Why do some believe easily, others hardly at all?

[anna.]

Speaking of believing... can anyone help me figure out the source of the video being shown here? I read through the Twitter thread and no one seems to know. I'm trying to find out if it's real.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628509452684115968

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

OK, so you are concluding all ghost encounters are more likely to be optical illusions along with other natural explanations than something real and unknown to science. I think the other way in the case of ghosts when all things and events are considered.

As I said, it becomes a personal judgment and we can differ. Or we can argue both sides of the ghost argument for 50 posts each and still end in disagreement.

But there is where I find our thinking differs, and for reasons I don't understand. You spoke earlier about people "seeing" ghosts. Well, I see many things moment by moment, and an army of scientists, with tons of specialized equipment, can see all of the things that I see -- and in more ways than I can perceive them. A flower looks very different through the eyes of an UV camera (or those of a bee) than it does to me, yet all of this is knowable and discoverable. (See image)

Now, it is also well known that people can and do hallucinate, and while the brain can be examined when this happens, the hallucination itself, unlike the flower, cannot be. No equipment known to science can look in the direction claimed for the hallucination and find anything.

And this appears, so far as I know, to be almost always the case with ghosts. Based on that -- and also on the fact that neither I, nor anyone I have ever known in my 75 years has claimed to have seen a ghost -- what do you think I assume? As you said, "when all things and events are considered." I've told you what I've considered, and I conclude that there are no ghosts.

 

[George-ananda]

But there is where I find our thinking differs, and for reasons I don't understand. You spoke earlier about people "seeing" ghosts. Well, I see many things moment by moment, and an army of scientists, with tons of specialized equipment, can see all of the things that I see -- and in more ways than I can perceive them. A flower looks very different through the eyes of an UV camera (or those of a bee) than it does to me, yet all of this is knowable and discoverable. (See image)

<maybe we'll get our 50 post discussion, lol>

Ghosts are a fleeting and unpredictable phenomenon. And I have seen quite convincing ghost photos and videos in my judgment but most of the time they would have to be anecdotal claims. So, scientists would have to become ghost hunters to have a decent chance. And there are ghost hunters with stories to tell. And for other reasons I also believe in psychic/clairvoyant sensing where people can perceive something that is not directly detectable to the physical senses and instruments. Most of the universe is not directly detectable (so-named Dark Matter).

And this appears, so far as I know, to be almost always the case with ghosts. Based on that -- and also on the fact that neither I, nor anyone I have ever known in my 75 years has claimed to have seen a ghost -- what do you think I assume? As you said, "when all things and events are considered." I've told you what I've considered, and I conclude that there are no ghosts

I have never 'seen' a ghost myself, but I do believe I have experienced even physical events involving spirit activity.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

OK, so you are concluding all ghost encounters are more likely to be optical illusions along with other natural explanations than something real and unknown to science. I think the other way in the case of ghosts when all things and events are considered.

As I said, it becomes a personal judgment and we can differ. Or we can argue both sides of the ghost argument for 50 posts each and still end in disagreement.

Years ago, as I was growing up and also as a young adult, I used to believe that I was seeing things (a.k.a. human spirits and nonhuman entities) because no one else I knew could see, hear, or feel what I could since I was six years old and saw my first human spirit (read about it here). So, I kept everything I experienced to myself until my mid-twenties, when I eventually told my husband, who was the first person I had ever told about my psychic mediumship.

It took me a few more years after telling him for me to finally accept and embrace my mediumship. Over the past fifteen and a half years, I have given readings to many people who didn't believe in the paranormal, and none of them remained skeptical of the paranormal after I revealed specific private information that was only known between them and their deceased loved one(s) (such as the names of their living or deceased relatives, exact dates of key events in their lives, family vacations, certain places they visited or traveled to outside of the country, and specific childhood memories that they have).

