Skeptiko - Science at the Tipping Point

The author of, Dreamer: 20 Years of Psychic Dreams and How They Changed My Life, discusses his psychic and precognitive experiences. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview discussing precognition and the psychic dreams of author Andy Paquette. During the interview Mr. Paquette discusses the differences between real life precognition expereinces and labratorty experiments on ESP like those of Dr. Daryl Bem, “Well, the funny thing about asking me a question like that is that while I am aware of some of those things, I became aware of them after I already knew that precognition happens because it happened to me in much more dramatic ways than was ever recorded in the lab. On the other hand, the reason he is studying it in the first place is because there are people like me who’ve had more dramatic examples of precognition. We’ve recorded them or passed them on to other people and this eventually makes researchers curious.” Paquette continues, “Now the problem with testing in the lab as I see it, is that you’re trying to duplicate an effect that has a very specific reason for coming into being without knowing what that reason is and without having any way to recreate those conditions because you don’t understand the reason to begin with. This, in my mind, is the reason why laboratory results tend to be very weak. It’s because they’re not really duplicating the right circumstances that cause these kinds of things to happen. So what happens is they kind of nick the edge of this thing that they’re researching, and even that little tiny slice they get is enough to support a hypothesis of precognition. However, it’s not as dramatic as the kind of real-life, spontaneous examples such as the ones that occurred with me.” Visit Andy’s website Help pilot Dr. Rupert Sheldrake’s telepathyexperiment.com Play it: Download MP3 (31:00 min.) Read it: Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. Before we get started with today’s interview I just want to make a quick little announcement here. Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, whom many of you know through his work, his many books, his very interesting website, and his appearance on the Skeptiko show, is launching a telephone telepathy experiment here, available in the U.S. and Canada. He’s looking for some folks to help him pilot this study. So if you’re interested in doing some telephone telepathy experiments and helping out in getting this project off the ground, please visit telepathyexperiment.com, or you can visit the link on our website and hear more about that. It’s actually a slight bit of a lead-in to today’s interview because today we welcome Andy Paquette, whose book Dreamer is a fascinating account of his experience with precognitive dreams and all the associated strangeness that goes with them. Andy is a frequent contributor to the Skeptiko forum and if any of you visit there I’m sure you’ve read some of his posts. But this book of this I thought really deserves the only kind of attention we can give it in a full episode. So here’s my interview with Andy Paquette. Alex Tsakiris: Well, this book of yours is really quite amazing. I found it very, very interesting but also challenging. It reminded me of reading the autobiography of a Yogi many years ago. I walked away thinking that either this guy, Yogananda, is a complete liar and that seemed quite unlikely, or that this personal account was going to radically shift how I thought about the world. So I kind of felt the same way with this book, in a way. The way I want to try and pull it apart in this interview is to go down two paths. They’re the two paths that we’ve been exploring on this show and one is the “Is it real?” path. Does precognition really occur and maybe more sp[...]

Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris and atheist blogger Greta Christina square-off for a debate on near Death Experience (NDE) science. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview discussing the existence of the soul and the science of Near Death Experience. During the interview Tsakiris points out the lack of research among NDE skeptics, “And really, if we’re going to play the kind of credential game, you really wouldn’t want to stack Dr. Bruce Greyson, Dr. Jeff Long, Dr. Pim Van Lommel, one of the most highly regarded cardiologists in the world who’s been studying near-death experience for 30 years-you wouldn’t want to stack them against Keith Augustine, who really doesn’t have any kind of medical credentials. So I’m talking to you about published research in these cases.” Ms. Christina responds, “There is what seems to me to be extremely shaky research and there’s no consensus about it in any sense-in fact, the overwhelming consensus among neurologists is that no, these people are, I’m not going to say crackpots, that’s too strong a word. But these people are mistaken. They’re being led down the garden path by their wishful thinking. And again, when you look at the history of thousands and thousands and thousands of years of human knowledge, where supernatural explanations consistently get replaced with natural ones and it’s ultimately when the research has been really done and it’s been really examined, it’s never been the case that it’s happened the other way around.” Near the end of the debate, Ms. Christina sums up her argument “…even if I conceded everything that you’ve said in this whole conversation, all that it proves is that consciousness is weird and that we don’t understand it. That’s all that it proves. It doesn’t prove anything about there being an immaterial soul that animates consciousness. It doesn’t prove anything about immaterial soul surviving death.” Tsakiris responds, “I don’t mind hearing your opinion, but you’ve got to back it up. You’re saying that every time somebody gives you research you go and look at it and it’s debunked. Well, tell me. Tell me what’s been debunked. You haven’t cited any real NDE research. You cited Keith Augustine and then you want to say Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptical Magazine?” Greata’s Blog Post: Why Near Death Experiences Are a Terrible Argument for the Soul Play it: Download MP3 (43:00 min.) Read it: Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. For a while on this show I’ve maintained that there really isn’t a good, solid, scientific argument against near-death experience science. If you’ve followed this show  and you’ve listened to the guests that we’ve had on, people like Dr. Jeffrey Long, Dr. Pim Van Lommel, Dr. Peter Fenwick, Dr. Bruce Greyson (who we haven’t actually interviewed but who has contributed by email), if you stack them up against the skeptics we’ve talked to, Dr. G. M. Woerlee, Dr. Kevin Nelson, Dr. Susan Blackmore, Dr. Steven Novella, or even Dr. Sam Parnia (who’s kind of in the middle of this issue but we really have to put on the side of the skeptic) if you stack up the two arguments there’s really no comparison. The skeptical arguments against near-death experience science really amount to nothing more than Apologetics. Folks are starting with an end conclusion that this is the way it has to be and then working backwards to try and fit the data and winding up in a position that just says, “Don’t give up hope. We can still hold out that someday we’ll be proven true.” This is most evident by the fact that there just isn’t any NDE research that these skepti[...]

