Do You Believe in Ghosts and Spirits?

[Seeker of Ka]

I don't believe in any ghost or spirit or whatever goes bump in the night, yet I find parapsychology interesting and intriguing nonetheless. If for anything, it's due to the fact that it explores an area of the unknown.

It actually would be great if there were beings that defy explanation through effective and ample confirmation to settle the issue, but the immense slew of fake yt vids and shows ultimately confirm that ghost, spirits, and demons simply don't exist. Even honest footage can't seem to stand up to any satisfactory conclusions so far.

That's not to say everyone that comes foreward about the paranormal is disingenuous, but there needs to be some type of methodology with ample evidence brought forth first.

Agreed, maybe we should make a thread discussing that?

 

[George-ananda]

the immense slew of fake yt vids and shows ultimately confirm that ghost, spirits, and demons simply don't exist.

Wait..how can fake videos show something doesn't exist? Anyway, my strong opinion is that ghostly phenomena exists and I think you are underestimating the quality of many of the people that work in the field plus the testimony of an incredible number of sober normal witnesses. By now I think ten times over that the chance that it all can be 'explained away' is nearly impossible to believe.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Wait..how can fake videos show something doesn't exist? Anyway, my strong opinion is that ghostly phenomena exists and I think you are underestimating the quality of many of the people that work in the field plus the testimony of an incredible number of sober normal witnesses. By now I think ten times over that the chance that it all can be 'explained away' is nearly impossible to believe.

My issue deals with the evasive nature by which those vids are made. Most can't be scrutinized and critiqued nor confirmed adequately enough to settle the issue once and for all. Big red flag for me.

I think there are a few folks who are genuine in some vids, but what's on the footage imo can be considered natural phenomina or unintended technically produced effects.

I'm sure however most uploads are dishonest parlor tricks entailing some amazing camara work that's still impressive to view.

I have yet to see anything worthwhile to date.


.

 

[Desert Snake]

My issue deals with the evasive nature by which those vids are made. Most can't be scrutinized and critiqued nor confirmed adequately enough to settle the issue once and for all. Big red flag for me.

I think there are a few folks who are genuine in some vids, but what's on the footage imo can be considered natural phenomina or unintended technically produced effects.

I'm sure however most uploads are dishonest parlor tricks entailing some amazing camara work that's still impressive to view.

I have yet to see anything worthwhile to date.


.

Forget vids. you just need to see a ghost for yourself.

then, the only question is, ''what is that''?
ie ghost demon etc

 

[George-ananda]

My issue deals with the evasive nature by which those vids are made. Most can't be scrutinized and critiqued nor confirmed adequately enough to settle the issue once and for all. Big red flag for me.

What could qualify as 'confirmed adequately'? We can get maybe 1 in 100 really analyzed and often inconclusively. Although I definitely believe in ghosts I don't think all vids/photos should be discounted or accepted. Many are a mystery,

I think there are a few folks who are genuine in some vids, but what's on the footage imo can be considered natural phenomina or unintended technically produced effects.

Of course they COULD be faked. With modern technology would skeptics ever accept a vid/photo as proof; No.

I have yet to see anything worthwhile to date.


.

I question how many you could have really seen and how you would know which are worthwhile. What would a worthwhile one look like?

I think ghosts exist for reasons beyond vids/photos but the serious people I believe do likely capture anomalous (ghostly) things on video but there is no way we can determine exactly what real phenomena should look like.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Forget vids. you just need to see a ghost for yourself.

then, the only question is, ''what is that''?
ie ghost demon etc

I've had growls in my cellar that I couldn't locate for awhile that peaked my imagination, but after awhile I noticed a pattern by which I could later trace back to old pipes a little time after running the shower, or emptying a large bucket of water after cleaning the floor.

Although I might think omg a ghost or demon or something once or twice, it inevitably leads to an explanation or plausibility where you end up chuckling over the scare.

Even if I did see one, I wouldn't think a sighting or even sightings would be convincing. That would require much more.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think ghosts exist for reasons beyond vids/photos but the serious people I believe do likely capture anomalous (ghostly) things on video but there is no way we can determine exactly what real phenomena should look like.

It shouldn't be any harder than capturing natural phenomina which is exactly what I think the unexplained is. The fact that paranormal attributed phenomina is so difficult to establish in a convincing manner leads to a strong suspicion that what is being documented and put out as, is more than it actually and truly is.

Even ghosts and such seem to be bound by natural laws so as such leads me to view all of it as natural unexplained phenomina and still intriguing as any paranormal enticement out there.

 

[Bunyip]

Wait..how can fake videos show something doesn't exist?

Seriously? You have never even heard of special effects? The T-Rex in Jurassic Park was not real.

Anyway, my strong opinion is that ghostly phenomena exists and I think you are underestimating the quality of many of the people that work in the field plus the testimony of an incredible number of sober normal witnesses. By now I think ten times over that the chance that it all can be 'explained away' is nearly impossible to believe.

Ghostly phenomena do exist - they are just as yet unexplained. The existence of the unexplained is no threat to materialism.

