Ghosts

[Mythbuster]

HA HA HA HA HA!!!! LOL!!!! ROFLMAO!!! (jk)
I don't think you've told us.. so just out of pure curiosity, can you tell us about those ghost encounters?
There are millions of stories and sightings about just about everything. I've known people who have seen UFOs, fairies (I ain't lying), auras, etc. and there are people who claim dragons exist, (click here- http://www.anzwers.org/free/livedragons/evolutio.htm ), Both my mom and my dad have said they have felt um... well... in mexico they call it the dead sitting on you or something, in other places they say a witch is sitting on you, demons, alien abductions, metal bars holding you down (japan), etc. It's just simply dream paralysis...
HECK! this girl in school says this other girl in church was possesed and she levitated off the floor, then the priest came over and expelled two demons... I forgot what the first one was, but the second one was "the devil of homosexuality".
but anyway my point is that frankly I couldn't care less how many people claim stuff, as it's irrelevant. Until I see hard evidence I won't believe it.
but anyway, what about those ghost encounters?

This is from the special FX department.

This image is made in 3D by someone at http://www.cgsociety.org/
The autor: http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3282&page=

 

[ellion]

maybe to understand what was happening in the expereinces that Qqazoo had.

Which cannot be done meaningfully without objective and independent evidence.

is it that you want objective evidence of a ghost? if it was not a ghost then how do you provide evidence of it? in order to begin to understand what the phenomena was, that was later identified (correctly or not) as a ghost, you need to share that experience in the most objective way possible, i would say.

Correct since the past many thousands of similar claims have not resulted in any useful conclusions. Why waste time examining yet another subjective opinion?

is it really wasting time? are you wasting time talking to me? you wasted time saying you did not want to hear about it unless there was objective evidence, which of course was quite obviously something that was not going to be demonstrated this by the member opening the thread

Because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

if your trying to fit the claim to certain criteria.

Because there is no reason to believe that ghosts exist based on mere personal experiences. Past investigations show it is highly probable that the claimant has been fooled by any number of illusions or similar. Something far more powerful needs to be presented before it will pique my interest.

no one has aked you to believe that ghosts exist, have they?

Past investigations show it is highly probable that the claimant has been fooled by any number of illusions or similar.

these illusions are not interesting to you? is there nothing interesting in how a mind creates these illusions? how did this claimant in particular come to the conclusion that his epxerience was something "extraordinary"?

 

[Katazia]

Ellion –

is it that you want objective evidence of a ghost?

Isn’t that what we are discussing?

if it was not a ghost then how do you provide evidence of it?

Doesn’t that depend on what it is?

in order to begin to understand what the phenomena was, that was later identified (correctly or not) as a ghost, you need to share that experience in the most objective way possible, i would say.

Which means under scientific conditions which was my original suggestion.

is it really wasting time?

It is unless some evidence is presented.

are you wasting time talking to me?

Probably.

you wasted time saying you did not want to hear about it unless there was objective evidence, which of course was quite obviously something that was not going to be demonstrated this by the member opening the thread

Those who make religious and superstitious claims need to be constantly reminded about the need for evidence?

if your trying to fit the claim to certain criteria.

The claim is for ghosts – that is extraordinary with no precedent.

no one has aked you to believe that ghosts exist, have they?

Why is it relevant whether I have been asked or not?

these illusions are not interesting to you?

How would you know if they are illusions except under controlled conditions?

is there nothing interesting in how a mind creates these illusions?

A good discussion for the science forums and not the religion forum.

how did this claimant in particular come to the conclusion that his epxerience was something "extraordinary"?

Which would be interesting if investigated under controlled conditions.

Kat

 

[ellion]

fair enough! i shall leave you to bicker amogst yourselves.

 

[Katazia]

ellion -

fair enough! i shall leave you to bicker amogst yourselves.

I merely asked for meaningful evidence. You it appears are the only one bickering here.

Kat

 

[ellion]

Isn’t that what we are discussing?

i don think we, are are we? we are discussing, or we should be discussing somebodies experience, which is believed to be a visitation of a ghost. no ghost has been presented for discussion. qazoo was open to discussing his experience.

Doesn’t that depend on what it is?

this is exactly my point! what is it that we were asked to consider? an experience, a memory, the story is the evidence. the subjective event is the object for discussion.

Which means under scientific conditions which was my original suggestion.

it does not mean that at all! we are on a forum not in a laboratory! the most objective way possible is arrived at by beating a path to it, starting with what ever thread of evidence we have.

It is unless some evidence is presented.

evidence of what? how is the unknown to be evidenced if you do not first seek to know it?

Those who make religious and superstitious claims need to be constantly reminded about the need for evidence?

they do not. it is you that has the need here. it is you that needs to remind them. they will get on with life without your authority.