That includes my first therapist (read about it here), as well as a couple of other therapists and a psychologist. In addition to what I've written in one of my previous posts here, I've also shared how I knew when a friend tragically died (read about it here), when my relatives died (read about it here), and when I've had extraordinary experiences that I couldn't confirm with other present witnesses or document with my ghost-hunting equipment, as I explained in an older post here. In fact, I've spent over a year posting on this forum about my personal experiences as a psychic medium (such as this post here) and a seasoned paranormal investigator (such as this post here) and commenting in many other threads as well. In the posts I linked, I've provided a great deal of specific detail regarding my experiences as a psychic medium and paranormal investigator. I don't just say that I can see spirits and then leave it at that.

 

[George-ananda]

Years ago, as I was growing up and also as a young adult, I used to believe that I was seeing things (a.k.a. human spirits and nonhuman entities) because no one else I knew could see, hear, or feel what I could since I was six years old and saw my first human spirit (read about it here). So, I kept everything I experienced to myself until my mid-twenties, when I eventually told my husband, who was the first person I had ever told about my psychic mediumship.

It took me a few more years after telling him for me to finally accept and embrace my mediumship. Over the past fifteen and a half years, I have given readings to many people who didn't believe in the paranormal, and none of them remained skeptical of the paranormal after I revealed specific private information that was only known between them and their deceased loved one(s) (such as the names of their living or deceased relatives, exact dates of key events in their lives, family vacations, certain places they visited or traveled to outside of the country, and specific childhood memories that they have).

That includes my first therapist (read about it here), as well as a couple of other therapists and a psychologist. In addition to what I've written in one of my previous posts here, I've also shared how I knew when a friend tragically died (read about it here), when my relatives died (read about it here), and when I've had extraordinary experiences that I couldn't confirm with other present witnesses or document with my ghost-hunting equipment, as I explained in an older post here. In fact, I've spent over a year posting on this forum about my personal experiences as a psychic medium (such as this post here) and a seasoned paranormal investigator (such as this post here) and commenting in many other threads as well. In the posts I linked, I've provided a great deal of specific detail regarding my experiences as a psychic medium and paranormal investigator. I don't just say that I can see spirits and then leave it at that.

It's from many people like yourself that I have become a believer.

Well the non-believers are entitled to their opinions, but I just have to wonder how well they immerse themselves in evidence contrary to their non-belief? Oh, well. I know I listen to every skeptical angle I can hear wanting to know if I'm missing something. I would say though that there is more belief now than when I was young though which means cable TV and the internet are exposing more people to this stuff.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It's from many people like yourself that I have become a believer.

Well the non-believers are entitled to their opinions, but I just have to wonder how well they immerse themselves in evidence contrary to their non-belief? Oh, well. I know I listen to every skeptical angle I can hear wanting to know if I'm missing something. I would say though that there is more belief now than when I was young though which means cable TV and the internet are exposing more people to this stuff.

As I previously stated in other threads, the negative stigma associated with believing in the paranormal has significantly lessened during the last twenty-two years. In fact, it is more widely accepted and common in today's society to acknowledge the reality of ghosts and other paranormal phenomena.

Rather than starting from scratch, I decided to copy what I posted in another thread on a related topic.

According to a survey from October 2021, 63 percent of its participants (2,000 people aged 21 and over) believe in the paranormal in some form. The people surveyed said the most common unexplained beings they believe exist include ghosts (57%), aliens (39%), and Bigfoot (27%). A third (35%) of the people surveyed said they have felt an unexplained presence in their home, prompting them to believe that they are being haunted. Here is a link to the survey: "Paranormal Nation: Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe in ghosts or aliens." For the record, there is a designated day each year (May 3rd) for people who believe in paranormal phenomena: National Paranormal Day 2023—A day for people who believe in ghosts and paranormal activities.

The following articles demonstrate how there has been a steady increase in people believing in paranormal phenomena over the last 22 years.

