PDA

View Full Version : Do scientists see ghosts?



Moonrock
2005-Dec-22, 07:27 PM
Im wondering if any scientists have seen ghosts? If so does it put them in an unusual situation because their job is to prove something exists by being able to reproduce it in laboratory conditions?

Myself and my brother have seen ghosts and experienced other weird phenomenon since an early age (UFOs, poltergeist activity, deja vu) and recently my brother who is studying to become a medium had 2 sceptics turn up from the local university in a bid to prove that mediumship and spiritualism was just fake.

The 2 sceptics sat in the middle of the circle which consisted many mediums. The medium in charge of the group asked for each of them to give the sceptics a message. When it came to my brother, not only did he accurately describe one of their grandmothers, right down to her very short size (around 4 foot), but he also told one of them their surname (and at the first attempt of trying). No questions were asked to give any clues either. The sceptics went away with a different viewpoint than when they came no doubt.

So Im wondering if anyone here is a scientist and has seen ghosts? And what is your verdict to what they could be?

Candy
2005-Dec-22, 07:32 PM
:shifty:

I await responses.

Monique
2005-Dec-22, 07:40 PM
Im wondering if any scientists have seen ghosts? If so does it put them in an unusual situation because their job is to prove something exists by being able to reproduce it in laboratory conditions?

Myself and my brother have seen ghosts and experienced other weird phenomenon since an early age (UFOs, poltergeist activity, deja vu) and recently my brother who is studying to become a medium had 2 sceptics turn up from the local university in a bid to prove that mediumship and spiritualism was just fake.

The 2 sceptics sat in the middle of the circle which consisted many mediums. The medium in charge of the group asked for each of them to give the sceptics a message. When it came to my brother, not only did he accurately describe one of their grandmothers, right down to her very short size (around 4 foot), but he also told one of them their surname (and at the first attempt of trying). No questions were asked to give any clues either. The sceptics went away with a different viewpoint than when they came no doubt.

So Im wondering if anyone here is a scientist and has seen ghosts? And what is your verdict to what they could be?
Is difficult to answer. I have experiences I do not believe for scientific explanation. I do not make scientific argument for ghost. However, I do not believe science have all answer for all current questions.

300 years ago, science do not have answer for why sun shine, but sun shine.

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-22, 07:53 PM
Is difficult to answer. I have experiences I do not believe for scientific explanation. I do not make scientific argument for ghost. However, I do not believe science have all answer for all current questions.

300 years ago, science do not have answer for why sun shine, but sun shine.

Good point Monique;)

I don't believe there will be much of a response to this thread because most scientist will use any excuse to prove that it was just a rare scientific occurrence. Do I believe in ghosts? Not exactly, but I have an open mind.

Candy
2005-Dec-22, 08:04 PM
I'm not sure how many scientists are on the board. From observation, there are not many.

Can we just talk about weird personal phenomenon(s)? We have had other threads with the same subject, but I'm too lazy to do a search.

Swift
2005-Dec-22, 08:10 PM
I have a PhD in chemistry, I guess that makes me a scientist.
I've never seen anything that I even remotely thought of as a ghost.
I can not speak for the rest of the scientists on the planet.

Kristophe
2005-Dec-22, 08:17 PM
I'm not really a scientist, and I've never seen a ghost, but I am mighty skeptical about your anticdote and its claims of accurate cold reading.

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-22, 08:24 PM
I have a PhD in chemistry, I guess that makes me a scientist.
I've never seen anything that I even remotely thought of as a ghost.
I can not speak for the rest of the scientists on the planet.


Question is Swift, do you find your observation to be biased? Do you think that you may have dismissed something that someone else would have taken as a ghost phenomenon? Although you can say right now that you don't think you have, it is a difficult thing to say that you have never witnessed an experience because there are a lot of explanations for rare occurrences like this.

I think it is just to difficult to say, because I think everyone's decision is biased due to experiences that you may have had before. If you think you had an experience before, then the likelihood of another experience increases because your looking for such a thing subconsciously, although you may be unaware of it. If you never thought it to be a possibility for such a thing to happen, or think that ghosts are hocus pokus, then your probably not going to have an experience.

Swift
2005-Dec-22, 08:44 PM
Question is Swift, do you find your observation to be biased? Do you think that you may have dismissed something that someone else would have taken as a ghost phenomenon? Although you can say right now that you don't think you have, it is a difficult thing to say that you have never witnessed an experience because there are a lot of explanations for rare occurrences like this.
Of course there is no answer I can give you to that, since you'll say I'm biased ;). But I can not recall anything in my life that I even remotely thought of as supernatural, ghostly, metaphysical, or beyond the normal laws of the physical world. I am not making a biased explanation of something I've observed, I've never observed anything that I think anyone would call a ghost. Now maybe the guy in the car next to me at the traffic light is a ghost, but if he is not semi-transparent or moves through walls, there is no external indication to me that he is a ghost.

It is like Wednesday's line from the end of the first Addam's Family movie, as to what she is dressed as for Halloween... "I'm dressed up as homicidal maniac, they look like everyone else" ;)

But before you completely dismiss my biased, scientist view of the world, keep in mind that there have been times in my life that I would have really loved to have seen a ghost, angel, space alien, etc. - so even looking for them I never saw anything that resembled one.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-22, 08:46 PM
I don't believe there will be much of a response to this thread because most scientist will use any excuse to prove that it was just a rare scientific occurrence.

Wow...not only is this thread about ghosts...it's also about mind-readers.

...just an observation...

SirBlack
2005-Dec-22, 08:47 PM
by being able to reproduce it in laboratory conditions?


Not quite, what they'd need are good observations. Laboratories are quite helpful at getting good observations, but are not a requirement in science. For instance, we can't put the Sun in a lab but scientists can study it just fine.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-22, 08:56 PM
Moonrock (on the Nemesis thread) said...


Another thing to consider is that trying to get a medium into a lab and scientifically prove them wrong is also the wrong conditions for a medium to work in.

Now why is that? Seems to be a very convienent "flaw" in the medium's powers.


Get Mr. Randi to go to a proper spiritualist service with a proper medium and he might just eat his hat.

Why would you assume that Randi has not attended a "proper spiritualist service" where there was a "proper medium"??

OH...and I'm postitve that his "hat" is safe.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-22, 10:30 PM
Also from this post (http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=632835&postcount=135):


Yes but the big problem is that you cant just turn it on, when it happens it happens. No medium could accurately say that they will see spirits every time somebody asks for them and if they do then they are bogus.

If there is something to this, that shouldn't be a problem for a properly executed experiment. As long as you can show results above chance level where the subject knows things that he couldn't have learned by conventional means, that would be a positive outcome. Randi or not, if you think you really have something, I'd suggest you persue experimental research.

trinitree88
2005-Dec-23, 03:21 AM
Ok. I already posted about the ghost at work, so I'm "out there" in some people's eyes....and yes I'm a scientist. So, I'll tell another. I was at home in Medford. Warm, lazy Sepember afternoon, sun shining in through the window, I'm reading the Boston Globe on the futon (foam bed). In the corner of the room, where it was shadowy...little lights began dancing on the ceiling...kind of like what you see when sunshine reflects off water that has a breeze rippling the surface....but there's no water, glass, or mirror producing it. I got goosebumps...it was eiree. Then I heard footsteps in the backhall. I went out and looked...it was still full of storage boxes from the couple downstairs, and I mean full, if there was a fire, we were jumping from the porch roof. Nobody there. I returned to the futon. As I sat there, there was suddenly the impression of a person sitting next to me....a distinct rump-shaped depression in the futon, four, five inches deep, and ~ 18 inches wide..and as they(it) got up...it slowly faded like a footprint in wet sand. I don't laugh at anybody who sees one. Stephen O'Meara , editor of Sky & Tel collects observatory ghost stories. Not in the domain of physics, or science, not everything is...:think:

paulie jay
2005-Dec-23, 04:12 AM
I don't want to sound too arrogant here, my experience is that it's the people who believe in ghosts who tend to see them. Whether that person is a scientist or not is neither here nor there - one doesn't determine the other. In fact, I don't really see why scientific qualification is relevant. For example, do we care more if it's a biologist or a chemist who claims to have seen a ghost?

Maksutov
2005-Dec-23, 10:50 AM
Im wondering if any scientists have seen ghosts? If so does it put them in an unusual situation because their job is to prove something exists by being able to reproduce it in laboratory conditions?As explained in earlier posts this is not what science does. Science is a process for determining the best explanation for observed phenomena in ways that are reproducible. Science also is the investigation of the natural world.


Myself and my brother have seen ghosts and experienced other weird phenomenon since an early age (UFOs, poltergeist activity, deja vu) and recently my brother who is studying to become a medium had 2 sceptics turn up from the local university in a bid to prove that mediumship and spiritualism was just fake.Uh, where does one study to become a medium?


The 2 sceptics sat in the middle of the circle which consisted many mediums. The medium in charge of the group asked for each of them to give the sceptics a message. When it came to my brother, not only did he accurately describe one of their grandmothers, right down to her very short size (around 4 foot), but he also told one of them their surname (and at the first attempt of trying). No questions were asked to give any clues either. The sceptics went away with a different viewpoint than when they came no doubt.Did you ask them, or is that another assumption on your part? It would behoove you to study something called "cold reading" to understand what went on there, if your story is accurate. I notice there are no names, dates, or locations given here. The term "anecdotal evidence" would be too kind to describe this variety of information.


So Im wondering if anyone here is a scientist and has seen ghosts? And what is your verdict to what they could be?Scientists "see" many things they don't understand. That's where the scientific method kicks in. It provides a methodology for truly understanding what the observations mean, and also has built-in safeguards that keep (most) scientists from jumping to conclusions.

BTW, the use of the scientific method isn't restricted to scientists. It's used by engineers on a regular basis. It's also used by many non-technical persons as a component of critical thinking. In fact it's a key component of critical thinking, which uses logic and analysis to keep a person from falling into a morass of logical fallacies.

Too bad those who accept mediums, psychics, etc., don't employ critical thinking in their evaluation of such tenuous phenomena.

On the other hand, given the tendency of folks who truly believe that ghosts exist to see such things, I would wonder, do ghosts see scientists?

:think:

Swift
2005-Dec-23, 02:36 PM
Uh, where does one study to become a medium?

Halfway between where you study to be a small and to be a large?
:shifty:

Maksutov
2005-Dec-23, 03:41 PM
Halfway between where you study to be a small and to be a large?
:shifty:Yo! Supersize me!

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 03:56 PM
Well theres quite a lot of questions to answer here, so here goes...



I'm not really a scientist, and I've never seen a ghost, but I am mighty skeptical about your anticdote and its claims of accurate cold reading.

No, as I said, no questions were asked of these two individuals before the readings. Cold readings are done by supposed mediums craftily asking questions and working off that information to get to an answer. That was not the case here. Please dont confuse the showmanship of mediums that you see on the TV as what goes on down a spiritualist church - they are two different things. In fact a true medium would never charge for a reading.


Moonrock (on the Nemesis thread) said...
Quote:
Another thing to consider is that trying to get a medium into a lab and scientifically prove them wrong is also the wrong conditions for a medium to work in.

Now why is that? Seems to be a very convienent "flaw" in the medium's powers.

Im sure a good medium would be more than happy for anyone to sit in on one of their readings in the right conditions. Its a bit like trying to get a racehorse to run on a treadmill when obviously it is more at home on a racecourse.


Quote:
Get Mr. Randi to go to a proper spiritualist service with a proper medium and he might just eat his hat.

Why would you assume that Randi has not attended a "proper spiritualist service" where there was a "proper medium"??

OH...and I'm postitve that his "hat" is safe.

Mr. Randi is too arrogant to even consider visiting a spirtualist church.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonrock
Yes but the big problem is that you cant just turn it on, when it happens it happens. No medium could accurately say that they will see spirits every time somebody asks for them and if they do then they are bogus.

If there is something to this, that shouldn't be a problem for a properly executed experiment. As long as you can show results above chance level where the subject knows things that he couldn't have learned by conventional means, that would be a positive outcome. Randi or not, if you think you really have something, I'd suggest you persue experimental research.

Again, this type of ability cannot simply be turned on at will. Sometimes a medium could talk for hours with messages and other days hardly get anything.


I don't want to sound too arrogant here, my experience is that it's the people who believe in ghosts who tend to see them. Whether that person is a scientist or not is neither here nor there - one doesn't determine the other. In fact, I don't really see why scientific qualification is relevant. For example, do we care more if it's a biologist or a chemist who claims to have seen a ghost?

In other words you mean that you have to have an open mind to probably see ghosts and in a way your right. A good saying is 'you have to believe to see it'. Although, there are many cases where people have experienced ghosts without even thinking about them or having a belief beforehand.


Uh, where does one study to become a medium?

As I said in my earlier post, myself and my brother have had an interest in this type of phenomenon for many years. My brother was the one who always saw ghosts and he decided to go to our local spiritualist church to find out more. Although he didnt get a reading that night, he was approached by the medium at the end of the night, who happened to be the main medium from the church in the next town to ours. She told him that she could see a very great light surrounding him and that she would like to personally train him to enhance his obvious gift. Since that day a couple of years ago I would estimate that my brother has seen at least 50 ghosts. Dont believe that ghosts are always transparent or black and white either, he has seen fully materialised ghosts and in colour too. He has also accurately described ghosts that he has seen in friends houses that turn out to be deceased relatives and on one remarkable occasion managed to accurately describe a place where two of our friends had gone on holiday. During the night a bottle top had been removed from a bottle of water by the bed and thrown across the room, which both our friend and his wife heard. It was not until the following morning that they discovered the bottle top which had been crushed.

Now heres one for the sceptics. On returning home my friend rang us up and asked us to go around as something odd had happened on their holiday (as described above). When my brother arrived they had the bottle top, a jug and a bowl on the table. They wanted to fool my brother and told him that they would describe the odd experience once he had picked out which item was connected to the experience. My brother picked out the bottle top straight away and went on to describe that they had stayed at a hotel with towers on each corner. He was spot on and even described the decor in the room. Now is that cold reading?


Did you ask them, or is that another assumption on your part? It would behoove you to study something called "cold reading" to understand what went on there, if your story is accurate. I notice there are no names, dates, or locations given here. The term "anecdotal evidence" would be too kind to describe this variety of information.

Too bad those who accept mediums, psychics, etc., don't employ critical thinking in their evaluation of such tenuous phenomena.


It was obvious by the look on their faces that they were shocked by my brothers reading. They were both parapsychologists by the way, from the local university. I know what cold reading is and this was not the case here. As I said, the guys sat in the middle of the circle saying nothing and each member of the circle had to give a reading - no questions asked. Ok so you want names and dates. The Spiritualist church is in Cheltenham, UK. The experienced happened around October this year and my brother accurately told one of them that his surname was Campbell. Obviously the parapsychologists put critical thinking to what happened and they couldnt explain it!

I have personally been to the spiritualist church on a couple of occasions. The first time the medium told me that I would be going on holiday in November. I dont get too many holidays, in fact I hadnt been on holiday for the past 6 years before that reading. I couldnt take her reading because as far as I knew I wasnt going anywhere. However, one month down the line my friend rings up and asks if we would like to go on a lads holiday in November. What are the chances of that?

She also accurately told me what happened with the family business and other stuff which she simply couldnt have got from cold reading because I was careful just to answer yes or no.

I have seen cold reading and they are nothing like what a proper and legitimate medium can do.

The big problem with people who dont believe is that they think that they can ask for a relative to come through and they will. Thats not how it works. Consider a medium being like a radio. They can only pick up whats being transmitted and sometimes get many stations coming in all at once. I went to see Derek Acorah (a well known medium here in the UK) and remember him saying that there were more spirits with him up on stage than there were in the audience of maybe 800 people. A medium cannot ask for a certain spirit to come through, only those spirits who wish to make contact will come though the medium.

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-23, 04:06 PM
Good point Monique;)

I don't believe there will be much of a response to this thread because most scientist will use any excuse to prove that it was just a rare scientific occurrence.

I just wanted to apologize after reading what I wrote, I didn't mean to sound so cocky about scientists, but SOME scientists do TEND to use other explanations, and that is what I was trying to say...And a special apology to trinitree, sorry if I offended you or anyone else... :(

Maksutov
2005-Dec-23, 04:15 PM
Well theres quite a lot of questions to answer here, so here goes...[edit]only those spirits who wish to make contact will come though the medium.It appears you've completely bought into this particular way of looking at things. Given that, any attempts to bring these views back to reality would be ineffective.

Let us know the next time you successfully cross a river on a bridge designed by a medium. Or better yet, inform us of your luxurious retirement enabled by a medium who gave you winning lottery numbers.

Meanwhile, it's tiresome talking about the same old, many times disproved, offal.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 04:28 PM
I do not hold my mysticism to scrutiny of science. I do not make science a spiritual path.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 04:45 PM
It appears you've completely bought into this particular way of looking at things. Given that, any attempts to bring these views back to reality would be ineffective.

Let us know the next time you successfully cross a river on a bridge designed by a medium. Or better yet, inform us of your luxurious retirement enabled by a medium who gave you winning lottery numbers.

Meanwhile, it's tiresome talking about the same old, many times disproved, offal.


And its pretty obvious that you dont actually read what people write. Bought into a particular way of looking at things? My brother has been going to spiritualist church for almost 2 years and every week something incredible happens.

For every true medium there are probably 3 who are trying just to make money from it. You could say the same for car mechanics but it doesnt mean that good mechanics do not exist.

Like I said, medium readings by proper mediums are far different than those you see on TV. If you havent gone to see them at work how can you be so critical?

If its all a load of hogwash please give me your explanation how my brother could describe where my friend went on holiday right down to the decoration of the room, also explain how a medium predicted exactly about a future holiday that at the time of the reading hadnt even been booked or anticipated, which was actually arranged by a friend. Perhaps you would like to explain how my brother accurately told a pub landlady about the ghost of a cavalier in her pub, or the ghost of an old man sitting in the corner wearing a flat cap? All verified by the landlady and landlord.

We are dealing with reality here. No need to bring my views back to reality because this is all true - whether you wish to believe it or not.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-23, 04:58 PM
In other words you mean that you have to have an open mind to probably see ghosts and in a way your right. A good saying is 'you have to believe to see it'.

