What Is Your Evidence?

[falcon9]

Your dyslexia ...

... Has nothing to do with your abject stupidity, nor with my ability to reason, (something which escapes you even now).
 

If you care to think back you could not show one single lie of me ...

As previously stated, your lying about your prior lies constitute new lies.  This means that you're either a compulsive or, pathological liar, (this would have to be determined by a mental health professional, should you choose to return to the asylum or, be involuntarily commited).  Not only have a few of your more recent lies been numbered for handy reference, you keep adding new lies in different threads.

I know way too much and am a pure thinker at my core. 

No, you don't.  You merely possess a mistaken belief, (like your religious ones), that you "know" more than you do.  Your thinking is neither "pure" nor clear, let alone logical.  You're a self-agrandizing idiot who looks things up online and substitutes a pretence of knowledge for it's actuality.  Those religious superstitions you cling to are neither rational nor, examples of a "pure thinker"; they exemplify a degree of self-delusion and cognitive dissonance common to religious adherents who are blinded by their faith.

[queenofnines]

My evidence: I am not religious and never have been. However, I have died twice, both times for 7 minutes and 32 seconds.

Let me stop you right there. BOTH times were for exactly seven minutes and 32 seconds?! That's ah-maz-ing. Amazingly unbelievable.

There is definitely a higher being-- I saw it and spoke to it. Have seen angels too.

You must be easily impressed. Woe to the average American's education! It's not just your lungs that require oxygen, your brain does, too. When your body is freaking out during a moment of crisis, your brain is deprived of oxygen, and as a result you can start "seeing things"...in the hallucination sense of the word. This is a FACT.

I know literally hundreds of people like me, including atheists, who have died and come back.

I am literally asking you to please stop misusing the word "literally". You literally know hundreds of people who have had near-death experiences?! I highly doubt that!

We get together and comfort each other, especially on those anniversaries--

Again, I highly doubt that. Sounds like you're going for dramatic effect here.

all of us would give ANYTHING to go back, for just a moment. Just to feel the most amazing, intimate feeling anyone can imagine--

Do you not realize the seriousness of what you are saying?? So you'd rather be dead because, for a few minutes before you will no longer exist, you get to go on a happy acid trip. People who do drugs would rather be on drugs, too.

[elandry]

My evidence: I am not religious and never have been. However, I have died twice, both times for 7 minutes and 32 seconds.

Let me stop you right there. BOTH times were for exactly seven minutes and 32 seconds?! That's ah-maz-ing. Amazingly unbelievable.

There is definitely a higher being-- I saw it and spoke to it. Have seen angels too.

You must be easily impressed. Woe to the average American's education! It's not just your lungs that require oxygen, your brain does, too. When your body is freaking out during a moment of crisis, your brain is deprived of oxygen, and as a result you can start "seeing things"...in the hallucination sense of the word. This is a FACT.

I know literally hundreds of people like me, including atheists, who have died and come back.

I am literally asking you to please stop misusing the word "literally". You literally know hundreds of people who have had near-death experiences?! I highly doubt that!

We get together and comfort each other, especially on those anniversaries--

Again, I highly doubt that. Sounds like you're going for dramatic effect here.

all of us would give ANYTHING to go back, for just a moment. Just to feel the most amazing, intimate feeling anyone can imagine--

Do you not realize the seriousness of what you are saying?? So you'd rather be dead because, for a few minutes before you will no longer exist, you get to go on a happy acid trip. People who do drugs would rather be on drugs, too.

Actually, I am not easily impressed. And yes, I have personally met over two hundred people who have died and come back. We tend to seek others who have shared the experience. My medical records clearly note my time of death and revival-- they have clocks in surgery, you know. And yes, on my last anniversary, I had a barbeque with forty people who live within a 3 hour drive-- I had a bunch of guests at the farm, complete with spouses and children.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. That it has no bearing on my experience, or the experiences of quite a few people I know is quite alright.

[falcon9]

There is definitely a higher being-- I saw it and spoke to it. Have seen angels too.

You must be easily impressed. Woe to the average American's education! It's not just your lungs that require oxygen, your brain does, too. When your body is freaking out during a moment of crisis, your brain is deprived of oxygen, and as a result you can start "seeing things"...in the hallucination sense of the word. This is a FACT.