 

[George-ananda]

Although I might think omg a ghost or demon or something once or twice, it inevitably leads to an explanation or plausibility where you end up chuckling over the scare.

Why say 'inevitably'?

Even if I did see one, I wouldn't think a sighting or even sightings would be convincing. That would require much more.

What would be convincing?

 

[George-ananda]

It shouldn't be any harder than capturing natural phenomina which is exactly what I think the unexplained is. The fact that paranormal attributed phenomina is so difficult to establish in a convincing manner leads to a strong suspicion that what is being documented and put out as, is more than it actually and truly is.

The question inevitably becomes; who determines what is convincing or even 'good evidence'? How can you say it hasn't been captured on film already? What would a captured phenomena look like to be 'evidence' to you?

Even ghosts and such seem to be bound by natural laws so as such leads me to view all of it as natural unexplained phenomina and still intriguing as any paranormal enticement out there.

To me the paranormal is the normal that shouldn't happen in the classical materialist worldview. Everything is natural.

 

[George-ananda]

Seriously? You have never even heard of special effects? The T-Rex in Jurassic Park was not real. Ghostly phenomena do exist - they are just as yet unexplained.

You misunderstood what I meant. I was just making the logical point that because fakes exist does not mean the real does not exist.

The existence of the unexplained is no threat to materialism.

I actually very slightly missed you the last couple of days

 

[Bunyip]

The question inevitably becomes; who determines what is convincing or even 'good evidence'? How can you say it hasn't been captured on film already? What would a captured phenomena look like to be 'evidence' to you?


To me the paranormal is the normal that shouldn't happen in the classical materialist worldview. Everything is natural.

Materialism doesn't have a list of things that shouldn't happen. The paranormal is simply the unexplained and thus no threat to materialism.

I think you project your own biases on to materialism - you insist that it rejects this and rules out that......no matter how often told otherwise.

 

[George-ananda]

Materialism doesn't have a list of things that shouldn't happen. The paranormal is simply the unexplained and thus no threat to materialism.

You never did take my advice to ask a fellow atheist what they think about materialism and spirits. My words fall in vain

 

[Bunyip]

You never did take my advice to ask a fellow atheist what they think about materialism and spirits. My words fall in vain

You just refuse to hear that I am not a materialist. Are you being deliberately dishonest?

George, the existence of unexplained phenomena does not challenge materialism, and atheism is not materialism anyway.

GEORGE - I AM NOT A MATERIALIST.

Got that George?

I'll write it again: I AM NOT A MATERIALIST GEORGE. Most definitely not according to how you you define the term, and not as I understand it either.

It's lovely that you missed me George, but I do not miss being deliberately misrepresented by you, and would really appreciate it if you stopped doing it.

 

[George-ananda]

That is a truly pathetic evasion George. You just refuse to hear that I am not a materialist. Are you being deliberately dishonest?

George, the existence of unexplained phenomena does not challenge materialism, and atheism is not materialism anyway.

For the record, and I think the sixth time in this thread alone I repeat: GEORGE - I AM NOT A MATERIALIST.

Got that George?

I'll write it again: I AM NOT A MATERIALIST GEORGE. Most definitely not according to how you you define the term, and not as I understand it either.

What term

You just refuse to hear that I am not a materialist. Are you being deliberately dishonest?

George, the existence of unexplained phenomena does not challenge materialism, and atheism is not materialism anyway.

GEORGE - I AM NOT A MATERIALIST.

Got that George?

I'll write it again: I AM NOT A MATERIALIST GEORGE. Most definitely not according to how you you define the term, and not as I understand it either.

It's lovely that you missed me George, but I do not miss being deliberately misrepresented by you, and would really appreciate it if you stopped doing it.

I know you said that before. How do you define yourself. What are your basic beliefs. I never felt I got anything I could understand.

 

[Bunyip]

George-ananda

So I say: "I AM NOT A MATERIALIST GEORGE. Most definitely not according to how you you define the term"

And you don't know what term I am referring to even though it is in capitals? George, you are being deliberately dishonest - I do not care to engage at your level.

 

[George-ananda]

George-ananda

So I say: "I AM NOT A MATERIALIST GEORGE. Most definitely not according to how you you define the term"

And you don't know what term I am referring to even though it is in capitals? George, you are being deliberately dishonest - I do not care to engage at your level.

calm down...I meant to ask 'what term defines you (if any)'

 

[Bunyip]

calm down...I meant to ask 'what term defines you (if any)'

At the moment - disgusted.

 

[George-ananda]

At the moment - disgusted.

I believe you misunderstand what I mean much of the time and run off upset. Maybe it's best you put me on 'ignore' for awhile. We need a 'trial separation'

 

[Bunyip]

I believe you misunderstand what I mean much of the time and run off upset. Maybe it's best you put me on 'ignore' for awhile. We need a 'trial separation'

Run off?

Not sure what I am supposed to be running from George, you appear to have converted to Hinduism entirely as a consequence of a misconception you have about what 'materialism' means.