<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Popular Delusions: Out-of-Body Experiences</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html</link>
	<description>NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:09:52 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daylight Atheism &#62; The Case for a Creator: TV Sets and Tennis Shoes</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-60447</link>
		<dc:creator>Daylight Atheism &#62; The Case for a Creator: TV Sets and Tennis Shoes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 01:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-60447</guid>
		<description>[...] given for this, but it&#039;s clearly the infamous story of Kimberly Clark Sharp, which I discussed in a previous post on OBEs. This story is pure hearsay, and no well-designed scientific experiment has ever shown that people [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] given for this, but it&#39;s clearly the infamous story of Kimberly Clark Sharp, which I discussed in a previous post on OBEs. This story is pure hearsay, and no well-designed scientific experiment has ever shown that people [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48532</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48532</guid>
		<description>I once had an OOBE.  I had no idea what was going on.  I floated up and saw my body lying there.  I then floated into the attic and could see everything up there.  I got as far as the top of my roof, panicked, and came back down.

I described the entire incident (in a lot more detail than I just gave) to someone who said I had a textbook OOBE experience.  And this was without me knowing what the textbook said.

Vivid dream?  Probably.  But it was very bizarre.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I once had an OOBE.  I had no idea what was going on.  I floated up and saw my body lying there.  I then floated into the attic and could see everything up there.  I got as far as the top of my roof, panicked, and came back down.</p>
<p>I described the entire incident (in a lot more detail than I just gave) to someone who said I had a textbook OOBE experience.  And this was without me knowing what the textbook said.</p>
<p>Vivid dream?  Probably.  But it was very bizarre.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scotlyn</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48278</link>
		<dc:creator>Scotlyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48278</guid>
		<description>Sabio &lt;blockquote&gt;I think ALL of us believe in a soul -- it is a natural cognitive illusion&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Sabio, while I broadly agree with the point you are making, it is perfectly possible to phrase it differently, for example: &quot;I think ALL of us experience a SELF - a natural cognitive illusion - which makes it very easy to believe we have a SOUL.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sabio<br />
<blockquote>I think ALL of us believe in a soul -- it is a natural cognitive illusion</p></blockquote>
<p>Sabio, while I broadly agree with the point you are making, it is perfectly possible to phrase it differently, for example: "I think ALL of us experience a SELF - a natural cognitive illusion - which makes it very easy to believe we have a SOUL."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sabio</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48242</link>
		<dc:creator>Sabio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:03:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48242</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;religious people believe in the soul&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I think ALL of us believe in a soul -- it is a natural cognitive illusion.  Some of us take more efforts than others to not let the illusion influence us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>religious people believe in the soul</p></blockquote>
<p>I think ALL of us believe in a soul -- it is a natural cognitive illusion.  Some of us take more efforts than others to not let the illusion influence us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Bowen</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48199</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Bowen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:11:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48199</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Gee, thanks, Steve. Here I was trying to bring some sense to the insensible.&lt;/blockquote&gt; Hey Thump you&#039;re welcome :) But of course this is the point about good &#039;ol non-falsifiable mystical woo; if the story doesn&#039;t fit the observable facts there&#039;s nothing to stop you changing the story. Religious apologists have been doing this for millenia and the new age types do it too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Gee, thanks, Steve. Here I was trying to bring some sense to the insensible.</p></blockquote>
<p> Hey Thump you're welcome :) But of course this is the point about good 'ol non-falsifiable mystical woo; if the story doesn't fit the observable facts there's nothing to stop you changing the story. Religious apologists have been doing this for millenia and the new age types do it too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer A. Burdoo</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48198</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer A. Burdoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48198</guid>
		<description>MikeK has a good point -- anything that is invisible also has to be blind, by definition.  I don&#039;t think it could hear or sense anything either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MikeK has a good point -- anything that is invisible also has to be blind, by definition.  I don't think it could hear or sense anything either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeK</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48197</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48197</guid>
		<description>Sorry &#039;bout the confusion. I don&#039;t think democrats have souls either. But if there were an anti-christ, he&#039;d just have to be a republican. They are evil after all. And the blood letting by the right wing wingnuts started in Central American long before either of us was born as in William Walker.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry 'bout the confusion. I don't think democrats have souls either. But if there were an anti-christ, he'd just have to be a republican. They are evil after all. And the blood letting by the right wing wingnuts started in Central American long before either of us was born as in William Walker.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thumpalumpacus</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48196</link>
		<dc:creator>Thumpalumpacus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:56:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48196</guid>
		<description>Gee, thanks, Steve.  Here I was trying to bring some sense to the insensible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gee, thanks, Steve.  Here I was trying to bring some sense to the insensible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian M</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48194</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48194</guid>
		<description>Love this site, love some of the commenting here, but can I just post one little minor (off-topic) quibble:

Our political and economic problems are not the fault (solely) of the Republican Party.  The modern incarnation of the Democratic Party shares most of the same basic fundamental economic, foreign policy, and ideological underpinnings as the Republican Party.  A Democrat (Saint Jimmy of Plains) started the program which ebcame the horror zone of 1980s Central America (as well as giving the go ahead to the Indonesians to slaughter 1/3 of the East Timorese).  Afghanistan was a bipartisan policy.  Iraq was bipartisan...remember the lovely 500,000 children are acceptable collateral dmaage quote?  That wasn&#039;t Cheney.  Clinton killed welfare.  Clinton bombed Serbia.  

