Do ghosts exist?

[Jessica.]

Do you believe in ghosts and the paranormal?

What is your view on fortune tellers?

[King Gizzard]

Ghosts..well maybe 'energy'

and fortune tellers..well that's just a load of bollocks

[Kizzy]

Yes i do, but fortune tellers/ mediums are scam merchants.

[Smithy]

Judge me all you want :hmph:

I saw one last year

oh idgaf about fortune tellers, scamming bastards

[Jessica.]

Judge me all you want :hmph:

I saw one last year

Nobody is going to judge you, I am sure lots of people believe in them.

[Jessica.]

So far it seems everyone agrees with me about fortune tellers/mediums, it's really sad how people will pay them, just because they are so desperate to communicate with a dead loved one.. :sad:

[Smithy]

Nobody is going to judge you, I am sure lots of people believe in them.

I meant i saw a ghost, not a fortune teller :tongue:

[Tom4784]

I've seen some odd things but I don't believe in ghosts. I'd attribute my experiences to the Stone Tape Theory.

[Jessica.]

I meant i saw a ghost, not a fortune teller :tongue:

I know what you meant. :joker:

[Kizzy]

Dont you try to science me out of believing! :)

[Jessica.]

Dont you try to science me out of believing! :)

Nobody has said you shouldn't believe in what you want. :nono:

[Kizzy]

Nobody has said you shouldn't believe in what you want. :nono:
meant to quote dezzy there jessica.

[GypsyGoth]

I don't know if ghosts are real or not. Maybe there are other worlds we can't see.

And I'm not sure about fortune tellers either.

[King Gizzard]

fortune telling is nearly as much of a joke as astrology

[GypsyGoth]

fortune telling is nearly as much of a joke as astrology

I foreseen you were going to post that :shocked:

[Jessica.]

I foreseen you were going to post that :shocked:

:joker:

[Jesus.]

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.

As a slow, bipedal mammal, making our way in the world during very dangerous times, it became an evolutionary trait of ours to see the faces of things for our own safety.

How many times have we looked at some wallpaper, rugs, or curtains, and seen a little face in there? When we had lions trying to eat us, having a brain that was good at picking out faces became an advantage. The difference between being eaten or not, was down to spotting predators early.

Anyone that believes they have seen a ghost, has obviously had a very real experience, but it wasn't a ghost, or at least there is not one shred of evidence to suggest it might be. Knowing what we know about life, then if ghosts were even possible, why do we have to go through physical life to end up in supernatural life?

It just makes no sense.

[Jessica.]

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.

As a slow, bipedal mammal, making our way in the world during very dangerous times, it became an evolutionary trait of ours to see the faces of things for our own safety.

How many times have we looked at some wallpaper, rugs, o curtains and seen a little face in there? When we had lions trying to eat us, having a brain that was goos at picking out faces became an advantage. The difference between being eaten or not was down to spotting the predators early.

Anyone that believes they have seen a ghost, has obviously had a very real experience, but it wasn't a ghost, or at least there is not one shred of evidence to suggest it might be. Knowing what we know about life, then if ghosts were even possible, why do we have to go through physical life to end up in supernatural life?

It just makes no sense.

:worship:

[Glenn.]

I do believe in Ghosts somewhat, and I'm a bit on the fence with fortune tellers.

Me and my cousin went to see one a couple of years ago and a lot of what she told us has actually happened.

She said my cousin was pregnant which my cousin thought was near impossible because she had problems conceiving. Two days later she found out she was pregnant.

And the stuff she told me was far too personal to be a coincidence. I never believed in fortune tellers so I literally gave her nothing to go on and concoct something.

[Bollo]

No I don't and fortune tellers are a bunch of charlatans

[Jesus.]

I do believe in Ghosts somewhat, and I'm a bit on the fence with fortune tellers.

Me and my cousin went to see one a couple of years ago and a lot of what she told us has actually happened.

She said my cousin was pregnant which my cousin thought was near impossible because she had problems conceiving. Two days later she found out she was pregnant.

And the stuff she told me was far too personal to be a coincidence. I never believed in fortune tellers so I literally gave her nothing to go on and concoct something.

So where is this information coming from? God? The universe? Satan. She performed a cold reading, and there are tricks of the trade that these people use. If you go and see one again, take a voice recorder and tape your reading.

You'll find there will be lots of misses in there, and if this information was coming from another realm, why would they know that a cousin is pregnant, but get something wrong about a grandparent? look up Derren Browns cold readings on YT. He explains how it's done.

[Jake.]

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.

As a slow, bipedal mammal, making our way in the world during very dangerous times, it became an evolutionary trait of ours to see the faces of things for our own safety.

How many times have we looked at some wallpaper, rugs, or curtains, and seen a little face in there? When we had lions trying to eat us, having a brain that was good at picking out faces became an advantage. The difference between being eaten or not, was down to spotting predators early.

Anyone that believes they have seen a ghost, has obviously had a very real experience, but it wasn't a ghost, or at least there is not one shred of evidence to suggest it might be. Knowing what we know about life, then if ghosts were even possible, why do we have to go through physical life to end up in supernatural life?

It just makes no sense.

I was waiting for a post from you, going on about how stupid the belief is. Iv'e come to expect it now :joker:

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

definitely

i think our bodies are just like shells and when we die we leave them behind and i think all the ghosts probably go to another dimension but every so often one finds its way back into ours AND i also think there are evil ghosts too :suspect:

like a ghost is basically a spiritual manifestation of the person that died so they are basically the same person like imagine hitlers ghost :suspect:

yes ghosts exist katniss has spoken

[Ammi]

definitely

i think our bodies are just like shells and when we die we leave them behind and i think all the ghosts probably go to another dimension but every so often one finds its way back into ours AND i also think there are evil ghosts too :suspect:

like a ghost is basically a spiritual manifestation of the person that died so they are basically the same person like imagine hitlers ghost :suspect:

yes ghosts exist katniss has spoken

..yes, I believe that too...but I don't know what happens to our 'spirit'...it has to be somewhere...I just don't know where

[Patrick]

Yes.

And they're not 'fortune tellers' they're Mediums - and some of them can be very reliable and correct. And Mediums can tell you what could happen in the future aswell - and they can be just as spot on as 'fortune tellers'.

I don't think Ghost's exist as in, the ones in films - but spirits coming back to earth are definitely true.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

same :suspect:

idk if i believe in heaven and hell tbh but i do believe in something

[lostalex]

I think most "ghost" experiences people have are actually extra-terrestrial/extra-dimentional beings. The "greys" as they are known are able to make themselves invisible, but you can see them sometimes, sort of like the predator in that movie. You can sometimes see a faint outline. And they do like to play little games like moving things around, and making noises to see how you react.

Also that's why you hear so many reports of children "ghosts", because the greys are usually quite small and child sized, although there are taller ones too.

[joeysteele]

Ghosts..well maybe 'energy'

and fortune tellers..well that's just a load of bollocks

I am with this comment, I do feel some energy is in existence,what that is I haven't the blueprint for nor I doubt has anyone else.

Totally agree too with the fortune tellers comment too,well described.

[Jesus.]

I was waiting for a post from you, going on about how stupid the belief is. Iv'e come to expect it now :joker:

I haven't actually rubbished the belief at all. I've just explained things in a rational manner. There is far more beauty in the workings of the natural world, than stories about the supernatural.

The results of the poll are disappointing though. More people are willing to believe things without any evidence at all, than require some kind of evidence for their beliefs.

[Jesus.]

Yes.

And they're not 'fortune tellers' they're Mediums - and some of them can be very reliable and correct. And Mediums can tell you what could happen in the future aswell - and they can be just as spot on as 'fortune tellers'.

I don't think Ghost's exist as in, the ones in films - but spirits coming back to earth are definitely true.

Do you have any evidence? Or is it just a "gut" feeling?