Hey...I've got a "saying" for ya...and from what I've seen, it applies to those who "see" ghosts...

Fake it till ya make it.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:01 PM
Why do many people on this board think that any theory that they dont agree with is simply made to make money? :wall:

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-23, 05:05 PM
Why do many people on this board think that any theory that they dont agree with is simply made to make money? :wall:

Because people can often not deal with the unexplained as a option, and quickly view everything as a joke, whether or not it is right now is up to the individual....

People have the right to be skeptical.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-23, 05:16 PM
We are dealing with reality here.

Then you should have no trouble presenting evidence to prove that 'reality".


No need to bring my views back to reality because this is all true...

We're not just going to "take your word or it", you have to (as I stated above) show us evidence of this "truth".


...whether you wish to believe it or not.

Belief is fine, you can believe anything you want. But, if your claim is that there is a "reality" to what you believe you will then have to demonstrate that reality with objective evidence.

Just "saying it is so" is not enough.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:17 PM
I have no problem with people being skeptical, but when they start poking fun at a subject that they obviously know nothing about it gets very irritating.

Heres another example of good mediumship.

One week the circle were doing readings for the others sat in the circle. My brother picked out a lady and told her that the spirit of her mother and her sister were stood behind her. He also got the image of a white gladiola which at the time the lady couldnt really understand what it meant.

The following week the lady rushed up to my brother and told him that she now knew what his reading meant. Her sister had travelled from across country to visit the family and as it was her mothers anniversary decided to pop into a local garden centre to pick up a bunch of flowers. Unfortunately the garden centre was closed by the time she got there but as she was leaving she spotted a white gladiola by the exit which she picked and took to her mothers grave. Her sister had not related the reading that featured the white gladiola until after she had heard the other sisters story about being too late to buy a bunch of flowers.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:19 PM
Then you should have no trouble presenting evidence to prove that 'reality".



We're not just going to "take your word or it", you have to (as I stated above) show us evidence of this "truth".



Belief is fine, you can believe anything you want. But, if your claim is that there is a "reality" to what you believe you will then have to demonstrate that reality with objective evidence.

Just "saying it is so" is not enough.


Fine what evidence do you want? Perhaps if Andy Lloyd wasnt banned then he could come on here and tell you about the bottle top incident as it was he who was staying at the hotel?

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:21 PM
Just "saying it is so" is not enough.

But you believe that man went to the Moon by being told and seeing a few photographs and files that could be bogus for all you know, so whats the difference?

Other than you actually being here when this type of thing happens how do you suggest that I prove that it is happening? The reason you asked the question is because you know other than you being here I cannot prove it which fits into your agenda nicely.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-23, 05:25 PM
I have no problem with people being skeptical, but when they start poking fun at a subject that they obviously know nothing about it gets very irritating.

So what is your criteria for someone "knowing something" about a subject?


Heres another example of good mediumship.


Anecdotal "stories" are basically worthlless as evidence. Oh, you can continue to post them, but just don't expect them to be take seriously unless they can be "backed up" with actual, testable evidence.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:31 PM
So what is your criteria for someone "knowing something" about a subject?



Anecdotal "stories" are basically worthlless as evidence. Oh, you can continue to post them, but just don't expect them to be take seriously unless they can be "backed up" with actual, testable evidence.

Well its obvious that your replies point towards your lack of knowledge about the subject. And if you dont belief the accounts that Im posting then thats fine. I personally dont have all day to hang around on these forums just to post fabricated stories and Im sure there are plenty of people here who can read and relate to them.

Even if I did get somebody or even all of the other mediums from his circle to bother and come here and back up these accounts you would still probably say 'yeah but your all in this together', so for every piece of evidence I could post Im sure you would still find fault with it in the end. Thats the nature of these forums - its why your on here all the time. In fact I havent actually read one post written by you where you not trying to tear somebodies beliefs apart be it related to space or anything else.

Should I take anything said over the radio during the Apollo missions being anything but fabrication also because there was no 3rd party organisation to verify that they came from the Moon?

Swings and roundabouts mate - swings and roundabouts. I could ask the same argument that you present here about many things relating to Apollo. :boohoo:

ASEI
2005-Dec-23, 05:46 PM
I have no idea why people are so eager to put things "beyond the reach of science", save out of desire to conceal deception.

If we have any reason to believe that ghosts exist, that statement implies that someone has sensed their presence, using one of their senses. That implies that science, or attempting to sense the presence of these objects in an objective, detailed, and repeatable manner shouldn't be so impossible to do. Maybe you can't turn a ghost on and off, but if you can leave detection equipment in a "haunted house" or something, you could concievably capture the same sensory information that someone else is getting.

Taking the ESP escape is logically incoherent. Extra-sensory-perception is an oxymoron. Information enters your brain through some detection device (eyes, ears, ect) by some process. If it's there, it's there. If it's not, it's not. You can't have it both ways. A lot of the "super"-natural is an attempt to have something both ways.

The reason why scientists are skeptical is that scientists are supposed to be skeptical. They can't say that something exists for sure until they have objective direct or indirect evidence for its existence. Dark matter is an example - we really don't know what it is, or even if it's actually matter, we've just observed gravitational behavior in galaxies suggesting much more mass than is apparent.

As far as the supernatural goes, scientists are extra-skeptical because people have been the targets of all sorts of gimmicks at the hands of "supernaturalists". The history of ghosts and mediums has been one long history of professional charlatans and crooks. Eventually, you sort of can't help developing an impression about the whole field. Sort of like children and hot stove burners.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 05:49 PM
Moonrock. Spirituality and mysticism do not pass scientific test. Is not bad, is way of science. For me science is good tool, not way of life.

Do not ask science to validate spiritual path. Science need to respect personal spiritual path if not asked to accept as scientific truth.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 05:55 PM
I do not hold my mysticism to scrutiny of science. I do not make science a spiritual path.

A very good thing, since it absolutely evaporates under objective examination. It is called mysticism because it defies any rational explanation, the only support being anecdotes of those for whom hope and desire and belief equals truth. I'd be less extrreme if there were one single documented case that stood up to objective examination.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 05:58 PM
Taking the ESP escape is logically incoherent. Extra-sensory-perception is an oxymoron. Information enters your brain through some detection device (eyes, ears, ect) by some process. If it's there, it's there. If it's not, it's not. You can't have it both ways. A lot of the "super"-natural is an attempt to have something both ways.

Actually you can have it both ways because there has been times when my brother has seen ghosts in a room that we both occupy and yet I cannot see it. I have sensed perfume in the area where he said the ghost was though. And if this subject is just pure imagination, how can two mediums work together and see the same thing?

We have done numerous ghost investigations and use an infrared laser thermometer that has read temperatures as low as -12c on a normal autumn evening, an EMF meter that has risen off the scale at points where my brother says there are ghosts (in open fields), and we have captured anomalous sounds on tape such as cannon fire during our investigation of an old battlefield.

If mediumship was just cold reading why would my brother describe a persons grandmother as being only 4 feet tall? Surely somebody doing cold reading would take the average which would be around 5 and a half feet and what if that persons grandmother was still living anyway?

Lets remember that Police investigations have been solved by mediums working to find bodies that have been missing for several years. Pure guess work? I think not.

As Ive said in another post here before, why do humans mock something that they dont understand? Just because you havent experienced it doesnt mean it doesnt happen.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Monique
I do not hold my mysticism to scrutiny of science. I do not make science a spiritual path.

A very good thing, since it absolutely evaporates under objective examination. It is called mysticism because it defies any rational explanation, the only support being anecdotes of those for whom hope and desire and belief equals truth. I'd be less extrreme if there were one single documented case that stood up to objective examination.

What about the Fatima prophesies?

Many of you here dont believe in UFOs either and yet there are well documented and filmed evidence of UFOs above Mexico City during the eclipse in the early 1990s. Thousands of people saw them and yet people still say theres no such things as UFOs. All prophesised by the way in ancient Mayan scriptures.

Im sure that every single person reading this has at one time or another experienced something odd like thinking of a person and the phone rings and its them or talking about a person you havent seen for a few years and meeting that person the same week. Or going to a place that seems familiar even though youve never been there before.

I had this when I was at school and we were in the maze at Hampton Court in London. I could easily find my way around the maze to the point where I had to go in and find the other pupils because they were taking too long to find the exit. I had the sense that I had been there before and by knowing the layout of the maze seems to validate my belief.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 05:59 PM
All verified by the landlady and landlord.

Yikes, you've played the landlady card. Absolutely no refuting that. Must be a fact, because there is of course no motivation for her to go along with tall tales about ghosts in her pub.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 06:01 PM
A very good thing, since it absolutely evaporates under objective examination. It is called mysticism because it defies any rational explanation, the only support being anecdotes of those for whom hope and desire and belief equals truth. I'd be less extrreme if there were one single documented case that stood up to objective examination.
I ask science to advise me on physical reality. I make personal choice on morality, justice, love, kindness, spiritual path. Science is advisor, not ruler. I believe is balance.

Love, emotion, kindness, spiritual belief, justice, not rational, come in heart.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 06:03 PM
Why do many people on this board think that any theory that they dont agree with is simply made to make money? :wall:

Maybe not all, but most are moneymakers. From Loch Ness to Fake Moon Landings; somebody is making money whenever there is the set-up of a hoax or the denial of a reality. And the reason it is a first angle of investigation is that like most everyhting else in this world, if you want to know what's really behind the action - follow the money.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 06:10 PM
I have no problem with people being skeptical, but when they start poking fun at a subject that they obviously know nothing about it gets very irritating.

So what is it you "know" about mediums that you think skeptics don't "know?"

I think a more accurate statement would be that you have beliefs about mediums that skeptics do not share.

ASEI
2005-Dec-23, 06:14 PM
We have done numerous ghost investigations and use an infrared laser thermometer that has read temperatures as low as -12c on a normal autumn evening, an EMF meter that has risen off the scale at points where my brother says there are ghosts (in open fields), and we have captured anomalous sounds on tape such as cannon fire during our investigation of an old battlefield.
Okay. That's what I'm talking about. Now if you could get that evidence reliably and repeatably from multiple agencies - people you would trust not to run off with your wallet, mind - then you would eventually amass enough to point to a phenomenon.

From there, you would have to make more detailed studies of each event (where does the temperature lower, when, by how much?) and start to come up with hypotheses about why it does so.


Just because you havent experienced it doesnt mean it doesnt happen.
True. But then again, the reputability of the phenomenon increases with the repeatability of observation. Any theory in science, you are free to test for yourself. If you set about creating magnets and electric coils, you are free to test Maxwell's laws. We do not say "thou shalt not put X to the test!", rather, we demand testing. There are no weasel-phenomenon that are only apparent to special people. There are no events that "only some people are allowed to see" that can have any credibility. If no one else sees the event you claim to experience under conditions X and location Y, even though they repeat conditions X and location Y, then why should they believe you? The patron saint of science could be said to be doubting Thomas.

The problem is that people are natural liars about all sorts of events, especially supernatural events. We've had an 8000 year recorded history of just plain making things up, and then backpedaling by placing those things in far off lands or under purposefully unrepeatable conditions.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 06:16 PM
Well its obvious that your replies point towards your lack of knowledge about the subject. And if you dont belief the accounts that Im posting then thats fine. I personally dont have all day to hang around on these forums just to post fabricated stories and Im sure there are plenty of people here who can read and relate to them.

Even if I did get somebody or even all of the other mediums from his circle to bother and come here and back up these accounts you would still probably say 'yeah but your all in this together', so for every piece of evidence I could post Im sure you would still find fault with it in the end. Thats the nature of these forums - its why your on here all the time. In fact I havent actually read one post written by you where you not trying to tear somebodies beliefs apart be it related to space or anything else.

Should I take anything said over the radio during the Apollo missions being anything but fabrication also because there was no 3rd party organisation to verify that they came from the Moon?

Swings and roundabouts mate - swings and roundabouts. I could ask the same argument that you present here about many things relating to Apollo. :boohoo:

Now that is some first-class obfuscation; a sure fire sign that this is purely a matter of belief, with nothing but hope and desire to back it up.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 06:20 PM
Now that is some first-class obfuscation; a sure fire sign that this is purely a matter of belief, with nothing but hope and desire to back it up.
Why so hard to respect beliefs and desires of human soul. Science not for satisfaction of human passion, human desire. Science to discover truth.

Halcyon Dayz
2005-Dec-23, 06:26 PM
And remember that Mr. Randi puts his money where his mouth is.
There is a cool million waiting for any medium who can proof
he/she is just that. ;)

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 06:26 PM
When phenomenon like this becomes such a part of your life that seeing and experiencing ghosts happens every day then it goes far beyond a belief.

I can understand where your coming from. Granted, perhaps because this type of thing happens frequently to me and my brother then we take it 'matter of factly'. But, we have noticed that things have started happening that are witnessed by our friends whilst we are at their houses. Once they were skeptics too... not any more.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 06:30 PM
how can two mediums work together and see the same thing?

Lets remember that Police investigations have been solved by mediums working to find bodies that have been missing for several years. Pure guess work? I think not.

Many of you here dont believe in UFOs either and yet there are well documented and filmed evidence of UFOs above Mexico City during the eclipse in the early 1990s.

Im sure that every single person reading this has at one time or another experienced something odd like thinking of a person and the phone rings

These are all very old, and despite the number of times they come around, very weak.

Two mediums working together - amazing to you but most people I know have a different word for it, as does the conclusion of every objective investigation I've ever read. The word is HOAX.

Solving crimes, I call that one luck. Funny how people like you forget about all the crimes they don't solve. So they get lucky and pull one out of the hat a few times every century - I call that the law of averages.

You are citing belief in UFOs as proof of ghosts? I'm not even sure what to say to that.

And yes, about 1 out of every 1000 calls I get is from someone I might have been thinking about. (Based on rough numbers of about 30 telephone conversations per day and 1 per month that has a "clairvoyant" nature to it). What does that prove? It probably should be higher. What does that prove?

Thomas(believer)
2005-Dec-23, 06:31 PM
Why so hard to respect beliefs and desires of human soul. Science not for satisfaction of human passion, human desire. Science to discover truth.

I agree.
I want to comment that discovering the truth can very well be a human passion or desire and science can be a very helpfull tool for that.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-23, 06:32 PM
Why so hard to respect beliefs and desires of human soul. Science not for satisfaction of human passion, human desire. Science to discover truth.

I agree, and I do not make an exception for discovering the truth about ghosts.

ASEI
2005-Dec-23, 06:38 PM
If just anyone (researchers and taxidermists included :D ) could walk into a haunted house and see the resident ghosts, would we even consider it supernatural? Different from a rare breed of lizard or a strange atmospheric event like ball lightning?

What seperates the supernatural from the natural, if not the level of contradictory or magical evasion involved, or the purposeful difficulty and exclusionary nature of observation? The non-repeatability and leaps of faith inherent in the events?

A good rule of thumb for determining the credibility of a phenomenon is the ratio of observation to explaination. We already seem to have a ready made explaination for what ghosts are even though we only have anecdotal evidence for their existence. This should set off anyone's warning bells. Scientific phenomena don't work like that - usually understanding follows observation by a good margin. We have to have observations in abundance to really know what we're looking at.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-23, 06:42 PM
What are ghosts? Are there ghost dogs? What about ghost fish, or shrimp? Are there ghost spiders or ants? (there'd be plenty of those around my house)
What about trees?

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 06:49 PM
And remember that Mr. Randi puts his money where his mouth is.
There is a cool million waiting for any medium who can proof
he/she is just that. ;)


And what is Mr. Randi? a magician and a fraudster. Ive seen him on shows claiming that he can easily do mediumship. And how does he do it? He gets somebody to follow his victim for one month to build up enough information to accurately do a reading. Do you believe that all accurate mediums have the time and money to do this?

As regards to his psychic challenge perhaps you should read this?

http://www.psicounsel.com/randiuse.html#ques

Candy
2005-Dec-23, 06:54 PM
It's easy to read people without following them around. I've done it myself (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=633671#post633671). :whistle:

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 06:56 PM
These are all very old, and despite the number of times they come around, very weak.

Two mediums working together - amazing to you but most people I know have a different word for it, as does the conclusion of every objective investigation I've ever read. The word is HOAX.

Solving crimes, I call that one luck. Funny how people like you forget about all the crimes they don't solve. So they get lucky and pull one out of the hat a few times every century - I call that the law of averages.

You are citing belief in UFOs as proof of ghosts? I'm not even sure what to say to that.

And yes, about 1 out of every 1000 calls I get is from someone I might have been thinking about. (Based on rough numbers of about 30 telephone conversations per day and 1 per month that has a "clairvoyant" nature to it). What does that prove? It probably should be higher. What does that prove?

So your making a decision without actually hearing the evidence? I call that narrow minded.


A good rule of thumb for determining the credibility of a phenomenon is the ratio of observation to explaination. We already seem to have a ready made explaination for what ghosts are even though we only have anecdotal evidence for their existence. This should set off anyone's warning bells. Scientific phenomena don't work like that - usually understanding follows observation by a good margin. We have to have observations in abundance to really know what we're looking at.

How many ghost sightings would it take from around the World to convince the scientific community that such a phenomenon exists? You cant bottle lightning either but they acknowledge that as being real.


What are ghosts? Are there ghost dogs? What about ghost fish, or shrimp? Are there ghost spiders or ants? (there'd be plenty of those around my house)
What about trees?

Yes, my brother has seen ghosts of cats as well as dogs. Anything that possesses a spirit can be a ghost. Which brings me nicely on to asking if anyone here has noticed thier dog or cat watching something invisible in a room? following something across the room or up into the corner of the ceiling.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 06:59 PM
It's easy to read people without following them around. I've done it myself (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=633671#post633671). :whistle:

Thats called cold reading love. Try doing it without asking any questions then you can call yourself a medium.

For instance, I think you have blue eyes and dark hair.

Candy
2005-Dec-23, 07:06 PM
Thats called cold reading love. Try doing it without asking any questions then you can call yourself a medium.