The claim is for ghosts – that is extraordinary with no precedent.

there is no such claim there is a request for explotration of an event, qqazzo it would seem to me, has a mind open to being corrected.

no one has aked you to believe that ghosts exist, have they?

Why is it relevant whether I have been asked or not?

it is relevant because you said "there is no reason to believe ghosts exist.." and my point is no one has aked you to believe ghosts exist.

How would you know if they are illusions except under controlled conditions?

the acquisition of knowledge happens not just under controlled conditions.

A good discussion for the science forums and not the religion forum.

why be bothered, the thread was opened here in religion. take the opportunity where you find it, better conditions may never be presented.

Which would be interesting if investigated under controlled conditions.

it is a forum, how do you set up those conditions on a webpage?

 

[Katazia]

Ellion –

From the opening post – ” Well, start laughing, because I can talk from person experience. I have a few ghost stories.” Looks to me like a claim for ghosts.

I would have liked the next step be to see the stories backed by some meaningful supporting evidence. Seems like a reasonable request to me so it is not clear why you have taken great pains and at great length to find issue with that position, and continue to do so.

Kat

 

[ellion]

Kat:

while i do still think that qazoo was more likely sharing his expereince as opposed to an actual ghost i can see how you could easily misinterpret it, so fair point, to be honest, i was simply seeking to know more about your attitude. this was not my sole motivation but it is the reason for those great pains you where a blessed witness to.

 

[Ophiolite]

There appears to be a standard error being made by several posters, on both sides of the debate. The presumption is that when someone says 'ghost' they mean the visible (or audible) presence of the spirit of a previously living person. This presumption can readily get in the way of fruitful discussion. 'Ghost', however, is best used in the same way that UFO is properly used to mean an unidentified flying object, not as a synonym for an ET spaceship. I propose that the discussion could proceed in a smoother manner, with less bitching, if the presumption of 'dead spirit' was removed from the equation.

 

[ellion]

agreed, in fact the discussion would be much more fruitful if all such presumptions, prerequsite criterion and personal ideoligies where put aside so we could look at what was actually being presented to us by qazoo.

 

[geeser]

ggazoo: you may find this site interesting, like minded people.
http://the-atlantic-paranormal-society.com/

 

[SnakeLord]

There appears to be a standard error being made by several posters, on both sides of the debate. The presumption is that when someone says 'ghost' they mean the visible (or audible) presence of the spirit of a previously living person.

ghost ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gst)
n.
The spirit of a dead person, especially one believed to appear in bodily likeness to living persons or to haunt former habitats.

It is therefore not a presumption, but an understanding based upon the word that was used. It would probably be pertinent for the thread starter to use the right phrases or terms if he did not want us 'presuming' he was referring to dead people.

The threads title is "ghosts", not "I saw something I can't explain and I'd like an opinion on it".

I propose that the discussion could proceed in a smoother manner, with less bitching, if the presumption of 'dead spirit' was removed from the equation.

Perhaps then it would be best for the thread title to be changed to 'sighting of an unknown phenomenon'.

You can clearly see by the thread starters post that he is indeed implying dead people, and as such I felt it pertinent to ask why he presumes it has to be dead people instead of something entirely different. Of course that would be made easier if he actually cited his 'stories' instead of just stating he has stories and then vanishing.. like a ghost. It seems to me that his idea was not to cite any stories but instead to simply get an idea of what other people's stances are regarding 'ghosts'. As such, every post made afterwards is valid.

Regards

 

[Cris]

The 2nd post asking for evidence probably frightened him away. Now we'll never know.

 

[scorpius]

.. I have a few ghost stories.

So tell me, what's your interpretation on ghosts, and the literally millions of stories about sightings?

I think you answered your own question

 

[Mythbuster]

- It is an essential ingredient of religion and if it doesn�t exist then all religions are nonsense. Seems like a pretty fundamental issue to me.
- Because, surprisingly, many people have the strange idea that they do have a soul.

 

[ggazoo]

geeser -thanks for the link.

Of course that would be made easier if he actually cited his 'stories' instead of just stating he has stories and then vanishing.. like a ghost.

I posted this before I the holidays, so I've been spending time with my family... sorry, I should have waited until after Christmas.

I'm hesitant to tell my story, only because, quite simply, I can't provide any evidence. Explaining what I experienced would be an exercise in redundancy since you guys weren't there, so you wouldn't be able to validate or disprove what I saw, and or heard. Only my mom and my four cousins can account for that, since they were there with me.

Thanks for all the replies though, it's been an interesting read.

 

[SnakeLord]

Well I wouldn't let that put you off. All you hear day in and day out around this place are stories without evidence, one more wont hurt.

At the very least I'm certain it would be interesting to read.