What do atheists have to say about incidents like these?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, I have heard and experienced more than my tipping point share of stories considered for quantity, quality and consistency to the point that I do not think they are all phony. So my answer to your questions would be; those leading questions are not rightly put.

I believe many types of so-called paranormal phenomena are real. And the best model of reality can be found in certain eastern and western esoteric traditions. Theosophical and Vedic schools of thought have knowledge of things beyond current mainstream science is my position.

And I think the Brooklyn Bridge is real; that doesn't mean I'd automatically accept that someone trying to sell it to me is genuine.

 

[George-ananda]

And I think the Brooklyn Bridge is real; that doesn't mean I'd automatically accept that someone trying to sell it to me is genuine.

Nor would I make said assumption either.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I’ll link the report again so that there are no excuses.

Intake Officer's Report

Also, you said:

“had you provided more than just tabloid article in your first post, you wouldn’t be getting so much skepticism in the first place.”

Well, the fact of the matter is that the OP does contain links to the official reports (the link to the indianopolis star, which is posted not once but twice in the OP, contains each of the reports mentioned).

What’s wrong with you dude? You try so hard to look like you know what you are talking about, but you for some reason cannot pay attention to the most basic of details.

You must enjoy coming off as an someone who is incompetent.

"RS states they believe the mother may have mental health concerns. RS states they believe the children are performing for the mother and that she's encouraging the behavior."
(5th paragraph down, from the top)

 

[SkepticThinker]

Regardless, none of these statements were made by the mother like how you claimed. The above mentioned statements were made by medical staff from either the hospital or the primary doctor’s office.

You lied and said that no source other than the mother made a statement, which has been proven to be most untrue.

Now, you are discrediting the statements made by the medical staff and you are changing your argument to “it’s all hearsay”.

I thought only the mother made a statement?

And yeah, it’s all hearsay simply because you say so, right?

Lmao.

No, it's hearsay because it's not a firsthand account, rather than "simply because you say so." As the posters explained.

 

[ecco]

Read carefully. "Medical staff reported that while the children were at their primary doctor’s office the medical staff reported"... Clearly there are two different groups of Medical Staff.

There is one medical staff - let's call them "group A". Then there is the primary doctor’s medical staff in the primary doctor’s office - let's call them "Group B".

"Group A reported that while the children were at their primary doctor’s office Group B reported..."

That's called hearsay. There is not report/statement directly from the primary doctor’s medical staff.

There is noting in the report that indicates who allegedly saw this. There is nothing in the report that indicates who said this.

No member from FCM Washington or the psychologist's office is quoted as saying this.

The report is poorly written in that it omits who saw what and who said what.

Regardless, none of these statements were made by the mother like how you claimed.

Slow down. Calm down. Read carefully. I said nothing about the mother.

The above mentioned statements were made by medical staff from either the hospital or the primary doctor’s office.

As I clearly showed above, they were made by a medical staffer about what a different medical staffer reported - hearsay.

You lied and said that no source other than the mother made a statement, which has been proven to be most untrue.

I cannot help it if you can not understand common English. What I wrote was...

No member from FCM Washington or the psychologist's office is quoted as saying this.​

Now, you are discrediting the statements made by the medical staff and you are changing your argument to “it’s all hearsay”.

I'm not changing anything. Perhaps you have me mixed up with someone else. I reposted my comments above so you could clearly see what you responded to.

I pointed out that the medical staff comments were hearsay because they are hearsay.

And yeah, it’s all hearsay simply because you say so, right?
Lmao.

If you don't understand the meaning of "hearsay", that is not my fault.

Instead of making nonsensical comments ...
Read carefully. "Medical staff reported that while the children were at their primary doctor’s office the medical staff reported"... Clearly there are two different groups of Medical Staff.

There is one medical staff - let's call them "group A". Then there is the primary doctor’s medical staff in the primary doctor’s office - let's call them "Group B".

"Group A reported that while the children were at their primary doctor’s office Group B reported..."

That's called hearsay. There is not report/statement directly from the primary doctor’s medical staff.



Now, as far as lying is concerned, you stated:

• But I was referring to police, hospital, and child service records.
• Yep, keep ignoring the police and hospital records.

When asked for the police report you posted the following link...
Intake Officer's Report

The document you linked is not a police report. It is a report by Valerie Washington, a Family Case Manager for the Indiana Department of Child Services.

Did you not take the time to read and understand the document you linked to? Do you not know the difference between a police report and a DCS report? Or did you know it was not a police report and thought you could fool us just like the tabloids fooled you.

 

[George-ananda]

"RS states they believe the mother may have mental health concerns. RS states they believe the children are performing for the mother and that she's encouraging the behavior."
(5th paragraph down, from the top)

But wouldn’t mental health concerns still be consistent with the demon hypothesis. And you can not influence a kid to defy gravity anyway.