For instance, I think you have blue eyes and dark hair.
I'd need a photo to give a cold reading. There's a lot one can tell from the wear and tear on the face. Skin color is another factor. I'm usually dead on with ethnic background(s). I would look at the hands and body shape to see environmental factors. I can still do it. http://www.bautforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I can guess a person's age, too. I've been off once by a year. I'm a people watcher. I got so wrapped up in what is so obvious, that I lost sense of what I was really doing to people. I was messing with their lives. :shifty:

Off to work I go. I predict this thread will be really long upon my return.

ASEI
2005-Dec-23, 07:07 PM
How many ghost sightings would it take from around the World to convince the scientific community that such a phenomenon exists? You cant bottle lightning either but they acknowledge that as being real. Considering how much of this stuff turned out to be make-believe bunk - a lot of sightings. But less than infinite. This skepticism is only fair. You have to reverse the generalization of decades of experience of fraud and deceit. Someone who has learned via hot stove burner that it's painful to touch glowing red metal, is not going to easily consent to touch glowing Space Shuttle Heat Sheilding tile even though the transfer rate is slow enough not to burn you. This is merely a byproduct of how people learn. If you want them to acknowledge that they are real, you will have to show enough respectable evidence to unlearn the centuries of fraud surrounding the subject.

We can and did bottle lightning (old Ben Franklin, baby!). We also store it in crude capacitors in physics class. We've harnessed it for running our devices. We all agreed it was real because we could all see it happening. It was far from inaccessible or unobservable.

At one time, learned naturalists back home didn't acknowledge the reality of the duck-billed platypus. They thought, and quite understandably and reasonably so, that it was just another patchwork fantasy creature like the griffin, positioned in a far off land to avoid scrutiny. A sailor's tale. Now we know better, but we only believe it now because anyone can go look at one in a zoo or reference vast numbers of credible people who've personally seen one. We have photos. We have the genome. We have the anatomy. We've captured specimens. (When someone captures a ghost and hauls it into a lab, let me know)

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 07:08 PM
I agree, and I do not make an exception for discovering the truth about ghosts.

Ghost may not be as you think. Human heart, human soul not scientific. Reality of ghost may be in heart not measure by scientific instruments.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 07:17 PM
Considering how much of this stuff turned out to be make-believe bunk - a lot of sightings. But less than infinite. This skepticism is only fair. You have to reverse the generalization of decades of experience of fraud and deceit. Someone who has learned via hot stove burner that it's painful to touch glowing red metal, is not going to easily consent to touch glowing Space Shuttle Heat Sheilding tile even though the transfer rate is slow enough not to burn you. This is merely a byproduct of how people learn. If you want them to acknowledge that they are real, you will have to show enough respectable evidence to unlearn the centuries of fraud surrounding the subject.

We can and did bottle lightning (old Ben Franklin, baby!). We also store it in crude capacitors in physics class. We've harnessed it for running our devices. We all agreed it was real because we could all see it happening. It was far from inaccessible or unobservable.

Take away all the hoaxes and youll still find plenty to prove that ghosts are real. There are thousands of ghost investigation groups with the proper equipment who hold vigils many times a year and who produce enough scientific evidence that ghosts exist.

What would religious groups do if the scientific community announced tommorrow that ghosts do exist? What about Christian beliefs that nobody can become a spirit as it says so in the bible? If this is so then why does the Catholic church employ Exorcists to remove evil spirits?

Heres another interesting account that happened to a couple of friends. My mates wife was around 6 months pregnant and was visited in a dream by my mates dead father who had died around 18 months before. His father told her in the dream that everything was going to be alright. My friend had a similar dream that night too. The following day my friends wife was involved in a head on car crash that wrote off the car and the baby had to be delivered that day. They were both fine. Coincidence?

I believe that certain people attract ghosts. One thing about being a medium is to know how to shut down properly after you have left the circle because you can attract spirits that may not be very nice. Strong mediums can produce a light that is almost like shining a torch at a ghost and this attracts them to the medium - that is why not everyone has the ability. One of the main reasons why my brother went to spiritualist church in the first place was because he was waking up some mornings with huge scratches on his body. Scratches that were very thin and around 6-12" in length. My brother bites his nails so that wasnt the answer and we dont have a cat either. This phenomenon is apparently common for mediums who dont shut down properly. Now that he has learnt how to do that he doesnt get scratched in the night anymore.

Kristophe
2005-Dec-23, 07:32 PM
Human heart, human soul not scientific.

I disagree. Simply because we don't understand the workings of the mind with a huge degree of accuracy does not mean that it behaves in ways that are at all beyond the scrutiny of science.

Remember that for some of us, naturalism is our spirituality.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 07:40 PM
I disagree. Simply because we don't understand the workings of the mind with a huge degree of accuracy does not mean that it behaves in ways that are at all beyond the scrutiny of science.

Remember that for some of us, naturalism is our spirituality.
Is fine. You may find human heart need irrational to survive.

Thomas(believer)
2005-Dec-23, 07:41 PM
A lot of religious people feel the presence of God. A lot of scientists do, I'm sure.
And I have no doubt that there are scientists who have seen or felt the presence of ghosts as well. Sometimes reallity can be a very personal thing.
I don't have all the answers myself and I respect what other people believe or see. If science would reveal the truth behind the gods and ghosts of our world then I think at that moment they would seize to exist. I don't believe that that will ever happen.

Monique
2005-Dec-23, 07:48 PM
Science not able to find all answers. Human heart need to fill where science do not have answer.

I do not say human heart is correct, but must be guide. 300 years ago science cannot tell person why sun shine, but it do. Heart sometime need more then, "do not know but must be rational answer".

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-23, 07:50 PM
Yes, my brother has seen ghosts of cats as well as dogs. Anything that possesses a spirit can be a ghost. Which brings me nicely on to asking if anyone here has noticed thier dog or cat watching something invisible in a room? following something across the room or up into the corner of the ceiling.

Ok so people, dogs, cats have a spirit. Do fish? What about ants? Worms? Trees? What is this spirit?

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-23, 07:55 PM
Ok so people, dogs, cats have a spirit. Do fish? What about ants? Worms? Trees? What is this spirit?

I can say that if I saw all of those things at once I would lay off of those mushrooms for a week or two.:D

But that is a good question, if we have spirits, then everything else should as well.

Gillianren
2005-Dec-23, 07:57 PM
What about Christian beliefs that nobody can become a spirit as it says so in the bible? If this is so then why does the Catholic church employ Exorcists to remove evil spirits?

What an amazing misunderstanding of exorcism! Note, the Catholic church does not employ exorcists to remove evil spirits. Not in the sense you mean. Exorcism is used to cast out demons, which were never considered to be human but instead are fallen angels.


Heres another interesting account that happened to a couple of friends. My mates wife was around 6 months pregnant and was visited in a dream by my mates dead father who had died around 18 months before. His father told her in the dream that everything was going to be alright. My friend had a similar dream that night too. The following day my friends wife was involved in a head on car crash that wrote off the car and the baby had to be delivered that day. They were both fine. Coincidence?

Why not? I've dreamed about my father, and those dreams didn't come true or relate to anything in my life. (He's been dead since 1983.) It's certainly within the realm of possibility that someday, one of my dreams of him will, but that's not evidence that my father's spirit is talking to me in dreams.

If ghosts exist (I have anecdotal evidence as well, but I won't present it here, as anecdotal evidence isn't worth much), they're just as likely to appear to scientists as anyone else. If ghosts exist, it ought to be possible to test for them scientifically, as we can for anything else that exists. I see no reason to hold ghosts separately.

Now, granted, I don't let my spirituality be completely controlled by what I can see, hear, etc. I do have a sense of spirituality beyond science. However, ghosts, to me, aren't part of it.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-23, 08:47 PM
Yes but the big problem is that you cant just turn it on, when it happens it happens. No medium could accurately say that they will see spirits every time somebody asks for them and if they do then they are bogus.


If there is something to this, that shouldn't be a problem for a properly executed experiment. As long as you can show results above chance level where the subject knows things that he couldn't have learned by conventional means, that would be a positive outcome. Randi or not, if you think you really have something, I'd suggest you persue experimental research.



Again, this type of ability cannot simply be turned on at will. Sometimes a medium could talk for hours with messages and other days hardly get anything.


Well, yes, I read that the first time, hence my response. This should only be a problem if the suggested event is incredibly rare. Are you saying that? Otherwise, as long as there are objectively testable results, a scientific experiment is possible. The experiment need not only last an hour or a day. An ongoing investigation is quite possible.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-23, 08:58 PM
And what is Mr. Randi? a magician and a fraudster.

You really need to be cautious about calling people names on this board...it will not be tolerated. You really need to familiarize yourself with the rules of this board.


He gets somebody to follow his victim for one month to build up enough information to accurately do a reading. Do you believe that all accurate mediums have the time and money to do this?

Since the proof for "accurate mediums" is non-existant, your question is meaningless.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-23, 09:04 PM
And what is Mr. Randi? a magician and a fraudster. Ive seen him on shows claiming that he can easily do mediumship. And how does he do it? He gets somebody to follow his victim for one month to build up enough information to accurately do a reading. Do you believe that all accurate mediums have the time and money to do this?


I believe people claiming to be mediums use a number of magician's tricks. In some cases, they may not even be consciously aware they are doing so. For people already very willing to believe, it doesn't take much. Randi certainly is a magician - an expert on the ways people can be fooled (sometimes even themselves) while making what they do look like some sort of paranormal event. This is exactly what you need if you want to objectively test these claims. There are a number of documented cases where scientists were fooled because they were not experts in the human angle.

Edited to add:

Wow, R.A.F, we decided to comment on the same thing at about the same time. Was this just coincidence, or an example of my amazing psychic powers?:whistle:

By the way, I thought the "fraudster" bit was too silly to comment on. Just sour grapes. You have a point, though.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-23, 09:34 PM
Talking from personal experience, I know my brother doesnt use magic tricks, I also know that he doesnt hoax things either. If you had been witness to some of the things that he has told people at places where he has never been before then perhaps you would believe it too.

Its easy to brush aside the whole subject based on a few well known cases of fruadulant mediums but all of them shouldnt be treated as using tricks to get answers.

Again, those who think that true mediums do nothing other than cold reading or use magic tricks should pay a visit to their local spiritualist church where you may just change your viewpoint.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-23, 09:58 PM
Talking from personal experience, I know my brother doesnt use magic tricks, I also know that he doesnt hoax things either. If you had been witness to some of the things that he has told people at places where he has never been before then perhaps you would believe it too.


You may not know. He may not know, consciously, that he is gathering information through conventional but unobvious means. This is where experts and experiments are appropriate.



Its easy to brush aside the whole subject based on a few well known cases of fruadulant mediums but all of them shouldnt be treated as using tricks to get answers.


I'm not brushing it aside. I'm asking for objective evidence. There are many examples of fruadulant mediums, more where people may not realize what they are doing.



Again, those who think that true mediums do nothing other than cold reading or use magic tricks should pay a visit to their local spiritualist church where you may just change your viewpoint.

I'll change my viewpoint when you can show me evidence, not belief or anectdotes that can't be confirmed.

I'll admit to heavy skepticism. In my case, my older sister called herself a white witch. When I was young, I heard many stories from her. Some gave me nightmares, like the one where she had been using a crystal ball improperly and black (evil) spirits came out of her mirror. Years later I found out that she had been using many interesting chemicals, including LSD, which I suspect had more than a little to do with her stories.

Because of her, I did quite a bit of research on the subject, and I've personally seen "mediums" and "psychics." Reviewing what they said later, it was obvious that I had never seen a psychic or medium that made specific and clear predictions or observations, or ones with high hit rates. They may very well have been honest about their beliefs (I'm sure my sister was) but that didn't change what they did.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-23, 11:05 PM
Yes but the big problem is that you cant just turn it on, when it happens it happens. No medium could accurately say that they will see spirits every time somebody asks for them and if they do then they are bogus.


If there is something to this, that shouldn't be a problem for a properly executed experiment. As long as you can show results above chance level where the subject knows things that he couldn't have learned by conventional means, that would be a positive outcome. Randi or not, if you think you really have something, I'd suggest you persue experimental research.


Again, this type of ability cannot simply be turned on at will. Sometimes a medium could talk for hours with messages and other days hardly get anything.
Ok, so this has been a big question of mine. I’ve heard ghosts can only be seen when they want to be seen. So what keeps them from only appearing at some random inopportune time, why don’t they appear when we want them to?

Can you have your brother ask one about this and get back to us?

EDIT I don't know how to nest quotes, looked pretty simple:(

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-23, 11:21 PM
EDIT I don't know how to nest quotes, looked pretty simple:(

It isn't hard, you just have to nest them manually. Here's an example:






Yo!
Yes?
Stop talking to me!



Which looks like:






Yo!
Yes?
Stop talking to me!

By the way, "noparse" is handy for examples like this.

Apologies for the OT diversion.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-23, 11:26 PM
huh, I thought that's what I did with the first attempt. hmmm maybe I got it a little upside down.

thanks.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-23, 11:31 PM
I thought the "fraudster" bit was too silly to comment on. Just sour grapes. You have a point, though.

I wouldn't have bothered to comment, except that Moonrock had previously stated...


...how many times do people really read forum rules? I am a member of many and dont read any rules because as long as Im on topic, not offending anyone and making a good contribution to the topic then I cant see how I would be breaking any rules.

...so I'm not sure that he's actually read the rules.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-24, 12:19 AM
Anecdotes are worthless for proving anything - any criminal lawyer (is there any other kind) will tell you that eye witnesses are the worst witnesses.

Regarding those "thousands of . . . groups" collecting scientific evidence - do they actually hand over their data to another group - say scientists - for an impartial judegement on the veracity of their findings? Or to see if there is some other explanation for the experience? Self certification (and that includes shipping off to some other ghostbuster group) is completely invalid- that's like asking the Pope if God exists.

As far as UFOs go, I am aware of only one photograph and no video that hasn't been debunked

Keep in mind, as the proponents you have to prove this thing exists. If there is ANY other explanation, that proof is still pending.

Personally, I'd love to have ghosts around - imagine what they could do for a court of law. But for now, I won't believe ANYthing without proof

paulie jay
2005-Dec-24, 05:19 AM
I don't want to sound too arrogant here, my experience is that it's the people who believe in ghosts who tend to see them. Whether that person is a scientist or not is neither here nor there - one doesn't determine the other. In fact, I don't really see why scientific qualification is relevant. For example, do we care more if it's a biologist or a chemist who claims to have seen a ghost?

In other words you mean that you have to have an open mind to probably see ghosts and in a way your right. A good saying is 'you have to believe to see it'. Although, there are many cases where people have experienced ghosts without even thinking about them or having a belief beforehand.


No, I'm not saying this at all. You must open your mind to accept the possibility that it's NOT a ghost. As I say, it seems that the only people who see ghosts are the ones who believe in them. The ones who don't tend to find explanations for what they have seen.




Lets remember that Police investigations have been solved by mediums working to find bodies that have been missing for several years. Pure guess work? I think not. Please give me one documented example of this. I don't mean hearsay or promotional material form a physchic's website. I mean you should tell me one specific case where the police sucessfully used a medium to solve an investigation. But please, no anecdotes - see my signature.

Archer17
2005-Dec-24, 05:32 AM
True story.

I went to a medium once (she was gorgeous, that's why) and asked her about my Uncle Fred. I told her about how my father was away for long stretches of time and that my beloved Uncle Fred was like a second father to me and how I missed our fishing trips. She did her thing and proceeded to tell me he was fine and looked forward to our meeting again in the afterlife, etc etc

I don't have an Uncle Fred. ;)

wayneee
2005-Dec-24, 05:39 AM
I phsycic powers were real, Mediums would not have to sell thier talents, they would all win the lottery.

If Ghosts Exist , how do they exist?

We have all felt Creepy, part of that primal fear response fight or flee. Ghost stories in the woods, dreaming of running away in terror but never able to gain normal speed. Part and Parcel of being human is that we are not all that far removed from our less conscious ancestors. Our Brain mapping is still keyed into many basic forms that have served us well in the past. It creats Anomolies in our wiring, ghosts in the machine.

Maksutov
2005-Dec-24, 05:52 AM
[edit]I don't have an Uncle Fred. ;)Well, if you take what Moonrock's posted at face value, you better believe you've got one now! http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Speaking of Moonrock's postings, since this thread looks like it's going to go on and on in the manner of a Jerry thread (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=314757&postcount=1) (could that be called a jerrymanner?), it might be not only instructive but also economical to ask Moonrock to post a list of all the mystical and supernatural stuff he doesn't believe in.

Might make for a really short conclusion to this thread. http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/4879/iconbiggrin1kg.gif


Meanwhile, as Steven Wright once remarked:

I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met.

All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.

Why do psychics have to ask you for your name?

wayneee
2005-Dec-24, 06:06 AM
My wife Sold a kitten to a psychic once, she had four to choose from in the litter. The lady did not know which one to pick, we had to choose for her via our knowlege of thier personalities. She them looked at my wife and asked if she would lower her price. To where my wife answered " What do you think ?"

Moonrock
2005-Dec-24, 11:51 AM
Originally Posted by Moonrock
Talking from personal experience, I know my brother doesnt use magic tricks, I also know that he doesnt hoax things either. If you had been witness to some of the things that he has told people at places where he has never been before then perhaps you would believe it too.

You may not know. He may not know, consciously, that he is gathering information through conventional but unobvious means. This is where experts and experiments are appropriate.

How would my brother have known the guys surname? How could he walk into a pub that is situated around 40 miles from where we live and tell me that he saw a cavalier and an old man in a flat cap in the pub. Then when we return around a month later, (we are in a band together and play gigs at the pub) he decides to ask the landlady if they have any ghosts and she confirms that there is the ghost of a cavalier and an old man there. He didn’t actually tell her what he had seen he just asked if the place was haunted and she confirmed what he had told me the month before. How do you suggest that he found out that information if at first he tells me he saw a cavalier and then on the next visit decides to ask the landlady and he’s correct?

How can he accurately describe a hotel rooms decoration that he’s never been to? And the building that the room is situated in? How can he be collecting information for the answer when he purposely tells the witness not to tell him anything before the reading?


Ok, so this has been a big question of mine. I’ve heard ghosts can only be seen when they want to be seen. So what keeps them from only appearing at some random inopportune time, why don’t they appear when we want them to?

Can you have your brother ask one about this and get back to us?

I cannot honestly answer that question, I can hazard a guess. As far as ghosts are concerned most of them don’t even know that they have deceased. They go about their normal routine and if they like a building or area they will hang out there in the residual (this means that they stay at one place most of the time). Many ghost sightings start when buildings are renovated or have large alterations carried out. The reasons why ghosts sometimes appear is because they realise that somebody is altering the place that they think they own. Also stone is well known for capturing spirits, if you start knocking around the walls of a very old building then you can probably expect some supernatural activity.

Ghosts are not created just to make us jump and obviously some people are more sensitive to seeing ghosts than others. Myself and my brother are a good example. I’ve never seen a ghost but he has seen over 50. We have been in the same room and he has seen ghosts and I haven’t, but I have smelt scent in the area where he says the ghost stood. He has worked with the main medium in his church and they have both seen the same ghosts and described what they look like, so its more a case of if you’ve got the goods then you will see them.

Other ghosts are connected to events and dates. Some appear on anniversaries of great wars or of tragedies, re-enacting the time of their death.


Anecdotes are worthless for proving anything - any criminal lawyer (is there any other kind) will tell you that eye witnesses are the worst witnesses.

Regarding those "thousands of . . . groups" collecting scientific evidence - do they actually hand over their data to another group - say scientists - for an impartial judegement on the veracity of their findings? Or to see if there is some other explanation for the experience? Self certification (and that includes shipping off to some other ghostbuster group) is completely invalid- that's like asking the Pope if God exists.

As far as UFOs go, I am aware of only one photograph and no video that hasn't been debunked

Keep in mind, as the proponents you have to prove this thing exists. If there is ANY other explanation, that proof is still pending.

Personally, I'd love to have ghosts around - imagine what they could do for a court of law. But for now, I won't believe ANYthing without proof

If eyewitness testimonies are worthless how do the jury come to a conclusion? What do they do? Hey heres a gun, theres the owner so it must be him, dont take into consideration that these 5 people saw his friend pick up the gun and do the shooting? huh?

Theres a show over here in the UK called ‘Most Haunted’ which conducts ghost investigations using mediums and also a parapsychologist who conducts experiments during the investigations. Many times they have captured anomalies on film and the parapsychologist has also picked up readings on EMF meters and infrared camera equipment whilst phenomenon has happened. At the end of the show another parapsychologist breaks down the events of the show and gives his verdict. There has been several times in the show where both parapsychologists hold up their hands and say ‘Sorry but I don’t have a valid explanation for what happened there’.


No, I'm not saying this at all. You must open your mind to accept the possibility that it's NOT a ghost. As I say, it seems that the only people who see ghosts are the ones who believe in them. The ones who don't tend to find explanations for what they have seen.

What would be your explanation be if you saw a person walking through a wall? Your assumption that ghosts are only seen by believers is totally incorrect. I have seen many programs where non believers have been made into believers by encountering ghosts for the first time.


Please give me one documented example of this. I don't mean hearsay or promotional material form a physchic's website. I mean you should tell me one specific case where the police sucessfully used a medium to solve an investigation. But please, no anecdotes - see my signature.

There is a program that has aired here in the UK which I think is called ‘Sensing Murder’. The program asks two independent mediums for clues that could solve unsolved murder cases. Time and time again the two mediums come up with similar information and in some cases they have solved the murder and found missing bodies. For more info see this article. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/09/11/1062902048579.html


I phsycic powers were real, Mediums would not have to sell thier talents, they would all win the lottery.

If Ghosts Exist , how do they exist?

We have all felt Creepy, part of that primal fear response fight or flee. Ghost stories in the woods, dreaming of running away in terror but never able to gain normal speed. Part and Parcel of being human is that we are not all that far removed from our less conscious ancestors. Our Brain mapping is still keyed into many basic forms that have served us well in the past. It creats Anomolies in our wiring, ghosts in the machine.


Mediums are given their gift to help others not for profit. Although, there are many lottery winners who have won by getting their numbers through dreams, so perhaps you could say that a guide is telling them the numbers?


True story.

I went to a medium once (she was gorgeous, that's why) and asked her about my Uncle Fred. I told her about how my father was away for long stretches of time and that my beloved Uncle Fred was like a second father to me and how I missed our fishing trips. She did her thing and proceeded to tell me he was fine and looked forward to our meeting again in the afterlife, etc etc

I don't have an Uncle Fred.


And as Ive said before, a true medium wouldnt even charge for a reading. My brothers teacher is out almost every night and travels around 50 miles most of the time. She never charges, the only money she gets is to cover her petrol costs which is donated by the church she is visiting. Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway?

Well, if you take what Moonrock's posted at face value, you better believe you've got one now!


Speaking of Moonrock's postings, since this thread looks like it's going to go on and on in the manner of a Jerry thread (could that be called a jerrymanner?), it might be not only instructive but also economical to ask Moonrock to post a list of all the mystical and supernatural stuff he doesn't believe in.

Might make for a really short conclusion to this thread.

Most things Apollo
Werewolves
The American President
Santa
You

Archer17
2005-Dec-24, 05:25 PM
..And as Ive said before, a true medium wouldnt even charge for a reading. My brothers teacher is out almost every night and travels around 50 miles most of the time. She never charges, the only money she gets is to cover her petrol costs which is donated by the church she is visiting.There's a very good reason why none of these charlatans can collect a million bucks from Randi .. there is no such thing as a "true" medium.
Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway? I already gave one reason. My other motivation was to put this hokum to the test.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-24, 06:45 PM
How can he accurately describe a hotel rooms decoration that he’s never been to?


hotel rooms have more than one decoration scheme?



If eyewitness testimonies are worthless how do the jury come to a conclusion? What do they do? Hey heres a gun, theres the owner so it must be him, dont take into consideration that these 5 people saw his friend pick up the gun and do the shooting? huh?


You should read what I said, not what you think I said. I said "eye witnesses are the worst witnesses". Not that they are worthless. Worst implies a list. In this case (pardon the pun), other evidence is always better (interpretation may not be).

If 10 people witness an occurance, if you ask them, you will get 10 different stories - frequently contradictory. Why else do you think there's even a field such as forensics?



Theres a show over here in the UK called ‘Most Haunted’ which conducts ghost investigations using mediums and also a parapsychologist who conducts experiments during the investigations. Many times they have captured anomalies on film and the parapsychologist has also picked up readings on EMF meters and infrared camera equipment whilst phenomenon has happened. At the end of the show another parapsychologist breaks down the events of the show and gives his verdict. There has been several times in the show where both parapsychologists hold up their hands and say ‘Sorry but I don’t have a valid explanation for what happened there’.


This is still a case of self-validation.



What would be your explanation be if you saw a person walking through a wall? Your assumption that ghosts are only seen by believers is totally incorrect. I have seen many programs where non believers have been made into believers by encountering ghosts for the first time.


I would assume the person that was 'convinced' was duped.



There is a program that has aired here in the UK which I think is called ‘Sensing Murder’. The program asks two independent mediums for clues that could solve unsolved murder cases. Time and time again the two mediums come up with similar information and in some cases they have solved the murder and found missing bodies. For more info see this article. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/09/11/1062902048579.html


Personally, I think it's more likely to be a case of a fresh viewpoint.




Mediums are given their gift to help others not for profit. Although, there are many lottery winners who have won by getting their numbers through dreams, so perhaps you could say that a guide is telling them the numbers?

And as Ive said before, a true medium wouldnt even charge for a reading. My brothers teacher is out almost every night and travels around 50 miles most of the time. She never charges, the only money she gets is to cover her petrol costs which is donated by the church she is visiting. Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway?


Personally, I wouldnt have a problem with a true medium charging. What we object to is that there is yet to be a proven true medium - so those who are charging are committing fraud.

Monique
2005-Dec-24, 10:57 PM
True story.

I went to a medium once (she was gorgeous, that's why) and asked her about my Uncle Fred. I told her about how my father was away for long stretches of time and that my beloved Uncle Fred was like a second father to me and how I missed our fishing trips. She did her thing and proceeded to tell me he was fine and looked forward to our meeting again in the afterlife, etc etc

I don't have an Uncle Fred. ;)
Is not true, you have Uncle Fred parents never tell you about. If they tell you, all happen as she say!! :whistle:


Edit to Add:

I must say. I do not bring my beliefs before science to validate. There is peace deep in my soul come from Buddhism. Is part of my life. I listen, am guided to places I must be. I do not ask others to believe, I do not ask science to say true. I believe I am good person, I ask for respect. If people do not agree I am good person, say to me.

EsquireJ
2005-Dec-24, 11:51 PM
I get very frustrated with this idea that because some of these ghostly experiences currently cannot be explained scientifically it must automatically be attributed to the dead person/spirit explanation. I will admit at the moment many things have not been explained by science but it is far more likely it is a natural remarkable phememenon, which we are yet to discover rather than a dead person. I also find the dead people thing falls apart when you think about how many people have actually died since the dawn on humankind! You must be talking about trillions and trillions of dead, which would mean if the dead person argument was correct, we should have ghosts in every square inch of earth and thus they would be very apparent in all our lives!

It must be noted that an explanation that doesn’t obey the rules of the universe makes it even less plausible than secret flying pigs creating mind altering drugs to create ghosts and trick mankind (this does obey the rules of the universe and so IS more plausible than spirits/dead people). I do hope this all made sense as the Christmas cheer (wine) has much gone to my head so to spoke

Monique
2005-Dec-25, 12:01 AM
I get very frustrated with this idea that because some of these ghostly experiences currently cannot be explained scientifically it must automatically be attributed to the dead person/spirit explanation. I will admit at the moment many things have not been explained by science but it is far more likely it is a natural remarkable phememenon, which we are yet to discover rather than a dead person. I also find the dead people thing falls apart when you think about how many people have actually died since the dawn on humankind! You must be talking about trillions and trillions of dead, which would mean if the dead person argument was correct, we should have ghosts in every square inch of earth and thus they would be very apparent in all our lives!

It must be noted that an explanation that doesn’t obey the rules of the universe makes it even less plausible than secret flying pigs creating mind altering drugs to create ghosts and trick mankind (this does obey the rules of the universe and so IS more plausible than spirits/dead people). I do hope this all made sense as the Christmas cheer (wine) has much gone to my head so to spoke
Those of us who believe do not ask you to believe. We ask for respect to be different from you. Why do such beliefs frustrate you? Must all believe as you??

EsquireJ
2005-Dec-25, 12:15 AM
It is frustrating because you make up your own explanation (which has little of no scientific basis) for something that hasn't been explained yet

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-25, 12:40 AM
How would my brother have known the guys surname?
It wasn’t Smith was it?


… he decides to ask the landlady if they have any ghosts and she confirms that there is the ghost of a cavalier and an old man there.
Just like the two guys in that picture over the bar.


How can he accurately describe a hotel rooms decoration that he’s never been to?
Lemme see when you first walk in the door off to the side was an alcove with a closet to one side and a sink to the other, with a small 4 cup coffee maker next to it. Past that there is the actual bath room, with the toilet and a bath tub with an off white shower curtain. Back to the bedroom area, there to one side of the room is a combination armoire/TV cabinet. Opposite the TV are two double beds made with white sheets one thick blanket and a 70’s is bedspread. Over each bed is a print of some pastel colored flowery scene. Between the beds and next to the far bed are night stands each with a lamp above it. The middle night stand has a small digital alarm clock, and a phone. Inside that nightstand is a local phone book and a bible. There is a floor lamp and a small desk/table next to the window on the far side of the room from the door. Hey I might have another calling, ‘cause I think I might be close.


We have been in the same room and he has seen ghosts and I haven’t, but I have smelt scent in the area where he says the ghost stood.

I love to do that to my brother to.

Me: Hey look a ghost!
Mybrother: Huh ghost? Where?
Me: *quietly fart while he’s distracted*
My brother: I didn’t see it.
Me: Yeah it was right there came out of that wall and went right through that one.
My brother: Man I missed it. It must have been here though ‘cause I can smell the stench of death in the air.

That is a good one.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-25, 12:43 AM
Those of us who believe do not ask you to believe. We ask for respect to be different from you. Why do such beliefs frustrate you? Must all believe as you??

I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs. If, however, you suggest something has objective reality, I'm going to ask for your physical evidence. For instance, if you want to believe in ghosts, fine. But if you say that there are ghosts that are giving you information that you couldn't receive in other ways, I'm going to want to see good evidence for it. It is no different from the arguments that UFOs are alien spacecraft - people can believe what they want, but if they want to argue what is physically real, they need to demonstrate it.

Monique
2005-Dec-25, 12:53 AM
It is frustrating because you make up your own explanation (which has little of no scientific basis) for something that hasn't been explained yet
But I do not involve you in my choice. I do not ask others to believe. I do not put belief to science and ask for validation.

My soul is personal province, no? Is not freedom to chose foundation for United States??

Monique
2005-Dec-25, 12:57 AM
I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs. If, however, you suggest something has objective reality, I'm going to ask for your physical evidence. For instance, if you want to believe in ghosts, fine. But if you say that there are ghosts that are giving you information that you couldn't receive in other ways, I'm going to want to see good evidence for it. It is no different from the arguments that UFOs are alien spacecraft - people can believe what they want, but if they want to argue what is physically real, they need to demonstrate it.
I do not say, I keep beliefs for me. I ask only for respect. As I have say, choices personal, only for me. You ask, "Do you believe in ghosts, I say yes." I drop subject, why do you continue? I only ask freedom to think as I wish. My work at university is very good, I have friends, I have lovers, people say I am good person.

Live life as you choose, I do same. I ask no person to think as me. Seem wrong for you to make me think as you.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-25, 01:12 AM
You ask, "Do you believe in ghosts, I say yes." I drop subject, why do you continue? I only ask freedom to think as I wish.

Live life as you choose, I do same. I ask no person to think as me. Seem wrong for you to make me think as you.

I'm not sure you understood me. I was explaining my position: I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs, though some others here might. However, if you, like Moonrock, suggest that there is a physical manifestation for these beliefs, then I will ask for properly gathered evidence.



Is not freedom to chose foundation for United States??


Yes, but we love to argue. :)

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-25, 01:24 AM
Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway?


I find this a very telling statement. I would think one answer would be obvious. It says a lot about your viewpoint. If I go to a medium, I would want to test them. I wouldn't answer a lot of questions, and if I did answer, I would give incorrect answers. I would volunteer as little as possible. I would keep a poker face. In short, I would test them. How else could I verify what I was seeing was more than psychological trickery?

Monique
2005-Dec-25, 01:26 AM
I'm not sure you understood me. I was explaining my position: I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs, though some others here might. However, if you, like Moonrock, suggest that there is a physical manifestation for these beliefs, then I will ask for properly gathered evidence.
Ahhhh is where Moonrock and me do not agree.




Yes, but we love to argue. :) So I find out!!! :razz:
:)

paulie jay
2005-Dec-25, 05:25 AM
What would be your explanation be if you saw a person walking through a wall? Your assumption that ghosts are only seen by believers is totally incorrect. I have seen many programs where non believers have been made into believers by encountering ghosts for the first time.I've never seen it happen, so how could I possibly answer that question?


There is a program that has aired here in the UK which I think is called ‘Sensing Murder’. The program asks two independent mediums for clues that could solve unsolved murder cases. Time and time again the two mediums come up with similar information and in some cases they have solved the murder and found missing bodies. For more info see this article. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...902048579.html

Sensing Murder is a disgusting farce of a show which was ripped off the air almost as soon as it began in Australia.
http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/2005/1_sensing.pdf
(Opens a 3 page PDF document in which the crew from the show reveal how the "psychic hits" were achieved)

I asked you for a documented example. A real case on police record, not a discredited freak show.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-25, 07:11 AM
Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway?
I find this a very telling statement. I would think one answer would be obvious. It says a lot about your viewpoint. If I go to a medium, I would want to test them. I wouldn't answer a lot of questions, and if I did answer, I would give incorrect answers. I would volunteer as little as possible. I would keep a poker face. In short, I would test them. How else could I verify what I was seeing was more than psychological trickery?
The same reason new medications go through double blind studies with placeboes. It’s pretty sound scientific process for determining bias, or invalid data. A fictional uncle is pretty bad data.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-25, 10:55 PM
Archer 17: There's a very good reason why none of these charlatans can collect a million bucks from Randi .. there is no such thing as a "true" medium.

Actually there have been quite a few mediums who have met Randi’s criteria and he has refused to pay out. One such medium could give Randi some very personal information about his family and where they lived and still Randi didn’t believe it. In fact Mr. Randi seems to have a knack of moving the goal posts to his test once a medium successfully completes them. Perhaps you didn’t read the link I posted earlier about how Randi is avoiding paying out to mediums who have passed his challenge?


LurchGS: If 10 people witness an occurance, if you ask them, you will get 10 different stories - frequently contradictory. Why else do you think there's even a field such as forensics?

Forensics test physical evidence not testimonies of witnesses.


LurchGS: I would assume the person that was 'convinced' was duped.

So you’ve come to a conclusion without any evidence?


Quote:
There is a program that has aired here in the UK which I think is called ‘Sensing Murder’. The program asks two independent mediums for clues that could solve unsolved murder cases. Time and time again the two mediums come up with similar information and in some cases they have solved the murder and found missing bodies. For more info see this article. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...902048579.html


LurchGS: Personally, I think it's more likely to be a case of a fresh viewpoint.

Doesn’t matter what viewpoint you have without a body. These psychics have found missing persons that a normal police investigation could not uncover.


LurchGS: Personally, I wouldnt have a problem with a true medium charging. What we object to is that there is yet to be a proven true medium - so those who are charging are committing fraud.

Not necessarily, I would suggest that some mediums who charge also give accurate readings.


EsquireJ: I get very frustrated with this idea that because some of these ghostly experiences currently cannot be explained scientifically it must automatically be attributed to the dead person/spirit explanation. I will admit at the moment many things have not been explained by science but it is far more likely it is a natural remarkable phememenon, which we are yet to discover rather than a dead person. I also find the dead people thing falls apart when you think about how many people have actually died since the dawn on humankind! You must be talking about trillions and trillions of dead, which would mean if the dead person argument was correct, we should have ghosts in every square inch of earth and thus they would be very apparent in all our lives!

