eisfeld

Misleading meme that leaves out the fact that in the same talk he said that the vaccines are not a 100% effictive solution. Why did you leave that important part out?

The poll is misleading because the simple truth is that vaccines are not a binary yes/no in terms of effectiveness and neither was their primary goal to prevent transmission. Their main goal is to prepare the body to fight the virus and reduce (ideally to zero) the effects of the disease it introduces. As a secondary effect they can to a certain degree also prevent transmission but again, it's not a binary yes/no as in 100% or 0%. Doubly so because there are various kinds of vaccines with totally different mechanisms and efficacies. Anyone with a little bit of reading skills should know this in 2023. Readers of this thread might also want to know that DudleySquat has engaged in heavy trolling in other threads where he tried to engage others with provocative posts. Here, he is trying to have members of the forum make a yes/no decision and will probably try to claim the answer should be "no" by posting misleading information that hinges on the wrong assumption that the aim was 100% prevention of transmission without more nuanced and realistic reflection on the facts of the matter.

It's funny because the whole point of the article you linked to is to put straight the misrepresentations by anti-vaxxers of what the Pfizer exec supposedly had said regarding transmission. Just like you did. You are also dragging the topic offtopic because it's not about vaccines or transmission but about Ivermectin being not effective in treating COVID-19.

The curvature of space-time.

And you are just trolling as usual.

He's just a member of the Bob Troll Club and trying to stir things up. Not really worth replying.

They are also free to prescribe water to treat COVID-19. Doesn't mean it makes sense.

I have a Shark helmet with carbon - model name Speed-R. Cost about 13k or thereabouts. Decent price as they are made in Thailand. Pretty good helmet. Is it worth it to spend extra for a carbon model? Not sure, you can definitely feel that they are lighter but I'm also fine with a regular helmet. Ventilation is more important. And availability of replacement inner liner.

Was it this guy?

Is this satire? I honestly don't know if I should take what was written serious. Stealthily docked during a covert mission that is covered by the media? It's also written in a very weirdly overly grandiose style.

Sounds weird to me You don't need to prove that you were not drinking unless the policy states that which I've never seen. I've whitnessed 3 motorbike accidents that got covered by insurance in my friends and family environment. Not once did insurance want to see a blood test. They just covered the expenses without much fuss. What they were more interested in is the documentation from police about the accident if another party was involved so they can claw back the expenses from them. If the policy really does state that then it's on you as the insured to make sure the hospital will do a blood test. The hospital will not study your policy. They don't even have access to it unless you hand it to them.

Do people from other religions that never heard about the christian believe stories have the same NDEs? If not, why not?

The iPhone 13 Pro is not the latest. The latest is the 15 Pro. She bought it for 30k THB which suggests she didn't pay full price because in Germany the Pros cost over 45k THB. But go on and paint it as some weird hiso show-off item for some reason. In the western world iPhones are not exactly a status symbol. Not when every second person has one.

Doesn't explain anything. Just says there could be other explanations. That's just an announcement of a symposium? And the quote you posted just says "we don't know, need to look more". That's announcement of a four-part event? Where is the actual content? Science cannot adddress the question conclusively *right now*. We've said that multiple times before in this thread. That doesn't mean we wont be able to figure it out in the future. Well I would agree it's an open question. But I'm also saying you can't trust peoples stories about supernatural stuff. Correct. My potential explanation was just to show there could be mundaine explanations. But I'm not claiming that this is 100% how it went. Just that we don't need to resort to supernatural phenomenons while we simply don't know how NDEs work at this point in time. History tells us that supernatural explanations usually turn out to be wrong and science prevails.

We don't trust the sources because we looked at them and they are extremely weak. We can come up with alternative explanations to yours and we have equally no proofs for those, same like you don't have any for yours. But we are honest in concluding that we simply don't know. You ask us to find an authorative source for what? None of these claims can be disproven. You can only find other, medical explanations but we are simply not there yet. So what exactly do you expect? We are just saying these phenomenons can probably be explained by very real effects in the brain without resorting to supernatural things. History tells us this is the best approach. They also believed in invisible men that are all-powerful. Or believed in demons, ghosts or any number of supernatural entities. They also knew nothing about science or how our brain works. Believes don't explain how something works. By definition a believe means they don't know! It's just a made up story about stuff. Sometime a believe can be an educated guess. Sometimes it's just nonsense pulled out of where the sun doesn't shine. Again, history has shown us that most of our believes were flat out wrong. Religions are the antithesis to science and knowledge. So there are two factors at play in these cases: 1. do the people actually process the sensory inputs while unconscious and 2. are they able to recall the processed information later on. Unconsciousness is not a binary state in the brain. There are trillions of different states the brain can be in. Some people have more brain activity and some will have less. For some part X will be working while for others it'll be more part Y. We should not be surprised that people who remember a NDE also can remember other facts. Clearly their memory is working better than the one of the people who can't remember anything. Survivership bias.

I don't know, maybe ask the OP?

