We aren't surrounded by swarms of invisible entities. That's absolutely fucking ridiculous.
We are surrounded by invisible bowls of pudding.
Bama on
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited April 2009
You know, I was just waiting for someone to say something silly like that.
Your analogy is worthless. A lot of scientific development came from investigating gaps in current knowledge, and trying to figure out why the current explanations just didn't quite work. There's nothing at all like that in the field of 'supernatural.' If these entities exist, they would have to be something so completely separate from the our understanding of the functioning of the universe that there isn't even a 'gap' to provoke curiosity. They have no presence in the EM spectrum, they neither emit nor consume energy, they do not disturb physical matter in any way. If something is visible, it must be emitting photons. If it can open a door, it must be exerting force, which means its both using energy, and something must be providing residence.
You're telling us to believe that we're surrounded by flying spaghetti monsters, but we just don't have the technology to see them. Are you really unware of just how silly that is? You've got the denial thing right, but we're not the ones having a problem with it.
I spent about 4 years living on Ft. Sheridan. 1988-1992. Before I moved there, I didn't pay attention to, care about, or really think about the possibility of ghosts. I was 11 when I got there, I was worried about more important things. Like G.I. Joes and such.
Anyway, we lived in your typical military housing. Two stories, with the bedrooms upstairs. About a week after we moved in, I woke up in the middle of the night and saw an older lady in a black dress with white, lacy ruffled shoulders in my doorway, looking at me. I was, of course, startled as hell. Then she walked into my room and through the wall next to my bed. This occurred frequently, at least 3 times a week for the 4 years I lived there. Never interacted with it, nothing ever changed, it was the same occurrence, over and over. Around the same time every time it happened, 3:20 am.
Was it a spirit? No idea. I subscribe to the theory that certain materials can record and store energy like videotapes, and replay themselves over and over when the conditions are right. Then again, it could've been an intelligent spirit. I really don't know. But it does keep me from saying outright that I don't believe in them.
They also had a library on the base that was used as a hospital during the early to mid-20th century. The basement was used to house the terminally ill patients, and in some cases, the insane. The windows looking out from the basement were eventually painted over with black paint. However, at night you could always, without fail, see faces looking out from them. Some had detail, some were just plain white ovals. Either way, strange seeing them when the windows were painted over.
I spent about 4 years living on Ft. Sheridan. 1988-1992. Before I moved there, I didn't pay attention to, care about, or really think about the possibility of ghosts. I was 11 when I got there, I was worried about more important things. Like G.I. Joes and such.
Anyway, we lived in your typical military housing. Two stories, with the bedrooms upstairs. About a week after we moved in, I woke up in the middle of the night and saw an older lady in a black dress with white, lacy ruffled shoulders in my doorway, looking at me. I was, of course, startled as hell. Then she walked into my room and through the wall next to my bed. This occurred frequently, at least 3 times a week for the 4 years I lived there. Never interacted with it, nothing ever changed, it was the same occurrence, over and over. Around the same time every time it happened, 3:20 am.
Was it a spirit? No idea. I subscribe to the theory that certain materials can record and store energy like videotapes, and replay themselves over and over when the conditions are right. Then again, it could've been an intelligent spirit. I really don't know. But it does keep me from saying outright that I don't believe in them.
They also had a library on the base that was used as a hospital during the early to mid-20th century. The basement was used to house the terminally ill patients, and in some cases, the insane. The windows looking out from the basement were eventually painted over with black paint. However, at night you could always, without fail, see faces looking out from them. Some had detail, some were just plain white ovals. Either way, strange seeing them when the windows were painted over.
My neighbor told me as a kid that our neighborhood was built on an Indian burial ground, and that freaked me out a little as a kid. Of course, even then it sounded cliche so it didn't bother me too much, but surprise of surprises he made it up and it's actually built on an old chicken farm. Interestingly though, I've never been frightened by the fact that we live right next to a rather large, active cemetery.
Anyway, my brain is weird, because whenever I'm scared of some ooga-booga thing it cleanly splits in two, with my rational part thinking, "There have never been zombies hiding under my bed, there never will be, and even if they were real AND had a way to get to your bed, they would have no desire to hide under it" and then my retarded basic brain is going overtime with, "and then right when I lay down the hands will start creeping up the foot of the bed and I'll be eaten!" It's kind of weird to have your intelligence be held prisoner by the part that controls your body.
They have no presence in the EM spectrum, they neither emit nor consume energy, they do not disturb physical matter in any way. If something is visible, it must be emitting photons. If it can open a door, it must be exerting force, which means its both using energy, and something must be providing residence.
No, this assertion is what is silly. Plenty of people --- and they aren't all idiots or lunatics --- have "seen" things which are unexplainable by any current scientific paradigm. "Seen," ergo, they either emit or absorb photons. There's plenty of evidence that these entities have some kind of EM footprint. Just because you can't put it neatly into a box labelled "2009 Science" doesn't mean it's not real. Seriously, are you telling me that our current state of knowledge is pretty much complete? Reminds me of these:
From 1888:
"We are probably nearing the limit of all we can know about astronomy."