[Roy Mars III]

There are no such things as ghost as much as i'd like them to be real

[Suze]

Do you believe in ghosts and the paranormal?

What is your view on fortune tellers?

The older I get, the less inclined I am to believe they do and that there are other explainations for things that happen around us attributed to a spirit world. Not to be pedantic (sorry) Is ghosts the right word? I always thought the term spirits was correct or some other word to describe them?

[Patrick]

Do you have any evidence? Or is it just a "gut" feeling?

Yes evidence from personal experience - and history in my family aswell.

[Kizzy]

You of all people should understand it is possible to believe in something without and hard evidence 'jesus' :)

[Marc]

I don't but I also like to think something might be out there.. makes life a little more interesting..

[Josy]

I believe in energies.

[Marc]

I believe in Miracles...

[Ammi]

What I do believe....is when someone has lost a loved one and say they can 'feel' them still there shortly after their death...I believe that they do

[Ammi]

I believe in Miracles...

..you sexy thing

[Kizzy]

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.

As a slow, bipedal mammal, making our way in the world during very dangerous times, it became an evolutionary trait of ours to see the faces of things for our own safety.

How many times have we looked at some wallpaper, rugs, or curtains, and seen a little face in there? When we had lions trying to eat us, having a brain that was good at picking out faces became an advantage. The difference between being eaten or not, was down to spotting predators early.

Anyone that believes they have seen a ghost, has obviously had a very real experience, but it wasn't a ghost, or at least there is not one shred of evidence to suggest it might be. Knowing what we know about life, then if ghosts were even possible, why do we have to go through physical life to end up in supernatural life?

It just makes no sense.

I dont think you need 'hard' evidence to believe in something. If thats the case then how do religions work?

[arista]

Do you believe in ghosts and the paranormal?

What is your view on fortune tellers?


Gifted Fortune Tellers
that read your hand for Free are good people.


If they want money - No deal.





Feel The Force.

[Jesus.]

You of all people should understand it is possible to believe in something without and hard evidence 'jesus' :)

Well there just isn't any evidence at all, never mind "hard evidence," apart from anecdotal personal experiences, and I've explained why we have those.

People will believe what they want, but without any kind of investigation into other possible causes.

[arista]

I believe in energies.


Yes
Your Aura is Spunky Today

[Jesus.]

I dont think you need 'hard' evidence to believe in something. If thats the case then how do religions work?

Through the indoctrination of children. Myths fed to children become reality.

[Ammi]

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.

As a slow, bipedal mammal, making our way in the world during very dangerous times, it became an evolutionary trait of ours to see the faces of things for our own safety.

How many times have we looked at some wallpaper, rugs, or curtains, and seen a little face in there? When we had lions trying to eat us, having a brain that was good at picking out faces became an advantage. The difference between being eaten or not, was down to spotting predators early.

Anyone that believes they have seen a ghost, has obviously had a very real experience, but it wasn't a ghost, or at least there is not one shred of evidence to suggest it might be. Knowing what we know about life, then if ghosts were even possible, why do we have to go through physical life to end up in supernatural life?

It just makes no sense.

Good post...I believe a spirit must still exist and 'be' somewhere...but that doesnt mean I'm right...there is no evidence to back it up. Beliefs are often things...crutches maybe..that people sometimes feel the need for....doesn't mean there is any foundation or evidence at all...but no one can take them away from them...I could believe that shoes work miracles..they give women a super power....they are the second coming.....maybe they are

[Kizzy]

Well there just isn't any evidence at all, never mind "hard evidence," apart from anecdotal personal experiences, and I've explained why we have those.

People will believe what they want, but without any kind of investigation into other possible causes.

I dont feel everything can be so rationally explained away.

[lostalex]

It would be awesome if ghosts existed, cause it means there is life after death.

If i ever saw a ghost i'd be like OMG this is so cool! it means i never have to fear death! There IS an afterlife! That would be a very freeing feeling i think.

but I don't really believe in life after death , not in that way at least(i know all of my atoms will still exist though), so i guess i don't believe ghosts exist.

I definitely believe in extra-terrestrials and extra-dimentional beings though.

[Jesus.]

I dont feel everything can be so rationally explained away.

Why?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Has anyone ever seen the ghost of a dinosaur? Or is it just humans in Victorian clothing?

[Kizzy]

Why?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Has anyone ever seen the ghost of a dinosaur? Or is it just humans in Victorian clothing?

I haven't personally but im not going to say they dont exist.
I thought i heard a dinosaur once, but it was my ex farting in bed...

[Ammi]

I haven't personally but im not going to say they dont exist.
I thought i heard a dinosaur once, but it was my ex farting in bed...

..was you ex a dinosaur?..a T-Ex

[Jessica.]

..was you ex a dinosaur?..a T-Ex

:joker::joker:

[Jesus.]

..was you ex a dinosaur?..a T-Ex

It was probably more likely to be a vibratoraptor.

[Ammi]

It was probably more likely to be a vibratoraptor.

Haha...yes, that would be it...I'm not up on my dinosaurs

[thesheriff443]

i dont do bullsh*t,but iv seen one,
where i used to live the previous owner died in his home,
i started to see a figure come past the window and go to the door and i would get up to answer the door but no one was there, i did not say anything i was thinking it was a shadow or something, months past and this went on,
then one day my brother came round who is very serious and does not do jokes,
he said there is someone at the door,i get up to answer it but again no one there,
i then say whats been happening,then my girlfriend says she has seen the same but did not want say anything,my brother then describes the man and it matches mine and my girlfriends.

[Glenn.]

I do believe in an "afterlife". I've been to a couple of mediums and there's no way the information I got can be false.

And have you ever watched Sally Morgan? She's bang on with information all the time. Only narrow minded people would say good mediums are a fake.

[Glenn.]

I do believe in an "afterlife". I've been to a couple of mediums and there's no way the information I got can be false.

And have you ever watched Sally Morgan? She's bang on with information all the time. Only narrow minded people would say good mediums are a fake.

[Jesus.]

I do believe in an "afterlife". I've been to a couple of mediums and there's no way the information I got can be false.

And have you ever watched Sally Morgan? She's bang on with information all the time. Only narrow minded people would say good mediums are a fake.

There's no such thing as a "good medium." Good mediums can't do anything that people like Derren Brown can do.

If these people would agree to proving their skills, they would be in line for nobel prizes for an entirely new scientific discipline. Not to mention the fact of the challenge below.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

[Glenn.]

Well they can talk to dead people. The evidence they can talk to them are the reactions of their family.

Not everything has to be explained by science. Just because it can't be proved, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Jesus.]

idVxRE8uM-A&feature=related

Please take 10 minutes to watch the YT vid.

[Glenn.]

I've watched the video and it doesn't dispute my argument.

There's no way that 'fake' mediums can know intimate things about the spirit they are talking to. I know from readings I have had and readings members of my family have had that have been to personal for someone to guess.

I refer back to Sally Morgan. I watched an episode once where she was taking to a woman about her husband. The husband has passed and Sally was talking about a car the woman had bought. Then Sally said something about a wardrobe which is where the woman had put her husbands urn in. How would she know that?

[Kizzy]

I agree with glenn to a point, im not sold on the idea of mediums as i feel it is an area that can be exploited by those who pray on the vulnerable.
However, i stand by the fact there is a case for proving the energy or essence of a person (or dinosaur). Ancient philosophers and scientists knew that all living things held an essence, i believe that there is more to know than is known at the moment and maybe one day in the future we will...never say never.

[Roy Mars III]

Sally Morgan is as fake as they come.

Most good mediums are smart. They know how to read people and ask the right type of questions. Some even google your name while you are in the waiting room, so they know a little about your life. Some even have the waiting room bugged incase you come with a friends and are talking in the waiting room about dead people who want to communicate with. They know what they are doing

[Samuel.]

Shocked to see so many people believing in ghosts.