 

[SkepticThinker]

But wouldn’t mental health concerns still be consistent with the demon hypothesis. And you can not influence a kid to defy gravity anyway.

The poster was saying that it doesn't say anywhere that it was posited that the children were putting on a performance for their mother.
It clearly states that in the report. I was just pointing that it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But wouldn’t mental health concerns still be consistent with the demon hypothesis. And you can not influence a kid to defy gravity anyway.

Where are you getting "defy gravity" from? You seem to be reading a lot into the report.

Here's a video of someone walking up a wall:

Here's another:

Did either of those involve defying gravity?

 

[George-ananda]

The poster was saying that it doesn't say anywhere that it was posited that the children were putting on a performance for their mother.
It clearly states that in the report. I was just pointing that it.

My bad for butting in. I guess I was trying to point out that influence is a moot point for the paranormal hypothesis. Continue on you two.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My bad for butting in. I guess I was trying to point out that influence is a moot point for the paranormal hypothesis. Continue on you two.

Not just a moot point; the two ideas are incompatible. If they thought the child was "putting on a performance," then this can be taken to mean that they did not think there was anything "paranormal" going on.

 

[George-ananda]

Where are you getting "defy gravity" from? You seem to be reading a lot into the report.

Here's a video of someone walking up a wall:

Here's another:

Did either of those involve defying gravity?

But the professionals are describing something more amazing than those practiced stunt men can even perform.

Are you claiming they saw something that should be reproducible for them at any time? As a skeptic I’m sure that must be your claim.

 

[George-ananda]

Not just a moot point; the two ideas are incompatible. If they thought the child was "putting on a performance," then this can be taken to mean that they did not think there was anything "paranormal" going on.

No, the professionals know the limits of normal phenomena. Even if he was acting up they ALSO claim to have seen things beyond the normal. The two are not necessarily contradictory.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But the professionals are describing something more amazing than those practiced stunt men can even perform.

Are they? Again: where are you getting this from?

Are you claiming they saw something that should be reproducible at any time? As a skeptic I’m sure that must be your claim.

No, my claim is that saying that someone "walked up a wall" could describe a wide range of situations, including many that aren't fantastical at all.

 

[George-ananda]

However

Are they? Again: where are you getting this from?

From the OP information. To me the key point of the whole story is that professionals (police, social workers, hospital staff) feel certain they saw things that was outside the range of normal phenomena. Multiple examples are given in the article.

So again a skeptic's position is that all these things are normal phenomena and can be reproduced for the professionals viewing at any time.

No, my claim is that saying that someone "walked up a wall" could describe a wide range of situations, including many that aren't fantastical at all.

However, the OP material describes much more details and events (levitations, kids thrown, graceful glide up to the ceiling, etc.) than your one hacked away example contains.

Anyway we each have to use our own judgment and you can believe whatever you want. As for me, I think this is highly likely to be a case containing genuine paranormal phenomena and that all these things reported are also not unprecedented in the annals of the paranormal.

 

[Tazarah]

I saw that line in your links as well. It is there.

And I "get it" that you have no actual refutations to what I say because I am describing the situation in completely representative detail. You know the kind of evidence I would be expecting - and you understand that it can't be produced - because these situations ARE NOT REPRODUCIBLE. You can't experiment on them, you can't "figure them out", you can't deconstruct or even observe with intent. All you can do is throw your hands up in the air, say you don't know what happened (because face it - YOU DON'T KNOW) and move on.

Who cares what kind of evidence you expect, and better yet who cares what you think or believe? The official documented reports speak for themselves.

Oh look, now he’s typing in big bold letters. Somebody is getting angry. Lmfao

 

[Tazarah]

I saw that line in your links as well. It is there.

Please quote what it says.

 

[Tazarah]

"RS states they believe the mother may have mental health concerns. RS states they believe the children are performing for the mother and that she's encouraging the behavior."
(5th paragraph down, from the top)

Yes, it says that they “believe”.

If I believe that my dog is a horse, does that mean it is true?

And on top of that, you and your buddy lied and said that “the children were performing for their mother” as if it had been proven as a fact.

Were the staff of the hospital and the investigating police putting on an act for the mother as well?

 

[Tazarah]

The poster was saying that it doesn't say anywhere that it was posited that the children were putting on a performance for their mother.
It clearly states that in the report. I was just pointing that it.

That’s because it does not say that.

 

[Tazarah]

No, it's hearsay because it's not a firsthand account, rather than "simply because you say so." As the posters explained.

It is a firsthand account, like the reports state. Both the officers and medical staff had their statements recorded and written down, and then that same exact information was taken and put into the intake report by the intake officer.

It’s not rocket science.

 

[Tazarah]

Where are you getting "defy gravity" from? You seem to be reading a lot into the report.

Here's a video of someone walking up a wall:

Here's another:

Did either of those involve defying gravity?

None of the people in your videos are walking backwards up walls.