It must be noted that an explanation that doesn’t obey the rules of the universe makes it even less plausible than secret flying pigs creating mind altering drugs to create ghosts and trick mankind (this does obey the rules of the universe and so IS more plausible than spirits/dead people). I do hope this all made sense as the Christmas cheer (wine) has much gone to my head so to spoke

Not all people who die become ghosts, only those who do not move on or who are not aware that they have died become ghosts. That is the job of mediums, to move spirits towards the light and explain to them that they have passed and need to cross over. Surely being a scientific community here you would know that matter cannot be destroyed? I also believe that we come back again and again, gaining more knowledge each time.


Monique: Those of us who believe do not ask you to believe. We ask for respect to be different from you. Why do such beliefs frustrate you? Must all believe as you??

Very true, couldn’t have said it better Monique.


EsquireJ: It is frustrating because you make up your own explanation (which has little of no scientific basis) for something that hasn't been explained yet

That’s because you have to get used to the idea that science cannot actually solve every riddle in the Universe. If science cannot explain the ghost phenomenon why should our explanation have scientific basis?


Hugh Jass:
Originally Posted by Moonrock
How would my brother have known the guys surname?
It wasn’t Smith was it?

Again, another person who doesn’t bother reading the thread before forcing his opinion. The guys name was Campbell. Hugh Jass, if you have nothing relevant to say on the subject then please leave it to people who do.


Van Rijn: I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs. If, however, you suggest something has objective reality, I'm going to ask for your physical evidence. For instance, if you want to believe in ghosts, fine. But if you say that there are ghosts that are giving you information that you couldn't receive in other ways, I'm going to want to see good evidence for it. It is no different from the arguments that UFOs are alien spacecraft - people can believe what they want, but if they want to argue what is physically real, they need to demonstrate it.

Fine, what evidence do you require?


Van Rijn: I'm not sure you understood me. I was explaining my position: I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs, though some others here might. However, if you, like Moonrock, suggest that there is a physical manifestation for these beliefs, then I will ask for properly gathered evidence.

These events happen in front of many people. If it happens at spiritualist church it happens in front of at least 30 people, some who have been going to that church for over 30 years and some who have come for the very first time. Each person come from different backgrounds and religious beliefs. They are your witnesses.


Quote:
Is not freedom to chose foundation for United States??

Yes, but we love to argue.

Yeah we know that, that’s why your country is always starting wars.


Van Rijn: Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonrock
Why would you purposely go to a medium and make up a fictional uncle anyway?

I find this a very telling statement. I would think one answer would be obvious. It says a lot about your viewpoint. If I go to a medium, I would want to test them. I wouldn't answer a lot of questions, and if I did answer, I would give incorrect answers. I would volunteer as little as possible. I would keep a poker face. In short, I would test them. How else could I verify what I was seeing was more than psychological trickery?


So do you do the same thing when you go to your doctor just to test if he’s good at his job? My brother tells me that many times a medium picks out an area of people in the church and says that there is a message for that part of the room. A person in the audience tells them ‘sorry I cant take any of that’, only for the person who has come with them and who was sitting next to them to say at the end of the evening ‘you know, I could have taken all of that message’. Can you see my point? If you start telling mediums wrong information or don’t speak up when they are getting a message for either you or the person sitting next to you then they think they are wrong. Its ok to just say yes or no, but at least tell the truth.

paulie jay
2005-Dec-25, 11:33 PM
Doesn’t matter what viewpoint you have without a body. These psychics have found missing persons that a normal police investigation could not uncover.
No they haven't! You obviously can't be bothered to read a two and a half page report of Sensing Murder to which I linked you. Yet you maintain that your mind is open - so open that you refuse to acknowledge anything that disagrees with what you believe.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-26, 01:03 AM
Read This: In Romania, a Sensing Murder team has taken credit for solving the mystery surrounding the disappearance of a 43-year-old man, whose body was found at "a location that had been perfectly described by the clairvoyant", to quote the press release of the Danish distributor of the format rights.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-26, 02:17 AM
Read This: In Romania, a Sensing Murder team has taken credit for solving the mystery surrounding the disappearance of a 43-year-old man, whose body was found at "a location that had been perfectly described by the clairvoyant", to quote the press release of the Danish distributor of the format rights.

Wow. A press release. And we know that this was properly investigated by an independent research team ... right? It is very clear you have a problem with the concept of careful scientific research. Interesting stories are fun, but with all the time people have been researching this stuff, if there is something to it, it is amazing that there haven't been better results in well controlled studies.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-26, 03:30 AM
Actually there have been quite a few mediums who have met Randi’s criteria and he has refused to pay out.


So, you have evidence that there was an agreement to a testing procedure and what constituted valid results, and they were tested and passed the test as per the agreement? I saw some accusations, but I didn't see anything that impressed me. Why don't you pick one example and give us the details, then we can see what the "other side" has to say about it, okay?



Forensics test physical evidence not testimonies of witnesses.


That's the point - physical evidence versus belief.



Monique: Those of us who believe do not ask you to believe. We ask for respect to be different from you. Why do such beliefs frustrate you? Must all believe as you??

Very true, couldn’t have said it better Monique.


And as I said, I won't argue subjective beliefs. Believe what you want. However, you are suggesting physical effects and you have not shown any reason why it shouldn't be possible to verify these physical effects scientifically.



That’s because you have to get used to the idea that science cannot actually solve every riddle in the Universe. If science cannot explain the ghost phenomenon why should our explanation have scientific basis?


As I mentioned in another thread, there are a number of things that cannot (at least yet) be scientifically explained but have been observed. Dark energy is one example. The issue here is that you have not provided good evidence that things you declare to be the effects of ghosts are real.




I'm not going to argue your subjective beliefs. If, however, you suggest something has objective reality, I'm going to ask for your physical evidence.Fine, what evidence do you require?


Haven't we covered this already? Evidence gathered during controlled studies conducted by researchers who are experts on conventional but unobvious methods of communication and trickery.




I find this a very telling statement. I would think one answer would be obvious. It says a lot about your viewpoint. If I go to a medium, I would want to test them. I wouldn't answer a lot of questions, and if I did answer, I would give incorrect answers. I would volunteer as little as possible. I would keep a poker face. In short, I would test them.
So do you do the same thing when you go to your doctor just to test if he’s good at his job?


This is somewhat apples and oranges: A doctor goes through many years of training and is licensed, so there is some objective reasons to assume competency. But in answer to your question: If I was investigating a doctor (for example, one who had been accused of doing unnecessary procedures), I certainly would give him incorrect information to test him. If he could see through the deception and reacted properly, he would pass the test. If he didn't ...



My brother tells me that many times a medium picks out an area of people in the church and says that there is a message for that part of the room. A person in the audience tells them ‘sorry I cant take any of that’, only for the person who has come with them and who was sitting next to them to say at the end of the evening ‘you know, I could have taken all of that message’.


Yep, that sounds pretty typical. Playing the crowd is a great way to improve a cold reader's hit rate, especially if the people listening want to make the statements fit. So you're saying it won't work if people don't play along? Big surprise. I'd like to see the results with a group of skeptics who had been instructed on how to respond by a professional magician before they went in. I suspect the results would be quite different.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-26, 11:32 AM
Wow. A press release. And we know that this was properly investigated by an independent research team ... right? It is very clear you have a problem with the concept of careful scientific research. Interesting stories are fun, but with all the time people have been researching this stuff, if there is something to it, it is amazing that there haven't been better results in well controlled studies.

You know its funny, all the time Im being told on this board 'read the rules' and 'you cant say that'. Well, under those conditions I am quoting a website of a show. If that evidence is incorrect then sue them. If this particular investigation was caught on film for any sceptic or scientist to scrutinise why do you come to the conclusion that this case hasn't been thoroughly scrutinised?

I think your just clutching at straws. You ask for evidence and when I post it you move the goalposts. If you took a little time to actually investigate this subject then you wouldn't keep asking the same questions. There is plenty of evidence out there if you care to look.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-26, 11:54 AM
So, you have evidence that there was an agreement to a testing procedure and what constituted valid results, and they were tested and passed the test as per the agreement? I saw some accusations, but I didn't see anything that impressed me. Why don't you pick one example and give us the details, then we can see what the "other side" has to say about it, okay?

Why not spend a little time with Google and do it yourself? Your the one who doesnt believe what I post, so you go and do the investigating and come back when you see the results.


And as I said, I won't argue subjective beliefs. Believe what you want. However, you are suggesting physical effects and you have not shown any reason why it shouldn't be possible to verify these physical effects scientifically.

I have no doubt that if science spent the time to go and watch a circle of genuine mediums then they would certainly find strong evidence in favour of this phenomenon. Unfortunately, its people like yourself who keep asking the questions but do nothing further to investigate. You want physical evidence, then go to your local spiritualist church and find out.


As I mentioned in another thread, there are a number of things that cannot (at least yet) be scientifically explained but have been observed. Dark energy is one example. The issue here is that you have not provided good evidence that things you declare to be the effects of ghosts are real.

You just answered your own question with the first sentence here. 'A number of things cannot be scientifically explained even though they have been observed'. Why should ghosts be any different?

When evidence presents itself from a medium that only a member of the family of the deceased would know, how else do you explain that the medium got the information? Heres an example. On an episode of 'Most Haunted', Derek Acorah, the medium, told the family who owned a pub that he was picking up the body of a dead bird. On saying this the owners suddenly remembered that during renovation work they had found the dead body of a crow in a box hidden up inside the fireplace. They had forgotten about the incident and had obviously not told anyone related to the show. Considering that this is a very unusual reading that could not be guessed through the cold reading method, how do you suggest the Derek picked up on this evidence if it were not spiritually?


Haven't we covered this already? Evidence gathered during controlled studies conducted by researchers who are experts on conventional but unobvious methods of communication and trickery.

And where is your evidence for that? Again, how can trickery be used when the medium is just asking to answer yes or no?


This is somewhat apples and oranges: A doctor goes through many years of training and is licensed, so there is some objective reasons to assume competency. But in answer to your question: If I was investigating a doctor (for example, one who had been accused of doing unnecessary procedures), I certainly would give him incorrect information to test him. If he could see through the deception and reacted properly, he would pass the test. If he didn't ...

So you think that a medium can simply just get up on the podium and start giving messages? Do you know how many years a medium has to study before they are allowed to represent the spiritualist church? Your also ignorant of the fact that mediums are licensed too. Before you make yourself look even more uninformed, please go look at this link and get yourself up to speed on the spiritualist church and there methods. http://www.snu.org.uk/index3.htm

I know a healer for example who is taking a 3 year course on the subject and that is the minimum requirement.


Yep, that sounds pretty typical. Playing the crowd is a great way to improve a cold reader's hit rate, especially if the people listening want to make the statements fit. So you're saying it won't work if people don't play along? Big surprise. I'd like to see the results with a group of skeptics who had been instructed on how to respond by a professional magician before they went in. I suspect the results would be quite different.

And your saying this without even going to spiritualist church to find out? If you decide to give false evidence when your being asked a question then the only person who is doing the hoaxing is yourself. I can now understand your mentality if you would purposely give wrong answers just so that you can come onto websites such as this and say 'hehe I tricked them'. Contrary to your belief anyway, a properly trained medium can tell if your trying to trick them. Its obvious that your just going on medium shows that youve seen on TV.

Here are the 7 principles of the Spiritualist Church. Perhaps you could take the time to read them and understand the religion better? Make sure you read the bit about personal responsibility.


The Fatherhood of God

By the study of Nature - that is, by trying to understand the Laws of Cause & Effect which govern all that is happening around us - we recognise that there is a creative force in the universe. This force, or energy, not only created the whole universe, but also life itself in its many forms and is continuing to create today. The effects of this eternal creation can be seen around us and this leads us to the evidence that 'God' - 'The Creative Force' - manifests directly, or indirectly, in all things. We know this power as God and as we are part of the Life created by God, we acknowledge God as our Father.

The Brotherhood of Man

Because we all come from the same universal life source we are, in effect, one large family, small individual offshoot from the whole. This means that all mankind is part of a brotherhood. A brotherhood is a community for mutual support and comfort. We are all members of the same divine family. We need to share our joys as well as our burdens; we need to understand the needs of other individuals in order to assist them as part of our service to each other. As we learn to give so must we also learn to receive thereby achieving the necessary balance for our life. We must look not only to the material necessities of our fellow creatures but also to their spiritual needs and help those in need to become strong and worthy of their relationship in the Family of God.

Communion of Spirits and the Ministry of Angels (This is the key Principle to our Religion)

All religions believe in life after death but only Spiritualism shows that it is true by demonstrating that communication with departed spirits can and does take place. Spiritualist Churches provide one of the venues where communication, through mediumship, is possible and many loved relatives and friends take advantage of this opportunity to continue to take an interest in our welfare. There are also spirit people/teachers who are dedicated to the welfare and service of mankind. Some (e.g. Silver Birch) bring inspiration and teachings whilst others work within the healing ministry.

Continuous Existence of the Human Soul

It is scientifically proven that matter (being part of the creative force, or energy) cannot be destroyed; it merely changes its form. Spirit, as part of the Creative Force is, therefore, indestructible. On the death of the physical body, the spirit continues as an integral part of a world, which interpenetrates our world but in a different dimension. This world is referred to as the SpiritWorld. In spirit life we have a spirit body, which until we progress far enough, is a replica of our earthly body. We are the same individuals in every way with the same personalities and characteristics and we change only by progression, or otherwise, as a result of our own efforts. Our personal responsibilities do not stop at death.

Personal Responsibility

This principle is the one which places responsibility for wrongful thoughts and deeds where it belongs - with the individual. It is the acceptance of responsibility for every aspect of our lives and the use to which we place our lives depends entirely upon ourselves. It is not possible for any other person, or outside influence, to interfere with our spiritual development, unless we are willing to allow this. No one can put right the wrongdoing except the offender. As we are given freedom of choice (freewill) so also are we given the ability to recognise what is right from what is wrong. We are totally, as well as personally, responsible.

Compensation and Retribution hereafter for all Good and Evil Deeds done on Earth

As with all the other Principles, the natural laws apply and this one echoes the law of Cause and Effect (as you sow, so shall you reap). One cannot be cruel and vindictive towards others and expect love and popularity in return. It must be understood that the compensatory or retributive effects of this law operate now - on earth - they do not wait until we begin to live in the Spirit World.

Eternal Progress open to every Human Soul

In every heart there exists the desire for progress and to every human spirit belongs the power to progress in wisdom and love.
All who desire to tread the path that leads to perfection are able to pursue it. The rate of progress is directly proportional to the desire for mental and spiritual understanding. If we do our best in earth life to follow our inward prompting or intuitions; we shall find progress very easy, on earth as in spirit; if not, every step in advancement will follow a struggle against imperfections, which we ourselves will have worked into our natures. Within the Family of God, with all the advantages that our realisation of that state can give us, we are all given the opportunity to be responsible for our own eternal progress.

As a final note to these principles, Spiritualism, through an intelligent and thorough investigation of its Seven Principles, reveals the understanding, the deepest significance of service to others and transforms life from selfishness to unselfishness, from individualism to social co-operation.Only on such a foundation can love and truth and all other spiritual values have any practical meaning or reality.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-26, 12:12 PM
I think your just clutching at straws. You ask for evidence and when I post it you move the goalposts.


Ah. I ask for evidence from properly conducted research and this is somehow "moving the goalposts." I find that rather odd, since that has always been my position. Well, at least I see how James Randi managed to be accused of the same sin: Just ask for good evidence.



If you took a little time to actually investigate this subject then you wouldn't keep asking the same questions. There is plenty of evidence out there if you care to look.

As I believe I mentioned before, I have researched the subject quite a bit. I had quite an eye-opening experience many years ago when I learned the nature of much of this "evidence" you speak of. Here are a couple of books I would suggest you read:

"Science: Good, Bad, and Bogus" by Martin Gardner

"Flim-Flam!" by James Randi

I'm sure others can suggest some other good books, and these have been around for some time, but these were very informative and eye opening. If you read these, you just might learn a bit from a different perspective.

parallaxicality
2005-Dec-26, 12:15 PM
I've seen ghosts a couple times, but I'm not a scientist. I can't claim that what I saw was verifiable in any way, so I don't stand by it as absolute fact, but nonetheless, I have, at least as far as I can determine, seen things that could be termed "ghosts."

paulie jay
2005-Dec-26, 01:42 PM
Read This: In Romania, a Sensing Murder team has taken credit for solving the mystery surrounding the disappearance of a 43-year-old man, whose body was found at "a location that had been perfectly described by the clairvoyant", to quote the press release of the Danish distributor of the format rights.
A press release!! Ahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!! http://www.cosgan.de/images/midi/froehlich/d050.gif

You cite a press release as evidence? Oh my lord, now that I know the gulibility I'm dealing with I don't think that I should bother persuing this thread much longer. Moonrock, you really need to learn the difference between stories and facts.

OK, one last shot...
I've asked you repeatedly for the specific name of any real case that is recorded on police file that has been solved by a medium. In my initial request I actually said "...I don't mean hearsay or promotional material form a physchic's website..." but perhaps should have expanded to include television shows. Surely if this is something that has happened enough times for you to confidently state it as a fact then you should be able to give me the name of a case without too many difficulties?

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-26, 01:59 PM
To get back to the OP, scientists see the same phenomena as other people, but they are less likely to accept "ghost" as an explanation for what they see.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-26, 02:11 PM
Ah. I ask for evidence from properly conducted research and this is somehow "moving the goalposts." I find that rather odd, since that has always been my position. Well, at least I see how James Randi managed to be accused of the same sin: Just ask for good evidence.



As I believe I mentioned before, I have researched the subject quite a bit. I had quite an eye-opening experience many years ago when I learned the nature of much of this "evidence" you speak of. Here are a couple of books I would suggest you read:

"Science: Good, Bad, and Bogus" by Martin Gardner

"Flim-Flam!" by James Randi

I'm sure others can suggest some other good books, and these have been around for some time, but these were very informative and eye opening. If you read these, you just might learn a bit from a different perspective.