Gallup Poll: One Third of Americans Believe in Ghosts (2000)

Americans' Belief in Psychic and Paranormal Phenomena Is up Over Last Decade (2001)

Three in Four Americans Believe in Paranormal (2005)

Brilliant Scientists Are Open-Minded about Paranormal Stuff, So Why Not You? (2012)

Spooky Number Of Americans Believe In Ghosts (2013; updated 2017)

Pew Research Center: 18% of Americans say they’ve seen a ghost (2015)

Paranormal America 2017 Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2017)

Paranormal America 2018 Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2018)

You Gov America: Many Americans believe ghosts and demons exist (2019)

Reports Of Paranormal Activity On The Rise During Coronavirus Stay-At-Home Orders (2020)

57 Percent of Americans Believe in Ghosts — and Many Think There's Paranormal Activity in Their Home (2021)

You Gov America: Two-thirds of Americans say they've had a paranormal encounter (2022)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

As I previously stated in other threads, the negative stigma associated with believing in the paranormal has significantly lessened during the last twenty-two years. It's more widely accepted and common in today's society to accept the reality of ghosts and other paranormal phenomena.

Rather than starting from scratch, I decided to copy what I posted in another thread on a related topic.

According to a survey from October 2021, 63 percent of its participants (2,000 people aged 21 and over) believe in the paranormal in some form. The people surveyed said the most common unexplained beings they believe exist include ghosts (57%), aliens (39%), and Bigfoot (27%). A third (35%) of the people surveyed said they have felt an unexplained presence in their home, prompting them to believe that they are being haunted. Here is a link to the survey: "Paranormal Nation: Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe in ghosts or aliens." For the record, there is a designated day each year (May 3rd) for people who believe in paranormal phenomena: National Paranormal Day 2023—A day for people who believe in ghosts and paranormal activities.

The following articles demonstrate how there has been a steady increase in people believing in paranormal phenomena over the last 22 years.

Gallup Poll: One Third of Americans Believe in Ghosts (2000)

Americans' Belief in Psychic and Paranormal Phenomena Is up Over Last Decade (2001)

Three in Four Americans Believe in Paranormal (2005)

Brilliant Scientists Are Open-Minded about Paranormal Stuff, So Why Not You? (2012)

Spooky Number Of Americans Believe In Ghosts (2013; updated 2017)

Pew Research Center: 18% of Americans say they’ve seen a ghost (2015)

Paranormal America 2017 Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2017)

Paranormal America 2018 Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2018)

You Gov America: Many Americans believe ghosts and demons exist (2019)

Reports Of Paranormal Activity On The Rise During Coronavirus Stay-At-Home Orders (2020)

57 Percent of Americans Believe in Ghosts — and Many Think There's Paranormal Activity in Their Home (2021)

You Gov America: Two-thirds of Americans say they've had a paranormal encounter (2022)

What a wonderful list of "so many Americans believe in..."

I wonder what you might think of other such lists, which show what else Americans believe? I can tell you, it doesn't impress me very much.

• 7% of Americans think chocolate milk comes brown cows
• Thousands of Americans believe they’re being systematically harassed and stalked by groups of people, for no reason
• 12 million Americans believe lizard people secretly run the US
• A bunch of Americans think HTML is an STD
• As many Americans believe in Bigfoot as the Big Bang Theory
• Almost 50% of Americans believe major news outlets make stuff up about Donald Trump
• A significant proportion of Americans believe dinosaurs and humans coexisted
• Half of Americans believe Global Warming will harm America, but not them personally
• Barely anyone in America knows anything about the Constitution

 

[Soandso]

Reflecting reality as we see it? As who see it?
That reality might not be all real.

If you say so. Honestly, I don't find the "brain in a vat" argument all that compelling

That seems to be saying that science is endeavoring to do things that go against religious beliefs.

That wasn't my intention. I was just affirming that I believe that religious beliefs can coexist with scientific endeavors just fine. That said, I also believe that it's unwise for someone to not be open minded and not allow for their beliefs to bend and adjust in light of better evidence

Ultimately, though, everyone sees the world in a different way. I don't care all that much what people believe as long as they aren't harming others or are overly pushy with their beliefs

So you want proof before committing to a religious belief or direction?