The whole concept of ghosts existing is ridiculous.

[Jesus.]

I agree with glenn to a point, im not sold on the idea of mediums as i feel it is an area that can be exploited by those who pray on the vulnerable.
However, i stand by the fact there is a case for proving the energy or essence of a person (or dinosaur). Ancient philosophers and scientists knew that all living things held an essence, i believe that there is more to know than is known at the moment and maybe one day in the future we will...never say never.

Can you define "essence?" Of course there is more to know than we know at the moment, but you will only find things out using the scientific method, and these psychics continually keep their "powers" away from scientific testing in order to protect their fraud/income.

[Jesus.]

I'd never heard of this Sally Morgan charlatan, so I decided to put her name into google.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/20/psychic-sally-morgan-hears-voices

[Ammi]

I'd never heard of this Sally Morgan charlatan, so I decided to put her name into google.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/20/psychic-sally-morgan-hears-voices

LOL..I already knew the ending so it spoilt the read a little

[Kizzy]

Can you define "essence?" Of course there is more to know than we know at the moment, but you will only find things out using the scientific method, and these psychics continually keep their "powers" away from scientific testing in order to protect their fraud/income.

I cannot simplify it anymore, essence...life force ...spirit... We are sentient beings.
Some may be so more than others, i dont have to see my nose to know its there.
Why do i get the feeling we are arguing the same point? There is more to know, and i believe science will once day be able to prove it.

[Jesus.]

I cannot simplify it anymore, essence...life force ...spirit... We are sentient beings.
Some may be so more than others, i dont have to see my nose to know its there.
Why do i get the feeling we are arguing the same point? There is more to know, and i believe science will once day be able to prove it.

Well I don't think we're arguing, at all. But knowing that your nose is on your face, is a little different from believing that when you die, a spirit/essence leaves your body, but still floats around the physical realm it just left. Sometimes, it'll slam a door, but other times, it will just peep through a window.

Sentience doesn't mean eternal access to some form of life. As a species, we are naturally scared of death, so we have created little stories like religion/ghosts/etc to provide us with comfort.

I just don't get the leap from us being sentient, to ghosts/spirits/presences/poltergeists.

[Roy Mars III]

The great James Randi offers one million dollars to any medium who can prove they can talk to the dead, no one has won the money

[Jesus.]

The great James Randi offers one million dollars to any medium who can prove they can talk to the dead, no one has won the money

I posted the link a few posts up. Any medium/psychic would get a million dollars and a nobel prize. But they prefer working up and down in provincial towns across the world, fleecing people who can't afford it.

[Shasown]

The great James Randi offers one million dollars to any medium who can prove they can talk to the dead, no one has won the money

I posted the link a few posts up. Any medium/psychic would get a million dollars and a nobel prize. But they prefer working up and down in provincial towns across the world, fleecing people who can't afford it.

If you are going to use Randi as proof that mediums are fakes, therefore there are no such things as ghosts, is it ok for me to say ghosts do exist because a friend of a friend of a friend seen one on a saturday night after a night in the pub.

Its pretty much the same Wild Ass Claim that has no bearing on reality.

If you want to know why no serious psychic/medium has gone any length down the challenge at least read up on it a bit.

http://dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge

[Jesus.]

If you are going to use Randi as proof that mediums are fakes, therefore there are no such things as ghosts, is it ok for me to say ghosts do exist because a friend of a friend of a friend seen one on a saturday night after a night in the pub.

Its pretty much the same Wild Ass Claim that has no bearing on reality.

If you want to know why no serious psychic/medium has gone any length down the challenge at least read up on it a bit.

http://dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge

What a bizarre little post that is. No one is using James Randi as proof that mediums are fake, so therefore the premise of your whole angered post becomes irrelevant.

I clicked the link, saw "lost civilisations & ancient mysteries " across the top and knew instantly what would be contained in the information below.

If these people that use their powers to take money from vulnerable people, really had these powers, then why should it matter what kind of test is put to them?

It's like saying, I can read minds, honest, but not just now.

[Shasown]

What a bizarre little post that is. No one is using James Randi as proof that mediums are fake, so therefore the premise of your whole angered post becomes irrelevant.

I clicked the link, saw "lost civilisations & ancient mysteries " across the top and knew instantly what would be contained in the information below.

If these people that use their powers to take money from vulnerable people, really had these powers, then why should it matter what kind of test is put to them?



Intersting, you can put up links to "back up" your claims, but you get hacked off and try to belittle mewhen I put up links to rip your claims apart? If you want to sit in the corner with your fingers in your ears chanting I am right and you are wrong because I cant hear you, thats fine with me.

Angered? Not angered or angry old chap, merely pointing out the fact you used the Institutes challenge that mediums are obvious frauds because none have passed a non scientific challenge instigated by a publicity hungry showman.

It's like saying, I can read minds, honest, but not just now.

No its not, its like Randi insisting any person undertaking the challenege has to undergo one sided media interviews, sign over all rights to the tests and results, oh and accept the fact that Randi's institute can change the test requirements any time they feel the challenger is getting close to beating the challenge.

As for psychics etc might be beneficial for you to read up on the definitions mediums and psychics used to define themselves.

[swinearefine]

I don't believe in ghosts, but I'm open-minded since we still know so little about the world. Same with mediums.

[Kizzy]

The barnum effect

[Glenn.]

No one can prove the existence of an afterlife, just likewise, no one can prove there isn't one. It's up to the individual's beliefs.

[Jesus.]

Intersting, you can put up links to "back up" your claims, but you get hacked off and try to belittle mewhen I put up links to rip your claims apart? If you want to sit in the corner with your fingers in your ears chanting I am right and you are wrong because I cant hear you, thats fine with me.

Angered? Not angered or angry old chap, merely pointing out the fact you used the Institutes challenge that mediums are obvious frauds because none have passed a non scientific challenge instigated by a publicity hungry showman.



No its not, its like Randi insisting any person undertaking the challenege has to undergo one sided media interviews, sign over all rights to the tests and results, oh and accept the fact that Randi's institute can change the test requirements any time they feel the challenger is getting close to beating the challenge.

As for psychics etc might be beneficial for you to read up on the definitions mediums and psychics used to define themselves.

I haven't put up any link to back up my claim. My opinions are the claims that I made. I think I've posted 2 links in this thread, one was, as I explained, the result of googling a medium that I knew nothing about, the other, was to emphasise the point that these fraudsters are happy to take money from vulnerable people, but don't want (does Dr. Evil impression) 1 million dollars for doing the same thing.

Lets take Randi out of it for a second, those academics questioning the prize would still be able to win a nobel prize. A prize that isn't run by a skeptic, but is perhaps the highest known accolade. They would win the prize for making discoveries unknown to science.

I have no idea why you think you've ripped my claims apart. Have your own opinion by all means, but you can't have your own facts. You've done no such thing, and here's why; it's not my responsibility to prove that fraudsters have special magical powers to communicate with humans whose brain and body are dead and decomposing. In the words of Carl Sagan - "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

It's up to these people to put their claims to the test. The default position for any rational person should be "the supernatural is unproven".

You also need to explain why people who know they are not psychics/mediums (like Derren Brown), can perform exactly the same routines, and using the same techniques, that these people with supernatural abilities use.

If people trained in cold reading can pass themselves off as communicating with the dead, perhaps it's not the watertight discipline you make out.

[Jesus.]

No one can prove the existence of an afterlife, just likewise, no one can prove there isn't one. It's up to the individual's beliefs.

You can't prove a negative, it's the sole responsibility of people who postulate the existence of an afterlife to prove it exists.

If I say I'm playing cards with a leprechaun and a goblin, in my flat, it's not your responsibility to prove me wrong, it's mine, to prove that it's true.

You may not agree with this post, but it's the truth.