But Ill ask again, did your investigations take you to a spiritualist church or are you just taking your examples from TV mediums?

Moonrock
2005-Dec-26, 02:55 PM
OK heres some good evidence as printed in 'Two Worlds Magazine, October 2005. This will give you scientific evidence that the phenomenon is real.

Scientist took 44 photos of spirit form

Copyrighted material deleted by moderator Tinaa, who adds:
Moonrock, you cannot post copywrited material. Post the link to the story, not the story. Yoiu have broken several forum rules. Read them now. Read the rules here: http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=32864

You probably should have been banned for this last infraction. You still might be.

The Bad Astronomer
2005-Dec-26, 08:47 PM
I have put Moonrock on a three day suspension.

Moonrock, read the rules. Then read them again. You may come back here in three days and post again, but if you break any of these rules in the slightest your ban will be permanent.

Archer17
2005-Dec-26, 10:20 PM
Actually there have been quite a few mediums who have met Randi’s criteria and he has refused to pay out. One such medium could give Randi some very personal information about his family and where they lived and still Randi didn’t believe it. In fact Mr. Randi seems to have a knack of moving the goal posts to his test once a medium successfully completes them. Perhaps you didn’t read the link I posted earlier about how Randi is avoiding paying out to mediums who have passed his challenge?It's not that I didn't read it, it's that I'm not buying it. I don't even have to be a medium to know that you never bothered checking the veracity of these claims.

Why is it that your ghosts even need a 'medium' to communicate with the living Moonrock? Is there some kind of spirit-world rule where the deceased are not allowed to talk to non-mediums or are their voices so faint that only the sharp-eared true medium can hear 'em?

LurchGS
2005-Dec-26, 10:24 PM
Do Cyclists see Goats?

Halcyon Dayz
2005-Dec-26, 10:29 PM
Sometimes. I have even seen lamas. :think:

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-26, 10:32 PM
Someone say Lamas (http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/llama.php)?

LurchGS
2005-Dec-26, 10:37 PM
:D

that makes about as much sense as anything I've read on this thread!

I wonder if I can play that as an MP3 whenever I honk my car horn...

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-27, 12:12 AM
But Ill ask again, did your investigations take you to a spiritualist church or are you just taking your examples from TV mediums?

As I mentioned before, I've been to people who called themselves mediums and psychics. When you get back, please let me know when you plan to read those books I suggested.

nostalgia
2005-Dec-27, 10:34 AM
I have experienced some weird phenomena but I'm not sure if ghosts exist.Nowadays ,many questions can't be answered because actually we know so a little about our world.

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-27, 06:16 PM
:D

that makes about as much sense as anything I've read on this thread!

I wonder if I can play that as an MP3 whenever I honk my car horn...

OMG that would be great! Can you imagine...:rofl: Oh, and the song is not supposed to make sense, but you know that by now.:lol:

William_Thompson
2005-Dec-27, 07:08 PM
What if our consciousnesses are multi-dimensional?

Just as a 3 dimensional object can cast a shadow on a two dimensional plane, what if a 5 or 6 dimensional thing can cast a shadow on our 4 dimensional observational world? Could that be what a ghost is?

I know it sounds like a Twilight Zone episode, but who knows?

I know, ghosts wear clothes. So this doesn't really make sense.

On the other hand, since the nature of consciousness is still a mystery, maybe ghosts are imprints on our minds somehow.

Yes, if you are guessing, I did see something once I cannot explain. I have written it off that I was somehow dreaming. But if I told you the story, you would see that that explaination doesn't make sense either.

William_Thompson
2005-Dec-27, 07:13 PM
You know, I don't believe in Bigfoot.

But if I saw one, I would have a different opinion.

I think anyone who says that there is no such thing as Ghost are confident only because they have not seen one.

On the other hand, I have heard of people who are bipolar who see ghosts when they are in their hightest manic phase. So maybe each ghost sighting is really just a brief psychotic snap.

EsquireJ
2005-Dec-27, 07:25 PM
Did anyone see the Derren Brown special where he went to a psychic/medium training centre? basically by the end of it he had convinced these 'psychics' and they believed him to be the most gifted they had ever seen but of course Derren is a very good magician/hypnotitst/pychologist/cold reader/EVERYTHING


some very good viewing!

LurchGS
2005-Dec-27, 07:35 PM
You know, I don't believe in Bigfoot.

But if I saw one, I would have a different opinion.

I think anyone who says that there is no such thing as Ghost are confident only because they have not seen one.


There's more to it than that- nobody we consider trustworthy (i.e. unbiased scientists) has proven they exist. Even if I were to see one, I'd be more likely to consider it a problem inside my head than long dead Uncle Joe. I'm definately not a qualified observer.



On the other hand, I have heard of people who are bipolar who see ghosts when they are in their hightest manic phase. So maybe each ghost sighting is really just a brief psychotic snap.

That's a new one to me.. I'll need to think on it a bit

William_Thompson
2005-Dec-27, 10:18 PM
You know, even if it is just in our mind, in a weird way it exists as a second degree truth. So being "real" depends on how you define "real". Post traumatic stress disorder is real even though it is just in people's head (not a good example of a second degree truth because there is actually physical change in the person's brain).

Or it could be thought of as a third degree truth. It is real in the sense that it has a cultural impact alone.

Mathematical Certitude Things which we know "in our hearts" to be true. Something that is not true at all. But solely on the fact that a large number of people believe it, it creates its own culture of truth. (http://www.completetranslations.com/_phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=372)

William_Thompson
2005-Dec-27, 11:03 PM
Naw!

On second thought, the are probably not real at all.

Consider how TV programs like "Naked Science" has dismantled the myth of the Loc Ness monster.

And consider how "Nova" has dismantled the myth of the Bermuda Tiangle.

I have the feeling that careful, scientific study would dismantle the idea of ghosts too.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-27, 11:07 PM
the problem here is that you can't prove a negative (directly).

You can debunk Nessie by proving that there is no large critter in the lake
You can debunk the triangle by showing what did happen to all those 'missing' whatevers..

But a ghost is by its nature arbitrary and immaterial. At best, you can either prove they exist or NOT prove they exist. Either way, the believers win, because if you didn't prove they exist, obviously your test was faulty.

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-27, 11:13 PM
It's the Invisible Pink Unicorn all over again.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-27, 11:15 PM
exactly... though I thought he was blue

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-27, 11:19 PM
She's pink as anyone who has insight knows. There's a picture of her here (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d5/Ipu.png).

LurchGS
2005-Dec-27, 11:27 PM
still looks blue to me.. but maybe if the link worked for me I might change my mind 8-{)}

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-27, 11:27 PM
It's the Invisible Pink Unicorn all over again.

Not quite. If someone wants to believe in ghosts, the IPU, or an invisible elf, that's one thing. But if they say there are real world effects, such as people learning things they should not otherwise be able to know, that can be tested. Assuming there are positive results in a properly conducted test, it still wouldn't necesarily prove a particular causation (the "ghost hypothesis") but it would, at least, demonstrate that something is happening that can't be accounted for by normal methods of communication or trickery.

Unfortunately for Moonrock, results from properly conducted tests are not promising.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-27, 11:38 PM
I don't believe there will be much of a response to this thread...

So much for your career as a Psychic. ;)

Archer17
2005-Dec-28, 12:25 AM
...If someone wants to believe in ghosts, the IPU, or an invisible elf, that's one thing. But if they say there are real world effects, such as people learning things they should not otherwise be able to know, that can be tested. Assuming there are positive results in a properly conducted test, it still wouldn't necesarily prove a particular causation (the "ghost hypothesis") but it would, at least, demonstrate that something is happening that can't be accounted for by normal methods of communication or trickery.

Unfortunately for Moonrock, results from properly conducted tests are not promising.My Uncle Fred agrees. ;)

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-28, 04:16 AM
So much for your career as a Psychic. ;)


Indeed, but I was referring to people that are scientists that have had experiences, but the only thing keeping this alive was the comments that moonrock said that got things stirred up.

Candy
2005-Dec-28, 04:35 AM
So much for your career as a Psychic. ;)
I believe this was meant to be funny. Well, I found it funny. :lol:

Now, I have the words UNCLE FRED in my head. :doh:

Maksutov
2005-Dec-28, 07:35 AM
This may prove useful as well as funny.

The next time someone shows up making outrageous, unsupported claims, we'll just refer them to Archer17's UNCLE FRED.

Wonder if Archer would object to the BAUT informally adopting his wonderful "uncle"? http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/4879/iconbiggrin1kg.gif

Candy
2005-Dec-28, 07:50 AM
Awesome, Maksutov! :clap: :lol:

farmerjumperdon
2005-Dec-28, 08:46 PM
You know, even if it is just in our mind, in a weird way it exists as a second degree truth. So being "real" depends on how you define "real". Post traumatic stress disorder is real even though it is just in people's head (not a good example of a second degree truth because there is actually physical change in the person's brain).

Or it could be thought of as a third degree truth. It is real in the sense that it has a cultural impact alone.

Mathematical Certitude Things which we know "in our hearts" to be true. Something that is not true at all. But solely on the fact that a large number of people believe it, it creates its own culture of truth. (http://www.completetranslations.com/_phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=372)

I don't know about that 3rd level. I would say it is a culture of belief, or even just a culture - but tacking the word truth on the end is slighting the meaning of the word. A belief may truly have an impact on a culture, and it may even be the truth, but it is never a truth just because it is a belief.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-28, 08:54 PM
I have a question.. is there any proof that moonrock exists? the only evidence I can provide is these transitory images on my computer screen, ostensibly caused by electrons hitting phosphorus in a specific pattern that some suggest MUST be caused by deliberate act..

Candy
2005-Dec-28, 10:07 PM
I have a question.. is there any proof that moonrock exists? the only evidence I can provide is these transitory images on my computer screen, ostensibly caused by electrons hitting phosphorus in a specific pattern that some suggest MUST be caused by deliberate act..
Let's ask Uncle Fred! ;)

Moonrock
2005-Dec-30, 03:30 PM
Well Im back. I'm a bit confused too? This board is obviously set up to ask questions on conspiracy theories. When a person such as myself puts forward such a theory the long haul posters of this group come forward asking for evidence and lets be honest who wouldnt?

However, on presenting such evidence the post is not only deleted, but the poster is banned. I have been looking at this forum for the past couple of days since I havent been able to post and have found time and time again that posters that start debatable topics are banned. Go look for yourself theres plenty of examples.

So, what exactly is the point of having a forum if you just want to hear one side of the story? Has the owners of this site never heard of the term 'fair use'? That is the right to use copyrighted material in short form as long as you link to the article/website.

The article that I posted was actually hand typed by myself and appeared in an edition of a spiritualist magazine. How can I link to that if it does not appear on the web?

You all sit here I guess laughing in full knowledge that when you ask 'wheres the evidence' that posters such as myself wont have the opportunity to post anything because the moderators deem it as breaking copyright laws.

Your in a win - win situation, so why should I bother any more?

Maksutov
2005-Dec-30, 03:35 PM
Moonrock,

It appears you're picking up where you left off.

Unless you review the moderator's reasons for your banning and use them to change your modus operandi, then your return probably won't amount to much. In fact, it may not have a ghost of a chance.

Good luck.

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-30, 03:51 PM
I have been looking at this forum for the past couple of days since I havent been able to post and have found time and time again that posters that start debatable topics are banned.

But is the reason that they are banned because they started "debatable topics"? No...the answer is that they were banned because they couldn't follow the rules of this board...

There are a number of "alternative thinkers" who post here. If your statement were true, then they all should have been banned by now...but they haven't (of course) because they have chosen to follow the rules and not "fly off the handle" when someone disagrees with them/asks for evidence.

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-30, 03:57 PM
The article that I posted was actually hand typed by myself and appeared in an edition of a spiritualist magazine. How can I link to that if it does not appear on the web?
The proper way to use the article since it's not on the net would be to obtain, in writing, permission from the copyright holder to post it here, then when posting include a clear statement on who owns the copyright and that it's used with permission. And ask the moderators first.

The rules about posting copyrighted material is here as protection for all of us, since copyright infringement is illegal and may get both the poster and the owners of the forum in trouble.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-30, 05:06 PM
But is the reason that they are banned because they started "debatable topics"? No...the answer is that they were banned because they couldn't follow the rules of this board...

There are a number of "alternative thinkers" who post here. If your statement were true, then they all should have been banned by now...but they haven't (of course) because they have chosen to follow the rules and not "fly off the handle" when someone disagrees with them/asks for evidence.

No Im sorry but your incorrect. Let me point to an example a couple of days ago where I was told off for using vulgar language. Now lets ask why a regular poster on this board who was also involved in that topic not banned for saying B******s?

For anyone who can see the light of day it is obvious that its one rule for the conspiracists and another rule for the little club of mainstays on this board.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-30, 05:08 PM
The proper way to use the article since it's not on the net would be to obtain, in writing, permission from the copyright holder to post it here, then when posting include a clear statement on who owns the copyright and that it's used with permission. And ask the moderators first.

The rules about posting copyrighted material is here as protection for all of us, since copyright infringement is illegal and may get both the poster and the owners of the forum in trouble.

So why dont we see people asking NASAs permission every time an article is copy and pasted here or their photographs used?

That is just a feeble excuse to stop visitors to this site presenting a valid argument because they cannot quote evidence. And the other side of the coin would be that you would ban that person anyway because by the time they had acquired permission to use the material he would be banned for taking too much time to answer the questions asked as happened in the case of my friend Andy Lloyd.

Hugh Jass
2005-Dec-30, 05:20 PM
RTFR!

Moonman er rock, read the rules... really. There are good ways and bad ways to get information linked and quoted. Asking general questions about it will allow you to piece the info together, but going right to the source is usually the best solution, I realize you have some kind of aversion to the idea but once again... read the rules.

There are some very good examples of folks with off the wall ideas who do not get banned, it is all in the presentation. The best one off the top of my head is Dennis in the expanding earth thread down in general science. There is plenty of debate and passion about the subject, but it is very under control, and he has been able to both answer questions and provide evidence for his argument when asked for. Its possible to do, give it a try.

[EDIT] sorry against the mainstream not general science, here (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=5728) The last 1/2 dozen pages or so.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-30, 05:26 PM
You wanted scientific evidence of the existence of ghosts. I sat down for half an hour and typed out an article from a magazine which perfectly illustrated how a scientist placed a medium into a cabinet and a ghost appear. The ghost under bright lights would basically melt away in front of the audience in the room. Pieces of material were cut from her dress and they would dissolve on the spot.

Unfortunately, theres your evidence but I cannot quote the original with all facts.

censorship!

R.A.F.
2005-Dec-30, 05:48 PM
censorship!

I see that your "time out" from the board has not changed your attitude.

Just an observation...

Wolverine
2005-Dec-30, 06:07 PM
So why dont we see people asking NASAs permission every time an article is copy and pasted here or their photographs used?

NASA press releases and photographs are public domain, not copyrighted, and can be freely reproduced unless explicitly stated otherwise.


That is just a feeble excuse to stop visitors to this site presenting a valid argument because they cannot quote evidence. And the other side of the coin would be that you would ban that person anyway because by the time they had acquired permission to use the material he would be banned for taking too much time to answer the questions asked as happened in the case of my friend Andy Lloyd.

You're grossly incorrect. Again.

Wolverine
2005-Dec-30, 06:09 PM
censorship!

Wrong.

Wolverine
2005-Dec-30, 06:18 PM
No Im sorry but your incorrect. Let me point to an example a couple of days ago where I was told off for using vulgar language. Now lets ask why a regular poster on this board who was also involved in that topic not banned for saying B******s?

Where? I'll look now.


For anyone who can see the light of day it is obvious that its one rule for the conspiracists and another rule for the little club of mainstays on this board.

Your assertion is incorrect. Review the Banned Posters Log and you can see how evenly the rules are enforced here.

The Bad Astronomer
2005-Dec-30, 06:26 PM
Moonrock, I will be as painfully clear as I can.

We do allow questions here; in fact, we encourage them.

We do not encourage illegal behavior, however. Hand typing, cutting-and-pasting, or any way of putting copyrighted material into this forum is illegal. As in, against the law. That's why we have a specific rule against it.

As R.A.F. pointed out, we have many posters here who constantly fly against the mainstream -- and they are appreciated. They can stay because they do so within the rules. We have had many posters here who have defended the mainstream, and who were not allowed to stay because they did not work within the rules.

Therefore your argument is incorrect.

If someone swears on this board, then if it is seen action is taken. Who is that person to whom you referred above? If they indeed used bad language then we will take care of it.

Your last three posts are skirting the edge here. I was clear before, and I'm being more clear now: I will not give you another chance. Read the rules again, and let them sink in.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-30, 07:07 PM
As with any other society, there are published rules. There are also rules for decorum. Break the rules and society will shun you. This applies to swearing as well as copyight violations and murder.

If you don't have written permission to reproduce a work, you can either direct us to the publication and article, or buy us all copies. That's not just the rules of this board, that's the law of the land.


This board is obviously set up to ask questions on conspiracy theories.

I've heard some pretty silly assertions before, and this is a good one. Wrong, though. Without reading the mind of the board owners, I would state that this board was set up to discuss science, particularly astronomy. That there are areas where members may discuss other things and have friendly conversations in no way detracts from the board's main purpose.

I think I can say with utmost confidence that this board was not created to provide anybody a soapbox from which to proseletyze unchallenged. If The Bad Astronomer himself came in and started spouting personal attacks he'd get warned and banned (and, probably hospitalized, since that would be a very strong indication that something was wrong with him)

Caveat: I am not a moderator, nor am I even a long term user of this board.

ToSeek
2005-Dec-30, 07:10 PM
Where? I'll look now.

Moonrock is complaining about this post (http://64.207.216.12/showthread.php?p=635057&highlight=********#post635057) which I will agree probably deserves a warning. If it didn't get one, it's because the word is pretty much meaningless to us Americans, though apparently it's rather vulgar in Britain.

Wolverine
2005-Dec-30, 07:57 PM
Ah, thanks. I hadn't seen that.

The Bad Astronomer
2005-Dec-30, 08:56 PM
FWIW, I just added that word to the censored word list.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-31, 12:09 AM
I did mention it in a reply but it seems the moderators missed it. It means testicles.