Father Rod Walton author of, Bereavement Rescue with Near Death Experience, discusses the evidence for and uses of NDE science. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview discussing the use of near death experience science in dealing with the loss of a loved one. During the interview Father Rod Walton explains why science is important to his work, “I think people really want evidence. Most people, once you give them evidence, it changes them. I often use Ken Ring’s book, Mindsight, about people who have been born blind.  They don’t even see in there dreams… they only can smell, taste and touch… but when these people have a near death experience they do see for the first time.  When the bereaved realize that this doesn’t add up, it affects them. It makes them willing to listen. They’re getting hope based on facts rather than just perhaps and ifs and pie in the sky.” Father Walton also discusses the Christian churches unwillingness to accept this new science, “Many Christian communities have great tunnel vision. They’re only looking in a straight line. They don’t look left; they don’t look right. I don’t think they’re searching. I don’t think they’re seeking. I think they’re just following tradition and dogma.” Father Rod Walton’s Bereavement Rescue Play it: Download MP3 (18:00 min.) Read it: Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. This show, Skeptiko, has always been about following the data. That’s kind of been our tagline. Just follow the data and you’ll find your way through these controversial, unsettling, breakthroughs in science and you’ll come to a new understanding about who you really are. That’s the theme of this show, if you will. But today’s interview with Rod Walton got me thinking about what it really means to follow the data. In particular, the data behind near-death experience science, a topic we’ve covered a lot on this show. As you know, we’ve spoken with some of the world’s leading researchers and we’ve spoken with some of the leading critics, as well. I guess when I follow that data, at the end of the day I don’t see how a reasonable person can look at that body of data and just say, “Gee, it’s all delusion. It’s all fraud. It’s all misreporting.” I mean, blind people seeing, patients reporting with crystal clear consciousness what happened to them while they were clinically dead and doctors and nurses confirming that. There are hundreds and hundreds of cases like that, and I think if you take the position that “Hey, that isn’t really happening,” or it’s somehow fraud or delusion, well then you’re not even following the data and the rest of this probably won’t mean much to you. What’s interesting to me is what if you do follow the data to that point? What if you’ve read some of the research? Read some of the books, the accounts, and you’ve gotten to the point where you say, “Wow, you know it sure does seem like there’s something there. There is something to this near-death experience. It is happening. It is medically unexplainable. It does seem to suggest that consciousness survives death.” What about then? Are you following the data? Or does following the data in this case, in the case of talking about consciousness surviving death, you not really dying when you think you die, does that kind of data and following of that kind of data require something more? Well, it did and it does for today’s guest, Father Rod Walton. As you’ll hear in this interview, Rod was familiar with the near-death experience research, but it wasn’t until he hit a bump in the road in his life-in this case, the loss of a lov[...]