[Livia]

Or... we could just accept that other people's beliefs, however ridiculous someone else may find them, are their own affair. However, "mediums" making money from the sad and the heartbroken are not included in those described in the first sentence.

[Marsh.]

You can't prove a negative, it's the sole responsibility of people who postulate the existence of an afterlife to prove it exists.

If I say I'm playing cards with a leprechaun and a goblin, in my flat, it's not your responsibility to prove me wrong, it's mine, to prove that it's true.

You may not agree with this post, but it's the truth.

But there is one big, fat problem with all this. Among professional logicians, guess how many think that you can’t prove a negative? That’s right: zero. Yes, you can prove a negative, and it’s easy, too. For one thing, a real, actual law of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction. This law states that that a proposition cannot be both true and not true. Nothing is both true and false. Furthermore, you can prove this law. It can be formally derived from the empty set using provably valid rules of inference. (I’ll spare you the boring details). One of the laws of logic is a provable negative. Wait... this means we’ve just proven that it is not the case that one of the laws of logic is that you can’t prove a negative. So we’ve proven yet another negative! In fact, ‘you can’t prove a negative’ is a negative  so if you could prove it true, it wouldn’t be true! Uh-oh.

http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articlepdf/proveanegative.pdf

:hmph:

[Glenn.]

Answer me this Jesus(that's a sentence I never thought I would ask)

Taking Sally Morgan as example, why she was able to ask a complete stranger about a wardrobe, to be told that's where the urn, containing the remains of the person that gave her the image?

[Marsh.]

Answer me this Jesus(that's a sentence I never thought I would ask)

Taking Sally Morgan as example, why she was able to ask a complete stranger about a wardrobe, to be told that's where the urn, containing the remains of the person that gave her the image?

Very interesting interview about what goes on in these shows of hers...

QiQF-NR6h8M

And just for a laugh...

j1z2X_442Ms

K14sIoE8qT4


:joker: "What with her toe stuck?"

[Kizzy]

But there is one big, fat problem with all this. Among profes- sional logicians, guess how many think that you can’t prove a negative? That’s right: zero. Yes, you can prove a negative, and it’s easy, too. For one thing, a real, actual law of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction. This law states that that a proposition cannot be both true and not true. Nothing is both true and false. Furthermore, you can prove this law. It can be formally derived from the empty set using provably valid rules of inference. (I’ll spare you the boring details). One of the laws of logic is a provable negative. Wait... this means we’ve just proven that it is not the case that one of the laws of logic is that you can’t prove a negative. So we’ve proven yet another negative! In fact, ‘you can’t prove a negative’ is a negative  so if you could prove it true, it wouldn’t be true! Uh-oh.





:hmph:

My head hurts....

[bbfan1991]

I do not believe in ghosts, never have done.

[Jesus.]

But there is one big, fat problem with all this. Among profes- sional logicians, guess how many think that you can’t prove a negative? That’s right: zero. Yes, you can prove a negative, and it’s easy, too. For one thing, a real, actual law of logic is a negative, namely the law of non-contradiction. This law states that that a proposition cannot be both true and not true. Nothing is both true and false. Furthermore, you can prove this law. It can be formally derived from the empty set using provably valid rules of inference. (I’ll spare you the boring details). One of the laws of logic is a provable negative. Wait... this means we’ve just proven that it is not the case that one of the laws of logic is that you can’t prove a negative. So we’ve proven yet another negative! In fact, ‘you can’t prove a negative’ is a negative  so if you could prove it true, it wouldn’t be true! Uh-oh.



:hmph:

Thank you for the link. I will have a read of it properly, although after skimming it, I saw some linguistic tricks and at least one fallacy, but I'll read the whole thing before commenting fully.



But just to highlight a glaring hole in his argument:



1. If unicorns had existed, then there is evidence in the fossil record.
2. There is no evidence of unicorns in the fossil record.
3. Therefore, unicorns never existed.



Not every animal that has existed we have evidence for, yet we know about their existence due to the fact that they are intermediary species, and through biology. Also, I'm fairly sure that there are, as of yet undiscovered fossils of animals that have existed in the past. Does the fact we are yet to find them, mean that they didn't exist? Of course not.


Finally, when people say " you can't either prove or disprove....." they are generally about to make a claim that is outrageous, such as heaven/religion/magic etc, so it's one thing attempting to use fossil evidence to disprove unicorns, but it's another thing entirely to make claims that can't be tested, and then say it's a draw.

[Glenn.]

The allegations in that radio interview doesn't make an sense whatsoever. It wouldn't be possible to to get personal information from someone in the audience, then convey the information on stage.

Is ridiculus :joker:

[Glenn.]

Jesus you haven't answered my question.

[Jesus.]

Answer me this Jesus(that's a sentence I never thought I would ask)

Taking Sally Morgan as example, why she was able to ask a complete stranger about a wardrobe, to be told that's where the urn, containing the remains of the person that gave her the image?

Because they know what they are doing. I've seen Derren Brown pick out an audience member, and then tell her that her mom had a thing for "hats" and was known as "the hat woman". The woman broke down as these things were completely true. Now how could he have known that about a stranger?

[Glenn.]

So it was common knowledge that the woman had her dead husbands remains in the wardrobe? And it was something that good old Sally jus happened to be from the conversation?

Your completely ridiculus.

[Jesus.]

LhYSI5sWi8s

[Marsh.]

The allegations in that radio interview doesn't make an sense whatsoever. It wouldn't be possible to to get personal information from someone in the audience, then convey the information on stage.

Is ridiculus :joker:

Not ridiculous. Many of Sally Morgan's shows have "pods" where people are asked to share their stories of what they hope to get from Sally, or fill out a card with their information on.

Also members of the crew stand around the foyer before the show starts where you are more likely to overhear all kinds of conversations the audience have before entering the show. I suggest you listen to the entire discussion.

A window open where she can hear someone in the projection room saying exactly what Sally says on the stage mere seconds before she does. Certainly not a coincidence.

Derren Brown has done many shows where he's predicted things or read people's minds to get information he couldn't have known. Yet he's openly admitted he's not a psychic and it's all a trick.

[Jesus.]

So it was common knowledge that the woman had her dead husbands remains in the wardrobe? And it was something that good old Sally jus happened to be from the conversation?

Your completely ridiculus.

You've completely misinterpreted what I said there. I don't know how she did it. Maybe the medium did her research, but people without these powers can also achieve the same results



fLbesxxKzcM&feature=relmfu


Watch this from about 35 minutes in.

[Marsh.]

Thank you for the link. I will have a read of it properly, although after skimming it, I saw some linguistic tricks and at least one fallacy, but I'll read the whole thing before commenting fully.



But just to highlight a glaring hole in his argument:



1. If unicorns had existed, then there is evidence in the fossil record.
2. There is no evidence of unicorns in the fossil record.
3. Therefore, unicorns never existed.



Not every animal that has existed we have evidence for, yet we know about their existence due to the fact that they are intermediary species, and through biology. Also, I'm fairly sure that there are, as of yet undiscovered fossils of animals that have existed in the past. Does the fact we are yet to find them, mean that they didn't exist? Of course not.


Finally, when people say " you can't either prove or disprove....." they are generally about to make a claim that is outrageous, such as heaven/religion/magic etc, so it's one thing attempting to use fossil evidence to disprove unicorns, but it's another thing entirely to make claims that can't be tested, and then say it's a draw.


But making a broad statement "You can't prove a negative" is incorrect.

[Jesus.]

But making a broad statement "You can't prove a negative" is incorrect.

Not as far as I'm aware. You've produced one piece of evidence that I picked holes in immediately. It just means I need to research more. At the moment, I'm happy with the previous statement I made, if that turns out to be wrong, I'll have no problem looking at my words. That's how science works. It updates and improves. It should never be seen as a weakness when you change your mind on something.

[Marsh.]

