[QUOTE=reedbo;39408289]So is the 'evidence' against the paranormal. Oh wait, there isn't any.[/QUOTE]
Well again you seem to be referring back to this idea of evidence against the unverifiable. Clearly nothing I or anyone else says will make you understand why that makes no sense, so I'm done here.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39408395]Well again you seem to be referring back to this idea of evidence against the unverifiable. Clearly nothing I or anyone else says will make you understand why that makes no sense, so I'm done here.[/QUOTE]
If it's about the whole burden of proof bullshit, you're the one claiming that the paranormal doesn't exist and the only reason why is because the paranormal doesn't fit into your own defined 'scientific laws'. I'm not trying to prove that they exist nor am I trying to prove that they don't. Clearly nothing I or anyone else says will make you understand why that makes no sense, so I'm done here.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408289]So is the 'evidence' against the paranormal. Oh wait, there isn't any.[/QUOTE]
Erm, absence of evidence is evidence of absence mate.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408422]If it's about the whole burden of proof bullshit, you're the one claiming that the paranormal doesn't exist and the only reason why is because the paranormal doesn't fit into your own defined 'scientific laws'. I'm not trying to prove that they exist nor am I trying to prove that they don't. Clearly nothing I or anyone else says will make you understand why that makes no sense, so I'm done here.[/QUOTE]
This isn't very hard to understand.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39408142] There's good reason to think they don't exist. Many of their behaviors defy known laws of physics and the way they are reported (exclusively by eye witness testimony) is very shady. We can of course play this agnosticism game with any number of "possible" phenomena.[/QUOTE]
I'm saying it's very extremely likely that ghosts (ethereal beings who fly through walls and haunt people) don't exist. They don't make sense given our current understanding of the world around us. If there was some remarkable discovery that really suggested ghosts did exist, then obviously science would be all over it. Also the fact that you're trying to belittle the scientific method is making it hard for me to read anything you say with a straight face.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39408443]Erm, absence of evidence is evidence of absence mate.[/QUOTE]
That is if [B]you[/B] want to make that assumption. You make what you want out of it. Let me bring back in an analogy.
Under our current understanding it's reasonable to assume that life exists on other planets in the universe, although we haven't witnessed it yet, you could reasonably assume that it's very possible right? Why would ANYONE believe that shit? Why would anyone who has no proof or evidence that there is extra-terrestrial life believe that it's a very real possibility?
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408479]That is if [B]you[/B] want to make that assumption. You make what you want out of it. Let me bring back in an analogy.
Under our current understanding it's reasonable to assume that life exists on other planets in the universe, although we haven't witnessed it yet, you could reasonably assume that it's very possible right? Why would ANYONE believe that shit? Why would anyone who has no proof or evidence that there is extra-terrestrial life believe that it's a very real possibility?[/QUOTE]
It doesn't exist until you have evidence that it does.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39408471]This isn't very hard to understand.
I'm saying it's very extremely likely that ghosts (ethereal beings who fly through walls and haunt people) don't exist. They don't make sense given our current understanding of the world around us. If there was some remarkable discovery that really suggested ghosts did exist, then obviously science would be all over it. Also the fact that you're trying to belittle the scientific method is making it hard for me to read anything you say with a straight face.[/QUOTE]
I'm not trying to belittle the scientific method, I'm pointing out that using the scientific method to understand something that is beyond our comprehension is unbelievably stupid. You're applying scientific laws to something that supposedly doesn't abide by those laws. You even reinforced my main point
[quote=Falubii]If there was some remarkable discovery that really suggested ghosts did exist, then obviously science would be all over it.[/quote]
Do you agree that there could be some bits of knowledge that could lead to proving or even disproving the paranormal that we don't currently understand?
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408479]That is if [B]you[/B] want to make that assumption. You make what you want out of it. Let me bring back in an analogy.
Under our current understanding it's reasonable to assume that life exists on other planets in the universe, although we haven't witnessed it yet, you could reasonably assume that it's very possible right? Why would ANYONE believe that shit? Why would anyone who has no proof or evidence that there is extra-terrestrial life believe that it's a very real possibility?[/QUOTE]
Because our current understanding exoplanets, biology, and chemistry all suggest that life should have arisen on many worlds.
Evidence for ghosts: Lots of known frauds say they're real, and some eye witness testimony, mostly from pre-industrial countries.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39408528][B]Because our current understanding[/B] exoplanets, biology, and chemistry all suggest that life should have arisen on many worlds.
