Have You Ever Seen A Ghost?

[One Drop]

Science is a cult mentality where the top dictates reality to the mass below?!?! Sounds like you got something completely backwards there. Science is about providing the best explanation using what has been experimentally verified and peer reviewed before any conclusion is accepted as being better than what is accepted today. It is also about accepting that some one will eventually come along who builds on the work of others to provide a more complete explanation than what you might have previously accepted. In other words, it's about being open minded.

Concluding that some unexplained phenomena must be the result of some mysterious bogeyman because it can't be explained any other way is what happened in the Dark Ages. That was a time when people who were trying to be open minded, trying to learn, trying to understand the world around them were shut down by the ignorant cultists who refused to give up their unfounded and silly superstitions. And too often those closed minded and ignorant cultists of superstition made many of those intelligent, open minded, and curious people pay painfully gruesome, gory, and horrific prices for daring to challenge the nonsense of the superstitious ignorant. Is that where you wish us to return? To the days of the rack, of the breaking wheel, and of the Pear to try preventing learning from stepping on the toes of superstition?

No, the cultish mentality where the top dictates the rules and reality to the masses below is NOT the domain of science. That's the domain of topics that can't be discussed outside of the TB Lobby.

Nicely put!

 

[adivin]

Science is a cult mentality where the top dictates reality to the mass below?!?! Sounds like you got something completely backwards there. Science is about providing the best explanation using what has been experimentally verified and peer reviewed before any conclusion is accepted as being better than what is accepted today. It is also about accepting that some one will eventually come along who builds on the work of others to provide a more complete explanation than what you might have previously accepted. In other words, it's about being open minded.

Concluding that some unexplained phenomena must be the result of some mysterious bogeyman because it can't be explained any other way is what happened in the Dark Ages. That was a time when people who were trying to be open minded, trying to learn, trying to understand the world around them were shut down by the ignorant cultists who refused to give up their unfounded and silly superstitions. And too often those closed minded and ignorant cultists of superstition made many of those intelligent, open minded, and curious people pay painfully gruesome, gory, and horrific prices for daring to challenge the nonsense of the superstitious ignorant. Is that where you wish us to return? To the days of the rack, of the breaking wheel, and of the Pear to try preventing learning from stepping on the toes of superstition?

No, the cultish mentality where the top dictates the rules and reality to the masses below is NOT the domain of science. That's the domain of topics that can't be discussed outside of the TB Lobby.

Yes. Sounds good. She blinded me with science.

 

[El Spearo]

Science is a cult mentality where the top dictates reality to the mass below?!?! Sounds like you got something completely backwards there. Science is about providing the best explanation using what has been experimentally verified and peer reviewed before any conclusion is accepted as being better than what is accepted today. It is also about accepting that some one will eventually come along who builds on the work of others to provide a more complete explanation than what you might have previously accepted. In other words, it's about being open minded.

Concluding that some unexplained phenomena must be the result of some mysterious bogeyman because it can't be explained any other way is what happened in the Dark Ages. That was a time when people who were trying to be open minded, trying to learn, trying to understand the world around them were shut down by the ignorant cultists who refused to give up their unfounded and silly superstitions. And too often those closed minded and ignorant cultists of superstition made many of those intelligent, open minded, and curious people pay painfully gruesome, gory, and horrific prices for daring to challenge the nonsense of the superstitious ignorant. Is that where you wish us to return? To the days of the rack, of the breaking wheel, and of the Pear to try preventing learning from stepping on the toes of superstition?

No, the cultish mentality where the top dictates the rules and reality to the masses below is NOT the domain of science. That's the domain of topics that can't be discussed outside of the TB Lobby.

Nicely put mate. What is this TB Lobby you speak of?

 

[ZenG]

It's becoming abundantly clear you have an ulterior reason for doubting science, which can't be broached here, so I'll just leave this thought and wish you a happy day.

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
-Isaac Asimov

Got nothing to do with anti-intellectualism....got lots to do with an elitist few (not all scientists are elitists) pushing certain agendas.
Your "knowledge" is such that it will be held to be the prevailing truth until further knowledge supercedes it.
If any truths challenge the current prevailing scientific truth it will be rejected unless approved by scientists. At this time the prevailing truth will be obsolete and a lie.
Any truth rejected for another truth by earlier scientists means those scientists were part of the "cult of ignorance" at that time by promoting a truth that wasn't.
And they've done that in the past.