I know literally hundreds of people like me, including atheists, who have died and come back.

all of us would give ANYTHING to go back, for just a moment. Just to feel the most amazing, intimate feeling anyone can imagine--

Do you not realize the seriousness of what you are saying?? So you'd rather be dead because, for a few minutes before you will no longer exist, you get to go on a happy acid trip. People who do drugs would rather be on drugs, too.

Actually, I am not easily impressed. And yes, I have personally met over two hundred people who have died and come back. We tend to seek others who have shared the experience. My medical records clearly note my time of death and revival-- they have clocks in surgery, you know. And yes, on my last anniversary, I had a barbeque with forty people who live within a 3 hour drive-- I had a bunch of guests at the farm, complete with spouses and children.

Here's the thing though; aside from knowing others that have experienced various degrees of oxygen deprivation/clinical "death", you didn't actually address QoN's skepticism regarding hallucinatory effects of oxygen deprivation being attributed to a 'religious experience'.

[Falconer02]

Actually, I am not easily impressed. And yes, I have personally met over two hundred people who have died and come back. We tend to seek others who have shared the experience. My medical records clearly note my time of death and revival-- they have clocks in surgery, you know. And yes, on my last anniversary, I had a barbeque with forty people who live within a 3 hour drive-- I had a bunch of guests at the farm, complete with spouses and children.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. That it has no bearing on my experience, or the experiences of quite a few people I know is quite alright.

Usually when groups of this size meet, there's generally a name for them, a website, or an invitation. Do you recall what yours is called?

Not to downplay your experience, but I myself had an odd NDE when I was a kid which involved fireworks and Darth Vader. My aunt had an OBE in which she was floating around the room when she fell unconscious. Apparently they're triggered by too much CO2 in the bloodstream which triggers weird hallucinations while the brain is still active-- occasionally people have them while conscious too at high altitudes. If I recall my research, all people who have had religious NDE's believe in life after death. Every Hindu had never seen a biblical character during one, and vice versa, so that pretty much cancels out the whole "1 true religion" argument in these experiences. I personally believe they're just weird and happy hallucinations that calm the body during moments of trauma.

[elandry]

My evidence: I am not religious and never have been. However, I have died twice, both times for 7 minutes and 32 seconds.

Let me stop you right there. BOTH times were for exactly seven minutes and 32 seconds?! That's ah-maz-ing. Amazingly unbelievable.

There is definitely a higher being-- I saw it and spoke to it. Have seen angels too.

You must be easily impressed. Woe to the average American's education! It's not just your lungs that require oxygen, your brain does, too. When your body is freaking out during a moment of crisis, your brain is deprived of oxygen, and as a result you can start "seeing things"...in the hallucination sense of the word. This is a FACT.

I know literally hundreds of people like me, including atheists, who have died and come back.

I am literally asking you to please stop misusing the word "literally". You literally know hundreds of people who have had near-death experiences?! I highly doubt that!

We get together and comfort each other, especially on those anniversaries--

Again, I highly doubt that. Sounds like you're going for dramatic effect here.

all of us would give ANYTHING to go back, for just a moment. Just to feel the most amazing, intimate feeling anyone can imagine--

Do you not realize the seriousness of what you are saying?? So you'd rather be dead because, for a few minutes before you will no longer exist, you get to go on a happy acid trip. People who do drugs would rather be on drugs, too.

Actually, I am not easily impressed. And yes, I have personally met over two hundred people who have died and come back. We tend to seek others who have shared the experience. My medical records clearly note my time of death and revival-- they have clocks in surgery, you know. And yes, on my last anniversary, I had a barbeque with forty people who live within a 3 hour drive-- I had a bunch of guests at the farm, complete with spouses and children.

Here's the thing though; aside from knowing others that have experienced various degrees of oxygen deprivation/clinical "death", you didn't actually address QoN's skepticism regarding hallucinatory effects of oxygen deprivation being attributed to a 'religious experience'.