Author Robert McLuhan examines the psychology and hidden purpose behind the modern skeptical movement pioneered by James Randi. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with the author of, Randi’s Prize: What Sceptics Say About the Paranormal, Why They Are Wrong, and Why It Matters, Robert McLuhan. During the interview Mr. McLuhan discusses the possible motivation of skeptics, “…we complain an awful lot about people like James Randi who apparently subvert what seems to be a perfectly good data and rather deceptively distort perceptions… but I think we have to start thinking beyond that and start thinking about what it is exactly that these guys are trying to protect? Is it a rational thing they’re doing? Perhaps I can make the point more succinctly in terms of psychokinesis, just imagine the effects of science declaring psychokinesis is real. If you really think this through you see we are in a very changed environment if we say human minds can interact with matter. That raises all sorts of very difficult implications.” McLuhan continues, “If we think some people can hex other people, or interfere with the brakes when they’re driving — it doesn’t even have to be true — but if science says something like that is feasible and possible, it might happen, then what sort of situation are we in? I suspect, and I’m not sure if this is a conscious idea skeptics have… but I think what I’m trying to say in a nutshell is we have to think about the wider implications of psi endorsed and accepted by a central authority like science.” Rob McLuhan Blogs at Paranormalia Play it: Download MP3 (47:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Robert McLuhan is an Oxford-trained freelance journalist who’s authored Randy’s Prize: What Skeptics Say About the Paranormal, Why They’re Wrong, and Why it Matters. Robert, welcome to Skeptiko. Robert McLuhan: Thanks, Alex; I’m glad to be here. Alex Tsakiris: I’m glad you’re here, too. Thanks for joining me. You’ve written an interesting book here that really goes way beyond James Randi and sets out the whole argument for paranormal effects like psi and near-death experience and so many of the things we’ve talked so much about here on Skeptiko. So let’s start by talking about the argument that supports the claim for the paranormal and why the gravitational pull of orthodoxy, as you say, means that all those those claims might not matter anyway. What is the argument for the paranormal? Robert McLuhan: What I was trying to say about the-I came up with this term, “rational gravity” and by that I meant the sort of pull of orthodoxy. It’s a psychological process. We’re used to the world working in certain ways. That’s our everyday reality. When something comes along that doesn’t fit with that reality, then I suspect there’s a psychological process that kicks in in many cases, not in all. Some people will unconsciously find some way of resolving the dilemma posed by this apparent anomaly and in the process of doing that they will come up with all sorts of explanations. Having arrived at explanations of what’s happened or what somebody has claimed, no matter how speculative it may be, they will feel that the whole matter has been resolved successfully and they don’t have to think about it anymore. I think that’s a process that one sees going on quite a lot in the skeptical community. Alex Tsakiris: Right, because you think the evidence that you lay out in the book is actually quite strong, at least in some areas, right? Robert McLuhan: I do, yes. But I think how one responds to it is very much a question of temperament. I mean, take something like telepathy, and personally I’m not particularly phased by the idea. It doesn’t bother me. It doesn’t frighten me. I’m intrigued about it, curio[...]

Popular author Nick Bunick claims past-life regression provided remembrances of Jesus, but biblical scholars have doubts. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with bestselling author of, Time For Truth, Nick Bunick. During the interview Mr. Bunick discusses how a chance visit to a psychic revealed his past,  ”Alex, I had no idea what he was talking about. Two thousand years ago I walked with the Master? I didn’t even have a religion. I’d never read the Gospels. I did have a relationship with God; it was a spiritual relationship. But what happened to me then over the next six or seven years, I had affirmation after affirmation from other sources that indeed, my spirit and soul had manifested itself 2,000 years ago in the person we know as the Apostle Paul.” But, as Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris explains during the interview, biblical scholars take exception with some of Mr. Bunick’s claims, “I’ve tried to get a sense for biblical scholarship in general and it surprised how much we do know about the Bible. It is the most studied document in history.  Millions of man-hours have been spent scouring the earth, finding every copy we can get our hands on. Scholars have gone through and scrutinized every word and every letter.  I don’t think these scholars would agree with your account. Secular scholars like Bart Ehrman and Robert Price, as well as Christian Biblical scholars don’t find any support for your claim that the Bible used to support reincarnation.” According to Bunick transcripts of past-life regression sessions, “gave information about the life of Paul never before known before, as well as the life of Jesus never before known. And also, it conflicted in many places with what is written in the New Testament.” Nick Bunick Play it: Download MP3 (49:00 min.) Read it: Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris, and I have to tell you that in preparing for this episode, in particular the introduction to this episode, I was really challenged. I was trying to figure out how to wrap my arms around what I wanted to say. And then I was going through the forum and I came across a video that one of our listeners had posted. The video was from philosopher/writer, Alan Watts, who in the 1950′s was one of the first people in the West to really popularize Zen Buddhism. Now since then his message has become very popular with Atheists and secular folks for a variety of reasons I can’t totally understand. But nevertheless, I want to play you about a minute of audio here and then talk about this for a minute. Here’s Alan Watts: “I am not a Zen Buddhist. I am not advocating Zen Buddhism. I’m not trying to convert anyone to it. I have nothing to sell. I am an entertainer. [audience laughter] That is to say in the same sense that when you go to a concert and you listen to someone play Mozart, he has nothing to sell except the sound of the music. He doesn’t want to convert you to anything; he doesn’t want you to join an organization in favor of Mozart’s music as opposed to, say, Beethoven’s. And I approach you in the same spirit as a musician with his piano or violinist with his violin. I just want you to enjoy a point of view which I enjoy.” So what struck me about this, of course, is the “I’m an entertainer.” Here’s a guy who became somewhat of a cultural lightning rod. He has these ideas that at the time were very controversial, this Zen Buddhist kind of “we are nothing, there is nothing,” at least the Western interpretation of that kind of thing going on. He’s in the middle of all this controversy, in the middle of all this debate and people want him to go back and forth. He steps back and says, “I’m an entertainer. I’m just playing [...]