- Simon Newcomb, early American astronomer
From 1894:
"The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote.... Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals."
- Albert. A. Michelson, speech at the dedication of Ryerson Physics Lab, U. of Chicago 1894
From 1900:
"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin
You're telling us to believe that we're surrounded by flying spaghetti monsters, but we just don't have the technology to see them. Are you really unware of just how silly that is? You've got the denial thing right, but we're not the ones having a problem with it.
I never said they were flying spaghetti monsters. You did. I have no idea what they might be. And yes, we don't have the technology, just as we once did not have the technology to detect the full electromagnetic spectrum. Would you have, 200 years ago, been telling me I was a fool because I believed in "X-rays"? Or "germs"?
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction."
Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872
Spaghetti monsters, my ass. I'm not the one with the closed mind here.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
I don't believe in ghosts because it seems to me there should be a lot more grunting cavemen ghosts and animal ghosts around if they do exist. (Lots of animals die violent deaths . . . mice being eaten by hawks, elk being eaten by wolves, etc. Where are all the mice ghosts?)
Logically, I know it's a hoax and the boy in the picture doesn't really "exit it at night", etc, but at the same time I would not have that picture in my house. No WAY. Even if I didn't know the "ghost story."
Aliens . . . Sure, they might exist. Why not life on other planets? Do they zip around our skies kidnapping people and experimenting on them? No, I don't believe they do. They're probably mostly one celled organisms, hanging out on their own planet(s), eating each other.
No, this assertion is what is silly. Plenty of people --- and they aren't all idiots or lunatics --- have "seen" things which are unexplainable by any current scientific paradigm. "Seen," ergo, they either emit or absorb photons.
Plenty of people have "Seen" angels telling them that Allah is God and Mohammad is His only prophet. Plenty of people have "seen" angels telling them that The Lord is God and Jesus is His son. At some point, it doesn't add up.
The denial dripping from your post is just silly, as are the stretches you're make trying to depict me as the close-minded one. I'm sorry that you want to believe in flying spaghetti monsters so badly, but you have nothing to back it up. My point about supernatural not emitting photons and not following any of the rules that the entire universe sticks to? No matter how many people attest, or how 'intelligent and trustworthy' you claim they are, you're still confronted with the fact that none of them have managed to back it up. It's never captured on camera, or recorded by some sort of sensor. Photons are photons. They're not coded to be human eye specific, so if someone sees something, so should a camera.
The failure of your attempts to make a point with
Would you have, 200 years ago, been telling me I was a fool because I believed in "X-rays"? Or "germs"?
is that you know you have absolutely no response to
If these entities exist, they would have to be something so completely separate from the our understanding of the functioning of the universe that there isn't even a 'gap' to provoke curiosity.
The human body has been studied for centuries to determine what happens to the mind after death, and we know for certain that when someone dies, and the chemical activity in their body ceases, there is no change to mark the departure of a 'soul.' It doesn't lose any mass. There are no unusual energy emissions leaving the body. It takes energy to move, mass to affect matter, some kind of structure to contain intelligence and volition, no matter how minimal and primal.
So not only are you arguing for the existence of something that ignores every physical law of the universe at a macro scale, you're also expecting us to believe that they spring into existence full clothe. Whatever kind of stuff they're made of and powers them, it are apprently exists _only_ in man sized volitional concentrations of free-floating strange energy. It never occurs in any simpler or less organized forms, and despite hundreds, or even thousands of years of observational attempts, it has never been mechanically recorded in any legitimate fashion.
No, this assertion is what is silly. Plenty of people --- and they aren't all idiots or lunatics --- have "seen" things which are unexplainable by any current scientific paradigm. "Seen," ergo, they either emit or absorb photons.
Plenty of people have "Seen" angels telling them that Allah is God and Mohammad is His only prophet. Plenty of people have "seen" angels telling them that The Lord is God and Jesus is His son. At some point, it doesn't add up.
Help me to understand the logic.
A: Some religious people have seen visions.
B: All religious people are idiots.
C: Therefore anyone who has seen anything unexplainable by current science is an idiot.
I'm not getting it. It's kind of like this:
A: Some "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" were hoaxes.
B: Therefore all "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" are hoaxes.
Or this:
A: Some Muslims / Christians / "Fill in the religion or religions of your choice" committed atrocities.
B: Therefore all Muslims / Christians / etc. are fanatics.
The logic is flawed.
I know a woman who says she sees the spirits of the dead. They don't tell her the future or anything like that. In fact, most of their communication with her is mundane.
She's not a psychic out to make money. She doesn't tell people this to get attention, in fact, I may be the only person she's ever talked to about it. This woman is a school teacher and single mother, a stable person. She's not on medication. She has no symptoms of mental illness or organic psychosis, no symptoms of a tumor. Her physical health is normal and unremarkable.
It's just something she's learned to accept, like being tone-deaf or color-blind. She doesn't know why it happens. And it doesn't really benefit her in any way. And she can't make it stop.