You are quite right, Falcon-- I didn't. I personally do not consider it a "religious" experience. I apologize for using inaccurate terms. Perhaps this will clarify:

I went elsewhere. I saw a being, and spoke to it. I saw several other beings of a different sort. My subjective impression of these different beings was that they were of a higher, or different perhaps is a better word, evolution than ourselves.  Many of the people I know define the first being they meet as "God" not in the personal sense of savior, per se, but in the original definition of a "God"-- being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality --
I don't dispute that I, like everyone who dies, suffered from oxygen starvation-- of course I did. That is a medical fact. I also do not dispute that said oxygen deprivation causes hallucinations. It certainly does. What I have found interesting, and the reason I actively seek to speak with other who have experienced clinical death, is the commonality in the hallucinations. At the time of my first experience, I was nine years old. My upbringing and the cultural influences I had experienced did not provide a contextual reference that could logically explain my particular experience.  My particular hallucination, if you prefer that word, was not in my world view. I assume that if you, personally, experienced a hallucination and saw something that you could not possibly imagine or explain, you would be curious, as well-- I believe, based on reading your posts, you would probably be quite curious. I can't imagine someone like you just dismissing the experience out of hand. That would, after all,be very closed minded.

A  "miracle" by definition: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

for me, at nine, the event was definitely unusual-- in that it had never happened to anyone I knew, and outstanding, in that it stood out as unique from other experiences. by definition, therefore, at the time it was a "miracle".

Definition of angel: an attendant spirit or guardian  the other beings I spoke to had arranged themselves around me. The subjective impression was one of being accompanied, observed or watched over, i.e. guarded, though not in a restrictive or negative manner.
I believe I have clarified the nature of my experience, somewhat.

[elandry]

Actually, I am not easily impressed. And yes, I have personally met over two hundred people who have died and come back. We tend to seek others who have shared the experience. My medical records clearly note my time of death and revival-- they have clocks in surgery, you know. And yes, on my last anniversary, I had a barbeque with forty people who live within a 3 hour drive-- I had a bunch of guests at the farm, complete with spouses and children.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. That it has no bearing on my experience, or the experiences of quite a few people I know is quite alright.

Usually when groups of this size meet, there's generally a name for them, a website, or an invitation. Do you recall what yours is called?

Not to downplay your experience, but I myself had an odd NDE when I was a kid which involved fireworks and Darth Vader. My aunt had an OBE in which she was floating around the room when she fell unconscious. Apparently they're triggered by too much CO2 in the bloodstream which triggers weird hallucinations while the brain is still active-- occasionally people have them while conscious too at high altitudes. If I recall my research, all people who have had religious NDE's believe in life after death. Every Hindu had never seen a biblical character during one, and vice versa, so that pretty much cancels out the whole "1 true religion" argument in these experiences. I personally believe they're just weird and happy hallucinations that calm the body during moments of trauma.

This replay is actually going to be slightly out of context, as I was replying to falcon when this came in-- While I am aware of groups that are formalized for people who die and come back, I have met everyone I know through personal contact, over a period of almost thirty years. I started back in the dino days, before the internet  . If you read my reply to falcon, I was not as refined in my choice of words as I should have been, for which I apologize, freely. I do not consider my experience "religious" in nature, as I am not "religious". I merely said I had seen a Higher Being-- perhaps differently evolved, or of a higher evolution would be more precise-- and spoke to it. I also saw angels, not in the religious sense, but in the sense of attendants, or guardians, by definition-- thank you Merriam Webster LOL.

I generally avoid formalized groups, as I have noticed that the people who join them come from a commonly religious background-- and no offense to anyone religious, I get preached at enough, thank you . Just because a hallucination is medically induced, doesn't mean that an entirely odd experience should be discounted out of hand. It may have no practical application, and may be entirely subjective, but it still might be worthy of investigation from a personal viewpoint. I don't stomp around trying to convince people I saw "God"-- and I also don't stomp around trying to convince people I'm a nut  . And I definitely don't stomp around trying to convince people there is no God, because they get very angry LOL. As you may notice, what should have been a relatively simple explanation is fast turning into a spirited debate, if you will pardon the pun 

[jcribb16]

No, your limitations in understanding the information ...