Author Chris Carter discuses how Near Death Experience Science is misunderstood and misrepresented by mainstream science. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with Chris Carter, author of, Science and the Near Death Experience. During the interview Carter explains how the acceptance of paradigm changing science like near death experience and telepathy wouldn’t change science as we know it, “…I do not agree with you that the acceptance-say of telepathy, or the acceptance of the near-death experience as a genuine separation of mind from body, I do not think that would challenge any aspect of science. I don’t think it would change the way that neuroscientists come in and do their jobs. I think that everything would be exactly the same. They’d continue looking for the same chemicals, the same neurotransmitters, the same areas of the brain that light up. They’d still be trying to work with split brain patients and patents who have damaged brains. I don’t think that anything would change. Except, yes, their conversations down at the pub on weekends would change. Absolutely. The philosophical conversations would change. But I really don’t think that it would impact anything in science simply because modern neuroscience is completely neutral as to whether the brain produces the mind or whether the brain acts as a receiver/transmitter for the mind.” According to Chris Carter the real dividing  point between mainstream science and the breakthroughs of near death experience science lie in conventional view that everything we experience can be reduced to just brain activity, “Materialists like to claim successes in modern science have been due to a Materialistic outlook. You’ve probably heard that before. But this is nonsense. The three men most responsible for the scientific revolution, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, were not Materialists. One of the reasons Galileo recanted his views is because he feared the Church would excommunicate him. Newton spent the last half of his life writing on theology. I mean, Materialism is an ancient philosophy that basically asserts that everything has a material cause. Therefore, the brain produces the mind. This dates back at least to Democritus in ancient Greece. It was thought to gain support from the physics of Isaac Newton, although Newton himself did not agree. Newton himself instead followed the Dualism of Renee Descartes. It was really the 18th century philosophers such as Diderot and Voltaire who spread the doctrines of Materialism and Mechanism. They did this in order to combat the religious fundamentalism and superstition, and the persecution that were common in their time.” Chris Carter Play it: Download MP3 (39:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. Before we get to today’s interview with Chris Carter, I want to take a minute and tell you about something that happened to me this week. One of the benefits of doing Skeptiko and having it achieve the little bit of success that it has is that I now get books sent to me on a regular basis. Little surprises in the mail. A new book. A new movie to review. Last week I received a request like that from a guy who had heard my interview with progressive Christian and self-proclaimed heretic, Spencer Burke. This guy had heard my interview with Spencer and he’d written a book on reimagining the Gospel in a new way, in a scientific way. He wanted to see if maybe we would do a Skeptiko show on it. So the first thing I did was email him back and say, “Hey, have you listened to some of my other shows? You might not really like my take on the “Gospel narrative.” Well, this launched about a two day email exchange back and forth between this author and myself about essentially what boils down to the t[...]

Scholar and author Dr. James Fetzer discuses how his research into the JFK assassination and 9/11 attacks has allowed him to sort out the real evidence. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with one of the world’s leading authorities on the JFK assassination, Jim Fetzer. During the interview Dr. Fetzer explains why it’s still hard for many Americans to accept the mountains of research contradicting the official story about the JFK assassination, “we place so much confidence in the government that we want to believe it’s there to nurture and protect us from our enemies, that any indication, even if it turns out to the powerful evidence, that this core belief might be false is too threatening to acknowledge. So a lot of Americans find it easier to adopt an ostrich policy and just bury their heads in the sand and ignore discussions and demonstrations such as the books that I publish that prove to the contrary.” While the show is a departure from topics usually covered on Skeptiko, according to host Alex Tsakiris it has many similarities, “Skeptiko has focused on the science of human consciousness… Psi, near-death experience, parapsychology. But Dr. Fetzer’s work is relevant to Skeptiko because the process he’s gone through in terms of sorting through a lot of scientific evidence on very controversial topics is exactly what we’ve been talking about on the last 100+ episodes of Skeptiko.” Dr. Fetzer, who has authored three books and dozens of papers on JFK assassination science, also discusses how his career teaching philosophy of science and critical thinking courses at the University of Minnesota provides him a unique perspective on competing theories regarding the JFK case, “I recognize that in science the convergence of opinion only obtains when you’re looking at the same range of hypotheses, using the same body of evidence, and using the same rules of reasoning. I know a great deal about these cases because I’ve investigated the full range of hypotheses, looked at all of the evidence, as much as is available, and sorted it out in terms of the authentic and the falsified and fabricated. I know the rules of reasoning because that’s been my professional obligation as a philosopher of science. So I’m in a position to analyze these things in a way that most others simply are not.” Dr. James Fetzer Assassination Science Website Play it: Download MP3 (65:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. Well, this show is going to be quite a departure-or at least it’s going to seem like quite a departure-from the topics we normally cover on Skeptiko. Today we’re going to talk about the JFK assassination. Yeah, we’re going to talk about the JFK assassination with one of the leading scholar/researchers on the topic, who also happens to be someone who’s taught critical thinking and scientific analysis for 35 years and is a very highly regarded philosopher/scholar on a number of topics. But the reason I wanted to cover the JFK assassination really does have to do with what Skeptiko is all about, because the JFK assassination, at the end of the day, is about two competing narratives. One narrative says that there was this lone, nut assassin who killed the President back in the 1960′s; and another narrative says that the government has lied and covered up its involvement in essentially a coup d’état. And the reason I think this is particularly relevant to Skeptiko is that I think the process you have to go through to sort through all the evidence and try and come to your own understanding, your own belief about what really happened, is very similar to the kind of process we’ve been talking about on the last 100+ shows of Skeptiko. Now while our gue[...]