I have no idea what is going on with her. I have no paradigm for it. I don't automatically assume that she's actually seeing dead people. But I'm hesitant to label her a zealot, an idiot, a fanatic, a rube, or anything like that.
I'd say a pretty high percentage of people who have anecdotal experiences of the "paranormal" are like her. Unfortunately, the extreme cases, who probably do have problems, get all the press. Then the radical skeptics point their fingers and laugh and feel justified. No objectivity at all.
Meanwhile, stuff keeps happening to everyday people living ordinary lives.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
Man that painting is, you know, a famous painting. It is pretty creepy, but it's not tied to any sort of ghost story.
Really? It only sold for about $1000 on eBay, and that was only after the seller went into this big spiel about how THE BOY LEAVES THE PAINTING AT NIIIIIIGHT!!!
Man that painting is, you know, a famous painting. It is pretty creepy, but it's not tied to any sort of ghost story.
Really? It only sold for about $1000 on eBay, and that was only after the seller went into this big spiel about how THE BOY LEAVES THE PAINTING AT NIIIIIIGHT!!!
A: Some religious people have seen visions.
B: All religious people are idiots.
C: Therefore anyone who has seen anything unexplainable by current science is an idiot.
It is more like:
A. Some religious people have seen visions.
B. These visions contradict each other and all reflect the culture in which the person lives.
C. If they were more than delusions, they would share more common characteristics than an authority figure appearing and confirming a person's beliefs.
D. These visions are therefore probably nothing more than delusions shitloads of people have.
E. ???
F. PROFIT!
No matter how many people attest, or how 'intelligent and trustworthy' you claim they are, you're still confronted with the fact that none of them have managed to back it up. It's never captured on camera, or recorded by some sort of sensor. Photons are photons. They're not coded to be human eye specific, so if someone sees something, so should a camera.
You're right. No one has EVER photographed anything unexplained.
If these entities exist, they would have to be something so completely separate from the our understanding of the functioning of the universe that there isn't even a 'gap' to provoke curiosity.
Again, how could I have forgotten that NO ONE ANYWHERE is studying paranormal phenomena. No one reputable, that is. No one is curious. I stand by the quotes I used earlier. They comment on you much better than I ever could.
The human body has been studied for centuries to determine what happens to the mind after death, and we know for certain that when someone dies, and the chemical activity in their body ceases, there is no change to mark the departure of a 'soul.' It doesn't lose any mass. There are no unusual energy emissions leaving the body. It takes energy to move, mass to affect matter, some kind of structure to contain intelligence and volition, no matter how minimal and primal.
A. "I can't measure it with my little toys, therefore it doesn't exist." Oh sorry, that was the guy 150 years ago denying the existence of X-rays, not you.
B. So the hell what? Your example is relevant to what? Neither I nor I.B. Singer ever said these things were the departed souls of the dead. I have no idea what they might be. Might be interesting to actually DO SCIENCE and find out.
So not only are you arguing for the existence of something that ignores every physical law of the universe at a macro scale, you're also expecting us to believe that they spring into existence full clothe. Whatever kind of stuff they're made of and powers them, it are apprently exists _only_ in man sized volitional concentrations of free-floating strange energy. It never occurs in any simpler or less organized forms, and despite hundreds, or even thousands of years of observational attempts, it has never been mechanically recorded in any legitimate fashion.
And of course, every physical law of the universe is known. Just as it was 100 years ago. And for skeptics like you, there is no "legitimate fashion." Your skepticism is a priori, no proof would ever be sufficient. Because you hold to the fallacious syllogism:
A: Unexplained phenomena A can be faked.
B: Therefore phenomena A is always fake.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
Meanwhile, stuff keeps happening to everyday people living ordinary lives.
If that were actually true, then it wouldn't have so far proven impossible to secure evidence of it. So you're friend, she sees spirits of the dead? Literally sees them? Why hasn't she taken a picture?
How do they communicate? Do they talk? Talking requires modulating soundwaves. Why hasn't she recorded them? It takes energy to affect air molecules, and would definitely be an observable, recordable effect. Do these words and visions just appear in her mind? There still must be some sort of energy interaction going on for that to happen.
And of course, every physical law of the universe is known. Just as it was 100 years ago. And for skeptics like you, there is no "legitimate fashion." Your skepticism is a priori, no proof would ever be sufficient. Because you hold to the fallacious syllogism:
A: Unexplained phenomena A can be faked.
B: Therefore phenomena A is always fake.
Oh bullshit. Your ignorance doesn't reinforce your position.
Man that painting is, you know, a famous painting. It is pretty creepy, but it's not tied to any sort of ghost story.
Really? It only sold for about $1000 on eBay, and that was only after the seller went into this big spiel about how THE BOY LEAVES THE PAINTING AT NIIIIIIGHT!!!
The one sold on eBay was probably a print.
Nope, it was a "real" painting according to Wikipedia and the original painter (Bill Stoneham,) who heard about the "OMG haunted" hubbub after the meme took off. (Incidentally, the painter's explanation of the symbolism is fascinating . . . I would never have guessed that he meant the giant doll to be a "guide" for the boy.)
