[Coach]

Originally Posted by Thor

Because it makes a presumption beyond what the data shows, science journalism needs to tell us the facts as we know it, not leap to claims and statements which are not supported by the available data.

We actually know quite a bit about brain death, the question of consciousness is not as far off as you think, spoiler, its in the brain

Science has looked at NDE's, its actually quite well studied now, and the answers are fascinating and science based, sorry so far no supernatural forces at work at brain death.

http://io9.com/a-new-scientific-expl...ces-1110395345

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...nd-near-death/

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-23672150

These 3 should get you up to speed on what we do know, and what we still need to find answers to.

Why does life after death have to be supernatural? We and everything around us is energy, as is, presumably, consciousness. When we die something has to happen to that energy. Of course most of it decomposes into nutrients for the earth and whatnot. But with all the electric impulses in our brains, and the bodily activities that occur after death, couldn't it be that our consciousness escapes the body no different than the gases, etc? We should be open to all possibilities and just because it's something we don't fully understand yet, doesn't mean it's rooted in the "supernatural".

I do get your point about the poor journalism though.