Let me repeat. None of the unexplained claims have been proven as real supernatural. Not a single one. It's like the people claiming to have been abducted by aliens. The claim about the moon is frankly ridicolous. We have pictures, videos and it's easily explained how we did it. We know all about it. Lets be real here. About your two examples: 1. Who says the kid never overheard the parents talking about it? They didn't consciously tell the kid about it but that doesn't mean the kid never heard about it. Also guessing the gender is a 50/50 chance, not exactly statistically significant data point. If I correctly predict a heads or tails coinflip then that doesn't mean I was able to predict the future. 2. The story comes from a page that has zero sources. No proof of anything not even mentioning dates, places or names. Anyone can post a story, doesn't mean it's true.

Again, these people *claim* to not have known these relatives. They might have simply forgotten about them or overheard information about them when small and so on. Plenty of scenarios could explain these without resorting to supernatural stuff. There is no proof for their claims. The ones that can recall stuff while they were unconscious... well their sensory inputs were not turned off were they? That they are not conscious doesn't mean their brain cant absorb the input. You mention consistent results. NDEs are anything but consistent. What you are looking at are extreme outliers and not the norm.

Exactly that. The body in these NDE situations is already in a very unusual state. Heart stopped, the brain does not get the same amount of inputs both sensory as well as in terms of nutrients, oxygen etc. It would be very surprising if it didn't enter a weird state in which it can malfunction in all kinds of weird ways including altering memories or perception of reality. It's not like the universe really enters a slowmo state in the mentioned example. That's evidence that what we think we experienced might not always match the physical reality. To then go and ask these people what their experiences were cannot be taken for reliable recollections of reality. The proofs that claim the persons had no way to know about something but after the NDE they could tell about it are missing that they did not prove that the person couldn't have known these things because for that they would have needed to monitor them during the whole timeframe (usually of their while life when it comes to known passed away relatives). They could have heard about them etc. who's to say just because they claim they didn't that they really didn't.

It claims that consciousness and awareness *appeared* to occur. There is no way to measure that when there is no heartbeat. It's not like they can ask the person right in that moment. They base it off of recollections once the patient is back again. And that's the tricky part because memories can be faked by the brain as evidenced by Deja Vu and other well known effects. And in the same vain there is no proof that they were not experiencing the events or facts that they *claim* to not have experienced before. They could have known about these facts but unable to access this part of their memories but now it surfaced. That we can't explain something medically *yet* does not mean that it's something strange that can't be explained medically ever. We just are not there yet with our understanding of the brain. People used to believe in all kinds of magical reasoning for things that our brain experiences but over time we've learned that there are physical explanations for. Many diseases like Chorea were attributed to demonic possessions while they turned out to be brain issues. Psychosomatic illnesses with no apparant physical cause were attributed to supernatural reasons while we now know they are due to psychological factors. I don't have a source for my point of view. But I'm also not claiming that something is real for which there is no evidence. My point is that memories and recollections by people are a very terrible source of information because they are unreliable and time again has science proven that what was once thought to be supernatural was instead something we just didn't understand. In fact, not a single supernatural thing in the history of human kind has been proven to be really that. So going by that track record I'll maintain my point of view that it'll be explained properly soon enough.

I have the feeling that a guy riding a stolen motorcycle while high to the moon wont care much about a drivers license suspension - if he has any. And causing property damage is the smallest issue. He commited theft and consumed illegal narcotics, that alone can be reason for jail time.

That's a good point. And I think it is not dissimilar to how most people don't remember the vast majority of their dreams. I nearly never remember a dream. Some people are also able to train themselves to enter lucid dream states on demand. Two times in my life I was in a near death situation and my brain acted quite differently than normal. Consciousness felt hightened (a bit like slowmo) but I can't be certain that it actually was higher or if its just how it felt or if my brain just decided to remember it like that. There were hallucinations as well. I'm pretty sure these NDE wil turn out one day to be a result of multiple factors like the brain trying a last ditch effort to survive so puts parts of it on turbo but some other parts may be already failing or not having enough control/power so all kinds of effects can happen. It'll be a matter of time before scientists figure it out. They made a lot of progress in recent decades but there is still a long road ahead.

The first one is pretty much the same as a Deja Vu experience. The brain can play very powerful tricks and alter memories on the spot to match a more recent experience. Note how they just *thought* that the people they later saw on pictures are the people they saw in their NDE "dream". Nothing unusual and also not evidence that they actually saw these people. Your second quote is weird. How can literally unconscious people have improved consciousness? That's an oxymoron. But it also just concludes that they can't explain it. Nothing there has any evidence that the NDE are something physically real.

That's not a study. That "paper" (I really wouldn't call that a paper, it's pretty much just a blog post of a random MD) that does not provide a single piece of evidence that NDE are real and is based on what people who had NDE "feel" and think about their experience. All it does is say we can't medically conclusively explain it yet. Well great, we knew that already.

IF it's something you actually ordered :P I've seen a friend having a return refused by Lazada. Paid COD and therefore SOL. He stopped buying from Lazada due to that.