Proof? No. Consistent, varifiable Evidence is what I'm looking for - especially for extraordinary claims. There are thousands of religious claims out there. Only 1 of them can be truly right, but all of them can be wrong

Science is good for finding stuff out about the material universe, and we all benefit from that. IMO when it comes to finding things out about any spiritual reality, science does not work and indeed, says it finds no evidence for a spiritual reality. It cannot study any evidence there is for a spiritual reality, and many skeptics of course say that if any spiritual reality were there, then science would find it.

I have dificulty believing in a spiritual reality when there isn't a consistent idea of what that even looks like. Are we talking heaven, valhalla, or the duat? I don't find the concept convincing

Personally I am amazed at what science has found about the past which agrees with what the Bible tells us.
But since science is not about faith, it keeps looking for natural answers where none may exist. It comes up with educated speculations imo.
But that is science and not human beings who can see and use other evidence and end up with a faith while science plods away at educated guesses, which many believe (a faith) even without proof.

Every holy book and religious story talks about real places and events - the bible isn't unique. Volsunga saga talks about very real people in history, follows very real world events, and mentions very real wars that we can look at and see evidence for. People also have magical powers and supernatural beings like valkyries exist and alter these real world events

History is full of people who stretch the truth or are ill informed, like herodotus, but they also write about real things we can varify. If this seems to be a very consistent theme everywhere else in history, why should we treat the bible differently?

Yes it would be great for me to have archaeological evidence that the Bible history is true, and I get more of that every time I look for it.
It amazes me that the evidence exists and that many, even in archaeology, deny it shows that Bible history is correct. (IMO it's errors built on errors)
Then there is fulfilled prophecy but as it stands these days skeptics say things could be made up after the events and people believe that.

I can look for archeological evidence for any holy book's claim that turns out to be varifiable and true - I just don't see the point in accepting everything else written wholesale as true as well

When it comes to prophecy, they are so vague that anyone can say that it means whatever they say it's supposed to mean - or they can just fulfill it themselves, such as in the case of Israel. Even the number of the beast has been stretched every which way to mean everything from ancient roman emperors to microchips. Number of the beast - Wikipedia

I don't find prophecy all that compelling

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It's from many people like yourself that I have become a believer.

The reason I post on RF about my experiences as a medium is to offer other people who don't have psychic abilities like mine a glimpse into what it's like to be a medium. As a paranormal investigator, I'd like to educate others about the paranormal in an effort to help dispel the negative stigma associated with believing in the paranormal. I don't post about my personal experiences to argue and debate with skeptics or try to persuade them to believe in the paranormal. In fact, I won't argue and debate with skeptics about my experiences or about anything else related to the paranormal. To be honest, it makes no difference to me whether skeptics believe me or not. As far as I'm concerned, they can make up their own minds whether to believe me or not. The fact is that their disbelief and skepticism don't alter the reality of my experiences. It makes no difference to me whether or not they believe in the paranormal.

 

[Audie]

The reason I post on RF about my experiences as a medium is to offer other people who don't have psychic abilities like mine a glimpse into what it's like to be a medium. As a paranormal investigator, I'd like to educate others about the paranormal in an effort to help dispel the negative stigma associated with believing in the paranormal. I don't post about my personal experiences to argue and debate with skeptics or try to persuade them to believe in the paranormal. In fact, I won't argue and debate with skeptics about my experiences or about anything else related to the paranormal. To be honest, it makes no difference to me whether skeptics believe me or not. As far as I'm concerned, they can make up their own minds whether to believe me or not. The fact is that their disbelief and skepticism don't alter the reality of my experiences. It makes no difference to me whether or not they believe in the paranormal.

If the number of paranormal- believers really
is increasing that is very depressing news,

 

[Heyo]

And if you conclude that "ghosts" are, in fact, figments of the imagination? I think it important that we remember that the human mind can be easily fooled into thinking it is seeing things that are not at all what they appear. How many great optical illusions have you seen? Here's one that I have on my phone.