If ,as you say, scientists have open minds and are always on the lookout for new findings and truths....

Then that means the current accepted truths are open for adjustment, replacement or dismissal at ANY time pending findings....

So I would really appreciate it if certain members of the scientific community would stop pretending they know everything and that the sun shines out of their collective arses.

The "cult of ignorance" starts when a body promotes a truth and declares all else a lie if it contravenes their status quo.
Oh ..wait...that's exactly what you are doing.

 

[dave64o]

Got nothing to do with anti-intellectualism....got lots to do with an elitist few (not all scientists are elitists) pushing certain agendas.
Your "knowledge" is such that it will be held to be the prevailing truth until further knowledge supercedes it.
If any truths challenge the current prevailing scientific truth it will be rejected unless approved by scientists. At this time the prevailing truth will be obsolete and a lie.
Any truth rejected for another truth by earlier scientists means those scientists were part of the "cult of ignorance" at that time by promoting a truth that wasn't.
And they've done that in the past.

If ,as you say, scientists have open minds and are always on the lookout for new findings and truths....

Then that means the current accepted truths are open for adjustment, replacement or dismissal at ANY time pending findings....

So I would really appreciate it if certain members of the scientific community would stop pretending they know everything and that the sun shines out of their collective arses.

The "cult of ignorance" starts when a body promotes a truth and declares all else a lie if it contravenes their status quo.
Oh ..wait...that's exactly what you are doing.

You clearly have no understanding of the scientific method, of what it means to have your findings reviewed, and the incredible level of scrutiny you will get and will have to defend your findings against before your findings are accepted as having advanced the body of knowledge. A legitimate scientist does NOT pretend he/she knows everything. In fact, a legitimate scientist KNOWS for a fact that he/she does NOT know everything and that, no matter how brilliant their findings are, their findings will eventually be pushed aside by someone who was able to take what has already been learned in the current body of knowledge, apply new research, use new techniques not yet thought of, with new technology not available today, and take what is known and accepted in new directions that might not have even been considered until that point. To simply call findings that have gone through that level of scrutiny and have come out the other end having successfully withstood all the challenges to them a mere "opinion", as if it someone was talking about whether or not the new Star Wars movie is the best so far or not, proves you haven't the faintest idea what what science is about.

Simply put, your posts show an alarmingly high level of ignorance about how knowledge is advanced. Clearly YOU have an agenda that YOU'RE pushing - and the frightening part is that you're doing it having absolutely no idea what you're talking about while asserting that people who DO know what they're talking about (to clarify - I'm talking about experts in a field of study, NOT about myself) are the ones who are ignorant.

I'd love to hear more about these scientists who pretend they know everything or are part of a cult of ignorance simply because they accept their findings as the best knowledge we have to date. I still assert, quite strongly, that the cult of ignorance is NOT a defining characteristic of the scientific community in general but is, instead, a defining characteristic of the agenda pushers who poo poo the best knowledge we have to date simply because it doesn't fit their ignorant opinions and superstitions.


EDIT: Having typed that, I should slightly modify what I said to assert that the concept of "the body of knowledge" and how the current body of knowledge is advanced would apply to any field, not just to the sciences. It could be education, marketing, finance, mathematics, history, music, you name it. It fits.

... with the obvious exceptions, of course, being the fields of ignorance and superstition.

 

[96tbird]

Nobel Prize Winner Barry J. Marshall in Part Proved What Causes Ulcers by Ingesting the Bacteria He Thought Was Causing Them
here's a story that illustrates just how open (closed) to change and challenge the scientific community is and how quickly it will (won't) do an about face.

Not saying science is bad. Just saying don't give us this crap that it is beyond reproach and not affected by ego.

 

[One Drop]

Nobel Prize Winner Barry J. Marshall in Part Proved What Causes Ulcers by Ingesting the Bacteria He Thought Was Causing Them
here's a story that illustrates just how open (closed) to change and challenge the scientific community is and how quickly it will (won't) do an about face.