No, this assertion is what is silly. Plenty of people --- and they aren't all idiots or lunatics --- have "seen" things which are unexplainable by any current scientific paradigm. "Seen," ergo, they either emit or absorb photons.
Plenty of people have "Seen" angels telling them that Allah is God and Mohammad is His only prophet. Plenty of people have "seen" angels telling them that The Lord is God and Jesus is His son. At some point, it doesn't add up.
Help me to understand the logic.
A: Some religious people have seen visions.
B: All religious people are idiots.
C: Therefore anyone who has seen anything unexplainable by current science is an idiot.
I'm not getting it. It's kind of like this:
A: Some "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" were hoaxes.
B: Therefore all "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" are hoaxes.
Or this:
A: Some Muslims / Christians / "Fill in the religion or religions of your choice" committed atrocities.
B: Therefore all Muslims / Christians / etc. are fanatics.
Here's logic that's just as flawed:
A: My cousin Larry claimed he saw a UFO and was probed anally
B: His story was never substantiated in any way
C: Therefore UFOs are real and probe people's anuses.
I guess I'm just a skeptic when it comes to ghosts and aliens in flying saucers. I'll keep an open mind because who knows? Maybe there is some supernatural element that I've never seen. In the meantime, though, I've never personally experienced ghosts so I guess I don't believe in them.
some scientists were wrong at some point so therefore ghosts
it makes perfect sense!
No, it goes like this:
some religious people (or not, not all people who experience this stuff are religious) were wrong at some point so therefore NO ghosts or anything else
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
I know a woman who says she sees the spirits of the dead. They don't tell her the future or anything like that. In fact, most of their communication with her is mundane.
She's not a psychic out to make money. She doesn't tell people this to get attention, in fact, I may be the only person she's ever talked to about it. This woman is a school teacher and single mother, a stable person. She's not on medication. She has no symptoms of mental illness or organic psychosis, no symptoms of a tumor. Her physical health is normal and unremarkable.
...you mean aside from the hallucinations?
Adrien on
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited April 2009
Ghost is just like the religious nut who stands firmly behind his belief that since God is all knowing and all powerful, he can perfectly hide his actions from all observers. No proof of god? It's because he doesn't want any! No proof of ghosts? It because we're just not advanced enough to detect them!
Maybe I'm not being as clear as I thought, but it's almost comedic the way he mangles my posts. My point about photons and physical laws of the universe? Why is it that these rule bending energies only exist at the mansize level? There are no gaps in our knowledge, no 'huh, that's doing something not explainable by our current understanding' that would be filled by volitional energy forms that obey none of the none lays of the universe. We know how brain chemistry works, that it takes energy and matter, so where do these spirits that talk to Ghost's 'friend' keep their brains?
A: My cousin Larry claimed he saw a UFO and was probed anally
B: His story was never substantiated in any way
C: Therefore UFOs are real and probe people's anuses.
I guess I'm just a skeptic when it comes to ghosts and aliens in flying saucers. I'll keep an open mind because who knows? Maybe there is some supernatural element that I've never seen. In the meantime, though, I've never personally experienced ghosts so I guess I don't believe in them.
I agree with everything you posted. It is a flawed syllogism. Just because somebody experienced something, that doesn't mean it was real. But just because they experienced it and they can't --- or won't -- substantiate it to the satisfaction of someone like Gabriel, doesn't mean it DIDN'T happen.
I much prefer the way you've expressed your skepticism. It's more rational, and in my mind, much more in the spirit of scientific inquiry.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
Ghost is just like the religious nut who stands firmly behind his belief that since God is all knowing and all powerful, he can perfectly hide his actions from all observers. No proof of god? It's because he doesn't want any! No proof of ghosts? It because we're just not advanced enough to detect them!
Of course. Anyone who believes in any of this stuff is obviously a religious nut.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
A: My cousin Larry claimed he saw a UFO and was probed anally
B: His story was never substantiated in any way
C: Therefore UFOs are real and probe people's anuses.
I guess I'm just a skeptic when it comes to ghosts and aliens in flying saucers. I'll keep an open mind because who knows? Maybe there is some supernatural element that I've never seen. In the meantime, though, I've never personally experienced ghosts so I guess I don't believe in them.
I agree with everything you posted. It is a flawed syllogism. Just because somebody experienced something, that doesn't mean it was real. But just because they experienced it and they can't --- or won't -- substantiate it to the satisfaction of someone like Gabriel, doesn't mean it DIDN'T happen.
Actually, yes it does. I'm just as open minded as Josh, but you're asking us to accept a flying spaghetti monster.
No proof of ghosts? It because we're just not advanced enough to detect them!
Sub in "germs" for ghosts. Or "neutrinos." Or "extrasolar planets." Or "plate tectonics."