View attachment 75686

I think you are mixing up things here. That photo is of a real phenomenon, light refraction between layers of differently dense air. Ghosts aren't that, you can't photograph ghosts as they only exist in the imagination of the believers.
Though that imagination might have been triggered by a real phenomenon of light but more likely by a psychological effect of interpreting visual input. Pareidolia is what makes people see what isn't really visible.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It's from many people like yourself that I have become a believer.

Well the non-believers are entitled to their opinions, but I just have to wonder how well they immerse themselves in evidence contrary to their non-belief? Oh, well. I know I listen to every skeptical angle I can hear wanting to know if I'm missing something. I would say though that there is more belief now than when I was young though which means cable TV and the internet are exposing more people to this stuff.

Well you might like to view the other side of this coin - as to so many of us who have never had anything that could be put down to the paranormal, have viewed much of the 'evidence' cited, perhaps have never had any mental health issues that might have affected such things (hearing unexplained voices or seeing apparitions, for example), never taken any recreational drugs that might have affected one's mind, etc., and who therefore tend to believe the evidence that comes from science - or not as in the case of paranormal phenomena.

Given science does have a reasonably good track record in most things as to discovering sufficient information to explain any particular thing. Such that it would have to be extreme arrogance on our part to go against the consensus view from science - that the paranormal just doesn't have the required evidence to support most of the claims. This is probably why so many of us cannot take the experiences of others that seriously, no matter who is claiming whatever - especially when there are plenty of explanations as to what is actually happening.

When scientific tests prove the existence of so many paranormal phenomena then no doubt many of us will accept such findings. Until then, not a chance. And there are plenty of rewards offered for those who could prove such things - but the prizes remain unclaimed. I wonder why?

 

[Brian2]

I can't see the right way. I think/feel that.

The right way is the way ordained by God, but if you can't see it, it means nothing.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think you are mixing up things here. That photo is of a real phenomenon, light refraction between layers of differently dense air. Ghosts aren't that, you can't photograph ghosts as they only exist in the imagination of the believers.
Though that imagination might have been triggered by a real phenomenon of light but more likely by a psychological effect of interpreting visual input. Pareidolia is what makes people see what isn't really visible.

Yes, I understand how the phenomenon of fata morgana works. But as I couldn't actually get a picture of a ghost -- and I wanted to show how easily our brains can be completely fooled -- that one had to do. The point being, in this context, just as you say "[ghosts] only exist in the imagination of the believers."

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The right way is the way ordained by God, but if you can't see it, it means nothing.

Where do I see that as see? I see nothing out there. I mean my faith in God is me and something I think/feel.

 

[George-ananda]

Well you might like to view the other side of this coin - as to so many of us who have never had anything that could be put down to the paranormal, have viewed much of the 'evidence' cited, perhaps have never had any mental health issues that might have affected such things (hearing unexplained voices or seeing apparitions, for example), never taken any recreational drugs that might have affected one's mind, etc., and who therefore tend to believe the evidence that comes from science - or not as in the case of paranormal phenomena.

I can think like a skeptic too and consider things from that perspective. I am not interested in brainwashing myself with either side of the coin. But in the end I'll ask: 'all things considered, what is most reasonable for me to believe'.

Given science does have a reasonably good track record in most things as to discovering sufficient information to explain any particular thing. Such that it would have to be extreme arrogance on our part to go against the consensus view from science - that the paranormal just doesn't have the required evidence to support most of the claims. This is probably why so many of us cannot take the experiences of others that seriously, no matter who is claiming whatever - especially when there are plenty of explanations as to what is actually happening.

When scientific tests prove the existence of so many paranormal phenomena then no doubt many of us will accept such findings. Until then, not a chance. And there are plenty of rewards offered for those who could prove such things - but the prizes remain unclaimed. I wonder why?

Here are the results of my personal 'all things considered' evaluation:

Much of the so-called 'paranormal' is spontaneous and fleeting and not amenable to later scientific analysis. So, there the events must sit unresolved to science. I believe so-called 'paranormal investigators' do document many anomalous occurrences that have no satisfactory answer within known science.

