Why Ghosts are not Real

Originally posted by Soulstone

call me "delusional" all you want, and i'll call you an ignorant, closed-minded know-it-all for even daring to challenge the subjects that us humans know next to nothing about. yes, that includes you.

Do you see you are contradicting yourself? You said in your post that God created many dimensions and all humans. "You know next to nothing about it" so why make up stories?

until you accept the fact that we can never truly comprehend or fathom a higher plane of existence or dimension until we're actually there, then you're always going to continue to have these questions. read a book called "Flatland"!

en.wikipedia.org...

EDIT: and i said we know NEXT to nothing about these topics. i, however, at least know now that there's a divine creator, but i doubt i'll ever be able to fully understand "it" in this material density that we occupy.

[edit on 30-8-2008 by adrenochrome]

Ghost are a stamp on reality. The device is born and dies, but remnants always remain, somewhere.

Except for the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, he is not real but a figment of one man's imagination.




[edit on 30-8-2008 by pluckynoonez]

reply to post by Soulstone

Usually ghosts can not be seen but they can be heard. This way they are trying to communicate with us for example. But if you see a ghost usually you will not know that its a ghost because it can look like a real person
If you have more questions feel free to ask and i will try to answer to you

reply to post by pluckynoonez


You say they're a stamp on reality, but you have no evidence for it.

That's what I'm getting at - this whole field is simply people's opinion, without a single shred of evidence anywhere to be found.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by pluckynoonez

 

You say they're a stamp on reality, but you have no evidence for it.

That's what I'm getting at - this whole field is simply people's opinion, without a single shred of evidence anywhere to be found.

according to most logic we are taught, yes, ghosts don't seem like a plausible entity in the reality we live in. i never "believed in them", never wanted to see one, yet one day I did see one w/ my own eyes. was the most amazing thing i've ever seen.

i wouldn't expect anyone to "believe" in ghosts unless they've actually seen one. ghosts / phantoms / illuminations defy most of the logic humans embody.

i've heard that ghosts, sometimes, will "decide" to present themselves to you. i feel lucky to have been a chosen one. amazing stuff here folks. i appreciate the evidence hunters; just know, however, that they exist. to explain the spirit world, however, i don't think is possible from most human perspectives.

cheers all & respect the spirit world, it's a beautiful, vibrant thing.

reply to post by lagos


The belief of something perceived solely through possibly-faulty equipment is irrational. Very irrational. Your brain is not perfect, and as such is possibly mistaken.

So no, I won't believe ghosts exist until I get evidence. And you shouldn't either, if you want to be rational.

Just because you don't see,doesn't mean they are not there....you have to be open minded to see one anyway...Ghosts,spirits..etc... take on many forms,they don't always manifest into a shape sometimes they can just be heard.Animal spirits,ghosts do exist all mammals have souls and it is the soul that becomes your ghost,spirit....
Just because you may not have witnessed one or have no proof it doesn't mean they don't exist....what a dull life it would be if we all went around saying "oh thats not real cos I haven't seen it"

[edit on 30-8-2008 by special]

reply to post by special


Which is entirely your opinion, not based on any evidence or sound thinking.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by special

 

Which is entirely your opinion, not based on any evidence or sound thinking.

Actually, not true.. what you are asking for is scientific evidence (only), when in fact there are many different types of evidence.

For example: intuition, personal experience, testimonial, anecdotal evidence, scientific evidence. Types of evidence

If you look at this from a scientific skeptic point of view then yes you are right.

But this is the Paranormal forum, people here tend to offer their evidence based on personal experiences, which you seem to automatically rule out. Even the word paranormal is described as being beyond what is deemed scientifically possible.

In most definitions of the word paranormal, it is described as anything that is beyond or contrary to what is deemed scientifically possible.[35] The definition implies that the scientific explanation of the world around us is the 'normal' part of the word and 'para' makes up the above, beyond, beside, contrary, or against part of the meaning.

To rule out all types of evidence but scientific is irrational. Science is often found wanting when it attempts to explain various paranormal subjects. Even subjects such as hypnagogia, hypnopompia, exploading head syndrome, time slips have all had scientific study and yet they cannot be fully explained. I see no reason why the subject matter of ghosts cant be studied using other types of evidence that is presented.

I do believe in ghosts and actually lived in a house that was haunted. This is my own personal experience / evidence its not scientific evidence but then the opening post of this thread never asked for a scientific answer or scientific evidence.

Anyway to the OP good thread, we do need more debate threads in this forum.

