallucinogen, and people who are accomplishing the unexplainable- doing things that are only possible outside the body- describing the location of a shoe on a window sill (in the article someone posted above), or the person who had their eyes lubed and taped shut during surgery and headphones on that described the dent in the surgical saw (something that is covered until the patient is out) and a conversation the team had during surgery (impossible to hear- also a story from the link), and person describing post it notes that were impossible to be seen, or the blind person from birth seeing. This mixed with the common themes from those who didn't even know what a NDE is, the list goes on and on of unexplainable miraculous stuff. And not only that, but these people say they have no question there's an afterlife and they have no more fear of death- I mean there are atheists and scientists (surgeons) who have NDEs who change their minds afterward. The effect is profound. And so I choose to believe this above shallow, no-proof, no-indication based skepticism. I mean the best evidence against is the God helmet and possibly DMT. But the God helemt has been worn by someone whose had a NDE and says it's not the NDE, and even took a lie detector to prove it (it's on YouTube). And you can YouTube NDE DMT and watch that video.
Yes, this might be based on personal account, but at some point the data cannot explain everything. If so, it would be able to explain placebo and how that works. I mean we thought not that long ago that the atom was the smallest object of existence, but now that's changed, it will always change with more knowledge. In fact, physicists are now coming to find that it's an invisible energy that holds everything together, since we humans are basically 99% empty space.
"So really, it's silly to argue with you about it."
But is it as silly as thinking hallucinations are real?
I have a form of schizophrenia and understand that people are gullible (especially when confronted with a case where "no answer" is the only logical one), so it's going to be difficult to convince me that what you see from a natural body high is anything more than just that, since I see, smell, hear, and feel things of my own that, as real as they might feel in the moment, are not.-I can appreciate your belief, but your belief is no more educated than mine. It might very well not be hallucinations.