Not saying science is bad. Just saying don't give us this crap that it is beyond reproach and not affected by ego.

The story of science is the story of people resisting new theories and the scientific community rejecting new discoveries and of politics and ego and all the other foibles that humans are subject to.

But in the long run it is still the best way we have to advance knowledge, and to use the argument that science isn't settled to deny something you don't agree with even though is no alternative theory that even approached being plausible, even while existing theory explains perfectly well and plausibly much of the phenomena, is both disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

Is it actually being claimed here that a scientific elite is suppressing the truth about the existence of ghosts? Or is it an irrelevant point that is convenient to deny ideas you simply don't accept?

In other words, if today a scientist was able to show evidence of the existence of ghosts, and prove a theory that explained their existence, would you accept it if I simply denied his proof and refused to believe it because the science will change one day? I very much doubt this, and one poster already linked complete bunkum masquerading as scientific proof, and made claims that certain phenomena are accepted by science when it is clear they are not.

Anyway, the above story is as good as any to support the importance of science as ultimately it offered the only way to counter vested interest and an 'elite' that denied the newer theory.

 

[96tbird]

Is it actually being claimed here that a scientific elite is suppressing the truth about the existence of ghosts? Or is it an irrelevant point that is convenient to deny ideas you simply don't accept?

No.

This was a ghost story thread until poopers showed up and shat upon it.

 

[One Drop]

No.

This was a ghost story thread until poopers showed up and shat upon it.

It wasn't a ghost story thread. It was a thread asking if anyone had seen a ghost. Perfectly natural that discussion would extend to their existence being real or not.

No one stopped people from telling their ghost stories.

Now when you have engaged in the discussion about science and its validity, and when I responded to your post, with respect and on topic to your points, all of a sudden you are back to griping about the thread high jack. Make your choice, you can't have it both ways!

 

[One Drop]

I know there's a paranormal thread going...but I want be specific...ghosts only.

Have you ever seen an actual apparition?

I confess I haven't personally..yet...but I'm inclined to think they do exist...

Hearing noises does not count......

BTW, this is the original post, why such outrage at the direction the thread took?

The OP is seriously pondering their existence, what's the gosh darned big deal about answering with an opinion on the subject? It's not as if I peed on a campfire.

 

[MEKer]

My point is this. You have never experienced the bone-chilling winds of Mount Everest but you take witnesses' accounts at face value. Why are ghosts different? Hundreds of wittnesses, some even notable people in history, have claimed to see ghosts. Why do they not get the same benefit of the doubt? Why do you completely discount something simply because you have not experienced it yourself? To me, that places oneself on a very high pedestal. It implies that you are perhaps the only one qualified to make such a call for the rest of us. Until you see it, it hasn't happened. Did the crashing of ocean waves not occur until you witnessed it?

Yes, my language is intentionally "trollish". But that is simply to emphasize a point. I don't mean everything I wrote in the most literal sense.

(These days, with everyone being so sensitive, one can no longer assume such understandings.)

Sure is a lot of "there is NO evidence that "ghosts" (choose your flavor what you want to call them) exist. Uhh...OK. Wish I was that 100% sure, but since I am unaware of all submitted evidence and all those who have attested to it, I cannot do so.

I do know, however, that science often has to do with funding and their own template of "respectable", so I do not think you get any real pursuit of many subjects by "scientists".

I also know that anyone who takes a picture, a recording, a video or anything else of something truly paranormal (looking at clock to see how long before "truly paranormal" becomes a contentious couple of words) will be attacked, ridiculed or at least be pressed to understand that, "No, what you saw was not real, what it did was not real and, even if the experience was real, haha, there is a reason OTHER than "entity" pertaining to your experience".

Sure, I have a couple of stories, but obviously I was deranged or "stressed".........everything/anything else at the time concerning my 2 experiences EXCEPT that it could have been an intelligent entity. Wish some of you were with me at the time. Then we could see who would have been the first to bolt for the door .

It cannot be simply because...it cannot be, right?