Science has not made much headway with the paranormal because the cause of this phenomena is not directly detectable by our physical senses and instruments (and that goes for the majority of the universe actually = Dark Matter/Energy).

Psychic functioning is weak but real in humans meaning you will not see a great deviation from chance in controlled experiments but after enough tests that small deviation from chance can become statistically significant rendering enormous odds against chance.

I am fine with science moving slowly but my interest is in 'all things considered'.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I can think like a skeptic too and consider things from that perspective. I am not interested in brainwashing myself with either side of the coin. But in the end I'll ask: 'all things considered, what is most reasonable for me to believe'.

Here are the results of my personal 'all things considered' evaluation:

Much of the so-called 'paranormal' is spontaneous and fleeting and not amenable to later scientific analysis. So, there the events must sit unresolved to science. I believe so-called 'paranormal investigators' do document many anomalous occurrences that have no satisfactory answer within known science.

Science has not made much headway with the paranormal because the cause of this phenomena is not directly detectable by our physical senses and instruments (and that goes for the majority of the universe actually = Dark Matter/Energy).

Psychic functioning is weak but real in humans meaning you will not see a great deviation from chance in controlled experiments but after enough tests that small deviation from chance can become statistically significant rendering enormous odds against chance.

I am fine with science moving slowly but my interest is in 'all things considered'.

Well I doubt I will see any answers appearing in my lifetime.

 

[George-ananda]

Well I doubt I will see any answers appearing in my lifetime.

Possibly, if you're young enough. Turtles tend to live a long time. (And I believe in reincarnation)

But I also consider the teachings of many clairvoyant/psychic masters alive and dead that tell us about more than our physical senses and instruments can directly detect. They tell of etheric, astral and mental planes of reality and about the operation of the matter/energy there in from their own psychic senses in their astral and mental bodies. From considering all that, I have what I would call my most reasonable ideas of how this operates that is not supernatural but rather supranormal.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I can think like a skeptic too and consider things from that perspective. I am not interested in brainwashing myself with either side of the coin. But in the end I'll ask: 'all things considered, what is most reasonable for me to believe'.

Here are the results of my personal 'all things considered' evaluation:

Much of the so-called 'paranormal' is spontaneous and fleeting and not amenable to later scientific analysis. So, there the events must sit unresolved to science. I believe so-called 'paranormal investigators' do document many anomalous occurrences that have no satisfactory answer within known science.

Science has not made much headway with the paranormal because the cause of this phenomena is not directly detectable by our physical senses and instruments (and that goes for the majority of the universe actually = Dark Matter/Energy).

Psychic functioning is weak but real in humans meaning you will not see a great deviation from chance in controlled experiments but after enough tests that small deviation from chance can become statistically significant rendering enormous odds against chance.

I am fine with science moving slowly but my interest is in 'all things considered'.

I'm not sure whether you've ever heard of the psychic medium, Tyler Henry. I'm mentioning him because he underwent a brain scan done before a reading and while he was giving a reading during the season 4 finale of his television show, Hollywood Medium with Tyler Henry. I won't reveal the results of his scan, but I'm including the following videos to give you an idea of what transpires in the episode. I recommend watching it, and it's available on Amazon Prime and Google Play (and see here). I recommend watching additional episodes as well as his other show, Life After Death with Tyler Henry, on Netflix.

 

[Audie]

Well I doubt I will see any answers appearing in my lifetime.

Or finding a "believer" who has any
capacity, at all, to comprehend how
an atheist / skeptic thinks.

FTM, I see in this forums the sad
results of the believer mindset,
or way of " thinking" if it can be
properly called that, but I cannot
" think like" a woo woo believer
or a religionist, no more than I can think
like a sumo wrestler or serial killer.

We see religionists claim their
greater - than- thou wisdom by saying
they used to be (usually " staunch", or
" militant") atheists but now...

They were not. Maybe as teenagers they
allowed doubts, but they fell back in.
They never ever understood what
it is to just not believe any more than
I do in flying turtles.

And never will be able to.