Evidence for ghosts: Lots of known frauds say they're real, and some eye witness testimony, mostly from pre-industrial countries.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't exist until you have evidence that it does.
Also, would this not apply to ghosts and the paranormal? Have you been ignoring my point that the paranormal may just be outside of our current understanding?
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408514]I'm not trying to belittle the scientific method, I'm pointing out that using the scientific method to understand something that is beyond our comprehension is unbelievable stupid. You're applying scientific laws to something that supposedly doesn't abide by those laws. You even reinforced my main point[/QUOTE]
Do you understand what science is? It's the method for understanding how our universe behaves. Something that is real [b]cannot[/b] defy the laws of nature. It can behave in ways that we don't yet understand, but it most certainly would be following the laws of nature.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408514]Do you agree that there could be some bits of knowledge that could lead to proving or even disproving the paranormal that we don't currently understand?[/QUOTE]
Yes, but this is just a stab in the dark. Again, like the cosmic teapot, an infinite number of unverifiable claims could be made and defended simply by saying, "You guys just might not understand it." Seriously, how can you not see the error in this?
For example, what if someone said, "I believe that Elvis resurrected himself, traveled faster than light, and is now currently residing on 75,000 lightyears away on the opposite side of the galaxy."
You wouldn't seriously be agnostic to this thought, would you? It is a claim about biology, physics, ad history that is completely incompatible with our current understanding of these subjects. Is it possible there are some additional rules of biology and physics that we have yet to understand that would allow Elvis to raise himself and traverse the galaxy?
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408555]It doesn't exist until you have evidence that it does.
Also, would this not apply to ghosts and the paranormal? Have you been ignoring my point that the paranormal may just be outside of our current understanding?[/QUOTE]
We have evidence that life can exist in a variety of environments, replicated on earth, that are representative of life on other worlds. We have evidence that animo acids can be created naturally. We have evidence that evolution can create complex life. We have evidence that planets outside of our own have the materials and conditions that can make it possible for life to survive.
Where is the evidence for ghosts?
Minus a few shoddy eyewitness testimonies, broken cameras, electrical interference, psychological problems, blurred camera lenses, misread school equipment and old unreliable books?
[QUOTE=Falubii;39408634]Do you understand what science is? It's the method for understanding how our universe behaves. Something that is real [B]cannot[/B] defy the laws of nature. It can behave in ways that we don't yet understand, but it most certainly would be following the laws of nature.
Yes, but this is just a stab in the dark. Again, like the cosmic teapot, an infinite number of unverifiable claims could be made and defended simply by saying, "You guys just might not understand it." Seriously, how can you not see the error in this?
For example, what if someone said, "I believe that Elvis resurrected himself, traveled faster than light, and is now currently residing on 75,000 lightyears away on the opposite side of the galaxy."
You wouldn't seriously be agnostic to this thought, would you? It is a claim about biology, physics, ad history that is completely incompatible with our current understanding of these subjects. Is it possible there are some additional rules of biology and physics that we have yet to understand that would allow Elvis to raise himself and traverse the galaxy?[/QUOTE]
There is no error in claiming that we may lack the knowledge to understand something because we lack knowledge in many fields. I would be agnostic to that thought because it's not my position to say that what someone else believes is wrong simply because I don't believe it.
For someone that legitimately believes they've experienced the paranormal I find it reasonable to allow them to believe in their existence and I don't feel that anyone should tell them otherwise. Believe what you want to believe in, there is a lot more to our universe than what science can explain.
This thread is just a circle-jerk for you "internet scientists" to argue about how "right" you are. It's completely pointless arguing with you because you're arguing against something that isn't understood by science. You all claim to have superior knowledge by applying "science" to something that does not currently apply to science. This is just as bad a r/Atheism claiming there is no god. I no longer see the point in arguing as it is impossible to convince you all that it's wrong to bash other people's beliefs because your own belief is based on "science". Good day.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408555]
It doesn't exist until you have evidence that it does.
[/QUOTE]
Beautiful use of a strawman. Nobody here has said that. But what we do agree on, is that given a total lack of evidence [b]in addition[/b] to a lack of a good reasoning, a claim can be thrown out. I don't think many people had decided the Higg's boson did not exist simply because there was no experimental evidence. They had good reason to believe it probably existed because of their current understanding of the laws of physics. Currently there is no good reason to believe in ghosts. Nothing that we currently understand about the universe would suggest that they exist. In addition to that, the idea of a ghost goes [b]against[/b] what we understand about biology and neuroscience. We know that the mind is almost certainly a product of the brain, so the idea that an individual can somehow exist in the absence of their brain is harmful to the theory that ghosts exist. There's also the defying gravity, traveling through walls, etc. All of these things are contradictory to our understanding of the universe, and so would require remarkable evidence in order to be taken seriously.