Not as far as I'm aware. You've produced one piece of evidence that I picked holes in immediately. It just means I need to research more. At the moment, I'm happy with the previous statement I made, if that turns out to be wrong, I'll have no problem looking at my words. That's how science works. It updates and improves. It should never be seen as a weakness when you change your mind on something.

I'm not saying your particular example is wrong. I'm saying that it's not always the case. Many negatives have been proven, "You can't prove a negative" is, by definition, a negative.

[Jesus.]

I'm not saying your particular example is wrong. I'm saying that it's not always the case. Many negatives have been proven, "You can't prove a negative" is, by definition, a negative.

Whether it boils down to my example or a broader explanation, I'm not changing my opinion on the statement "you can't prove a negative" on the basis of that link you gave me. I will look into it further before I change my mind to being able to prove a negative.

[Marsh.]

Whether it boils down to my example or a broader explanation, I'm not changing my opinion on the statement "you can't prove a negative" on the basis of that link you gave me. I will look into it further before I change my mind to being able to prove a negative.

I know you won't change your mind. I've noticed your stubborn nature all over the forum already. Not that that's a bad thing but you can prove negatives.

For example, I can prove there is no milk in my cereal bowl by showing an empty cereal bowl.

[Glenn.]

I know a man called Steve who owns the local Gym who's psychic. He goes to sleep and wakes up with a message from someone who has passed away. He forgets about it and he eventually comes into contact with the person the message is for. Whether its in the street or in the gym.

I asked him once how he does it and he said he was woke up one night with these voices talking in his head.

He doesn't earn money from it, and doesn't want to. He resents it.

I know its the real deal because of stuff he's told me. It's too personal to guess.

[Kizzy]

It should work the same way justice rystem(should) work, innocent till proven guilty...Its not up to me to prove i did see a ghost....Its up to you to prove i Couldn't possibly see one. :)

[Roy Mars III]

you didn't see one because they do not exist. case closed

[Jesus.]

I know you won't change your mind. I've noticed your stubborn nature all over the forum already. Not that that's a bad thing but you can prove negatives.

For example, I can prove there is no milk in my cereal bowl by showing an empty cereal bowl.

Classic case of seeing what you want to see. I've been polite in our conversation, but you've made a judgment about me, so you now need to to live up to it. Let me spell it out for you again. Just because you have provided a link saying that you can actually prove a negative, it doesn't mean that I quickly change my approach. What I've said, and what is actually the right thing to do, is to take time to read the complete link in this thread, then work from there.

So you can say what you like about me, but you're just incorrect with this point. I have strong views, and I'm not afraid to spell them out. When people feel threatened by that, like you are now, then you stop looking at the content of what I write, and instead try to weaken the positions I take by muddying the water, rather than addressing the points I make.

[Jesus.]

I know a man called Steve who owns the local Gym who's psychic. He goes to sleep and wakes up with a message from someone who has passed away. He forgets about it and he eventually comes into contact with the person the message is for. Whether its in the street or in the gym.

I asked him once how he does it and he said he was woke up one night with these voices talking in his head.

He doesn't earn money from it, and doesn't want to. He resents it.

I know its the real deal because of stuff he's told me. It's too personal to guess.

Did you watch the Derren Brown reading I posted above, Glenn? What did you think? Has it made you question anything, or does it make you think that he has the gift, but doesn't yet know it?

[Kizzy]

I agree there are those who seem sensitive to these things, experience a lot of de ja vous, have really strong warning instincts, know when children or family members are in trouble.
Childre are very sensitive thats why they have lots of experiences, but no one believes them.

[Jesus.]

I agree there are those who seem sensitive to these things, experience a lot of de ja vous, have really strong warning instincts, know when children or family members are in trouble.
Childre are very sensitive thats why they have lots of experiences, but no one believes them.

Agree with whom?

[Glenn.]

Did you watch the Derren Brown reading I posted above, Glenn? What did you think? Has it made you question anything, or does it make you think that he has the gift, but doesn't yet know it?

Yes I watched it.

It doesn't change my view on this whatsoever.

Especially not with my friend Steve.

Your outright calling him a liar because you don't believe it.

[Kizzy]

Agree with whom?

Not you obv! haha, i meant glenn :dance:

[Jesus.]

Yes I watched it.

It doesn't change my view on this whatsoever.

Especially not with my friend Steve.

Your outright calling him a liar because you don't believe it.

You asked me how Sandra could know things about the urn, so I show you Derren Brown doing similar things. And now you're accusing me of attacking your friend.

Why did you go through the pretense of having a conversation about it? You should of just flounced at the start, and we could have avoided the civil conversation. Really bizarre. I'm not asking you to change your mind, I'm just showing you there are other examples of these skills.

I never for one second thought, that offering you information that you requested, would result in you having a go at me.

[Glenn.]

You asked me how Sally:thumbs: could know things about the urn, so I show you Derren Brown doing similar things. And now you're accusing me of attacking your friend.

Why did you go through the pretense of having a conversation about it? You should of just flounced at the start, and we could have avoided the civil conversation. Really bizarre. I'm not asking you to change your mind, I'm just showing you there are other examples of these skills.

I never for one second thought, that offering you information that you requested, would result in you having a go at me.

I gave you an example of why I believe in mediums and you posted a video, obviously with the attempt to debunk my opinion.

My friend isn't a commercial medium. He doesn't make money on it and has no intentions to fool people, like the examples in your video, which suggests all psychic's do fool people.

In a roundabout way, your calling mediums and psychics frauds. My example says its not the case, which you seem to be ignoring because you don't agree with it.

[Marsh.]

Classic case of seeing what you want to see. I've been polite in our conversation, but you've made a judgment about me, so you now need to to live up to it. Let me spell it out for you again. Just because you have provided a link saying that you can actually prove a negative, it doesn't mean that I quickly change my approach. What I've said, and what is actually the right thing to do, is to take time to read the complete link in this thread, then work from there.

So you can say what you like about me, but you're just incorrect with this point. I have strong views, and I'm not afraid to spell them out. When people feel threatened by that, like you are now, then you stop looking at the content of what I write, and instead try to weaken the positions I take by muddying the water, rather than addressing the points I make.


I'm not interested in your "points" that's why I'm not addressing them. That's a debate you're having with Glenn.
I'm disputing your comment on not proving negatives because it's incorrect.

It's not a case of me reading the link I provided and then reading yours and slowly thinking about it. The reason I provided the link was I came to my own stance on it a long time ago when someone else suggested you can't prove negatives. You can't prove heaven doesn't exist, but that does not mean "you can't prove a negative" because logic itself tells us differently.

[Jesus.]

I gave you an example of why I believe in mediums and you posted a video, obviously with the attempt to debunk my opinion.

My friend isn't a commercial medium. He doesn't make money on it and has no intentions to fool people, like the examples in your video, which suggests all psychic's do fool people.

In a roundabout way, your calling mediums and psychics frauds. My example says its not the case, which you seem to be ignoring because you don't agree with it.

You purposefully asked me about one specific example about the urn. Lets not pretend that I have been hunting down your points and ticking them off, you even accused me of not answering your questions when I took longer than you wanted me to, to reply.

I called mediums/psychics frauds on page one, but I think you thought you had the "smoking gun" with the tale of an urn.

I haven't attacked anyone personally here, yet people are free to make incorrect assertions about what I've written in this thread.

[Glenn.]

OK then. Is my friend a fraud? You seem to have all the answers.

[Jesus.]

I'm not interested in your "points" that's why I'm not addressing them. That's a debate you're having with Glenn.
I'm disputing your comment on not proving negatives because it's incorrect.

It's not a case of me reading the link I provided and then reading yours and slowly thinking about it. The reason I provided the link was I came to my own stance on it a long time ago when someone else suggested you can't prove negatives. You can't prove heaven doesn't exist, but that does not mean "you can't prove a negative" because logic itself tells us differently.