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited April 2009
You're still failing. I burned that strawman down a long time ago. Light is a form of energy verifiable on myriad levels, from a single photon, all the way up to the light pressure of a blazing star. The problem with your supernatural energy is that it exists in only a single, apprently sapient, incredibly complex form. _Nothing_ else in the universe operates like that, and there's no hint, no knowledge gap, no unexplained occurrences from the micro to the macro level that would indicate the slightest chance of anything like that existing.
See, here's evidence I will accept. Set me up an interview with your friend. If dead people are actually communicating with her, then she will be in possession of verifiable facts that there is no way she could actually know unless she got them from the deceased themselves. I might not be able to see them, I might not be able to hear them, but the fact that somehow information is being transmitted would convince me that there's more going on.
See, here's evidence I will accept. Set me up an interview with your friend. If dead people are actually communicating with her, then she will be in possession of verifiable facts that there is no way she could actually know unless she got them from the deceased themselves. I might not be able to see them, I might not be able to hear them, but the fact that somehow information is being transmitted would convince me that there's more going on.
Why this precondition, in particular? What assumption are you making?
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
I know a woman who says she sees the spirits of the dead. They don't tell her the future or anything like that. In fact, most of their communication with her is mundane.
She's not a psychic out to make money. She doesn't tell people this to get attention, in fact, I may be the only person she's ever talked to about it. This woman is a school teacher and single mother, a stable person. She's not on medication. She has no symptoms of mental illness or organic psychosis, no symptoms of a tumor. Her physical health is normal and unremarkable.
...you mean aside from the hallucinations?
So anything that she perceives that is not part of "shared consensus reality" makes her, by definition, mentally ill? Wow.
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited April 2009
Are you really that dumb (actually this applies equally well to both of your above posts)?
If she tells me it was rainy Thursday, and a ghost told her that, who cares about that bullshit? If a ghost tells her about the gorgeous woodwork they covered up when converting a townhouse 75 years ago, and I can go to that townhouse, tear down a panel of sheetrock and find gorgeous wood paneling that's been covered up for 75 years, that's information that will not be explained away by, 'she looked out the window last Thursday.'
You're still failing. I burned that strawman down a long time ago. Light is a form of energy verifiable on myriad levels, from a single photon, all the way up to the light pressure of a blazing star. The problem with your supernatural energy is that it exists in only a single, apprently sapient, incredibly complex form. _Nothing_ else in the universe operates like that, and there's no hint, no knowledge gap, no unexplained occurrences from the micro to the macro level that would indicate the slightest chance of anything like that existing.
In your own mind, maybe.
Also in that paragraph you snipped because you didn't like it. Stop that.
some scientists were wrong at some point so therefore ghosts
it makes perfect sense!
No, it goes like this:
some religious people (or not, not all people who experience this stuff are religious) were wrong at some point so therefore NO ghosts or anything else
actually, it's more like this
everything we know about the way the world works indicates that if ghosts exist it would be an unbelievable uprooting of the science of the last 400 years. you know, the same science that gives us iphones and cars, pasteurization and medicine, and sent landers to the fucking moon, mars, venus, and titan
so given that the evidence is so overwhelmingly against ghosts existing, we would need an incredibly clear example of ghosts in order to start believing there's something to them
instead all we have is personal anecdotes that are never substantiated scientifically, told by people who often get a thrill from telling ghost stories and who have a vested interest in not thinking of themselves as delusional
oh and let's not forget that part of the scientific enlightenment was finding out that our brains are laughably unreliable at being objective witnesses to what goes on around us
your position is childish and unsophisticated, and i'm increasingly depressed that people like you make it through our scientific education in 2009
MikeMan on
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
You're still failing. I burned that strawman down a long time ago. Light is a form of energy verifiable on myriad levels, from a single photon, all the way up to the light pressure of a blazing star. The problem with your supernatural energy is that it exists in only a single, apprently sapient, incredibly complex form. _Nothing_ else in the universe operates like that, and there's no hint, no knowledge gap, no unexplained occurrences from the micro to the macro level that would indicate the slightest chance of anything like that existing.
In your own mind, maybe.
Also in that paragraph you snipped because you didn't like it. Stop that.
Actually, that was a ninja edit on my part. Sorry.
You're still failing. I burned that strawman down a long time ago. Light is a form of energy verifiable on myriad levels, from a single photon, all the way up to the light pressure of a blazing star. The problem with your supernatural energy is that it exists in only a single, apprently sapient, incredibly complex form. _Nothing_ else in the universe operates like that, and there's no hint, no knowledge gap, no unexplained occurrences from the micro to the macro level that would indicate the slightest chance of anything like that existing.
In your own mind, maybe.
Also in that paragraph you snipped because you didn't like it. Stop that.
Actually, that was a ninja edit on my part. Sorry.
Oh, sorry. I just assumed he snipped out your entire argument in favor of turning it into a strawman because that's all he's done so far.
Are you really that dumb (actually this applies equally well to both of your above posts)?