Cardiologist and NDE Researcher Dr. Pim van Lommel discuses how his research with near-death experiencers has changed his beliefs about life and consciousness. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with cardiologist and author of Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience, Dr. Pim van Lommel.  During the interview Dr. van Lommel explains how he began his research, and how what he learned from his patients led him to a personal transformation, “I started to ask my patients who survived cardiac arrest if they could remember something of the period of unconsciousness. To my big surprise, out of 50 patients asked, 12 of them told me about their NDEs. This was the start of my scientific curiosity, how could people have an enhanced consciousness when they are unconscious, when the heart doesn’t work, and there is no breathing, and their brain has stopped functioning?”  Van Lommel continues, “When you have spoken to patients who have had a near-death experience, their emotions, their reluctance to share their experience with you… it’s so honest. You just believe them because they’re so honest. You get convinced that there is more than what we can see, what we can measure.” Dr. van Lommel also discusses how his controversial findings have been accepted by the medical community, “The gap is not as big as you presume.  It just looks that way because the Skeptics are very active. The Skeptics have their own truth and they don’t listen to somebody else who has a different opinion. So there’s a gap and there will always be a gap. There is no discussion possible with Skeptics because they have the truth.  But a lot of physicians are a little bit more open, but they won’t write articles. They won’t write or tell about it in public. I know some physicians who have had a near-death experience. They said to me and wrote to me that, ‘what happened to me now I’ve always said this is impossible, and now it happened to me.’” Play it: Download MP3 (40:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris. Before we get started with today’s interview with Dr. Pim Van Lommel, I want to take a couple of minutes and talk about skepticism and a couple of things that have come up in the Skeptiko forums. Before Skeptiko I don’t think I ever had more than a couple of forum posts in my whole life and since I’ve already passed the 1,000 mark in forum posts on Skeptiko, you can see that I’ve changed quite a bit. This dialogue that I’ve been able to have with Skeptiko listeners has been very informative for me. It’s also shaped a lot of the shows and a lot of the directions we’ve taken with many of our guests. The other thing I feel like I’ve gotten from the Skeptiko forums is a deeper appreciation for the skeptical position, if you will. Not that I agree with all the skeptics I dialogue with there because in general I don’t, but it gives me an appreciation for what I’ve dubbed as the “two skeptical questions.” They both relate to this interview we have coming up with Pim Van Lommel, but they’re also broader in scope, as well. So the first skeptical question that seems to always crop up is the rebuttal question-the “but” question, and it’s obvious. It’s what’s the other side have to say? And while all of us who are scientifically and reason/logic based ask those questions all the time, there’s something unique in the way that the question gets framed within this skeptic versus believer context. The difference is the depth of rebuttal. Let me give you an example of how this has played out in the Skeptiko forum and then you’ll understand what I mean. Recently in the Skeptiko [...]