Well congratulations on arriving on your own, to an issue we disagree about. My point, that you are not interested in (even though you attempted to mock it in your last post), is that I won't be changing my mind on the basis of one link, but I will look into the information you have provided.

Now, I was always under the impression that only mathematics (a discipline I'm **** at) can prove a negative, so you see, from an intellectual perspective, I can't just accept your evidence and change my opinion with the click of yours/or my fingers.

Intellectual honesty requires that I take time to look into both sides of this again and reexamine my position.

Now, that isn't me being "stubborn" as you tried to paint me. That is me, taking the correct approach to an intellectual position.

[Marsh.]

Well congratulations on arriving on your own, to an issue we disagree about. My point, that you are not interested in (even though you attempted to mock it in your last post), is that I won't be changing my mind on the basis of one link, but I will look into the information you have provided.

Now, I was always under the impression that only mathematics (a discipline I'm **** at) can prove a negative, so you see, from an intellectual perspective, I can't just accept your evidence and change my opinion with the click of yours/or my fingers.

Intellectual honesty requires that I take time to look into both sides of this again and reexamine my position.

Now, that isn't me being "stubborn" as you tried to paint me. That is me, taking the correct approach to an intellectual position.

I've already said I don't expect nor want you to change your mind.

[Kazanne]

I don't believe in fortune tellers etc,but Ghosts,I would never say they do not exist as none of us really know,I have never seen one,but I would never jest at anyone who has seen one,they may or may not exist.

[Jesus.]

OK then. Is my friend a fraud? You seem to have all the answers.

Glenn, please look at my first post in this thread on page one. Never, have I claimed to have all the answers. I've offered different opinions, and explained them using the terms of our own survival as a species, as to why we see things that aren't really there.

Saying that "you seem to have all the answers" is an easy way to pretend that's what I believe about myself.

[Glenn.]

Again, you didn't answer my question.

Nevermind. I'm really not wasting any more of my time on this subject.

[Jesus.]

Again, you didn't answer my question.

Nevermind. I'm really not wasting any more of my time on this subject.

I purposefully decided against answering your question, because there is no point after your accusations against me last time.

Probably best if we agree to disagree.

[Jessica.]

you didn't see one because they do not exist. case closed

:laugh3:

[Shasown]

You purposefully asked me about one specific example about the urn. Lets not pretend that I have been hunting down your points and ticking them off, you even accused me of not answering your questions when I took longer than you wanted me to, to reply.

I called mediums/psychics frauds on page one, but I think you thought you had the "smoking gun" with the tale of an urn.

I haven't attacked anyone personally here, yet people are free to make incorrect assertions about what I've written in this thread.

People are also free to read your posts and to see exactly what you have posted in black and white.

Mediums or psychics are frauds? Please note there is a difference. there may be people who are psychics or mediums (or who claim to be0 therefore you have insulted them.

Also in other posts you called those who believe in mediums etc gullible thats also a condescending attitude to throw about.

Do you believe in the laws of physics?

[Kizzy]

I believe that anyone who claims to be psychic and or a medium, and who uses this claim to make a living or charge monies to any person or persons to be fraudulent.

[Jords]

Probably not, scientifically speaking what would be the point?
Cool/Scary/Interesting idea though.

My uncle swears blind he saw a ghost in a field when he still lived in Italy and she was sat on hay though, so yeah.. probably not but you cant be completely sure.

[Jesus.]

People are also free to read your posts and to see exactly what you have posted in black and white.

Mediums or psychics are frauds? Please note there is a difference. there may be people who are psychics or mediums (or who claim to be0 therefore you have insulted them.

Also in other posts you called those who believe in mediums etc gullible thats also a condescending attitude to throw about.

Do you believe in the laws of physics?

Yes - Mediums/Psychics are frauds. They can't do anything that people with training can do.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think I've rubbished anyone who has claimed to believe in such things. I think I've challenged their positions, but people don't have the right to go through life without being offended. I also remember stating they were victims in this whole scenario, and they were being fleeced. That is a far cry from mocking people who believe it. I tell you what I have done, though. I've tried to provide evidence and theories for this whole subject.

I don't believe in the laws of physics in the same way I don't believe in the sun. It just is. They are part of our universe. I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I am a science geek. I don't need to know every discipline of the scientific process, but I'm confident in those who do work in this field. My confidence is ensured, through the constant using of the scientific method.
I wouldn't jump off a building just to see whether gravity really does exist.

I hope this "laws of physics" question isn't going to lead you on to some Deepak Chopra. But in fact, what I think you're trying to aim for, is quantum physics and the unpredictable predictability. Maybe a bit of string theory thrown in for good measure?

Considering you said you weren't interested in my points, but merely wanted to argue about proving a negative, I have no idea why you quoted my post at all.

[Glenn.]

Yes - Mediums/Psychics are frauds. They can't do anything that people with training can do.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think I've rubbished anyone who has claimed to believe in such things. I think I've challenged their positions, but people don't have the right to go through life without being offended. I also remember stating they were victims in this whole scenario, and they were being fleeced. That is a far cry from mocking people who believe it. I tell you what I have done, though. I've tried to provide evidence and theories for this whole subject.

I don't believe in the laws of physics in the same way I don't believe in the sun. It just is. They are part of our universe. I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I am a science geek. I don't need to know every discipline of the scientific process, but I'm confident in those who do work in this field. My confidence is ensured, through the constant using of the scientific method.
I wouldn't jump off a building just to see whether gravity really does exist.

I hope this "laws of physics" question isn't going to lead you on to some Deepak Chopra. But in fact, what I think you're trying to aim for, is quantum physics and the unpredictable predictability. Maybe a bit of string theory thrown in for good measure?

Considering you said you weren't interested in my points, but merely wanted to argue about proving a negative, I have no idea why you quoted my post at all.

Not all mediums and psychics.

[Jessica.]

I think some Mediums really believe they can talk to the dead, but really they can't.

[Glenn.]

My friend can.

And he doesn't make a penny for it. Hardly a fraud :rolleyes:

[Kizzy]

My friend can.

And he doesn't make a penny for it. Hardly a fraud :rolleyes:

Is that to me or jeebs? i agree if he can do it without having to hire out the local community centre and charging £20 a pop then great :)

[Glenn.]

Why would it be to you?

[Jessica.]

My friend can.

And he doesn't make a penny for it. Hardly a fraud :rolleyes:

I didn't say he was a fraud btw, he probably does believe he can communicate and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, he doesn't sound greedy or anything, I don't think it harms anyone.

[Glenn.]

It's not a case of whether he believes he can do it. He can.

He says he wouldn't wish it on anyone. To him it's more of a burden than a gift.

[lostalex]

Why are we still talking about ghosts and psychics? i already told you guys, there are no ghosts, and psychics are nothing. There is such a thing as psychic power, but psychic power doesn't allow you to talk to the dead. The dead are gone forever.

People are experiencing invisible aliens.

[Shasown]

Yes - Mediums/Psychics are frauds. They can't do anything that people with training can do.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think I've rubbished anyone who has claimed to believe in such things. I think I've challenged their positions, but people don't have the right to go through life without being offended. I also remember stating they were victims in this whole scenario, and they were being fleeced. That is a far cry from mocking people who believe it. I tell you what I have done, though. I've tried to provide evidence and theories for this whole subject.

I don't believe in the laws of physics in the same way I don't believe in the sun. It just is. They are part of our universe. I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I am a science geek. I don't need to know every discipline of the scientific process, but I'm confident in those who do work in this field. My confidence is ensured, through the constant using of the scientific method.
I wouldn't jump off a building just to see whether gravity really does exist.

I hope this "laws of physics" question isn't going to lead you on to some Deepak Chopra. But in fact, what I think you're trying to aim for, is quantum physics and the unpredictable predictability. Maybe a bit of string theory thrown in for good measure?