 

[One Drop]

Sure is a lot of "there is NO evidence that "ghosts" (choose your flavor what you want to call them) exist. Uhh...OK. Wish I was that 100% sure, but since I am unaware of all submitted evidence and all those who have attested to it, I cannot do so.

I do know, however, that science often has to do with funding and their own template of "respectable", so I do not think you get any real pursuit of many subjects by "scientists".

I also know that anyone who takes a picture, a recording, a video or anything else of something truly paranormal (looking at clock to see how long before "truly paranormal" becomes a contentious couple of words) will be attacked, ridiculed or at least be pressed to understand that, "No, what you saw was not real, what it did was not real and, even if the experience was real, haha, there is a reason OTHER than "entity" pertaining to your experience".

Sure, I have a couple of stories, but obviously I was deranged or "stressed".........everything/anything else at the time concerning my 2 experiences EXCEPT that it could have been an intelligent entity. Wish some of you were with me at the time. Then we could see who would have been the first to bolt for the door .

It cannot be simply because...it cannot be, right?

The thing is, paranormal is used to describe something that cannot be explained by science, and for which claims are made for its existence being real.

It is not true that little scientific study has been done, but it is easy to understand that scientists are more interested in pursuing more likely explanations for phenomena than the existence of spirits, for example.

The subject has attracted intense interest over many decades and scientists have been able to offer explanations for a large number of cases that have been put forward to justify certain claims. No one has ever been able to reproduce their claims to be able to contact the dead's spirits, move objects with their mind, levitate, or any of the other paranormal phenomena that some people have made claim to, often for profit.

As science progresses and time goes on more and more little-understood phenomena will be explained scientifically just as so many of the phenomena is now that was at one time attributed to magic, wizardry, higher powers like gods and demons, or to the positions of the stars and planets.

No one is claiming derangement or stress has to be involved, simply put, we experience stimuli and process it in certain ways, and inherent in those ways are effects that we have trouble making conscious sense of. It can be as simple as an optical illusion or and auditory one, it can be due to suggestion or willful manipulation, and it can be from illness, side effects of a drug, lack of sleep, and so many other combinations of mental states and external phenomena.

If you are really interested in having your mind blown, watch some Derren Brown videos of some of the ways a rational intelligent person can be easily made to believe in the paranormal or supernatural. He has studied many claims and scams and is one more in a long lime of skeptics who have approached the subject scientifically, increasing our knowledge of psychology and physiology at the same time.

Derren Brown

The Séance series in instructive, the Mind Control one is incredibly scary and fascinating, and the one called 'Messiah' is one of the most eye-opening and astonishing illustrations of how we can be manipulated into believing in a higher power that I have ever seen. If you have any doubts as to the incredible effects as to the power of suggestion, and as to how easily we are can be manipulated by another human being, then these will be a revelation.

All of them are great entertainment as well, I think anyone interested in this stuff, skeptic or believer, will be fascinated.

 

[Hoff Kinkmeister]

Houdini gave his wife a password before he died. She held séances with mediums and psychics, and never got the password.

Just a fun bit of trivia.

 

[One Drop]

This is interesting, to me more than a supernatural explanation. The experiment was carried out at a university near me, and offers a highly plausible explanation for some sightings:

Ghosts created by scientists in 'disturbing' lab experiment

 

[MEKer]

The thing is, paranormal is used to describe something that cannot be explained by science, and for which claims are made for its existence being real.

It is not true that little scientific study has been done, but it is easy to understand that scientists are more interested in pursuing more likely explanations for phenomena than the existence of spirits, for example.

The subject has attracted intense interest over many decades and scientists have been able to offer explanations for a large number of cases that have been put forward to justify certain claims. No one has ever been able to reproduce their claims to be able to contact the dead's spirits, move objects with their mind, levitate, or any of the other paranormal phenomena that some people have made claim to, often for profit.

As science progresses and time goes on more and more little-understood phenomena will be explained scientifically just as so many of the phenomena is now that was at one time attributed to magic, wizardry, higher powers like gods and demons, or to the positions of the stars and planets.