On the contrary, my understanding is not limited or restricted in any way by blind religious faith as yours is.  Keep fabricating crap and falsely attributing it to me if wished, your own troll-chow will be fed to you to choke on, fundie.

Yeah, because we know that only 'blind religious faith' allows us to see light photons reflected off of a surface.  It is amazing when I present things in a secular manner based upon science that you become even more obtuse than normal.  I have never fabricated anything and falsely attributed it to you, but I have proven where you fabricated a statement and inserted it into my quote and tried to attribute it to me.  You did this multiple times, in fact.

Are you trying to threaten me?  Come on let me really have it and keep that weak stuff for your neighborhood kids or your dog or your girlfriend or wherever you are used to using it.  We both know quite well where the results of such a confrontation would lead so don't pretend to act froggy with me.

I have encountered this "threatening" type of attitude through a certain quote, from him, as well.  This seems to happen when he's getting a tad on the angry side.

[falcon9]

I personally do not consider it a "religious" experience. I apologize for using inaccurate terms. Perhaps this will clarify:

I went elsewhere. I saw a being, and spoke to it. I saw several other beings of a different sort. My subjective impression of these different beings was that they were of a higher, or different perhaps is a better word, evolution than ourselves.  Many of the people I know define the first being they meet as "God" not in the personal sense of savior, per se, but in the original definition of a "God"-- being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality --

You're still attributing an entirely subjective experience, (which occurred only within your own skull, despite the attribution of the individual subjective experiences of others), to supernatural causes.  There is no evidence supporting such attributions and much counter evidence of an hallucinatory experience stemming from oxygen deprivation in the brain.

I don't dispute that I, like everyone who dies, suffered from oxygen starvation-- of course I did. That is a medical fact. I also do not dispute that said oxygen deprivation causes hallucinations. It certainly does.

Then you do acknowledge the medical basis for skepticism concerning attribution of such effects to a supernatural cause.  As to the foundational content of such hallucinations, there are other possibilities.

What I have found interesting, and the reason I actively seek to speak with other who have experienced clinical death, is the commonality in the hallucinations. At the time of my first experience, I was nine years old. My upbringing and the cultural influences I had experienced did not provide a contextual reference that could logically explain my particular experience.  My particular hallucination, if you prefer that word, was not in my world view. I assume that if you, personally, experienced a hallucination and saw something that you could not possibly imagine or explain, you would be curious, as well-- I believe, based on reading your posts, you would probably be quite curious. I can't imagine someone like you just dismissing the experience out of hand. That would, after all,be very closed minded.

As with alleged U.F.O. abductees, there are commonalities in their "shared" experience, ("shared" being a misnomer in this instance and NDE instances because they actually consist of groups of individual experiences with apparent commonalities).  So, let's look closer at what conscious and subconscious previous religious exposures a nine-year old could have had.  There's television, contact with other kids who had been religiously-indoctrinated and the inability of brains most nine-year olds, (or 99 year olds), to process a hallucinatory experience in any rational manner.  After all, the brain was starved for oxygen and synapses were firing/not firing sporatically triggering jumbled images, smells, tastes, sounds and "sights" - all of these internal fabrications, (were not as a result of external stimuli).  Given that chaos, anything can be imagined - even retroactively interpreted, especially by 'sharing' the experience with others who are capable of retroactively reinterpreting their NDE as well.  Once such 'sharing' occurs, you're going to get some generalized commonality of agreement, ("white lights", "authortive voices",
"dead relatives showing up", "alien probes" etc.).

A "miracle" by definition: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

for me, at nine, the event was definitely unusual-- in that it had never happened to anyone I knew, and outstanding, in that it stood out as unique from other experiences. by definition, therefore, at the time it was a "miracle".

A nine-year old's interpretation of events as 'miraculous' is dubious due to the general and relative inability to discern fact from fantasy at that age, (this is even carried into the misattributions of older people).

Definition of angel: an attendant spirit or guardian  the other beings I spoke to had arranged themselves around me. The subjective impression was one of being accompanied, observed or watched over, i.e. guarded, though not in a restrictive or negative manner.
I believe I have clarified the nature of my experience, somewhat.