Considering you said you weren't interested in my points, but merely wanted to argue about proving a negative, I have no idea why you quoted my post at all.

A closed mind eh?

Could I ask where I said I wasnt interested in your points and merely wanted to argue to prove a negative? Or is this another random thrown in to muddy the water? Give you clue though go back a page or two and re-read the posts in the thread.

[Jesus.]

A closed mind eh?

Could I ask where I said I wasn't interested in your points and merely wanted to argue to prove a negative? Or is this another random thrown in to muddy the water? Give you clue though go back a page or two and re-read the posts in the thread.

I'm really sorry. I got you and 08marsh mixed up, so I take that sentence back. Is that the only part of my reply that you focused on? A throw away line at the end?

So where is my mind closed? You really were going to go down the Deepak Chopra route? Go one then. I owe you one after mixing you up with 08, so I'm all ears.

[Kizzy]

Why would it be to you?

I mentioned fraudulent mediums...

[Roy Mars III]

Why are we still talking about ghosts and psychics? i already told you guys, there are no ghosts, and psychics are nothing. There is such a thing as psychic power, but psychic power doesn't allow you to talk to the dead. The dead are gone forever.

People are experiencing invisible aliens.

:joker:

[Niamh.]

I don't know, probably not but I couldn't say for sure. Fortune tellers, I would say generally not but I did have one really weird experience with one

[Kizzy]

Why are we still talking about ghosts and psychics? i already told you guys, there are no ghosts, and psychics are nothing. There is such a thing as psychic power, but psychic power doesn't allow you to talk to the dead. The dead are gone forever.

People are experiencing invisible aliens.

Not sure why aliens should be so believable and ghosts not tbh... There is no evidence for either that im aware of.
Im not saying you're wrong btw, nobody knows whats out there do they?

[Niamh.]

Not sure why aliens should be so believable and ghosts not tbh... There is no evidence for either that im aware of.
Im not saying you're wrong btw, nobody knows whats out there do they?

Probably because ghosts are super natural and would be a dead person still floating around, where as an alien is just like us a living thing on another planet with the right properties to sustain life, that's pretty believable to me, if we are here why couldn't there be another planet somewhere similar to ours, it's a vast universe out there

[Jesus.]

Not sure why aliens should be so believable and ghosts not tbh... There is no evidence for either that im aware of.
Im not saying you're wrong btw, nobody knows whats out there do they?

Because aliens are possible because of what we know about life. Life started on this planet once, and if it can start here, there are other planets with similar conditions that it can start too. That's only carbon based life too. For all we know, there may well be other possibilities for different kinds of life to evolve.

Alien life can be explained using natural laws, ghosts are supernatural.

[InOne]

Well I don't believe in God so there would be no reason for me to think the idea of ghosts has any more truth to it.

[Marsh.]

Typical yank thinking they're the centre of everything. Suggestion: get over yourself.

[Shasown]

I'm really sorry. I got you and 08marsh mixed up, so I take that sentence back. Is that the only part of my reply that you focused on? A throw away line at the end?

So where is my mind closed? You really were going to go down the Deepak Chopra route? Go one then. I owe you one after mixing you up with 08, so I'm all ears.

Nah the throw away line was the only one I could be erssed taking you to task over.

Deepak Chopra? Nah read some of his work and thought he was just repackaging and modernising some older ideas, some say the epitome of pseudoscience.

I was thinking more basic laws than you incorrectly pre-supposed, but hey on you go matey.

Your mind is closed to the possibility of some sort of phenomena that people call ghosts actually existing. Multiple universes, multiple timelines, energy imprints, empathic feelings and a few other theories could explain said phenomena but hey you decided that ghosts have to be the residual spirit of a once living being hanging around on this earthly plane. And obviously that couldnt possibly happen could it?

[Kizzy]

Because aliens are possible because of what we know about life. Life started on this planet once, and if it can start here, there are other planets with similar conditions that it can start too. That's only carbon based life too. For all we know, there may well be other possibilities for different kinds of life to evolve.

Alien life can be explained using natural laws, ghosts are supernatural.

But there is no proof, as far as we know so far there is no planet with an atmosphere that could sustain life. Therefore as far as we know its impossible...
How do you know that on one of these planets is all the essences of every person (and dinosaur) that ever lived?....
Do you know what that would mean?
WE are the aliens.

[Jesus.]

Nah the throw away line was the only one I could be erssed taking you to task over.

Deepak Chopra? Nah read some of his work and thought he was just repackaging and modernising some older ideas, some say the epitome of pseudoscience.

I was thinking more basic laws than you incorrectly pre-supposed, but hey on you go matey.

Your mind is closed to the possibility of some sort of phenomena that people call ghosts actually existing. Multiple universes, multiple timelines, energy imprints, empathic feelings and a few other theories could explain said phenomena but hey you decided that ghosts have to be the residual spirit of a once living being hanging around on this earthly plane. And obviously that couldnt possibly happen could it?

Well you haven't taken me to task at all. I guess it's all about perspective.

As for my mind being closed on the different kind of examples you list, well you're just wrong. But let's be honest here, when people talk about ghosts, they are talking about a very specific thing.

Another problem I have, is that as of yet, there is just no way to test for such things. How can my mind be closed, when I don't know enough about theoretical physics to begin to work out a model for such things? It's one thing to call me (incorrectly) closed minded, but it's another thing all together, to be so open minded that your brain falls out.

If you have a theory for how to test for such things as empathic imprints on the universe, then be my guest.

All I know now, is that there is absolutely no reason currently, to believe that ghosts/afterlife can exist. Just like all disciplines of science - show me your hypothesis and how you plan to test it.

I'll genuinely, have absolutely no problem changing my mind should new evidence come to light, but as of now, then there isn't anything that you've written, that could even begin to tempt me, and I know you want to paint that as closed minded, but it's not. It's not closed minded for the same reason that biologists don't study intelligent design. Namely, it's untestable, unprovable, pseudo-science.

[Jesus.]

But there is no proof, as far as we know so far there is no planet with an atmosphere that could sustain life. Therefore as far as we know its impossible...
How do you know that on one of these planets is all the essences of every person (and dinosaur) that ever lived?....
Do you know what that would mean?
WE are the aliens.

That's neither half true, or good satire. We know of planets similar to earth already. Because of their size they will have different gravitational forces, but they have liquid water, and reside in a sort of "goldilocks" zone, hospitable to the kinds of life we know.

[Kizzy]

That's neither half true, or good satire. We know of planets similar to earth already. Because of their size they will have different gravitational forces, but they have liquid water, and reside in a sort of "goldilocks" zone, hospitable to the kinds of life we know.

Can i just say here, you are not really jesus? you dont know anything on this subject...it would be impossible to know, even the most brilliant minds on this planet couldn't say with all certainty that from the knowledge they have now that is possible.
I was not aiming for satire so thats good, i can only say what I believe to be true.
Is there proof? hard evidence? samples? no... Therefore its heresay.

[Jesus.]

Can i just say here, you are not really jesus? you dont know anything on this subject...it would be impossible to know, even the most brilliant minds on this planet couldn't say with all certainty that from the knowledge they have now that is possible.
I was not aiming for satire so thats good, i can only say what I believe to be true.
Is there proof? hard evidence? samples? no... Therefore its heresay.

Wow. I think you would struggle to find a brilliant thinker alive today, who didn't think life elsewhere was a "possibility". Not all of them believe it has occurred, but you would struggle to find one that would say that it is impossible.

[MTVN]

I always find it a bit surprising tbh, how people are a lot more prepared to accept the supernatural when it comes to ghosts, but not when it comes to God, miracles etc.

[Jesus.]

I always find it a bit surprising tbh, how people are a lot more prepared to accept the supernatural when it comes to ghosts, but not when it comes to God, miracles etc.

I would guess it's because everyone knows someone who claims to have seen a ghost, or had an absolutely true reading from a psychic, it's sort of worked it's way into our psyche like that. It's part of our language.