No one is claiming derangement or stress has to be involved, simply put, we experience stimuli and process it in certain ways, and inherent in those ways are effects that we have trouble making conscious sense of. It can be as simple as an optical illusion or and auditory one, it can be due to suggestion or willful manipulation, and it can be from illness, side effects of a drug, lack of sleep, and so many other combinations of mental states and external phenomena.

If you are really interested in having your mind blown, watch some Derren Brown videos of some of the ways a rational intelligent person can be easily made to believe in the paranormal or supernatural. He has studied many claims and scams and is one more in a long lime of skeptics who have approached the subject scientifically, increasing our knowledge of psychology and physiology at the same time.

Derren Brown

The Séance series in instructive, the Mind Control one is incredibly scary and fascinating, and the one called 'Messiah' is one of the most eye-opening and astonishing illustrations of how we can be manipulated into believing in a higher power that I have ever seen. If you have any doubts as to the incredible effects as to the power of suggestion, and as to how easily we are can be manipulated by another human being, then these will be a revelation.

All of them are great entertainment as well, I think anyone interested in this stuff, skeptic or believer, will be fascinated.

There we go...as expected. Its all just how we erroneously attribute something when it was just a perceptual process of interpretation that has nothing to do with an entity other than ourselves. That certainly explains now to my great satisfaction a physical movement of a physical object right in front of my eyes over the course of a few feet along with an auditory experience, in a house that had been "bothered" for quite a while. I just simply did not see or hear it correctly. Whew...I feel better.

Ah yes, all the research by these scientists shows it was my interpretation of that sensory data. Ya ya ya.

Yes, we can categorically state now that we at IT. Nothing nor anybody else to it. There is only us.

Dang--------I thought the OP wanted some stories of paranormal activity instead of this rush to poo-poo anything someone posts of their story. Hmm. Very enlightening. Lets now switch to discussing the incredible value of tone wood in our (perceived) bass sound.

 

[One Drop]

There we go...as expected. Its all just how we erroneously attribute something when it was just a perceptual process of interpretation that has nothing to do with an entity other than ourselves. That certainly explains now to my great satisfaction a physical movement of a physical object right in front of my eyes over the course of a few feet along with an auditory experience, in a house that had been "bothered" for quite a while. I just simply did not see or hear it correctly. Whew...I feel better.

Ah yes, all the research by these scientists shows it was my interpretation of that sensory data. Ya ya ya.

Yes, we can categorically state now that we at IT. Nothing nor anybody else to it. There is only us.

Dang--------I thought the OP wanted some stories of paranormal activity instead of this rush to poo-poo anything someone posts of their story. Hmm. Very enlightening. Lets now switch to discussing the incredible value of tone wood in our (perceived) bass sound.

I haven't poo-pooed anyone's story or accused them of lying or anything else.

I have offered some plausible explanations that are are as valid an explanation than disembodied spirits or ghosts or whatever you want to call them.

I have engaged with those that insist that science is worthless or a bad way to approach the as yet unexplained.

I have also not said it's impossible that there exists the possibility that all if it is true, including visiting aliens, Sasquatch, and the Great Gazoo.

It's just bloody unlikely, and your explanation for what you saw is no better than a complete guess and most probably explainable if you had the time and resources to investigate it fully, or had you done do at the time.

If you believe in it so strongly why does my opinion matter do much to you? And why the ad hominem?

It's not very cool to make a point either, followed by a cement that you know what the answer will be.
I never even addressed your stories, but I did comment on your opinions, which I think is fair.

So far no one has commented or probably even watched any of the relevant articles or videos I've linked. If they had we might be capable of actually having an interesting conversation instead of talking past each other.

I fully believe you experienced what you did. I just think the interpretation is framed by your beliefs and expectations, or by suggestion, for example. This is entirely ordinary and we are all subject to it as human beings.

I simply take nothing as an article of faith, and as an amateur student of history, anthropology, and an admirer of the scientific method, am aware that we are not the first and won't be the last to assign what we cannot explain to the
supernatural.

Look, I get it that you guys don't want to have your experiences questioned. I'll leave you in peace to trade ghost stories, just don't expect to argue with my points and for me not to react. You are the second person here to complain about this thread's direction and then personally make sure it stays there.

 

[MEKer]

I haven't poo-pooed anyone's story or accused them of lying or anything else.