Cheers,

JQ.

reply to post by John Q


If we actually want to understand something, then the only acceptible evidence is scientific. That is not irrational, but quite the opposite. I refuse to form beliefs based on shoddy, intrinsically flawed evidence. Ghost stories prove nothing.

Why can't ghosts be studied without scientific evidence? Because that is not studying, pure and simple. It's peddling anecdotes, nothing more. Don't fool yourself into thinking that you're learning - you're not. I want to learn, so I'll only accept rigorous scientific evidence.

Deny ignorance - don't promote it.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by special

 

Which is entirely your opinion, not based on any evidence or sound thinking.

Well, yes we are all entitled to an opinion,as much as you are yours

reply to post by dave420


Hey again,

I've read through the rest of the thread from when I was here previously, to catch-up and it is obvious that you are adamant in your opinion ... and I'm being serious when I say that's admirable. No-one should be swayed by the opinion of another !

As I said several pages ago ... 'each to their own' but can I ask you a question (and this is a genuine enquiry to you and anyone else who is so 'absolute' when claiming that ghosts DO NOT exist).

>>> What makes your certainty so concrete in determining that they don't exist ... and what evidence can you provide to substantiate their non-existence as HARD FACT ?

This is something that as always interested me ... especially when such people also say they've had experiences but cannot and/or will not accept them as paranormal.

I'm not being facetious or trying to trick you in any way by asking this question, so please don't feel the need to be defensive / sarcastic or rude when (if) you reply.

I simply want to see whether non-believers can explain themselves in a more satifactory way than we believers appear to do !

Woody

Are ghosts real?

Why don't you ask yourself whether God is real or not.

Originally posted by MrAndy
Photos, Videos, EVPs, personal accounts.. all evidence even if you don't accept them, Dave. What you are looking for is scientific explanation, and no, we don't have that.. that's why It's still paranormal and not the simply normal. Photos, videos, audio recordings and witness testimony are all valid evidence in court, I'm not sure why they wouldn't be here. There is no proof that a photo of a cloudy figure is a dead human being's energy or whatever but it is what people would call a ghost. Anyone seriously studying the topic would observe this evidence.

There may be photos, videos, EVPs and personal accounts but until we can absolutely say what is causing these events it is irrational to assume that they are ghosts. There were many speculations made about the northern lights before it was known what they were. To make assumptions without evidence to prove what is actually happening is irrational.

It doesnt matter if there is video or EVPs or whatever, I can admit that there may be something to these claims and this documentation but to make a speculative guess without any proof that what we are seeing are actually ghosts is irrational. What if I look at the photos, video and EVPs and come to the conclusion that it is the government feeding electrical information from a device that we are unaware of. Does that seem like a rational answer or conclusion to draw? It could be true but for me to make that assumption without any proof that the government is actually the cause, is just as irrational to assume that it is caused by the souls of dead spirits.

reply to post by special


What is leading you to believe that the things that people see are ghosts? What evidence is there that the things people film and record are caused by the energies/souls/etc. of dead humans.

I propose that all of these recordings, photos, video and I witness accounts are the result of the government. They have a device that is able to generate a type of energy that creates hallucinations for some people. Is this theory as valid as saying that what people are seeing is the remnents of dead friends, family, pets, etc.?

Because I would say that govenment involvement and deceptions could be just as valid as assuming that these events are caused by some unknown paranormal energy from the spirit world. I know the govt exist, I cannot say the same for the spirit world. So which theory would be a better starting point?

reply to post by Soulstone


Actually, I never made up my mind about ghosts till I got a visit from a ghost cat when I stayed at the Lizzie Borden bed and breakfast. Most people never hear about the cat. When I spoke to the manager the next morning, she told us that the step-mothers cat had been found beheaded in the basement the day before the murders. (so this makes the experts believe it was pre-meditated) and sometimes the cat comes to visit people. Especially cat owners.

Why aren't there ghosts at the wtc? well considering that it is one big cement block right now, there really isn't much to huant. But when the new buildings are built, you might start hearing stuff.

Why do some places haunt and not others? probably for the same reason that some people do things in rl. Just human behavior.

Some things may be so traumatic that people don't want to come back.
Lets assume that someone is going to haunt because there are deep unanswered mysteries or questions surrounding their death, or life. Say like abuse or the wrong murderer is accused for ex.

If something is traumatic, say like 9/11. There is no mystery about how they died. They know, despite the scale of it all.



Not all hauntings are bad either. My husbands relatives are around all the time.