The internal experience remains entirely a claim lacking external evidence and therefore, cannot be equated which a factual event for which independent evidence, (not simular 'depositions' of other hallucinating during NDEs), does not exist.  It then becomes a matter of "faith", (a belief for which there is no evidence).

Just to clarify, I had an NDE during a car accident in which the vehicle I occupied rolled-over.  The paramedics who revived my after some firemen pulled me from the smashed vehicle indicated I was "out", (not just unconscious), for "awhile", (they probably timed it, I didn't ask).  I experienced no 'religious epiphanies' nor aliens, angels or miracles.

[falcon9]

I have encountered this "threatening" type of attitude through a certain quote, from him, as well.  This seems to happen when he's getting a tad on the angry side.

No, you misinterpreted a quote from someone else as "threatening".  This seems to stem from your inability to reason and a resorting to an irrational emotional response.

"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people"
-- Gregory House

[elandry]

I personally do not consider it a "religious" experience. I apologize for using inaccurate terms. Perhaps this will clarify:

I went elsewhere. I saw a being, and spoke to it. I saw several other beings of a different sort. My subjective impression of these different beings was that they were of a higher, or different perhaps is a better word, evolution than ourselves.  Many of the people I know define the first being they meet as "God" not in the personal sense of savior, per se, but in the original definition of a "God"-- being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality --

You're still attributing an entirely subjective experience, (which occurred only within your own skull, despite the attribution of the individual subjective experiences of others), to supernatural causes.  There is no evidence supporting such attributions and much counter evidence of an hallucinatory experience stemming from oxygen deprivation in the brain.

I don't dispute that I, like everyone who dies, suffered from oxygen starvation-- of course I did. That is a medical fact. I also do not dispute that said oxygen deprivation causes hallucinations. It certainly does.

Then you do acknowledge the medical basis for skepticism concerning attribution of such effects to a supernatural cause.  As to the foundational content of such hallucinations, there are other possibilities.

What I have found interesting, and the reason I actively seek to speak with other who have experienced clinical death, is the commonality in the hallucinations. At the time of my first experience, I was nine years old. My upbringing and the cultural influences I had experienced did not provide a contextual reference that could logically explain my particular experience.  My particular hallucination, if you prefer that word, was not in my world view. I assume that if you, personally, experienced a hallucination and saw something that you could not possibly imagine or explain, you would be curious, as well-- I believe, based on reading your posts, you would probably be quite curious. I can't imagine someone like you just dismissing the experience out of hand. That would, after all,be very closed minded.

As with alleged U.F.O. abductees, there are commonalities in their "shared" experience, ("shared" being a misnomer in this instance and NDE instances because they actually consist of groups of individual experiences with apparent commonalities).  So, let's look closer at what conscious and subconscious previous religious exposures a nine-year old could have had.  There's television, contact with other kids who had been religiously-indoctrinated and the inability of brains most nine-year olds, (or 99 year olds), to process a hallucinatory experience in any rational manner.  After all, the brain was starved for oxygen and synapses were firing/not firing sporatically triggering jumbled images, smells, tastes, sounds and "sights" - all of these internal fabrications, (were not as a result of external stimuli).  Given that chaos, anything can be imagined - even retroactively interpreted, especially by 'sharing' the experience with others who are capable of retroactively reinterpreting their NDE as well.  Once such 'sharing' occurs, you're going to get some generalized commonality of agreement, ("white lights", "authortive voices",
"dead relatives showing up", "alien probes" etc.).

A "miracle" by definition: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

for me, at nine, the event was definitely unusual-- in that it had never happened to anyone I knew, and outstanding, in that it stood out as unique from other experiences. by definition, therefore, at the time it was a "miracle".

A nine-year old's interpretation of events as 'miraculous' is dubious due to the general and relative inability to discern fact from fantasy at that age, (this is even carried into the misattributions of older people).

Definition of angel: an attendant spirit or guardian  the other beings I spoke to had arranged themselves around me. The subjective impression was one of being accompanied, observed or watched over, i.e. guarded, though not in a restrictive or negative manner.
I believe I have clarified the nature of my experience, somewhat.

