= new reply since forum marked as read
And send a copy to my past-wife. She loves anything to do with NDEs. Have you read Anita Moorjani's book? I'm almost finished, and hope to do a review of it on my blog.
Thanks for posting this! 
unable to accept that consciousness could exist after death of the brain/body. This is why they'll agree with you that energy cannot be destroyed, but disagree with the rest of us that the same energy will continue to be organized into a mind. More like (to them) it will dissipate. The energy is still there, just in a state too diffuse to be a consciousness 
Is she the woman who was featured on Wayne Dyer's most recent PBS program? If so, I saw her.
Ok, now I'm reading about Dr. Lanza (who is, btw, really attractive....oohlala! lol) and it turns out he currently lives in a working class town practically next door to the working class town I lived in before moving to Maine. And his company is in the same small town that my career was in. Dam.....I have such sucky timing! 
He is a leading western medicine biologist at the forefront of stem cell research and cloning. He was the first person to clone a human embryo. He has successfully cloned endangered species. He is the Chief Science Officer at the Mass-based genetic research company that is using stem cell research and cloning to grow new tissues, such as retinal tissue to cure macular degeneration, to grow cardiac tissue to repair hearts, etc.
IOW, he is at the heart and center of western science and western medicine. 
to make these claims. I only hope the rest of their community can take the same steps forward that he's doing. They are very quick to comment in the negative and seemingly loathe to ponder the concepts presented by "one of their own" 
Last edited Wed Nov 7, 2012, 03:07 PM - Edit history (1)
honestly
Only that I'm jaded by how the science community, in general, often reacts to things like this. I do hope that it takes off and gets a consensus. The detractors will then have to either go along to get along or keep quiet.
I really do wish some of our DU members would get over their problems with people other than scientists using "quantum physics/mechanics" as if they are the only ones "allowed" to use them, and anyone else doing so is automatically a "woo purveyor." It's rather tiresome. (sorry about the run-on sentence )
But this seems like it could be a potential starting point for some serious, research. The nobel scientist that reviewed the book thought of it as something very worthwhile for scientists to read and think about. If that happens, they will start the "what if" thinking that can lead to experiments. When they start experiments that can be duplicated and peer reviewed, that's when it will start finding a consensus, or not.
I suspect the problem scientists have with non-scientists have with trying to use quantum physics/mechanics is that we have no idea what we are talking about so inadvertently abuse the science.
It reminds me of a writer colleague who started telling me everything that was supposedly wrong about my arabian gelding, who was a New England and Regional grand champion on the line when he was a baby. She had read a book about arabians, so she thought she "knew" the breed. In fact, her knowledge was about 1/8" deep, and not very broad either. She knew *nothing* about the modern strains of the breed, nor the original strains and types. She knew nothing about the history or genetic origin. She also knew nothing in depth about horses.
But she could quote the marketing-type coffee table books that give a superficial description of the idealized egyptian royalty strain bred to be "living art" and so she thought she "knew" all about arabians.
Since she had absolutely no idea what she was talking about, she abused and insulted my experience and knowledge with criticism and condescension based in ignorance. 
with regards to quantum physics and other hard sciences. However, there are then people like Bruce Lipton or Jude Currivan that not only have doctoral degrees in these sciences, but have done the work, the research, involved in their fields. However, because they are also associated with the likes of us, they are automatically dismissed as purveyors of woo. At least, that's for what I read either on DU or some other blogs they also quote.
I agree that the "what if" scenarios are the way to get this going, to get people in the sciences thinking, pondering, imagining. We will just have to learn to dismiss the dismissers
and if that means we just continue along as if they don't exist, that is ok too. Our day will come.
A lot of breakthrough scientists are dissed early on, until the few that figure out a way to work with their ideas start showing results...
When I did my final microbiology presentation project on prions, my professor sat in the back of the room squirming in his seat, rolling his eyes and visibly struggling to keep from jumping up and shutting me down as I started with the "wrong" scientist hypothesizing a protein-based pathogen, and how she was ridiculed and dissed for proposing such an "impossible" scenario.
And then I jumped forward 15 years to the better known, high positioned, male scientist who proposed the identical hypothesis, cleverly named the malformed proteins "Prions" (the real acronym is proins, but that didn't sound good enough so he transposed the i and o) and won the Nobel prize for "his" ideas.
Suddenly the same professor who had taken pleasure in ridiculing me for a semester and could barely contain himself, shrank into his seat and looked like he wanted to crawl under the bench! 
He spent the rest of my presentation enthralled...and then terrified as I described the continued failed efforts to destroy these incredibly stable proteins that can't seem to be denatured no matter what the eff you do to them
Our day will come.