NDE Researcher Dr. Jeffrey Long responds to recent comments by Dr. Sam Parnia regarding near-death experiences being a “trick of the mind”. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with physician and New York Bestselling author, Dr. Jeffrey Long. During the interview Dr. Long is asked to respond to recent comments by fellow NDE researcher Dr. Sam Parnia suggesting that the near-death experience phenomena may be an illusion, Dr. Long said, “… I strongly support any researcher that has a reasonable opinion about near-death experiences. I think the one opinion that I think is not reasonable at this point in time is the absolute blanket statement that NDEs are illusions. There’s just too strong evidence forthcoming from my research as well as the research of others. I mean, by the time you have near-death experiencers with crystal-clear consciousness, the out-of-body observation seemed to be overwhelmingly correct in both prospective and retrospective studies, near-death experiences in those totally blind from birth, near atypical near-death experiences even while under general anesthesia, and it goes on and on. I think that’s pretty thoroughly refuted… when I read the interview it sounded to me more like Dr. Sam Parnia considered NDEs to be a research question. In other words, that’s why he’s doing this prospective study. The comment that stuck out more to me is ‘I don’t know’ in terms of what the cause of near-death experiences are.” But when asked what evidence would suggest that Dr. Parnia’s suspicion is correct, Dr. Long presented a highly unlikely set of circumstances, “for NDEs to be accepted as an illusion then each and every one of all of the following must be true for all NDEs: 1) The predominately crystal-clear consciousness during NDEs would always have to be an illusion. 2) Accurate OOB observations (out-of-body observations) during NDEs must all be false. 3) NDEs reported under general anesthesia, they all must be false.  4) The consistency of NDE reports, both from very young children who are not socialized, and older children, and adults — the consistency of all those groups must be explainable by some yet unknown means. 5) We also have to explain the consistency of the content from NDEs around the world, including cultures very different from Western cultures. All that must be explainable.” In conclusion, Long states, “therefore, the belief that NDEs are only illusions would require both: 1) the lack of acceptance of established and corroborated, extensive NDE evidence and 2) faith that science will someday have explanations for what we’ve already observed and find unexplainable.” Dr. Jeffrrey Long: What Must Be True If NDEs Are an Illusion VIDEO: Stanford Research Institute (SRI)  investigations into ESP and psychic phenomena featuring Uri Geller. Play it: Download MP3 (31:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris, and on this episode of Skeptiko, well, I have a couple of different things I want to try and mish-mash together and create a show for you. But before I do any of that, I want to take a minute, because I really don’t talk about this too much. I want to just thank you all, listeners. You know, it’s kind of amazing. You sit down here in front of a microphone and you’re all by yourself after the kids have gone to school and it’s nice and quiet and you talk and maybe you call some people up and you talk to them. It’s just amazing that that can reach out and connect with so many people like this show has. That interaction, that talking to you and you talking back to me has really been a tremendous gift, at the risk of being trite. But it really has. It’s been a tremendous experience for me and I jus[...]

Interview with author and influential thinker in the Emergent Church movement looks at Christianity 10,000 years from now. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with the author of, A Heretic’s Guide to Eternity, Spencer Burke.  During the interview Mr. Burke is asked about the future of Christianity in light of discoveries regarding the nature of consciousness, “I take a long view of history. So let’s say 10,000 years from now the Christians look back at us in the early, nostalgic age of early Christianity in the year 2000. Think about all the understanding and knowledge they will have. This perspective gives us a little bit of freedom to hold things a bit loosely.  If I say, ‘what I have right now, if I lose it I lose who I am’… that’s a difficult place to be. But if I say, ‘here’s who I am today’, now I have the freedom and strength to continue to move forward without the fear or worry of discovering, learning, growing, evolving… whatever words you want to use… maturing in ‘the way’… why are we so afraid of that?” Mr. Burke also examines the future direction of the Emergent Church movement he helped found, “…you know the pendulum swung so hard in some ways with the Emerging Church, and I love that, but it’s also got to find some reality and that’s my quest. Like in my book, Making Sense of the Church, I was struggling with the idea of saying all evangelism is just evil. And I’m like, no, just evil evangelism is evil. Leadership’s bad. No, bad leadership is bad. Isn’t there good leadership? Good evangelism? And I think what Skeptiko is doing with this in a beautiful way is maybe creating that hybrid. I think that’s what this next thing is.” Learn more about Spencer Burke Play it: Download MP3 (41:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I’m your host, Alex Tsakiris, and for those of you who have been following this show for a while, you might realize that we’ve kind of been going down two tracks. One track, of course, is exploring the science of consciousness. This has more-or-less been the mainstay of the show. We’ve primarily focused on evidence that this here-now mind model of consciousness, if you will, that is that everything that makes you you is generated by your brain right here and right now. That’s obviously the prevailing model in science. What we’ve been focusing on is that that model, that paradigm, is more-or-less being swamped by data that suggests otherwise. So on this show we’ve interviewed Rupert Sheldrake and Morphic Residence and Dean Radin and Presentience and Remote Viewing and Global Consciousness Project and on and on and on. Lately we’ve been looking at near-death experience. All of these phenomena and the data that the research into them has generated contradicts this model that our mind is generated by what our brain is doing right here, right now, that chemistry. Overturning that model has such a profound effect for just about every area of science that you look at that it really deserves a lot of attention that we’ve given it on this show to really understand what that research is telling us. At the same time, of course, we’ve had to look at the opinions of the hold-outs, the skeptics, and the folks that are saying, “Not so fast.” And this point of view is probably best expressed by Dr. Richard Wiseman, who’s been a guest on the show a couple times and who takes the position that sure, all that data is great, but it’s not enough to convince me. It may be enough for any other field of science, but for such a revolutionary idea it’s not enough. It falls under this “extraordinary claims, extraordinary proof” thing that you’ve heard[...]