Not many people have witnessed someone resurrected from the dead, or water turning to wine.

Even religious people have their own snobbery. If I went into church and said MTVN had performed a miracle, they wouldn't take me on face value, they'd want more proof than my word.

[Kizzy]

Wow. I think you would struggle to find a brilliant thinker alive today, who didn't think life elsewhere was a "possibility". Not all of them believe it has occurred, but you would struggle to find one that would say that it is impossible.

Yes you would be able to find one, no probs there is nowhere that we know of in out solar system that could sustain life as we know it.

[Shasown]

As for my mind being closed on the different kind of examples you list, well you're just wrong. But let's be honest here, when people talk about ghosts, they are talking about a very specific thing.

Another problem I have, is that as of yet, there is just no way to test for such things. How can my mind be closed, when I don't know enough about theoretical physics to begin to work out a model for such things? It's one thing to call me (incorrectly) closed minded, but it's another thing all together, to be so open minded that your brain falls out.

If you have a theory for how to test for such things as empathic imprints on the universe, then be my guest.

All I know now, is that there is absolutely no reason currently, to believe that ghosts/afterlife can exist. Just like all disciplines of science - show me your hypothesis and how you plan to test it.

I'll genuinely, have absolutely no problem changing my mind should new evidence come to light, but as of now, then there isn't anything that you've written, that could even begin to tempt me, and I know you want to paint that as closed minded, but it's not. It's not closed minded for the same reason that biologists don't study intelligent design. Namely, it's untestable, unprovable, pseudo-science.

Ah i see now what you mean, you define someone seeing some form of energy which the person viewing either rightly or wrongly defines as a "ghost". that doesnt happen.

You are open minded enough to admit that there may be something unexplained that we cant put an accurate definition to?

And yet there is no possibility at all that any of those phenomenon could possibly some form of life force, be it residual energy from some form of trauma in a persons life replaying or even a spirit of a dead person?

There are no such things as ghosts, and there is absolutely no reason to think that there could be.



Am glad all the wonders, mysteries and strange occurences of the modern world can be sorted into categories so easily.

[Kizzy]

I always find it a bit surprising tbh, how people are a lot more prepared to accept the supernatural when it comes to ghosts, but not when it comes to God, miracles etc.
Im sure there are miricles, im sure they happen everyday we just dont look for them, we focus on the shiz....

[Jesus.]

Ah i see now what you mean, you define someone seeing some form of energy which the person viewing either rightly or wrongly defines as a "ghost". that doesnt happen.

You are open minded enough to admit that there may be something unexplained that we cant put an accurate definition to?

And yet there is no possibility at all that any of those phenomenon could possibly some form of life force, be it residual energy from some form of trauma in a persons life replaying or even a spirit of a dead person?



Am glad all the wonders, mysteries and strange occurences of the modern world can be sorted into categories so easily.

Again, I'm trying to be patient here, but you're coming back with the same tired routine. Bring me something new, that's tangent, that we can discuss, because all I'm getting from you, is some very mystical sounding nonsense.

You're the open minded one, describe "some form of life force, be it residual energy from some form of trauma in a persons life replaying or even a spirit of a dead person?" to me. How does it work? When the brain/organs shut down, does this phenomena float out of your body?

Because unless you have a theory, other than slightly nuanced versions of your previous arguments, then there is no need for me to change my reply.

Describe this imprinting process to me.

Anyone can throw up mystical sounding examples that don't really mean anything, which is exactly what you've done.

I'll stick by my point, there is absolutely no evidence in any kind of afterlife, there is no evidence that ghosts exist, and there is no evidence that the tooth fairy exists, either.

May I ask where you got your avatar from? There are a number of religious/pseudo-scientific websites that use the same one. Is this just a coincidence?

One massive error that people in general make, is believing that people who believe and trust in the scientific process, are completely closed to change.

That's just not true. New discoveries, evidence and theories are what keeps our knowledge expanding. Where is your avatar from?

[MTVN]

I would guess it's because everyone knows someone who claims to have seen a ghost, or had an absolutely true reading from a psychic, it's sort of worked it's way into our psyche like that. It's part of our language.

Not many people have witnessed someone resurrected from the dead, or water turning to wine.

Even religious people have their own snobbery. If I went into church and said MTVN had performed a miracle, they wouldn't take me on face value, they'd want more proof than my word.

I guess, the "evidence" for both is essentially the same though, normally anecdotal or from questionable photo/film, I'd say there's a lot more documented evidence of miracles than there is of ghosts

Im sure there are miricles, im sure they happen everyday we just dont look for them, we focus on the shiz....

The Catholic Church spend quite a lot of time looking for them

[Jesus.]

Yes you would be able to find one, no probs there is nowhere that we know of in out solar system that could sustain life as we know it.

I'll humour you - what about outside of our solar system?

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/kepler-22b/

[Jesus.]

I guess, the "evidence" for both is essentially the same though, normally anecdotal or from questionable photo/film, I'd say there's a lot more documented evidence of miracles than there is of ghosts



The Catholic Church spend quite a lot of time looking for them

Absolutely, your initial pondering was correct, it doesn't make sense. I just tried to offer a reason that it might be the case. Like you, I see no reason why the two things are treated differently.

[InOne]

I guess, the "evidence" for both is essentially the same though, normally anecdotal or from questionable photo/film, I'd say there's a lot more documented evidence of miracles than there is of ghosts



The Catholic Church spend quite a lot of time looking for them

I don't think there is that many miracles that they have certified. They're usually the ones to be most skeptic at first.

[Jesus.]

I don't think there is that many miracles that they have certified. They're usually the ones to be most skeptic at first.

That's not really true anymore. The Catholic church are in the process of beautifying lots of people for really vague reasons. For instance, one of Mother Teresa's miracles, was a lighting effect when she was interviewed on film, once.

[InOne]

That's not really true anymore. The Catholic church are in the process of beautifying lots of people for really vague reasons. For instance, one of Mother Teresa's miracles, was a lighting effect when she was interviewed on film, once.

I might be just thinking of Lourdes then. But they have their own investigation team when they are claimed I think lol Not kept up with any of that for a while though

[Kizzy]

I'll humour you - what about outside of our solar system?

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/kepler-22b/


Dont humour me... Are we delving back into hypotheticals now?....what if? ..if only?....
And I am less than blinded by that website my 15yr old son could do a better job!

[MTVN]

I don't think there is that many miracles that they have certified. They're usually the ones to be most skeptic at first.

That's not really true anymore. The Catholic church are in the process of beautifying lots of people for really vague reasons. For instance, one of Mother Teresa's miracles, was a lighting effect when she was interviewed on film, once.

I don't know a huge lot about it but with John Paul II his supposed miracle also seems very dubious, I think Benedict just confirmed it in order to beatify him

[Marsh.]

I remember watching a documentary about the miracle of the Bleeding Host. It was tested and had started to bleed real human blood and was real flesh in front of a congregation during a mass.
This has loads of details; whether you believe it or not it's very interesting. Matched the blood type of that found in the Turin Shroud.

http://www.indefenseofthecross.com/Eucharistic_miracles.htm

[Jesus.]

Dont humour me... Are we delving back into hypotheticals now?....what if? ..if only?....
And I am less than blinded by that website my 15yr old son could do a better job!

So good website design is the key to you accepting that life is a "possibility?" Not proven, or certain, but a possibility.

[InOne]

I remember watching a documentary about the miracle of the Bleeding Host. It was tested and had started to bleed real human blood and was real flesh in front of a congregation during a mass.
This has loads of details; whether you believe it or not it's very interesting. Matched the blood type of that found in the Turin Shroud.

http://www.indefenseofthecross.com/Eucharistic_miracles.htm

Quite interesting, although that film isn't very clear. Has anyone come up with a debunk or anything?