-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Science of Ghosts
- Thread starter Mycroft
- Start date
outhouse
Atheistically
Support this.
Who do you think you are to label any atheist?
Provide examples of who these atheist are and why you think you have the chops to call anyone a troll
Stage 1) I am convinced that people do see forms of humans that are not normal physical beings and can not be satisfactorily explained away as 'all hallucinations'. The quantity, quality and consistency of the evidence is convincing to me. This dramatically shows the limitations of current science.
Stage 2) Consider the theories as to what is going on. The most convincing theories and understanding in my judgement come from those more sensitive to the beyond the normal phenomena, and eastern wisdom traditions (Indian).
outhouse
Atheistically
pseudoscience rules!
#1 no one is claiming they are all hallucinations
#2 unsubstantiated rhetoric. Glad that you ALONE can judge who is the best ghost hunters !
No it doesn't.
Science is all over personal perception, hoaxes, frauds, common visions and hallucinations, mistaken sightings, and pointing out the PSEUDOSCIENCE that keeps this alive in the media and IMAGINATION
And I believe the evidence shows that more than just the above must be going on in many of the stronger cases. The quantity, quality and consistency of the anecdotal evidence leads me to that position. It is to me clearly something current science doesn't understand.
outhouse
Atheistically
Please, post that evidence up!
outhouse
Atheistically
many claim this is only a matter of lack of education on specific topics
Not that request again! We already know it comes down to individual judgment on a large body of anecdotal evidence.
I am claiming that in the body of strong cases the cause is beyond the knowledge of even the most educated scientist.
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
In which case, scientists simply say they don't know what it is. They don't take random leaps in logical steps and conclude it's disembodied dead people.
outhouse
Atheistically
Then I ask what evidence you believe and to post it
Which amounts to ! you know I don't have ANY evidence
outhouse
Atheistically
Does that mean you think souls exist ?
outhouse
Atheistically
Not really true. They look for the truth instead of using pseudoscience like those who come up with conclusions based on faith.
They do see for the most part these so called ghost do not exist or even appear in front of groups.
Showing these only exist in some peoples minds
I addressed that issue in post #123.
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
No. I said they don't conclude that. =P Did you misread what I wrote?
I don't believe in a literal soul that lives on after death. But I might use the word soul metaphorically from time to time.
Of course they look for the truth, but in the mean time, they say they don't know if there's insufficient information. If there's an occurrence they can't solve, they simply say there's no conclusion (they don't know). Where as pseudoscientists jump to conclusions with insufficient information (hence, people concluding a weird occurrence is a ghost).
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
I'm reading post 123 and I don't see where exactly you address that. There's no reason to leap from "I see scary apparitions, stuff move by it self, etc..." to "it's dead people".
But reality is so much more strange and mysterious than any of these fantasy stories that people tell themselves. I don't think the world could possible be more interesting than it already is. Reality is more fantastic than any mythology, more wonderful and more horrifying than any ghost story.
If anything these stories serve to shield us from how fantastic reality is. Reality is just too strange for some people to handle, so they create these stories for themselves.
First we have phenomena with no known scientific explanation (nobody is calling it 'dead people' yet). . The next normal step is to create and consider explanatory theories and I said that to me the most reasonable theories out there are coming from people claiming sensitivity to what is beyond the physical realm and the wisdom traditions of certain eastern (Indian) schools. I can not claim scientific PROOF of anything but I believe beyond reasonable doubt that some ghost sightings are the temporary materialization of 'dead people'.
Can you define what you mean by "materialization"? What kind of "material" is involved here? If there is a "material" involved here it might be possible to propose some kind of testable hypothesis.
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
Why is that the most reasonable theory? People who see weird stuff like to claim they are sensitive to the supernatural, and they like to think they are. Schitzophrenic people do it. People who have a knack for intuitively assessing people psychologically -- by asking them questions and slowly extract information from them -- like to think they are psychic mediums.
Consider that no one likes to think of the idea that they're hallucinating, even when we know they are. Also consider that people claim all types of things apart from ghosts. Things such as alien abductions or psychokinesis.
Last edited: