@OmSigDAVID,
Of course Id be quite interested in all the events and the means by which i seemed to acquire the information. However, that would entail a detailed investigation of which Im not sure Id know how to begin.
At the outset,The very act of maintaining some objectivity would be difficult because Id have some initial information that followed this sort of reasoning:
!I was at point A and was "unconscious" or "sufficiently dead" by what medicine now knows
2Something entirely different was going on atpoint B at the same time I was unconscious. Point B is a t sopme distnace to my point A
3 When I awoke (Or was revived) I knew about everything that happened at point B while I was sufficiently dead.
Im thinking that there needs to be established some assurance of "information isolation" between me at A and what went on at B. Ne?
Id guess start by conducting some interviews tofind out whether anyone was talking about the occurence at B , or was listening to a radio, or that there was any other means of conveying a news story to where I was lying unconscious.
You agree that wed then have to investigate at some point establishing what was common about Me, Point A, and Point B (as well as simultaneity in time).
NDE's are an experience of a Not-quite-dead being(IMHO) so theres a vast chasm of reality between sufficiently dead and not-quite-so-dead
FACT OF NATURE
A marine Galapogos iguana and a Saltwater Crocodile can totally stop allbodily functions underwater. Theyve been monitored with no pulse or brain waves in controlled studies. Then, they just come back to life. and they do this **** all the time. Im wondering whether we have a latent ability to go deep within ourselves and almost shut down during stress and trauma so that medicine isnt yet able to define the state as anything but "sufficiently dead", when its actually not-quite-so-dead.
I think we have to start thereabouts dont you?.