If she tells me it was rainy Thursday, and a ghost told her that, who cares about that bullshit? If a ghost tells her about the gorgeous woodwork they covered up when converting a townhouse 75 years ago, and I can go to that townhouse, tear down a panel of sheetrock and find gorgeous wood paneling that's been covered up for 75 years, that's information that will not be explained away by, 'she looked out the window last Thursday.'
First, the last paragraph above doesn't appear in your post for some reason. I didn't snip out the rest of that other paragraph. I didn't see it. Must have something to do with refresh.
Second, I think you've given a good and fair example of a verifiable test. Are you aware that there's plenty of anecdotal evidence of exactly the kind you're suggesting? And please don't ask me to cough up a bunch of it. This is a forum, for God's sake, not my job. Go look it up yourself. It's there and it's not all on wacko websites.
Finally, making ad hominem attacks on me doesn't help make your case, Gabriel. Stick to your science.
You might be interested in this article. I think it touches on what we've been "discussing."
some scientists were wrong at some point so therefore ghosts
it makes perfect sense!
No, it goes like this:
some religious people (or not, not all people who experience this stuff are religious) were wrong at some point so therefore NO ghosts or anything else
actually, it's more like this
everything we know about the way the world works indicates that if ghosts exist it would be an unbelievable uprooting of the science of the last 400 years. you know, the same science that gives us iphones and cars, pasteurization and medicine, and sent landers to the fucking moon, mars, venus, and titan
so given that the evidence is so overwhelmingly against ghosts existing, we would need an incredibly clear example of ghosts in order to start believing there's something to them
instead all we have is personal anecdotes that are never substantiated scientifically, told by people who often get a thrill from telling ghost stories and who have a vested interest in not thinking of themselves as delusional
oh and let's not forget that part of the scientific enlightenment was finding out that our brains are laughably unreliable at being objective witnesses to what goes on around us
your position is childish and unsophisticated, and i'm increasingly depressed that people like you make it through our scientific education in 2009
Actually, I don't think it would change much of anything if the existence of "ghosts" or whatever you want to call them was proven. I think life would go on pretty much as it has, and I don't think it would be much more than a blip in scientific understanding.
Why would it be such a big deal?
Ghost314 on
Life is a highway -- I want to ride it -- and comment on it ironically -- all night long.
Posts
We are surrounded by invisible bowls of pudding.
Your analogy is worthless. A lot of scientific development came from investigating gaps in current knowledge, and trying to figure out why the current explanations just didn't quite work. There's nothing at all like that in the field of 'supernatural.' If these entities exist, they would have to be something so completely separate from the our understanding of the functioning of the universe that there isn't even a 'gap' to provoke curiosity. They have no presence in the EM spectrum, they neither emit nor consume energy, they do not disturb physical matter in any way. If something is visible, it must be emitting photons. If it can open a door, it must be exerting force, which means its both using energy, and something must be providing residence.
You're telling us to believe that we're surrounded by flying spaghetti monsters, but we just don't have the technology to see them. Are you really unware of just how silly that is? You've got the denial thing right, but we're not the ones having a problem with it.
Anyway, we lived in your typical military housing. Two stories, with the bedrooms upstairs. About a week after we moved in, I woke up in the middle of the night and saw an older lady in a black dress with white, lacy ruffled shoulders in my doorway, looking at me. I was, of course, startled as hell. Then she walked into my room and through the wall next to my bed. This occurred frequently, at least 3 times a week for the 4 years I lived there. Never interacted with it, nothing ever changed, it was the same occurrence, over and over. Around the same time every time it happened, 3:20 am.
Was it a spirit? No idea. I subscribe to the theory that certain materials can record and store energy like videotapes, and replay themselves over and over when the conditions are right. Then again, it could've been an intelligent spirit. I really don't know. But it does keep me from saying outright that I don't believe in them.
They also had a library on the base that was used as a hospital during the early to mid-20th century. The basement was used to house the terminally ill patients, and in some cases, the insane. The windows looking out from the basement were eventually painted over with black paint. However, at night you could always, without fail, see faces looking out from them. Some had detail, some were just plain white ovals. Either way, strange seeing them when the windows were painted over.
Is it anything like your avatar.
Anyway, my brain is weird, because whenever I'm scared of some ooga-booga thing it cleanly splits in two, with my rational part thinking, "There have never been zombies hiding under my bed, there never will be, and even if they were real AND had a way to get to your bed, they would have no desire to hide under it" and then my retarded basic brain is going overtime with, "and then right when I lay down the hands will start creeping up the foot of the bed and I'll be eaten!" It's kind of weird to have your intelligence be held prisoner by the part that controls your body.
No, this assertion is what is silly. Plenty of people --- and they aren't all idiots or lunatics --- have "seen" things which are unexplainable by any current scientific paradigm. "Seen," ergo, they either emit or absorb photons. There's plenty of evidence that these entities have some kind of EM footprint. Just because you can't put it neatly into a box labelled "2009 Science" doesn't mean it's not real. Seriously, are you telling me that our current state of knowledge is pretty much complete? Reminds me of these:
I never said they were flying spaghetti monsters. You did. I have no idea what they might be. And yes, we don't have the technology, just as we once did not have the technology to detect the full electromagnetic spectrum. Would you have, 200 years ago, been telling me I was a fool because I believed in "X-rays"? Or "germs"?