[editline]29th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408759]
This thread is just a circle-jerk for you "internet scientists" to argue about how "right" you are. It's completely pointless arguing with you because you're arguing against something that isn't understood by science. You all claim to have superior knowledge by applying "science" to something that does not currently apply to science. This is just as bad a r/Atheism claiming there is no god. I no longer see the point in arguing as it is impossible to convince you all that it's wrong to bash other people's beliefs because your own belief is based on "science". Good day.[/QUOTE]
Goodness, you devoted an entire paragraph to ad hominem? If it matters so much to you I am majoring in physics, so I'm not just an "internet scientist."
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408759]There is no error in claiming that we may lack the knowledge to understand something because we lack knowledge in many fields. I would be agnostic to that thought because it's not my position to say that what someone else believes is wrong simply because I don't believe it.
For someone that legitimately believes they've experienced the paranormal I find it reasonable to allow them to believe in their existence and I don't feel that anyone should tell them otherwise. Believe what you want to believe in, there is a lot more to our universe than what science can explain.
This thread is just a circle-jerk for you "internet scientists" to argue about how "right" you are. It's completely pointless arguing with you because you're arguing against something that isn't understood by science. You all claim to have superior knowledge by applying "science" to something that does not currently apply to science. This is just as bad a r/Atheism claiming there is no god. I no longer see the point in arguing as it is impossible to convince you all that it's wrong to bash other people's beliefs because your own belief is based on "science". Good day.[/QUOTE]
you're right, let's believe everything everybody claims, regardless of how outlandish it is, even if it contradicts what we currently know about the world, and has no evidence to suggest it is real.
your actual position on this seems to be "we can't ever know anything with 100% certainty, so i won't say i think you're wrong, despite the fact that i disagree with you".
and then you criticize people for being skeptical. i'm not even going to point out stupid that is.
and do you know how much of a leap in logic it is to say that you can't apply science where science currently has no knowledge? wtf! lots of shit isn't understood by the current body of scientific knowledge, but when we apply the scientific [i]method[/i], we find out stuff to add to our body of knowledge. it's not like it's hugely complicated, it's a very simple process: collect objective evidence that can be repeated by other people under the same circumstances. no verifiable evidence of ghosts? no reason to assume they exist. do their claimed characteristics contradict what we currently know? they probably don't exist. if they do, they will be verified by science (and if they were as common as people claim they probably already would have been!)
with ghosts there is nothing to add to our body of knowledge. they are supernatural, infallible and unfalsifiable, and unscientific. you can always claim that they are above what we currently know.
and how pitiful that you had to retort to "omg, ur all so narrow minded!! circlejerk idiots!" because we don't share your mindset of not wanting to see a shred of evidence before we believe something
[QUOTE=Chrille;39411508]you're right, let's believe everything everybody claims, regardless of how outlandish it is, even if it contradicts what we currently know about the world, and has no evidence to suggest it is real.
[/QUOTE]
You just described religion.
If you learn how magical thinking works and comes about it explains the human tendency to invent ghosts and such
Making "type 1" errors for instance is evolutionary advantageous. It is safer to get a bad feeling about eating a fruit, and therefore not eating it than eating it and finding out whether your belief is justified. The same with paranormal belief, it is safer to the hunter gatherers we have evolved to to assume that say, you shouldn't walk down that corridor because it's "haunted".
Probability misjudgements also prove a big factor, people often underestimate (particularly believers) how likely something is to happen, like a cold draft and weird noise come from where someone was murdered in the distant past. A believer might assume this to be too rare to be a coincidence, and therefore to gain some control over the situation assume it is the paranormal spirit of the victim causing it- when in actual fact it could be quite likely. Illusion of control also contributes to making people want to believe in ghosts, to feel calmer about a situation which is out of control and perceived as dangerous.
On methodological issues with paranormal study, it has been found in properly controlled studies paranornal activity cannot be replicated. Some might blame this on "jealous phenomena", saying that the effects will refuse to appear when studied. However this does not lend itself to credible evidence- and making up explanations to refit a discredited theory is a feature of pseudoscience.
In short, we've evolved to believe in ghosts and even though nobody has been able to evidence their existence or provide a reason, because of this we still believe in paranormal.