Interview with NDE researcher and AWARE Project leader explores limits of experiments on near-death experience. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with the NDE expert and author of, What Happens When We Die?, Dr. Sam Parnia.  During the interview Dr. Parnia is asked why he suspects NDE is an “illusion”, and a “trick of the mind”.  When pressed, Dr Parnia stated, “…It may well be. You’re pushing and I’m giving you honest answers. I don’t know. If I knew the answers then I don’t think I would have engaged and spent 12 years of my life and so much of my medical reputation to try to do this. Because to appreciate people like me, I risk a lot by doing this sort of experiment. So I’m interested in the answers and I don’t know. Like I said, if I was to base everything on the knowledge that I have currently of neuroscience, then the easiest explanation is that this is probably an illusion.” While Dr. Parnia’s position regarding the validity of the NDE phenomena stands in contrast to most other near death experience researchers he continues to push forward.  His AWARE Project asks cardiac arrest patients who experience a NDE to recall hidden pictures placed above their bed.  This methodology has been criticized by NDE experts who give it little chance of yielding positive results. Dr. Parnia responds, “I don’t know if [the tests will] be successful or not. That’s an important point to make. As I said, I don’t have a particular stance. It’s possible that these experiences are simply illusionary and it’s possible that they’re real. Science hasn’t got the answers yet. So we have to go fair-minded. Right now what we have is a setup that can at least, we hope, objectively determine an answer to the question.” Dr. Sam Parnia Bio Video lecture at Goldsmiths in London Is Dr. Sam Parnia’s AWARE Study of Near Death Experience Doomed to Fail? Play it: Download MP3 (38:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: We’re joined today by the author of What Happens When We Die? He’s a leading expert on NDE research. He’s best known as the lead investigator of the AWARE Project. Dr. Sam Parnia is a Fellow in pulmonary care at Cornell University and he’s a doctor. I mean, in addition to being a researcher, he’s also there in the ICU saving lives. Dr. Parnia, thanks so much for joining me today on Skeptiko. Dr. Sam Parnia: My pleasure. Alex Tsakiris: Well, it’s really my pleasure to have you on. Your work has generated a lot of interest and the little bit of exchange we’ve had has generated a lot of interest. A couple of months ago I did publish a post suggesting that the AWARE study of consciousness during clinical death–I suggested that maybe that was doomed to fail. You are nice enough to join me on this show today and discuss that a little bit. So let me start with this: in replying to my post, you suggested that maybe I had misrepresented the AWARE Project when I said it seeks to verify out-of-body experience after clinical death. Perhaps you’d like to clarify what the AWARE Project is and maybe what that misrepresentation was. Dr. Sam Parnia: One of the things that’s really interesting to me is trying to understand what happens to-as you pointed out, I work in an Intensive Care Unit-and one of the things I find most interesting is trying to understand what happens to patients when they’re critically ill. And then particularly when they have died, which is basically a cardiac arrest. So cardiac arrest and death are synonymous. Most people don’t realize that. We deal with a number of patients who have cardiac arrest in hospitals and what we’ve come to understand is that in order for us to improve the medical care of these patients, I’m not sure that we can bring them back to life again and improve their neurological outcome[...]

Comparative Religions scholar and author of, Authors of the Impossible explores the link between consciousness and culture. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for and interview with Rice University Religious Studies professor and author of, Authors of the Impossible, Dr. Jeff Kripal.  During the interview Dr. Kripal discusses how a broad view of comparative religions might inform scientific debate on the nature of consciousness, “I have  developed this model of consciousness and culture… I’m sure some people will read that it’s always just culture. Other people will read it as saying I believe in some kind of absolute consciousness beyond our culture… but actually it’s both. I’m trying to maintain this both/and thinking and not keep falling into this either/or.” Dr. Kripal also discusses how this model might change our view of near-death experience science, “I’m not suggesting that near-death experiences are simply culture or nothing but local context. Not at all. I think consciousness is self-existent and does survive bodily death, but I also think it always, always, always expresses itself… through language and culture and context. So you’re never outside of that. But you may be outside of it when you die. I mean, I don’t know. If I’ve died before I don’t remember it.” Dr. Kripal also share his thoughts on how a new model of consciousness might impact religion, “I’m thinking more of creating a new religious worldview. Not me, personally, mind you, but as a culture. That’s where the historian can speak here, too. When religious systems start out, nobody knows where they’re going. They never, ever, ever come out of nowhere. They’re always syntheses or fusions of the scientific knowledge of the time and the different cultures that are interacting. So where I place my hope isn’t on Church A or Synagogue B or Scientist X. It’s the future generations who can put this stuff together in a completely new way, which I think is almost inevitable.” Check out Dr. Jeff Kripal’s website Authors of The Impossible Podcast: Dean Radin Interview Play it: Download MP3 (61:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Today we’re joined by the author of Authors of the Impossible: The Paranormal and the Sacred, a book that he’s also developing into a documentary film, as well as a podcast titled, Impossible Talk. As an aside, I have to mention what a fine podcast it is. The interviews are just fantastic and Jeff brings this dialogue-between-colleagues style that’s really enjoyable and quite insightful. He’s also the head of the Department of Religious Studies at Rice University and is the author of several other interesting books I hope we have a chance to talk about. Dr. Jeff Kripal, thanks for joining me today on Skeptiko. Dr. Jeff Kripal: Thanks for having me, Alex. Alex Tsakiris: You bet. You know, Jeff, it’s interesting digging into your background. I mean, Department of Religious Studies at Rice University. That doesn’t sound all that exciting on the surface, but what a story. I mean, you grow up Roman Catholic; you go to the seminary for four years because you think you want to be a priest. You leave, get this Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in Comparative Religions and then wind up writing a book, Kali’s Child, about the homoerotic interpretations of this Hindu saint and you find yourself in this intellectual firestorm and your book is being debated on the floor of the Indian Parliament. And now here you are 15 years later, you’re tacking psi and the paranormal. I mean, what a ride for an academic. Dr. Jeff Kripal: Yeah, it’s been a ride. It’s all related in my mind. It’s all really the same set of questions, but from the outside it might look pretty wild. Alex Tsakiris: Tell us a little bit about that path and what are those questions? Dr. Jeff K[...]