Spaghetti monsters, my ass. I'm not the one with the closed mind here.
That said, late at night I get very creeped out if I read ghost stories and such. Like this story about the haunted eBay painting.
Logically, I know it's a hoax and the boy in the picture doesn't really "exit it at night", etc, but at the same time I would not have that picture in my house. No WAY. Even if I didn't know the "ghost story."
Aliens . . . Sure, they might exist. Why not life on other planets? Do they zip around our skies kidnapping people and experimenting on them? No, I don't believe they do. They're probably mostly one celled organisms, hanging out on their own planet(s), eating each other.
Plenty of people have "Seen" angels telling them that Allah is God and Mohammad is His only prophet. Plenty of people have "seen" angels telling them that The Lord is God and Jesus is His son. At some point, it doesn't add up.
Uh. Our intuitions can be fooled with some pretty simple tricks.
The failure of your attempts to make a point with is that you know you have absolutely no response to
The human body has been studied for centuries to determine what happens to the mind after death, and we know for certain that when someone dies, and the chemical activity in their body ceases, there is no change to mark the departure of a 'soul.' It doesn't lose any mass. There are no unusual energy emissions leaving the body. It takes energy to move, mass to affect matter, some kind of structure to contain intelligence and volition, no matter how minimal and primal.
So not only are you arguing for the existence of something that ignores every physical law of the universe at a macro scale, you're also expecting us to believe that they spring into existence full clothe. Whatever kind of stuff they're made of and powers them, it are apprently exists _only_ in man sized volitional concentrations of free-floating strange energy. It never occurs in any simpler or less organized forms, and despite hundreds, or even thousands of years of observational attempts, it has never been mechanically recorded in any legitimate fashion.
Help me to understand the logic.
A: Some religious people have seen visions.
B: All religious people are idiots.
C: Therefore anyone who has seen anything unexplainable by current science is an idiot.
I'm not getting it. It's kind of like this:
A: Some "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" were hoaxes.
B: Therefore all "fill-in-the-blank supernatural phenomena" are hoaxes.
Or this:
A: Some Muslims / Christians / "Fill in the religion or religions of your choice" committed atrocities.
B: Therefore all Muslims / Christians / etc. are fanatics.
The logic is flawed.
I know a woman who says she sees the spirits of the dead. They don't tell her the future or anything like that. In fact, most of their communication with her is mundane.
She's not a psychic out to make money. She doesn't tell people this to get attention, in fact, I may be the only person she's ever talked to about it. This woman is a school teacher and single mother, a stable person. She's not on medication. She has no symptoms of mental illness or organic psychosis, no symptoms of a tumor. Her physical health is normal and unremarkable.
It's just something she's learned to accept, like being tone-deaf or color-blind. She doesn't know why it happens. And it doesn't really benefit her in any way. And she can't make it stop.
I have no idea what is going on with her. I have no paradigm for it. I don't automatically assume that she's actually seeing dead people. But I'm hesitant to label her a zealot, an idiot, a fanatic, a rube, or anything like that.
I'd say a pretty high percentage of people who have anecdotal experiences of the "paranormal" are like her. Unfortunately, the extreme cases, who probably do have problems, get all the press. Then the radical skeptics point their fingers and laugh and feel justified. No objectivity at all.
Meanwhile, stuff keeps happening to everyday people living ordinary lives.
Really? It only sold for about $1000 on eBay, and that was only after the seller went into this big spiel about how THE BOY LEAVES THE PAINTING AT NIIIIIIGHT!!!
The one sold on eBay was probably a print.
A. Some religious people have seen visions.
B. These visions contradict each other and all reflect the culture in which the person lives.
C. If they were more than delusions, they would share more common characteristics than an authority figure appearing and confirming a person's beliefs.
D. These visions are therefore probably nothing more than delusions shitloads of people have.
E. ???
F. PROFIT!
You're right. No one has EVER photographed anything unexplained.
Again, how could I have forgotten that NO ONE ANYWHERE is studying paranormal phenomena. No one reputable, that is. No one is curious. I stand by the quotes I used earlier. They comment on you much better than I ever could.
A. "I can't measure it with my little toys, therefore it doesn't exist." Oh sorry, that was the guy 150 years ago denying the existence of X-rays, not you.
B. So the hell what? Your example is relevant to what? Neither I nor I.B. Singer ever said these things were the departed souls of the dead. I have no idea what they might be. Might be interesting to actually DO SCIENCE and find out.
And of course, every physical law of the universe is known. Just as it was 100 years ago. And for skeptics like you, there is no "legitimate fashion." Your skepticism is a priori, no proof would ever be sufficient. Because you hold to the fallacious syllogism:
A: Unexplained phenomena A can be faked.
B: Therefore phenomena A is always fake.