There may be ghosts or signs everywhere, but people don't see them. They are not looking.

And, not every person is going to come back, so there are only going to be a few who do for specific reasons.It takes a great deal of energy to come back.

[edit on 30-8-2008 by nixie_nox]

reply to post by iamcamouflage

Hi
well all I can say is that I have witnessed ghostly goings on all through my life,and have been around people that have also witnessed...People who have been sceptical one a devout catholic who would not believe but could not explain what he had seen.
I do not need to prove what I or the other's saw,as I know what I have seen and heard and have no other explaination as to what they could be...
Unless of course I have lost my mind.. but hey why haven't they locked me up yet!

reply to post by special


I'm not asking you to prove what you saw, i'm only asking why you assume that it is a ghost from a dead person/animal? Why are unexplained lights, noises, shadows, etc assumed to be spirits? I think that is the point myself and others are tying to make. I am open to there being things that we have not yet explained but thats just it we can create hypothesis as to what they may be but to claim 100% that its the spirit of a dead human is irrational and no more acceptable then me assuming that these events are caused by a government device.
The people who have seen things they cannot explain, attribute it to a ghost, and feel they are 100% accurate in claiming that it is a spirit from a dead human. They say unequivocally that ghosts are real but its really just a hypothesis for what they have seen.
So, I ask, for those of you who have seen something unexplainable in your eyes, is it not possible that what you saw was a hallucination generated by a device made by the government. If you feel it is not possible then you are being as close minded as those who dismiss your claims that what you have seen is impossible.
Can anyone refute the possiblity that "ghostly" phenomenon is produced by a device made by the govenment?

reply to post by iamcamouflage

This is a refreshing alternative view of the subject ... I like the way you think out of the box 'cam'.

In this day and age I would believe the government could do pretty much anything (including producing a devise that would convince us we'd seen a ghost / ufo etc) ... but do you think such a devise would have been around and accounted for ghost-sightings/experiencs that were experienced let's say ... 100yrs ago (only because that's a nice round number) ?

And if not then I have to ask ... what do you think is the explanation for older paranormal experiences ?

Woody

reply to post by woodwytch


I was really only using this as an example to show that assuming that the unexplained are 'ghosts' is not a very rational choice of explanation. But my main point was that this phenomenon could be caused by any number of things.

Lets not say it was the government but aliens that are using a device that causes us to hallucinate. It could be that the flying spaghetti monster gets its kicks by decieving humans.

Some of the more scientific explanations that I have heard for this type of phenomenon have to do with magnetic fields causing hallucinations. The electrical wiring in old houses does not have very good insulation and we know that when you run a current through a wire it generates a magnetic field. Even in new homes, there could be magnetic fields generated from all the electrical devices or even power lines outside.

The wiring in homes essentially create a cage of wire surrounding anyone inside. Not sure if its been tested but what are the results of spending time in a electrically charged wire cage.(obviously, protecting the individual from electrocution). What are the results of being exposed to large amounts or even small amounts over a long period of time, of magnetic fields.
Yale researchers have used magnetic fields on the auditory section of the brain to quiet auditory hallucinations in psychiatric patients who hear voices. So who is to say that the reverse cannot happen. Being exposed to magnetic fields could cause auditory or visual hallucinations, or even physical(being touched, sensing a presence, etc.)

I dont have a problem with people presenting thier hypothesis for these types of phenomenon but its a hypothesis, not fact. So for people to claim without a doubt that ghosts exist without having any real evidence that it is ghosts that are causing this phenomenon, is against the whole basis of this site and of science and it limits the ability to find the actual truth.

The people who claim to have seen ghosts, tell those who havent that they need to be more open minded but they have formed an opinion without fact and are being close minded in thinking that what they saw was in fact a ghost. When it could be any number of things. They will say what they saw is unexplained but then they will explain it by saying it was a ghost of a loved one who has a score to settle or that the spirit is unaware that they have died.

The irony of their claims is almost too much to handle.

Claiming that unexplained phenomenon can be explained by their interpretation that it is a ghost, makes absolutely no sense and is only their attempt to answer something that they cannot explain. If you saw something, you cannot explain and you claim its a ghost, you are being more close minded than someone who says it cannot be explained. To say something is unexplained does not mean it doesnt exist, it only means you cannot explain it with current technology or other means and until we can explain it, we should refrain from making the assumption that it is a ghost/spirit of a dead human/animal without any more proof than my government/aliens are using a device to cause you to hallucinate.


Source