The last thing Ill say on this matter is that there are plenty of articles copied and pasted in this forum, which are worse examples than I was banned for and yet they are still there? I specifically refer to the images and articles posted by Phunk.

Archer17
2005-Dec-31, 12:22 AM
This may prove useful as well as funny.

The next time someone shows up making outrageous, unsupported claims, we'll just refer them to Archer17's UNCLE FRED.

Wonder if Archer would object to the BAUT informally adopting his wonderful "uncle"? http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/4879/iconbiggrin1kg.gifNot at all and I don't think there's a ghost of a chance he'd mind either. ;)

paulie jay
2005-Dec-31, 04:38 AM
Moonrock, when I asked for evidence (that is, the name of a real case where a medium has solved the case for the police) there was no need to spend 30 minutes typing up an irrelevant article. All you had to do was give the name of the case. Reproducing an article you wrote yourself does not constitute evidence! It's just another anecdote.

Evidence needs to be INDEPENDANT!

Moonrock
2005-Dec-31, 09:11 PM
No, I typed up the article from a spiritualist magazine, I am not the original author.

Wolverine
2005-Dec-31, 10:40 PM
The last thing Ill say on this matter is that there are plenty of articles copied and pasted in this forum, which are worse examples than I was banned for and yet they are still there? I specifically refer to the images and articles posted by Phunk.

Where? Please provide direct links to the instances or posts you mention. If a copyright violation has taken place, the forum staff will address it accordingly.

Moonrock
2005-Dec-31, 11:00 PM
Check out pages 17,18 and 20 of the WTC Demoliton Evidence thread. Theres a couple of posters there who have obviously copied and pasted articles/pictures.

Wolverine
2005-Dec-31, 11:16 PM
Check out pages 17,18 and 20 of the WTC Demoliton Evidence thread. Theres a couple of posters there who have obviously copied and pasted articles/pictures.

Moonrock, I'll need you to be specific - please link me directly to the post or posts you have concerns about. Thread display settings vary from one user to the next. Mine are set to the maximum per page, and as a result the thread is only 17 pages long on my screen.

You can click on the post numbers at the upper-right hand side then copy & paste the post URL into the message box.

SolusLupus
2005-Dec-31, 11:22 PM
You can also do a "report post". Remember that.

paulie jay
2006-Jan-01, 03:47 AM
No, I typed up the article from a spiritualist magazine, I am not the original author.
Ok then, my bad. I didn't get a chance to see the article before it was removed. Did it mention a specific police case that I could check out?

Don't forget, there's nothing wrong with paraphrasing an article in your own words, so long as you provide the magazine name and issue so that the content can be verified :)

Gillianren
2006-Jan-01, 03:56 AM
In fact, there's nothing wrong with posting a small section of something verbatim. It's when you post a whole article verbatim that copyright laws start coming into effect.

Moonrock
2006-Jan-01, 11:40 AM
http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=637952&postcount=582

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=637185&postcount=533

Maksutov
2006-Jan-01, 01:02 PM
M,

Are you going to spend the rest of your time on the BAUT digging up examples of where you thought BB rules were violated but not prosecuted?

Or are you going to address the various questions put to you regarding your failure to provide any evidence for your claims?

snarkophilus
2006-Jan-01, 03:51 PM
I'm not really a scientist, and I've never seen a ghost, but I am mighty skeptical about your anticdote and its claims of accurate cold reading.

There was an Isaac Asimov mystery story (I think part of the Black Widowers series) where that was the answer! The guy told an increasingly improbable story about psychics, and at the end, it turned out that he'd just been making it up as a little joke. Fortunately for all involved, the butler was (as ever) too smart to be fooled....

Anyway, I know a fair bit of magic (the mundane kind, not the fantasy stuff), and I can't help but chuckle when my friends tell me they can see my aura (whatever that is -- apparently I glow gold or something) or when they bring friends to relate stories of spirits hurling objects out of their kitchen cupboards. Some of them think I have special powers, when it's really just sleight of hand and simple parlour tricks, and although I try my best to disabuse them of the notion, people will believe exactly what they want to believe. I've done cold readings on people before (and on pencils, pieces of fruit, and floppy disks), and the truth is that no matter how tenuous the connections you draw, your audience will latch on to them, because they want to believe. Honestly, as irritating as it can be in normal life, when I'm out somewhere doing magic, it's better that way.

A friend of mine knows someone who has memories of having been kidnapped by aliens. However, despite having those memories, he doesn't believe it really happened. I guess he knows enough about how memories can be falsely created not to trust his own brain....

Sam5
2006-Jan-01, 04:09 PM
I think that scientists probably see visual illusions, occasionally, just like everyone else does. But I think that scientists and most other people realize they are some kinds of visual illusions and are not “supernatural ghosts” at all.

I think that people who are prone to experience the phenomenon known as “pareidolia” will mistake the illusions as “supernatural ghosts”. Illusions seen in the sky are often thought by pareidoliaists to be UFOs and “spacecraft from other planets”. Illusions seen in pictures of the moon and Mars are often thought to be “monuments” rather than accidental collections of rocks and mountains.

Kristophe
2006-Jan-01, 11:36 PM
A friend of mine knows someone who has memories of having been kidnapped by aliens. However, despite having those memories, he doesn't believe it really happened. I guess he knows enough about how memories can be falsely created not to trust his own brain....

I often have "memories" that I realize were from dreams. I very often don't remember my dreams (I often say "I don't dream", and get called on it every time -- it's amazing how even the most interpretive of people become hardcore literalists when I speak those words), but those that I do remember are always amazingly vivid.

If I were to believe uncritically every memory I've ever had, I would have to accept that I was boiled alive by garden gnomes when I was 13. I wonder how long I could go on under the weight of that paradox?

SolusLupus
2006-Jan-02, 02:22 AM
I often have "memories" that I realize were from dreams. I very often don't remember my dreams (I often say "I don't dream", and get called on it every time -- it's amazing how even the most interpretive of people become hardcore literalists when I speak those words), but those that I do remember are always amazingly vivid.

If I were to believe uncritically every memory I've ever had, I would have to accept that I was boiled alive by garden gnomes when I was 13. I wonder how long I could go on under the weight of that paradox?

I once had a dream where my fingers were cut off at the age of 8 to 10, and they all grew back in a few moments.

Edited to clarify: I had the dream when I was 8 to 10.

And, it's more or less a "memory" to me rather than a dream. For a long time, it FELT like it "really happened".

Candy
2006-Jan-02, 02:26 AM
I once had a dream where my fingers were cut off at the age of 8 to 10, and they all grew back in a few moments.
I once had a dream that I cut your fingers off, and they didn't grow back. You were typing with your nose. :liar: :lol:

Wolverine
2006-Jan-02, 10:16 AM
http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=637952&postcount=582

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=637185&postcount=533

Thank you. The first post contained one image indicating it was copyrighted, from the CBS News archives. I converted the embedded image to URL.

I have submitted a query to phunk about the others.

Where are the reproduced articles you had concerns about?

jkmccrann
2006-Jan-03, 03:07 PM
The one thing I've noticed about ghosts is that as I've advanced in years, the number of times I've thought, `Oh, was that a ghost I just saw?' has dropped to 0, where its been since I was about 13/14.

Interesting how though I thought I may have seen a ghost a few times before then, that since around that time not once has that thought struck me, even after hearing strange bumps in the night. Thankyou possums. I can definitely see a strong correlation there between knowledge and ghosts.

Theoretician
2006-Jan-03, 05:01 PM
I'm a final year masters degree student in theoretical physics. I have seen and heard nothing that cannot be described with conventional science. I believe that just about everything reported as strange is caused by the person's own perception of an entirely reasonable situation.

However, I rule nothing out completely. The Universe seems like a strange place sometimes.

Moonrock
2006-Jan-04, 04:23 PM
The one thing I've noticed about ghosts is that as I've advanced in years, the number of times I've thought, `Oh, was that a ghost I just saw?' has dropped to 0, where its been since I was about 13/14.

Interesting how though I thought I may have seen a ghost a few times before then, that since around that time not once has that thought struck me, even after hearing strange bumps in the night. Thankyou possums. I can definitely see a strong correlation there between knowledge and ghosts.

The reason for that is probably because your more subsceptible to picking up paranormal phenomenon when you are young. Most poltergeist activity seem to manifest around teenagers going through puberty.

I had an interesting conversation for around 3 hours last night with a couple who had travelled from Devon to my home town (which is around 200 miles I guess from where they live). The couple had got in touch with myself and the other guys who I run a website with as they were coming to our town to do a treasure hunt, the girlfriend posted a small orange container with a note in it and told my friend to find a place for it in the town and to write down clues so that her boyfriend could find it. Myself and my brother picked up our friend, but beforehand my brother (a medium) made a prediction as to where it would be hidden and told me to write it down. His prediction said that the item would be placed near 3 faces, and that one of the faces would have hair similar to Lisa Simpson out of The Simpsons. My friend planted the container on a stone seat that consisted of many faces of moon gods and gargoyles in a place called Greyfriars which is a very ancient area of our city. It didnt dawn on me until later, when we ventured back to that area, as the couple came to try and find it, that the '3 faces' prediction was absolutely right, because my friend had placed the container in the mouth of one of the faces, and I hadnt realised at the time that there only 3 faces on that part of the seat and that one of them was a sort of sun character with 'hair like Lisa Simpson'. Spooky eh?

Now over the night a few interesting occurances happened. Ill start with the end of the evening when this couple were looking for the item that my friend hid. As I said, they live at least 200 miles away and she had never been to our town before (her boyfriend had a few years previously). We got to a very close distance to Greyfriars and her boyfriend decided that he had to go back and look at a street map because he had to try and find out where Greyfriars was (my friend had given him this clue on a sheet of paper). Anyway, what was interesting, was that his girlfriend all of a sudden started running down an alley - she had been drawn to the area and youve guessed it, it was exactly the spot where we planted the capsule. She even found the item 5 minutes before her boyfriend, without the aid of the clues that he had in his hand!

Earlier in the night, during a cosy chat down the pub, she related how she had been subjected to some very strange experiences that started after she meddled with a ouija board many years ago. She now finds that she has some type of indian spirit guide that reaches her through dreams. This spirit guide is so strong that sometimes she goes into a trance state, at which point her boyfriend has asked the guide questions. The boyfriend would try and research the information and most of it was really obscure stuff from way back, concerning indian rituals, but some of it was quite recent.

She gets messages in her dreams and then writes them down when she awakes. She has written down some very obscure indian names, some properly spelled even though they are 20 letters long, and some really strange stuff that you wouldnt even think of looking up on the internet. There were many strange stories that they related to us, one of which was that she got the name Ginette Tate who is a very famous unsolved murder victim over here in the UK from the 1970s, her body has never been found. This woman got the image of wells and 4 numbers. Her boyfriend realised that the numbers she was relating to were probably grid references. So he got hold of an ordinance survey map and started looking. The numbers she got for the area started with SX, which he thought was odd because the grid reference in the area was SY. The other numbers in the reference however were correct. They spent a day going around the areas of where the wells were and found some and not others, because according to the map they were in the middle of marsh areas or places that were unaccessable. The most interesting thing though is that she suddenly started getting information about a quote from Revelations in the Bible (they did say which chapter it was but I forget now) and the name Hart? At one of the spots where a well was found there was an archway and it had the exact Revelations reference to what she claimed.

Her boyfriend did a very thorough search on the internet and finally (after about the 50th website) came across a person whos surname was Hart who had done research into the wells of England. He managed to track down a list that this guy did, which held around 150 wells. The 4 wells that his girlfriend had seen in her dream turned out to be the very last 4 wells on the list - and the most interesting thing.... they were also referenced wrongly as SX instead of SY?

Theyve had some very weird stuff happening at their flat, like chairs appearing on beds and things going missing only to appear up in an attic (where a previous owner had hung himself). They are so worried that they have finally managed to sell the flat and will be moving out soon. Strange mists have been seen and many items go missing for weeks at a time only to appear in the attic in a drawer?

In many of her dreams she gets book titles, which she finds are real books when she searches for them. In fact that is how she met her boyfriend, he owns a paranormal bookshop. She said that in her dreams she sees the book and goes to hold it but it then just bursts into flames?

One of the most interesting stories though was when she said she got the name Anthony Dodd and a set of street names and directions. A couple of months later she was looking through a book and noticed that a guy called 'Tony Dodd' was appearing at a paranormal meeting up in Scotland, talking about animal mutilations. She went to the conference and told Mr Dodd about her dreams and explained the names and directions. The guy was Gobsmacked, she had described exactly how to get to his house!

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-04, 04:54 PM
Hmmm...so were any of the "participants" in your "stories" scientists???

I thought that was what this thread was "about"...

Moonrock, anecdotal "stories" are not evidence...

Moonrock
2006-Jan-04, 05:04 PM
Yes, one was a chemist with first class honours- satisfied?

Hugh Jass
2006-Jan-04, 05:59 PM
There were many strange stories that they related to us, one of which was that she got the name Ginette Tate who is a very famous unsolved murder victim over here in the UK from the 1970s, her body has never been found.

Did I miss the conclusion to this one? Does this tie into the wells, was Ginette Tate found in this particular well with the Revelations quote? or did she just dream about the name and that is evidence enough of psychic ability?

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-04, 06:28 PM
Yes, one was a chemist with first class honours- satisfied?

Not really...it's still an anecdote, a story without any evidence. As such it proves nothing.

Gillianren
2006-Jan-04, 08:11 PM
I've got an anecdote, too. It comes from the History Channel special about Houdini that I watched the other night.

It seems that Houdini was perfectly aware that huge numbers of the spiritualists of his day were frauds, given that they used tricks he himself used for some of his illusions and escapes. (Funny, that. Actually, there's a very good description of fradulent spiritualists in Strong Poison, by Dorothy L. Sayers.) He also received communications from spiritualists trying to connect him with the spirit of his dead mother. One had a cross on it, an unlikely message from the wife of a rabbi.

So anyway. One of Houdini's targets was spiritualist churches. He did quite a study on them, apparently, though I don't have most of the details handy. Of course, he himself couldn't go to these spiritualist churches, because they'd recognize him in an instant, so he sent a woman who worked for him, and lo and behold, the woman became not merely a member but, as I understand it, ordained by quite a few of those churches.

Under the name of Mrs. F. Raud.

While it is true that a seance is held every year on the day of Houdini's death in an attempt to contact him, it is done so precisely because he did not believe it was possible to return from the dead. His wife was under very strict instructions not to allow any "spiritualist" to conduct the seance. She was to conduct it herself. As a further failsafe, ten words from a letter to Houdini by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle were chosen as the proof that it really was the spirit of Houdini. No seance has ever been successful.

pghnative
2006-Jan-04, 08:37 PM
Moonrock
Just curious, but why don't you use your powers to predict lottery numbers? Or maybe you could contact the ghost of Jimmy Hoffa --- find out where his body is buried, that'd be pretty cool.

Or maybe contact Amelia Earhardt -- you'd be pretty famous if you could definitively find her plane. If that doesn't work, there's always D.B. Cooper --- find out if he survived the parachute landing, and where the money is.

You see, what I don't understand is why spiritualists don't use their powers for something useful. They're always "revealing" that person A's father was named Pete, that he always loved his wife and that he's sorry. They never reveal the murderer's name, or where a robber hid the money, or whether anyone was shooting from the grassy knoll.

edited to correct spelling

SolusLupus
2006-Jan-04, 08:39 PM
Amelia Earhart is dancing the hula hula with Cthulhu and Godzilla. In the Bermuda Triangle.

Erm, or so Tom Smith tells me.

But y'see, I can come up with a perfectly "logical" reason that they don't predict lottery numbers: They hear what the ghosts want to tell them, and they can't just turn their ability "on" or "off" as they please. It's the perfect greased pig explanation.

SeanF
2006-Jan-04, 08:45 PM
No seance has ever been successful.
Of course not. I certainly hope, that if I claimed something was impossible, you wouldn't accept my failure to do it as any sort of evidence that I was right.

:)

paulie jay
2006-Jan-04, 09:54 PM
Moonrock
Just curious, but why don't you use your powers to predict lottery numbers? Yeah, I've often wondered this - why no medium will ever come out with the numbers to next week's Lotto draw - just for yuks. The standard answer is that psychics are so pure of heart that they refuse to use their gifts in this way for financial profit. Which usually leads me to ask why they charge people for consultations...:rolleyes:

Candy
2006-Jan-04, 10:05 PM
Yeah, I've often wondered this - why no medium will ever come out with the numbers to next week's Lotto draw - just for yuks. The standard answer is that psychics are so pure of heart that they refuse to use their gifts in this way for financial profit. Which usually leads me to ask why they charge people for consultations...:rolleyes:
:lol: That's a great post!

William_Thompson
2006-Jan-05, 12:30 AM
No seance has ever been successful.

Pro-spirtualists would put an absurd "...yet" at the end of that last sentance.

Just as the pro-ETI cult would say: (contrary to Fermi's Observation) "No contact has every been made...YET"

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 12:36 AM
Add this, Gillianren has been wrong with her knowledge. No one ever questions her direction, though, which confuses me.
I STEP UP AND CHALLENGE GILLIANREN TO HER POSTS (PLEASE PROVIDE LINKS) when answering questions.

snarkophilus
2006-Jan-05, 12:36 AM
Yeah, I've often wondered this - why no medium will ever come out with the numbers to next week's Lotto draw - just for yuks. The standard answer is that psychics are so pure of heart that they refuse to use their gifts in this way for financial profit. Which usually leads me to ask why they charge people for consultations...:rolleyes:

There's a Roald Dahl book about this, sort of. The main character manages to learn to see through cards, so he can always win at blackjack (or poker or whatever he played... I haven't read the book in fifteen years or so). But when he tries to use his power for his own personal gain, he's completely impotent. He can't see the cards. He only gets the power back once he determines that he'll only use his knowledge for good.