I have offered some plausible explanations that are are as valid an explanation than disembodied spirits or ghosts or whatever you want to call them.

I have engaged with those that insist that science is worthless or a bad way to approach the as yet unexplained.

I have also not said it's impossible that there exists the possibility that all if it is true, including visiting aliens, Sasquatch, and the Great Gazoo.

It's just bloody unlikely, and your explanation for what you saw is no better than a complete guess and most probably explainable if you had the time and resources to investigate it fully, or had you done do at the time.

If you believe in it so strongly why does my opinion matter do much to you? And why the ad hominem?

It's not very cool to make a point either, followed by a cement that you know what the answer will be.
I never even addressed your stories, but I did comment on your opinions, which I think is fair.

So far no one has commented or probably even watched any of the relevant articles or videos I've linked. If they had we might be capable of actually having an interesting conversation instead of talking past each other.

I fully believe you experienced what you did. I just think the interpretation is framed by your beliefs and expectations, or by suggestion, for example. This is entirely ordinary and we are all subject to it as human beings.

I simply take nothing as an article of faith, and as an amateur student of history, anthropology, and an admirer of the scientific method, am aware that we are not the first and won't be the last to assign what we cannot explain to the
supernatural.

Look, I get it that you guys don't want to have your experiences questioned. I'll leave you in peace to trade ghost stories, just don't expect to argue with my points and for me not to react. You are the second person here to complain about this thread's direction and then personally make sure it stays there.

Well, all that's very nice. And I like the minimizing by use of the Great Gazoo.
By the way, I certainly did investigate the incident I briefly described quite fully at the time, as did the others there. Pretty simple to do so as it was a very straight forward event. The event was certainly not a "guessable thing" nor was our "interpretation" of it.
And again, you have to fall back on, "I just think the interpretation is framed by your beliefs and expectations, or by suggestion, for example. This is entirely ordinary and we are all subject to it as human beings."
You are not the only one here, I am sure, to be an amateur student of history, anthropology, and an admirer of the scientific method. But I still see dogmatism in your stance: anything is acceptable EXCEPT.......

I agree, we'll leave this thread in peace and keep to our own thoughts on the matter.

 

[One Drop]

Well, all that's very nice. And I like the minimizing by use of the Great Gazoo.
By the way, I certainly did investigate the incident I briefly described quite fully at the time, as did the others there. Pretty simple to do so as it was a very straight forward event. The event was certainly not a "guessable thing" nor was our "interpretation" of it.
And again, you have to fall back on, "I just think the interpretation is framed by your beliefs and expectations, or by suggestion, for example. This is entirely ordinary and we are all subject to it as human beings."
You are not the only one here, I am sure, to be an amateur student of history, anthropology, and an admirer of the scientific method. But I still see dogmatism in your stance: anything is acceptable EXCEPT.......

I agree, we'll leave this thread in peace and keep to our own thoughts on the matter.

Cool.

BTW the Gazoo was uncalled for, but then again he never comes when called anyway. I'm also a student of The Flintstones.

 

[adivin]

There we go...as expected. Its all just how we erroneously attribute something when it was just a perceptual process of interpretation that has nothing to do with an entity other than ourselves. That certainly explains now to my great satisfaction a physical movement of a physical object right in front of my eyes over the course of a few feet along with an auditory experience, in a house that had been "bothered" for quite a while. I just simply did not see or hear it correctly. Whew...I feel better.

Ah yes, all the research by these scientists shows it was my interpretation of that sensory data. Ya ya ya.

Yes, we can categorically state now that we at IT. Nothing nor anybody else to it. There is only us.

Dang--------I thought the OP wanted some stories of paranormal activity instead of this rush to poo-poo anything someone posts of their story. Hmm. Very enlightening. Lets now switch to discussing the incredible value of tone wood in our (perceived) bass sound.

I would love to hear your story. Please ignore the campfire pissers. They should go start their own, "No Evidence of Ghost" thread.

 

[One Drop]

I would love to hear your story. Please ignore the campfire pissers. They should go start their own, "No Evidence of Ghost" thread.

I'm honored by my new title.

I really didn't mean to stir up such hostility. I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.