The internal experience remains entirely a claim lacking external evidence and therefore, cannot be equated which a factual event for which independent evidence, (not simular 'depositions' of other hallucinating during NDEs), does not exist.  It then becomes a matter of "faith", (a belief for which there is no evidence).

Just to clarify, I had an NDE during a car accident in which the vehicle I occupied rolled-over.  The paramedics who revived my after some firemen pulled me from the smashed vehicle indicated I was "out", (not just unconscious), for "awhile", (they probably timed it, I didn't ask).  I experienced no 'religious epiphanies' nor aliens, angels or miracles.

   I salute your irrefutable logic, falcon. My hallucinations and I shall retire from the *bleep* battlefield. As to the cultural influences-- we didn't have a tv. I was also home schooled, back when "socialization' was not considered essential to development, so I had few friends. I agree entirely that 9 year olds have little experience processing anything-- that does not change the fact, that at that age, such an event would seem miraculous by definition. I have met several other people who died, and were revived, and experienced nothing. These cases are actually the most fascinating, because one would assume that they didn't suffer the effects of oxygen deprivation, or if they did, it took a different form. Do you have an opinion on why this would be the case?

[elandry]

I personally do not consider it a "religious" experience. I apologize for using inaccurate terms. Perhaps this will clarify:

I went elsewhere. I saw a being, and spoke to it. I saw several other beings of a different sort. My subjective impression of these different beings was that they were of a higher, or different perhaps is a better word, evolution than ourselves.  Many of the people I know define the first being they meet as "God" not in the personal sense of savior, per se, but in the original definition of a "God"-- being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality --

You're still attributing an entirely subjective experience, (which occurred only within your own skull, despite the attribution of the individual subjective experiences of others), to supernatural causes.  There is no evidence supporting such attributions and much counter evidence of an hallucinatory experience stemming from oxygen deprivation in the brain.

I don't dispute that I, like everyone who dies, suffered from oxygen starvation-- of course I did. That is a medical fact. I also do not dispute that said oxygen deprivation causes hallucinations. It certainly does.

Then you do acknowledge the medical basis for skepticism concerning attribution of such effects to a supernatural cause.  As to the foundational content of such hallucinations, there are other possibilities.

What I have found interesting, and the reason I actively seek to speak with other who have experienced clinical death, is the commonality in the hallucinations. At the time of my first experience, I was nine years old. My upbringing and the cultural influences I had experienced did not provide a contextual reference that could logically explain my particular experience.  My particular hallucination, if you prefer that word, was not in my world view. I assume that if you, personally, experienced a hallucination and saw something that you could not possibly imagine or explain, you would be curious, as well-- I believe, based on reading your posts, you would probably be quite curious. I can't imagine someone like you just dismissing the experience out of hand. That would, after all,be very closed minded.

As with alleged U.F.O. abductees, there are commonalities in their "shared" experience, ("shared" being a misnomer in this instance and NDE instances because they actually consist of groups of individual experiences with apparent commonalities).  So, let's look closer at what conscious and subconscious previous religious exposures a nine-year old could have had.  There's television, contact with other kids who had been religiously-indoctrinated and the inability of brains most nine-year olds, (or 99 year olds), to process a hallucinatory experience in any rational manner.  After all, the brain was starved for oxygen and synapses were firing/not firing sporatically triggering jumbled images, smells, tastes, sounds and "sights" - all of these internal fabrications, (were not as a result of external stimuli).  Given that chaos, anything can be imagined - even retroactively interpreted, especially by 'sharing' the experience with others who are capable of retroactively reinterpreting their NDE as well.  Once such 'sharing' occurs, you're going to get some generalized commonality of agreement, ("white lights", "authortive voices",
"dead relatives showing up", "alien probes" etc.).

A "miracle" by definition: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

for me, at nine, the event was definitely unusual-- in that it had never happened to anyone I knew, and outstanding, in that it stood out as unique from other experiences. by definition, therefore, at the time it was a "miracle".

A nine-year old's interpretation of events as 'miraculous' is dubious due to the general and relative inability to discern fact from fantasy at that age, (this is even carried into the misattributions of older people).

Definition of angel: an attendant spirit or guardian  the other beings I spoke to had arranged themselves around me. The subjective impression was one of being accompanied, observed or watched over, i.e. guarded, though not in a restrictive or negative manner.
I believe I have clarified the nature of my experience, somewhat.