How do they communicate? Do they talk? Talking requires modulating soundwaves. Why hasn't she recorded them? It takes energy to affect air molecules, and would definitely be an observable, recordable effect. Do these words and visions just appear in her mind? There still must be some sort of energy interaction going on for that to happen. Oh bullshit. Your ignorance doesn't reinforce your position.
Nope, it was a "real" painting according to Wikipedia and the original painter (Bill Stoneham,) who heard about the "OMG haunted" hubbub after the meme took off. (Incidentally, the painter's explanation of the symbolism is fascinating . . . I would never have guessed that he meant the giant doll to be a "guide" for the boy.)
some scientists were wrong at some point so therefore ghosts
it makes perfect sense!
Here's logic that's just as flawed:
A: My cousin Larry claimed he saw a UFO and was probed anally
B: His story was never substantiated in any way
C: Therefore UFOs are real and probe people's anuses.
I guess I'm just a skeptic when it comes to ghosts and aliens in flying saucers. I'll keep an open mind because who knows? Maybe there is some supernatural element that I've never seen. In the meantime, though, I've never personally experienced ghosts so I guess I don't believe in them.
No, it goes like this:
some religious people (or not, not all people who experience this stuff are religious) were wrong at some point so therefore NO ghosts or anything else
...you mean aside from the hallucinations?
Maybe I'm not being as clear as I thought, but it's almost comedic the way he mangles my posts. My point about photons and physical laws of the universe? Why is it that these rule bending energies only exist at the mansize level? There are no gaps in our knowledge, no 'huh, that's doing something not explainable by our current understanding' that would be filled by volitional energy forms that obey none of the none lays of the universe. We know how brain chemistry works, that it takes energy and matter, so where do these spirits that talk to Ghost's 'friend' keep their brains?
I agree with everything you posted. It is a flawed syllogism. Just because somebody experienced something, that doesn't mean it was real. But just because they experienced it and they can't --- or won't -- substantiate it to the satisfaction of someone like Gabriel, doesn't mean it DIDN'T happen.
I much prefer the way you've expressed your skepticism. It's more rational, and in my mind, much more in the spirit of scientific inquiry.
Of course. Anyone who believes in any of this stuff is obviously a religious nut.
Sub in "germs" for ghosts. Or "neutrinos." Or "extrasolar planets." Or "plate tectonics."
See, here's evidence I will accept. Set me up an interview with your friend. If dead people are actually communicating with her, then she will be in possession of verifiable facts that there is no way she could actually know unless she got them from the deceased themselves. I might not be able to see them, I might not be able to hear them, but the fact that somehow information is being transmitted would convince me that there's more going on.
In your own mind, maybe.
Why this precondition, in particular? What assumption are you making?
So anything that she perceives that is not part of "shared consensus reality" makes her, by definition, mentally ill? Wow.
If she tells me it was rainy Thursday, and a ghost told her that, who cares about that bullshit? If a ghost tells her about the gorgeous woodwork they covered up when converting a townhouse 75 years ago, and I can go to that townhouse, tear down a panel of sheetrock and find gorgeous wood paneling that's been covered up for 75 years, that's information that will not be explained away by, 'she looked out the window last Thursday.'
Also in that paragraph you snipped because you didn't like it. Stop that.
everything we know about the way the world works indicates that if ghosts exist it would be an unbelievable uprooting of the science of the last 400 years. you know, the same science that gives us iphones and cars, pasteurization and medicine, and sent landers to the fucking moon, mars, venus, and titan
so given that the evidence is so overwhelmingly against ghosts existing, we would need an incredibly clear example of ghosts in order to start believing there's something to them
instead all we have is personal anecdotes that are never substantiated scientifically, told by people who often get a thrill from telling ghost stories and who have a vested interest in not thinking of themselves as delusional
oh and let's not forget that part of the scientific enlightenment was finding out that our brains are laughably unreliable at being objective witnesses to what goes on around us
your position is childish and unsophisticated, and i'm increasingly depressed that people like you make it through our scientific education in 2009
Oh, sorry. I just assumed he snipped out your entire argument in favor of turning it into a strawman because that's all he's done so far.
First, the last paragraph above doesn't appear in your post for some reason. I didn't snip out the rest of that other paragraph. I didn't see it. Must have something to do with refresh.
Second, I think you've given a good and fair example of a verifiable test. Are you aware that there's plenty of anecdotal evidence of exactly the kind you're suggesting? And please don't ask me to cough up a bunch of it. This is a forum, for God's sake, not my job. Go look it up yourself. It's there and it's not all on wacko websites.
Finally, making ad hominem attacks on me doesn't help make your case, Gabriel. Stick to your science.
You might be interested in this article. I think it touches on what we've been "discussing."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/5081751/Why-science-doesnt-make-sense.html
Actually, I don't think it would change much of anything if the existence of "ghosts" or whatever you want to call them was proven. I think life would go on pretty much as it has, and I don't think it would be much more than a blip in scientific understanding.
Why would it be such a big deal?
you really need to stop with the "people who have paranormal experiences" are delusional therefore no ghosts
Why do I NEED to stop?