Sorry if this is a bitundreadable but typing from a mobile device is difficult to proofread before post.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408759]There is no error in claiming that we may lack the knowledge to understand something because we lack knowledge in many fields. I would be agnostic to that thought because it's not my position to say that what someone else believes is wrong simply because I don't believe it.
For someone that legitimately believes they've experienced the paranormal I find it reasonable to allow them to believe in their existence and I don't feel that anyone should tell them otherwise. Believe what you want to believe in, there is a lot more to our universe than what science can explain.[/QUOTE]
This line of reasoning annoys me because everyone, and I know that includes you, has seen things that are unsupported by any hard evidence and gone "that's bullshit". No attempt at a defense, no fence sitting. When you pull out that epistemological argument on uncertainty holding validity, you force yourself into a corner where you can't with any integrity dismiss any whack theories. Planet Nibiru and Lord Xenu? You have to defend that now. The world leaders being secret reptilian overlords? That's now a valid concern because we haven't proven it wrong. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Googled "ghost adventures proved fake" yesterday.
Didn`t find anything useful.
I refuse to believe that all the people they have interviewed outright lies.
Im a sceptic ,but how can you prove stuff when noone believes your evidence? :v:
[QUOTE=SteenRNS;39424088]Googled "ghost adventures proved fake" yesterday.
Didn`t find anything useful.
I refuse to believe that all the people they have interviewed outright lies.
Im a sceptic ,but how can you prove stuff when noone believes your evidence? :v:[/QUOTE]
Running around a dark house with night vision goggles, bumping into something, and sprinting around screaming for five minutes does not constitute evidence.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39424185]Running around a dark house with night vision goggles, bumping into something, and sprinting around screaming for five minutes does not constitute evidence.[/QUOTE]
Did you watch all 7 seasons to come to that conclusion?
They have matured quite a bit.
If they faked evidence and lied for 7 seasons ,then im truly impressed.
They dont run around for 5 minutes either. Its much longer.
Some of their videos should constitute evidence ,but you dont believe the evidence.
If they caught a demon picking up Zac and then throwing him into a brick wall ,you wouldn`t believe it.
Even in full HD you wouldn`t believe it. What evidence do sceptics like you need?
[B]Everything can be faked these days ,but i dont believe everyone lies.[/B]
[QUOTE=SteenRNS;39424355]Did you watch all 7 seasons to come to that conclusion?
They have matured quite a bit.
If they faked evidence and lied for 7 seasons ,then im truly impressed.
They dont run around for 5 minutes either. Its much longer.
Some of their videos should constitute evidence ,but you dont believe the evidence.
If they caught a demon picking up Zac and then throwing him into a brick wall ,you wouldn`t believe it.
Even in full HD you wouldn`t believe it. What evidence do sceptics like you need?
[B]Everything can be faked these days ,but i dont believe everyone lies.[/B][/QUOTE]
I don't believe most are lying either. Most people probably honestly believe they had some kind of supernatural experience.
As for you Ghost Adventures
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbkZu7u2nxU[/media]
I wonder what else they faked.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39424566]I don't believe most are lying either. Most people probably honestly believe they had some kind of supernatural experience.[/QUOTE]
Im an atheist myself ,but i keep my mind open. There`s to many claims to simply ignore all of them.
Could be some weird chemical reaction in our head ,im not claiming otherwise.
There`s a lot of unexplained out there ,and science has to explain that stuff.
[editline]31st January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Falubii;39424566]I don't believe most are lying either. Most people probably honestly believe they had some kind of supernatural experience.
As for you Ghost Adventures
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbkZu7u2nxU[/media]
I wonder what else they faked.[/QUOTE]
I`ll watch that when i get home. Cant watch videos here.
I hope its not the video of the guy throwing that EMF detector.
(Because the GA crew got a lot of anger from fans because of that incident.
They said themselves that the incident was not paranormal and left it at that.)
Douches like that give the field a realy bad name.
edit; Okay i was right. Its what im talking about. That guy was a guest on the show.
GA is not to blame. They debunked it themselwes.
Hence this is no proof that GA is faking stuff. "Cowboy Bob" is faking stuff.(lol)
I propably sound like a fanboy here ,but im right. :v:
They don't have to lie, they could be [i]mistaken[/i].
[QUOTE=SteenRNS;39424616]Im an atheist myself ,but i keep my mind open. There`s to many claims to simply ignore all of them.