We all hated the Cheney Administration.  But until &quot;change&quot; is something other a hackneyed political slogan and real differences in political philosophy and personnel is in place...let&#039;s be more modest about assigning blame to one wing of our unified political-military-industrial complex.  Even if he reads from a teleprompter more eloquently than his idiot predecessor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Love this site, love some of the commenting here, but can I just post one little minor (off-topic) quibble:</p>
<p>Our political and economic problems are not the fault (solely) of the Republican Party.  The modern incarnation of the Democratic Party shares most of the same basic fundamental economic, foreign policy, and ideological underpinnings as the Republican Party.  A Democrat (Saint Jimmy of Plains) started the program which ebcame the horror zone of 1980s Central America (as well as giving the go ahead to the Indonesians to slaughter 1/3 of the East Timorese).  Afghanistan was a bipartisan policy.  Iraq was bipartisan...remember the lovely 500,000 children are acceptable collateral dmaage quote?  That wasn't Cheney.  Clinton killed welfare.  Clinton bombed Serbia.  </p>
<p>We all hated the Cheney Administration.  But until "change" is something other a hackneyed political slogan and real differences in political philosophy and personnel is in place...let's be more modest about assigning blame to one wing of our unified political-military-industrial complex.  Even if he reads from a teleprompter more eloquently than his idiot predecessor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeK</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48193</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48193</guid>
		<description>An interesting experiment when a person is experiencing an OBE and this incorporeal thingee is hovering above his body, looking around the room, would be to poke his (the solid, corporeal body part) eyes out and see if he can still see. If he could still see, that would be evidence for a soul!

Or you could bust into an operating room when somebodies heart has been stopped as on a heart lung machine, heart transplant, etc. -- heart stoppage being used to define death when folks claim to have &quot;died&quot; and have these OBE&#039;s -- and bash the patient&#039;s head in and claim that you&#039;re innocent of murder since the doctor had already killed the guy when he stopped his heart.

Or when somebodies having an OBE, you could try and catch the thingee floating around the room with a plastic bag and determine if it&#039;s really incorporeal, etc. And how would a incorporeal thingee see since seeing is the actual physical interception of photos by the retina. Ditto, hearing. Or, another way of looking at it, if there are two ways of sensing, both physical with the eyes and however the soul does it, how would you blind a person since his soul would still be able to see.

I&#039;m confused, at least my corporeal being is confused.

And do republicans have OBE&#039;s? -- I doubt they&#039;d have souls -- at least Cheney doesn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An interesting experiment when a person is experiencing an OBE and this incorporeal thingee is hovering above his body, looking around the room, would be to poke his (the solid, corporeal body part) eyes out and see if he can still see. If he could still see, that would be evidence for a soul!</p>
<p>Or you could bust into an operating room when somebodies heart has been stopped as on a heart lung machine, heart transplant, etc. -- heart stoppage being used to define death when folks claim to have "died" and have these OBE's -- and bash the patient's head in and claim that you're innocent of murder since the doctor had already killed the guy when he stopped his heart.</p>
<p>Or when somebodies having an OBE, you could try and catch the thingee floating around the room with a plastic bag and determine if it's really incorporeal, etc. And how would a incorporeal thingee see since seeing is the actual physical interception of photos by the retina. Ditto, hearing. Or, another way of looking at it, if there are two ways of sensing, both physical with the eyes and however the soul does it, how would you blind a person since his soul would still be able to see.</p>
<p>I'm confused, at least my corporeal being is confused.</p>
<p>And do republicans have OBE's? -- I doubt they'd have souls -- at least Cheney doesn't.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: King Aardvark</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48192</link>
		<dc:creator>King Aardvark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48192</guid>
		<description>Whoa, Ebon, slow down and save some of this stuff for the Case for a Creator series!  One of the &quot;scientific experts&quot; believes that OBEs prove mind-body dualism.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whoa, Ebon, slow down and save some of this stuff for the Case for a Creator series!  One of the "scientific experts" believes that OBEs prove mind-body dualism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Bowen</title>
		<link>http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/06/popular-delusions-xiii.html#comment-48190</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Bowen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:30:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1064#comment-48190</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;It&#039;s a silver cord. Get your mystical nonsense straight :).

&lt;/blockquote&gt;So it is, so it is. But then again, my invisible pink unicorn is actually purple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It's a silver cord. Get your mystical nonsense straight :).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So it is, so it is. But then again, my invisible pink unicorn is actually purple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