The internal experience remains entirely a claim lacking external evidence and therefore, cannot be equated which a factual event for which independent evidence, (not simular 'depositions' of other hallucinating during NDEs), does not exist.  It then becomes a matter of "faith", (a belief for which there is no evidence).

Just to clarify, I had an NDE during a car accident in which the vehicle I occupied rolled-over.  The paramedics who revived my after some firemen pulled me from the smashed vehicle indicated I was "out", (not just unconscious), for "awhile", (they probably timed it, I didn't ask).  I experienced no 'religious epiphanies' nor aliens, angels or miracles.

   I salute your irrefutable logic, falcon. My hallucinations and I shall retire from the *bleep* battlefield. As to the cultural influences-- we didn't have a tv. I was also home schooled, back when "socialization' was not considered essential to development, so I had few friends. I agree entirely that 9 year olds have little experience processing anything-- that does not change the fact, that at that age, such an event would seem miraculous by definition. I have met several other people who died, and were revived, and experienced nothing. These cases are actually the most fascinating, because one would assume that they didn't suffer the effects of oxygen deprivation, or if they did, it took a different form. Do you have an opinion on why this would be the case?

By the way-- the bleep was not a profane word, or an expletive-- perhaps the system would prefer sanguinary, or gory.

[jcribb16]

I have encountered this "threatening" type of attitude through a certain quote, from him, as well.  This seems to happen when he's getting a tad on the angry side.

No, you misinterpreted a quote from someone else as "threatening".  This seems to stem from your inability to reason and a resorting to an irrational emotional response.

"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people"
-- Gregory House

It was the timing of the quote, the reason behind the quote, and the exhibiting of your usual mode of response when you start getting ticked.  All I'm saying is that we need to be careful what we say or use, sometimes, because they can be perceived different ways.  As you very well know, there are some crazy people on the internet.  Words and quotes may be meant a certain way, but when things are contentious, sometimes they are not seen as a mere quote or wording, but what they are implying.  You can stop with the cut down on the personal person remarks, too.  No need for those.

[falcon9]

As to the cultural influences-- we didn't have a tv. I was also home schooled, back when "socialization' was not considered essential to development, so I had few friends. I agree entirely that 9 year olds have little experience processing anything-- that does not change the fact, that at that age, such an event would seem miraculous by definition.

The possibilities suggested were not intended to be all-inclusive.  For instance, children are influenced by contact with their parents, (even if there were no overt religious proselytizations detected by a nine-year old), or books - even if home-schooled.  Many things seem "miraculous" to nine-year olds; such perceptions are not necessarily indicative of 'miracules'.

I have met several other people who died, and were revived, and experienced nothing. These cases are actually the most fascinating, because one would assume that they didn't suffer the effects of oxygen deprivation, or if they did, it took a different form. Do you have an opinion on why this would be the case?

Preconceived notions, (especially unconscious ones), can and do have an influence in that regard.  Such preconceptions will vary from person to person, even with some 'socialized' commonalities.  Having "few friends" is significantly different than having none, (or many).  A few friends will have more depth of influence than many friends, (who will have many different perspectives and similarties to 'share', as opposed to smaller pool of friends).  

Were I to speculate further, (as you're requesting), I'd say that some people tend to skepticism more than an unquestioning acceptance of a more "religious" explanation to account for such experiences.

[falcon9]

It was the timing of the quote, the reason behind the quote, and the exhibiting of your usual mode of response when you start getting ticked. 

Your conclusions are based upon perceptions, assumptions and preconceptions, (just like they are for most people).  These aspects may not be accurate relections of a situation but, the only information currently available.

All I'm saying is that we need to be careful what we say or use, sometimes, because they can be perceived different ways.  As you very well know, there are some crazy people on the internet.  Words and quotes may be meant a certain way, but when things are contentious, sometimes they are not seen as a mere quote or wording, but what they are implying.  

Even implications, insinuations, inferences based upon subjective aspects of perceptions, assumptions and preconceptions can & will vary.  To that extent, I think we agree, (at least nominally).