Could be some weird chemical reaction in our head ,im not claiming otherwise.
There`s a lot of unexplained out there ,and science has to explain that stuff.
[editline]31st January 2013[/editline]
I`ll watch that when i get home. Cant watch videos here.
I hope its not the video of the guy throwing that EMF detector.
(Because the GA crew got a lot of anger from fans because of that incident.
They said themselves that the incident was not paranormal and left it at that.)
Douches like that give the field a realy bad name.
edit; Okay i was right. Its what im talking about. That guy was a guest on the show.
GA is not to blame. They debunked it themselwes.
Hence this is no proof that GA is faking stuff. "Cowboy Bob" is faking stuff.(lol)
I propably sound like a fanboy here ,but im right. :v:[/QUOTE]
Can you give share with me some video evidence that they acquired? I don't mean a person jumping and saying, "AH! A ghost just touched me!"
People will scoff if I claim that I have seen invisible pink elephants fly around town at night but no one can [B]prove[/B] that it doesn't happen, however because ghosts are so widely cited to exist, people give it credence as a real phenomenon.
I believe the same applies to religion, the ideal god cant be verified by any senses thus it cant be dis-proven. That's not to say our senses are the only reality, we cannot see radiation or UV but it exists regardless.
My point is that anyone can claim something to exist but you cant trust whether its true or not as our knowledge of the universe is limited and all theories are based on fallible evidence derived through our senses. Essentially you cant trust anything to be wholly true.
[QUOTE=waoop;39431071]People will scoff if I claim that I have seen invisible pink elephants fly around town at night, however because ghosts are so widely cited to exist, people give it credence as a real phenomenon.
I believe the same applies to religion, the ideal god cant be verified by any senses thus it cant be dis-proven. That's not to say our senses are the only reality, we cannot see ultraviolet or UV but it exists regardless.
My point is that anyone can claim something to exist but you cant trust whether its true or not as our knowledge of the universe is limited and all theories are based on fallible evidence derived through our senses. Essentially you cant trust anything to be wholly true.[/QUOTE]
Just because you can't see UV light doesn't put it in the same category as myths. We can detect it, but things like ghosts and demons can only be verified by people who "witnessed" them.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39431108]Just because you can't see UV light doesn't put it in the same category as myths. We can detect it, but things like ghosts and demons can only be verified by people who "witnessed" them.[/QUOTE]
True perhaps my analogy is not the best, but essentially my point still stands that we trust our senses to provide us with the truth, when ultimately senses have evolved to ensure survival not to determine the nature of the universe.
[QUOTE=reedbo;39408479]That is if [B]you[/B] want to make that assumption. You make what you want out of it. Let me bring back in an analogy.
Under our current understanding it's reasonable to assume that life exists on other planets in the universe, although we haven't witnessed it yet, you could reasonably assume that it's very possible right? Why would ANYONE believe that shit? Why would anyone who has no proof or evidence that there is extra-terrestrial life believe that it's a very real possibility?[/QUOTE]
How is the fact that the earth probably isn't the only habitable planet in the universe? There are trillions of galaxys and planets around the universe and a shitload of asteroids and meteorites flying through it, while most of them are actually carrying matter we humans are made of.
It's something completely different with ghosts. We don't have ANYTHING that could prove their existence...
[QUOTE=reedbo;39406135]I'm sure a lot of you believe that there are aliens out there in the universe so why is it so hard to grasp the concept that there could be something that exists without having any proof of it's existence?.[/QUOTE]
Yes, obviously, but don't let the Hollywood / Entertainment industry to deceive you.
There likely won't be some slime-monsters, or C'thulus except just in the form of various of badass squids as far as we know, or scary-spooky wailing ghosts who visibly move through walls like nobody's business. That's just bullshit.
Aliens don't have to be anything special, just like cats and dogs and people and cows and fishes and shit. But ghosts? I was never into Horror, much like Comedy, they never make for truly good films.
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;39431259]Yes, obviously, but don't let the Hollywood / Entertainment industry to deceive you.
There likely won't be some slime-monsters, or C'thulus except just in the form of various of badass squids as far as we know, or scary-spooky wailing ghosts who visibly move through walls like nobody's business. That's just bullshit.
Aliens don't have to be anything special, just like cats and dogs and people and cows and fishes and shit. But ghosts? I was never into Horror, much like Comedy, they never make for truly good films.[/QUOTE]
Considering what lived on earth in prehistoric times ,i dont think other planets only have cute cats and puppies.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.