Interview with author and consciousness expert Dr. Susan Blackmore explains why Skeptics and atheists cling to her opinions on NDE science. Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for and interview with oft quoted near-death experience skeptic, Dr. Susan Blackmore. During the interview Dr. Blackmore acknowledges that dispute her reputation among near-death experience doubters, she has not remained current in the field, “It’s absolutely true; I haven’t written about this subject for a long time and I haven’t kept up with all the literature, either.” Blackmore continues, “… I gave up all of this stuff so many years ago…if you are a researcher in the field it behooves you to read as much as you can of the best work because otherwise you can’t be a researcher in the field. I’m not a researcher in the field. I have not been for a long time.” Dr. Blackmore also responds to criticisms of her interpretation of Buddhist teachings. In her book, Dying to Live, Blackmore stated, “… in Buddhism these [near-death and after-life] experiences are not meant to be taken literally”. This statement has been criticized by Buddhists scholars. During the Skeptiko interview Blackmore responds to those criticism, “Well, I’m not a Buddhist scholar. I don’t read Sanskrit or original language. I’m not a scholar of Buddhism in that sense. But I have been training in Zen for 30 years now. I’ve also trained to some extent, much and much less in Tibetan practices. Most of what I wrote there is based on that long practice.” Check out Dr. Susan Blackmore’s Website A Critique of Susan Blackmore’s Dying Brain Hypothesis by Greg Stone Play it: Download MP3 (53:00 min.) Read it: Alex Tsakiris: Today we welcome back Dr. Susan Blackmore. She’s a writer, lecturer; in fact, you may have seen her excellent presentation at the TED conference a couple years ago, which is quite an honor itself. She’s also a visiting professor in psychology at the University of Plymouth. Dr. Blackmore, welcome back to Skeptiko. Dr. Susan Blackmore: Thank you very much. Alex Tsakiris: Well, as I explained in my email, the main reason I wanted to have you back on is because as we’ve dug in this show into near-death experience science and we tried to explore what skeptics have to say about this, and whether this is really evidence for consciousness existing outside of the brain, well, the more we dig into that your name seems to keep popping up. I have always said, “Hey, Susan Blackmore hasn’t published on this in 15 years.” I don’t know where you’re going but nonetheless, I keep getting a lot of “You need to read Susan Blackmore’s book.” So I thought it would be nice to have you back on and clear up some of these questions. Dr. Susan Blackmore: Well, thank you very much. It’s absolutely true; I haven’t written about this subject for a long time and I haven’t kept up with all the literature, either. I hear about some of the things that are happening. I talk to people involved. I know Peter Fenwick for example, very well. So I kind of know what’s going on to some extent but I got to the point many, many years ago when I just thought, ‘I have done all I feel I can do for the moment, and I just need to get out of the endless round of arguments and do something else.’ So I have. I’m now spending my time investigating other aspects of consciousness and these particular experiences in meditation and meanings and evolution and all sorts of other things. I’m glad to have gotten out of that. Why people go on with that I suppose, I provided some sort of position for the people to argue about it and people who persist in thinking that near-death experiences are evidence for life after death or evidence of a soul or a spirit or something. We hate any proposal[...]

Explore controversial science with leading researchers and their critics. Skeptiko.com has become the leading source for intelligent skeptic-versus-believer debate with guests like: Dr. Rupert Sheldrake - Dr. Michael Shermer - Dr. Dean Radin - James Randi - Dr. Peter Fenwick - Dr. Richard Wiseman - Dr. Raymond Moody - Dr. Marilyn Schlitz - Dr. Steven Novella - Dr. Alan Wallace - Stephan A. Schwartz - Dr. Edward Kelly - Dr. Emily Kelly - Dr. Charles Tart - Dr. Julie Beischel - Dr. Elisabet Sahtouris - Dr. Carol Tavris - Dr. Michael Brooks - Dr. Susan Blackmore - Dr. James Alcock - D.J. Grothe - Ben Radford