True ghost tales

No they don't. I've said it before, but you have the data, which are noises, sights, or lights. Your interpretation of that data as a ghost is not warranted. It's certainly not scientific. I'm not saying it isn't ghosts, but every other remotely plausible explanation must be discounted first. And by remotely, I mean remote control robots, which I can prove do exist.

Why does no one who doesn't believe in ghosts ever see a ghost?
 
Just out of curiosity, the thread title says "True ghost tales"... are you saying that the stories are of genuine ghosts, or simply that they are genuinely stories about ghosts?
As a hint: one of these interpretations I agree with.
 
spidergoat said:
No they don't. I've said it before, but you have the data, which are noises, sights, or lights. Your interpretation of that data as a ghost is not warranted. It's certainly not scientific. I'm not saying it isn't ghosts, but every other remotely plausible explanation must be discounted first. And by remotely, I mean remote control robots, which I can prove do exist.

Why does no one who doesn't believe in ghosts ever see a ghost?
Click to expand...

Everybody who experiences these phenomena naturally rule out mundane causes. It's common sense. And it's easily done since there's only a few. Why don't skeptics see ghosts? They do. There's many former skeptics who had paranormal experiences who became believers.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Ghosts/comments/4ryree/former_skeptics_turned_believers_describe_the/
 
Last edited:
Sarkus said:
Just out of curiosity, the thread title says "True ghost tales"... are you saying that the stories are of genuine ghosts, or simply that they are genuinely stories about ghosts?
As a hint: one of these interpretations I agree with.
Click to expand...

The stories are true accounts of paranormal phenomena.
 
spidergoat said:
No they don't. I've said it before, but you have the data, which are noises, sights, or lights. Your interpretation of that data as a ghost is not warranted. It's certainly not scientific. I'm not saying it isn't ghosts, but every other remotely plausible explanation must be discounted first. And by remotely, I mean remote control robots, which I can prove do exist.
Click to expand...

LOL!! That's hilarious. :D
 
To skeptics - what might it take for you to believe in the paranormal?
 
wegs said:
To skeptics - what might it take for you to believe in the paranormal?
Click to expand...

Good question wegs. I once posed the question to posters here...what if your long dead aunt suddenly appeared to you out of thin air. Everybody insisted they would think they were mentally ill rather than believe their own eyes.
 
Magical Realist said:
Good question wegs. I once posed the question to posters here...what if your long dead aunt suddenly appeared to you out of thin air. Everybody insisted they would think they were mentally ill rather than believe their own eyes.
Click to expand...

lol I too struggle with the idea that our deceased relatives are somehow coming back to haunt us, or warn us, or hang out with us. What would cause that phenomenon? Let's say we know for sure that ghosts exist. What are ghosts and what causes them to exist? What are they made out of? If I had a better understanding of that end of it, I'd be completely open minded to the idea that ghosts exist, as opposed to mildly open minded. ;)
 
wegs said:
To skeptics - what might it take for you to believe in the paranormal?
Click to expand...
Good question.
Me? Probably a personal experience, or at least a more reputable all encompassing claim with proper evidence that shows otherwise.
That also goes for Alien contact, and the fact that [at the risk of boring some] that extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
You may like to read the following....
http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/why-people-see-ghosts.pdf
 
paddoboy said:
Good question.
Me? Probably a personal experience, or at least a more reputable all encompassing claim with proper evidence that shows otherwise.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, but the stories that MR posts are all from claimants' personal encounters. ;)

That also goes for Alien contact, and the fact that [at the risk of boring some] that extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
Click to expand...
What kind of evidence would suffice? Alien DNA would be helpful, something that could be testable.

You may like to read the following....
http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/why-people-see-ghosts.pdf
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll check it out.
 
wegs said:
Hmmm, but the stories that MR posts are all from claimants' personal encounters. ;)
Click to expand...
Well, I would certainly hope that if I did have a "personal encounter" I would critically acclaim that encounter as logically as within my power.
Yes, I doubt both the encounters as put by MR, and the personal encounters as being as claimed.
BTW, I have related my own sighting of a UFO on this forum, but did not immediatly jump to any conclusion it was of Alien origin.
wegs said:
What kind of evidence would suffice? Alien DNA would be helpful, something that could be testable.
Click to expand...
Yes! Or some sort of artifact of obvious Alien origin. Certainly not the same old hum drum claimed sightings by small groups and/or individuals, with never any attempt by these same supposed Aliens for making their visitations official, and the literally thousands of times they just do the usual, flitter in and flitter out again.....really the same continued reports are now boring to say the least.
Let me once again reconfirm my greatest wish before I kick the bucket: That is the conclusive, convincing evidence of life off this Earth, something in which I firmly believe exists.
 
Actually, it's your bullshit that's so toxic to this forum. Your nonsense has turned this website into a joke.
Click to expand...

I'm posting material appropriate for the precise forum set aside for it. It is the one place where none of this is either nonsense or a joke, although you hope like crazy it all is.
 
Objective evidence, i.e. reproducible, that is, corroborated by independent observers, using different facilities and ideally different methods.

This is always lacking.
Click to expand...

Noone's reproduced the Big Bang, or black holes, or dark energy, or consciousness, or even life itself yet. Yet we all acknowledge the reality of these phenomena. So much for reproducibility eh?
 
Magical Realist said:
Noone's reproduced the Big Bang, or black holes, or dark energy, or consciousness, or even life itself yet. Yet we all acknowledge the reality of these phenomena. So much for reproducibility eh?
Click to expand...
The evidence is there for all to see re the BB and BH's and DE....and science also understands that scientific theories are always open for modification, falsification or further validation.
The evidence for ghosts, goblins, the paranormal is not there for all to see.
So much for denial, eh?
 
exchemist said:
Objective evidence, i.e. reproducible, that is, corroborated by independent observers, using different facilities and ideally different methods.

This is always lacking.
Click to expand...
I think that this is fair. I hadn't thought of independent observers in terms of proving the existence of alien life, maybe that is what ''Area 51'' is all about? :O
Kidding. But, it makes for good UFO 'lore.

paddoboy said:
Well, I would certainly hope that if I did have a "personal encounter" I would critically acclaim that encounter as logically as within my power.
Yes, I doubt both the encounters as put by MR, and the personal encounters as being as claimed.
BTW, I have related my own sighting of a UFO on this forum, but did not immediatly jump to any conclusion it was of Alien origin.

Yes! Or some sort of artifact of obvious Alien origin. Certainly not the same old hum drum claimed sightings by small groups and/or individuals, with never any attempt by these same supposed Aliens for making their visitations official, and the literally thousands of times they just do the usual, flitter in and flitter out again.....really the same continued reports are now boring to say the least.
Let me once again reconfirm my greatest wish before I kick the bucket: That is the conclusive, convincing evidence of life off this Earth, something in which I firmly believe exists.
Click to expand...

This is also fair. I think for myself what it might take for me to believe without any reasonable doubt in the existence of alien life, and that would be a very strong personal encounter. I'm a rational person (for the most part) I don't do drugs, don't really drink much, so it wouldn't ever be a question of my sobriety. I'd of course rule everything else out, and wouldn't leap to any conclusions.
 
spidergoat said:
He can be skeptical about my life experiences, but which is more plausible, a central system that updates all the clocks dating from a time before cell phones and personal computers (my experience happened in 1978-9), or a ghost?
Click to expand...

That system persisted at least into the eighties in the schools I attended. It was rare that we actually saw the reset happen, but every once in a while, yes, we got to see it.

To the other, apparently this is the thread for not bothering with logical explanations? The Logical explanation discussion↗ isn't very popular, though probably for obvious reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top