It's as likely an explanation as any, I suppose. :)

HenrikOlsen
2006-Jan-05, 12:50 AM
Add this, Gillianren has been wrong with her knowledge. No one ever questions her direction, though, which confuses me.
I STEP UP AND CHALLENGE GILLIANREN TO HER POSTS (PLEASE PROVIDE LINKS) when answering questions.
Unfortunately, you're requesting a proof for a negative which is impossible.
At least if I figured out which post you're referring to.

Gillianren
2006-Jan-05, 12:55 AM
Add this, Gillianren has been wrong with her knowledge. No one ever questions her direction, though, which confuses me.
I STEP UP AND CHALLENGE GILLIANREN TO HER POSTS (PLEASE PROVIDE LINKS) when answering questions.

I stated very clearly in that post that the information came from a History Channel special. (It had Teller on it in silhouette, on account of he was talking.) What's more, very little of my knowledge comes from the internet; it comes from (primarily) books. I can give you book titles, but you'd have to do a wee bit more work in order to find the information than just click on something.

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 12:58 AM
Unfortunately, you're requesting a proof for a negative which is impossible.
At least if I figured out which post you're referring to.
I've only noticed this recently. I first noticed it in the BAUT Frapp Thread many moons ago. I've been watching since then, and I'm quite amazed at my discoveries. That's why I am speaking up. I know, I will get the black banner for this action. :shifty:

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 01:01 AM
I stated very clearly in that post that the information came from a History Channel special. (It had Teller on it in silhouette, on account of he was talking.) What's more, very little of my knowledge comes from the internet; it comes from (primarily) books. I can give you book titles, but you'd have to do a wee bit more work in order to find the information than just click on something.
Case in point. You are rattling off information from your head without checking facts.

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 01:04 AM
I've been watching you via BAUT. "I follow those I eventually will lead". Sorry, I had to use my old slogan.

SolusLupus
2006-Jan-05, 01:07 AM
Pro-spirtualists would put an absurd "...yet" at the end of that last sentance.

Just as the pro-ETI cult would say: (contrary to Fermi's Observation) "No contact has every been made...YET"

Wow, nice way of sneaking that in there. This thread is not about ETI. This thread is not about SETI. This thread is not about contact with ETI. This thread has nothing to do with ETI at all. It has to with very terrestrial, but very unnatural, phenomena that supposedly exists.

Please do not try to derail a thread to push an agenda.

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 01:09 AM
It's derailed!

Candy
2006-Jan-05, 01:20 AM
Unsubscribing! If you wish to talk about this subject, please send me a PM.

Gillianren
2006-Jan-05, 01:47 AM
Case in point. You are rattling off information from your head without checking facts.

She says she's gone, but I'd like to know how, exactly, she knew I wasn't checking facts. Because I don't have a website to link to? That's true. However, I'm not sure why I'd need one to state what I saw on TV two days ago.

The Bad Astronomer
2006-Jan-05, 01:50 AM
Just as the pro-ETI cult would say: (contrary to Fermi's Observation) "No contact has every been made...YET"


Please do not hijack this thread.

Also folks, I can see this may become personal quickly. Please calm down.

paulie jay
2006-Jan-05, 04:06 AM
There's a Roald Dahl book about this, sort of. The main character manages to learn to see through cards, so he can always win at blackjack (or poker or whatever he played... I haven't read the book in fifteen years or so). But when he tries to use his power for his own personal gain, he's completely impotent. He can't see the cards. He only gets the power back once he determines that he'll only use his knowledge for good.

It's as likely an explanation as any, I suppose. :)
A good idea, but still doesn't explain why their powers work when they charge a fee for consultations though :lol:

Gillianren
2006-Jan-05, 04:57 AM
Of course not. I certainly hope, that if I claimed something was impossible, you wouldn't accept my failure to do it as any sort of evidence that I was right.

:)

I think there has been confusion about what I meant. No seance to contact Houdini, the person about whom I was talking, has met the tests that Houdini himself established for them before death.

LurchGS
2006-Jan-05, 05:56 AM
Amelia Earhart is dancing the hula hula with Cthulhu and Godzilla. In the Bermuda Triangle.

Erm, or so Tom Smith tells me.



Not hijacking the thread - just borrowing it for a quick trip to Correctionland

Earhart wasn't lost in the triangle - but somewhere over the pacific. (if she DID end up in the triangle, her piloting skills were worse than usual)


We now return you to your regularly scheduled slugfes... er,... thread

SolusLupus
2006-Jan-05, 05:58 AM
Not hijacking the thread - just borrowing it for a quick trip to Correctionland

Earhart wasn't lost in the triangle - but somewhere over the pacific. (if she DID end up in the triangle, her piloting skills were worse than usual)


We now return you to your regularly scheduled slugfes... er,... thread

I never said she did. She just ended up in the Bermuda Triangle. I don't know how. Maybe she took a boat there. ;) 'sides, it makes the song "Bermuda Triangle" by Tom Smith that much funnier.

LurchGS
2006-Jan-05, 06:03 AM
I never said she did. She just ended up in the Bermuda Triangle. I don't know how. Maybe she took a boat there. ;) 'sides, it makes the song "Bermuda Triangle" by Tom Smith that much funnier.


ok.. I'll take your word for it (she'd be the only missing person who traveled TO the triangle after vanishing).

Though.. come to think of it.. given her adequate skills as a pilot, I suppose it IS possible she got lost and ended up there anyway. Would explain why nobody's found any sign of her in all those empty, barren, featureless miles of the Pacific ocean ;)

Hugh Jass
2006-Jan-05, 06:05 AM
I wonder if that's where all my socks and sunglasses have ended up?

LurchGS
2006-Jan-05, 06:07 AM
nope - they're at my house.

[whisper] have you ever considered odor-eaters? [/whipser]

Maksutov
2006-Jan-05, 07:08 AM
I never said she did. She just ended up in the Bermuda Triangle. I don't know how. Maybe she took a boat there. ;) 'sides, it makes the song "Bermuda Triangle" by Tom Smith that much funnier.It's called "poetic license", or as with the case of some lyricists, "poetic license to kill."

Back to the main schlagfest, uh, topic.

Of course scientists see ghosts. Scientists see UFOs. Scientists see holy images on taco shells.

The difference is the scientist doesn't stop at that point and say "I can't figure this out, so therefore it's supernatural." The scientist doesn't say, "Well this is new to me so I'll jump to a fully-unsupported conclusion based on incomplete data, shaky assumptions, and my gut instincts." The scientist definitely doesn't say, "This is something science will never figure out."

Instead the scientist dives into the hard of work of figuring out exactly what the currently unexplained phenomenon is. With the taco shell, ghosts, and UFOs, the process is pretty quick and for the most part, the work has already been done. With such things as unified forces, dark matter and energy, and the origin(s) of the Universe, it takes considerably more time and work, and lots of innovation.

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 02:16 PM
Not really...it's still an anecdote, a story without any evidence. As such it proves nothing.

Hmmm, couldnt we say that about anything that we didnt see with our own eyes? I dont know, theres no pleasing some people.


While it is true that a seance is held every year on the day of Houdini's death in an attempt to contact him, it is done so precisely because he did not believe it was possible to return from the dead. His wife was under very strict instructions not to allow any "spiritualist" to conduct the seance. She was to conduct it herself. As a further failsafe, ten words from a letter to Houdini by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle were chosen as the proof that it really was the spirit of Houdini. No seance has ever been successful.

If a spiritualist or medium was not allowed to run the séance then how do you suggest that the message could be received? I could also make such claims and say that I want a scientific investigation into the Apollo hoax, as long as no scientists are involved. Doh!


Moonrock
Just curious, but why don't you use your powers to predict lottery numbers? Or maybe you could contact the ghost of Jimmy Hoffa --- find out where his body is buried, that'd be pretty cool.

Or maybe contact Amelia Earhardt -- you'd be pretty famous if you could definitively find her plane. If that doesn't work, there's always D.B. Cooper --- find out if he survived the parachute landing, and where the money is.

You see, what I don't understand is why spiritualists don't use their powers for something useful. They're always "revealing" that person A's father was named Pete, that he always loved his wife and that he's sorry. They never reveal the murderer's name, or where a robber hid the money, or whether anyone was shooting from the grassy knoll.

edited to correct spelling

You misunderstand the ability of mediumship. A medium CANNOT ask for specific people to make contact. It’s the spirit who decides to contact the medium, not the other way around. And the gift of mediumship is given as a gift, it is not there to make money – money has no meaning to the spirit world so why should they give lottery numbers? And before you come back and say ‘if mediumship isn’t to make money, why are so many doing it on the TV’, my answer is that those people are not what I class as a true medium.

My brother who attends sprititualist church twice a week related to me how his teacher a couple of weeks ago even told a family that she could smell the aftershave of their dead son and named the brand. Hardly a case of cold reading there? The big problem you see is that your all 'assuming' that all mediums work like the ones you see on TV. They do not.

If you want real proof go down your local spiritualist church, in fact I challenge anyone here to do so. You will soon change your narrowmindedness.

For all your information, a proper medium DOES NOT charge for readings.

And finally, I can link to an article that I tried to post here last week which shows that a well qualified scientist carried out scientific study into this phenomenon with many scientists as witnesses. You may be shocked by the results.

http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/books/fodor/chapter5.htm

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 02:45 PM
For all your information, a proper medium DOES NOT charge for readings.

Why not?

HenrikOlsen
2006-Jan-05, 02:52 PM
For all your information, a proper medium DOES NOT charge for readings.
This is one of those nice self fulfilling statements that is so very easy to make.
Any counterexample is easily dismissed by "that one is not a proper medium"

Hamlet
2006-Jan-05, 02:59 PM
This is one of those nice self fulfilling statements that is so very easy to make.
Any counterexample is easily dismissed by "that one is not a proper medium"

Ah Yes. Another variant of the old No True Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman) fallacy.

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 03:04 PM
Lets put it another way. Of all the mediums that I know of who travel far and wide to distances of 100 miles or more, none of them get paid for the readings, they claim petrol money obviously which comes from church donations and that is all.

Also the Spiritualist church gives donations to many charities around the World. £72,331 has been raised in the past 10 years for good causes.

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 03:22 PM
That doesn't answer the question.

Why not?

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 03:50 PM
Why do you think they should charge?

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 04:02 PM
Oh no you don't. You don't answer a question by asking another. Rather, you don't avoid answering a question by trying to turn it around. I'll answer your question when you answer mine.

Now, why not?

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 04:06 PM
If your asking why 'proper' mediums dont charge its because it is against the beliefs of the National Spiritualist Church. Also because most genuine mediums believe that mediumship should be used to help others, not for their own gain.

I have nothing to hide. I was just wondering why you think they should charge?

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-05, 04:13 PM
I dont know, theres no pleasing some people.

That's a mischaracterization...I would be very pleased if you would present some actual evidence to back up your claims...you have not done so...


Also the Spiritualist church gives donations to many charities around the World.

How is that relevent to this discussion??

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 04:20 PM
Originally Posted by Moonrock
I dont know, theres no pleasing some people.


That's a mischaracterization...I would be very pleased if you would present some actual evidence to back up your claims...you have not done so...

If you even bothered to read my posts properly you could have gone and read the link I just posted. It gives you plenty of evidence of a very well known scientist who studied an apparition and concluded that such things exist,,, Now off you go and then come back and well debate it.

Quote=Moonrock:
Also the Spiritualist church gives donations to many charities around the World.


How is that relevent to this discussion??

Its just an example that the popular held belief on this board that all mediums are just charlatans in it for the money is completely wrong.

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 04:22 PM
If your asking why 'proper' mediums dont charge its because it is against the beliefs of the National Spiritualist Church.

Fair enough, though I point out that the Catholic Church doesn't believe in permarital sex. Doesn't seem to stop most Catholics. What the church says and what the members do are often very different.


Also because most genuine mediums believe that mediumship should be used to help others, not for their own gain.

Why? How do you know this? Do you know most "genuine" mediums personally?


I have nothing to hide.
Then you should be more forthcoming with your answers.


I was just wondering why you think they should charge?
I didn't say I think they should. I asked you why a "genuine" medium wouldn't.

That said, I see absolutely no reason why anyone with a specialized skill set shouldn't be allowed to use those skills to support themselves.

You seem to have decided that monetary exchange is some sort of moral filter. If someone is benifiting from their trade, they're somehow less entitled to their skills.

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-05, 04:23 PM
Also because most genuine mediums believe that mediumship should be used to help others, not for their own gain.

If their "powers" were actually real, then the way they could help others the "most" would be in identifying murderers. Since there has never been an objective study demonstrating that any crime has been solved by psychic means, then I have a lot of trouble believing in genuine mediums.

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 04:24 PM
Its just an example that the popular held belief on this board that all mediums are just charlatans in it for the money is completely wrong.

That's right. Because real mediums are morally superior beings.


Also, I'll just throw this in here:
Regarding your linked article... You've been told how many times that anticdotes aren't evidence? And let's not even get started on the appeal to authority.

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 04:28 PM
You seem to have decided that monetary exchange is some sort of moral filter. If someone is benifiting from their trade, they're somehow less entitled to their skills.

Your beliefs are not held by many people both on this board and who I have spoken to in the past. Most people believe that if your charging for mediumship then your probably just making it all up to make money. Its the same with the UFO subject. People will accuse you of making up things just for profit. Its the first line of attack for some people.

Anyway, as you brought up the Catholic church, I could state that even with normal churches there are ministers who appear on TV and ask for money (Billy Graham style) and those who just have thier little gathering in a small village that gather 'religiously' (pun intended) each week because of their beliefs.

Why should the Spiritualist church be any different?

Kristophe
2006-Jan-05, 04:30 PM
Anyway, as you brought up the Catholic church, I could state that even with normal churches there are ministers who appear on TV and ask for money (Billy Graham style) and those who just have thier little gathering in a small village that gather 'religiously' (pun intended) each week because of their beliefs.

Are you suggesting that the single largest religious organization on Earth is somehow abnormal, or in the minority?

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 04:43 PM
If their "powers" were actually real, then the way they could help others the "most" would be in identifying murderers. Since there has never been an objective study demonstrating that any crime has been solved by psychic means, then I have a lot of trouble believing in genuine mediums.

Well heres one for a start.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9368276/

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 04:45 PM
Are you suggesting that the single largest religious organization on Earth is somehow abnormal, or in the minority?

What Im saying is no matter what faith a person has, there will always be somebody trying to mislead that faiths followers and charging money to do so. But that does not mean that there are people in the same faith who are genuine.

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-05, 04:54 PM
If you even bothered to read my posts properly...

Careful...there is no need to make this personal...


...you could have gone and read the link I just posted. It gives you plenty of evidence of a very well known scientist who studied an apparition and concluded that such things exist,,, Now off you go and then come back and well debate it.

The fact that a scientists was able to fool himself in an experiment conducted over a hundred years ago does not impress me.


Its just an example that the popular held belief on this board that all mediums are just charlatans in it for the money is completely wrong.

"In it for the money" or not makes no difference to me. I'd just like to see any evidence that these "real mediums" communicate with the dead.


Well heres one for a start.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9368276/

Found by water is a standard medium answer, and the story you linked to proves nothing...except, perhaps that there are a lot of people capable of fooling themselfs.

pumpkinpie
2006-Jan-05, 04:55 PM
Well heres one for a start.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9368276/

According to the article,""That Chiara ended up in Lake Como, and not in Venice or who knows where, was already known: it was in fact the most likely hypothesis," said Massimo Polidoro, the head of a skeptics group called the committee for the control of paranormal affirmations."

It wasn't out of the blue that Busi, the purported psychic, led rescuers to that lake. The desceased woman lived near it. The article doesn't give any details about the extent of the local police search of the lake, if there ever was one at all. It is unfortunate that the police hadn't found her, but that doesn't prove that she would have only been found with Busi's help. Perhaps the rescuers she had help her simply did a more thorough job.

Another thing in the article makes me skeptical. Busi said she wouldn't report how the woman died, and that's something she only told the mother. But wouldn't that fact come out through the following police investigation--shouldn't there be one?

Maksutov
2006-Jan-05, 04:55 PM
This thread appears to have, once again, strayed far off topic, not only due to Moonrock's inability to provide direct answers to direct questions asked him, but also due to its having digressed into a purely religious discussion.

Answers based on objective evidence to the various questions raised would be quite refreshing.

Meanwhile, the descent into metaphysics and worse continues...

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-05, 05:03 PM
Thanks, pumpkinpie for that review...You covered all the points I would have, were I not so lazy. :)

R.A.F.
2006-Jan-05, 05:06 PM
...the descent into metaphysics and worse...

HUH???, are you telling me that there is something worse than metaphysics??

I'm scared...

Moonrock
2006-Jan-05, 05:11 PM
Well Maksutov, Spiritualism is a religion, so how am I off topic?

Im starting to get pretty board with the same old runaround that you guys constantly do on these boards. You ask for scientific evidence and I post it and you still find a way to not believe it.

I'd like to ask why the most likely hypothesis was that this persons body would end up in the lake? What evidence did they have to conclude that she would more than likely be found there?

You see, thats what I like about this board, we have 2 sides of the fence. If I claimed such an idea I would have everyone and their grandmother claiming that I had no evidence for my theory and yet you lot blatantly are claiming things that you 'think' must be the case and yet dont expect to provide any evidence to back up your claims.

Do you know what? Im not worried if you believe in mediumship or not. Its fine, you dont believe in it then thats ok. You dont have the ability to see ghosts, fine, but dont think that everyone is like you. Just go out in the street and see that everybody is different and then youll realise that just because you dont experience something does not make it improbable.

Do you know that a study was carried out a few years ago and it proved that people with an open mind were more likely to encounter such things as ghosts and UFOs than those who dismissed them.


The fact that a scientists was able to fool himself in an experiment conducted over a hundred years ago does not impress me.

Nah, your clutching at straws again. Go read it again and youll see that MANY scientists witness the apparition. Dont start discounting evidence just because you cant explain it. How do you suggest that this scientist picked up a piece of this ghosts dress which then vapourised? Come on Im itching to know your obvious superior knowledge.

The Bad Astronomer
2006-Jan-05, 05:18 PM
This thread has strayed off topic, gotten personal, and been mean-spirited (pun intended) for too long, even after I posted a warning. I am closing it.

People: go read the fourm rules again, right now. This sort of behavior (with religious discussion as well) will not be tolerated.