Ghosts.... Is There Any Proof, and Why do You believe.

Originally posted by tinfoilman
We have to acknowledge that a ghost's behavior is vastly different than that of a human being who's had a near death experience and so we should keep and open mind. Perhaps they're not human at all.

edit on 21-11-2010 by tinfoilman because: (no reason given)

Depending on the type of haunting, this can be true. The Residual Haunting isn't human. It's not even consciously aware that it exists. Since you've been an investigator, you know that these manifestations are like holographic information loops embedded within the physical environment.

As far as the Intelligent Haunting, these are human, but you have to realize that what we are as human is not what the fully viable, completed human being actually is. In fact, they're human. We're corporeal beings that are still in gestation. The difference between them and us is the difference between us and a fetus. Literally.

The human brain is the generator of the fully viable human being. What we experience, as corporeal humans, is one burst of generated Intellect at a time, with each burst disappearing to a collective mass of contextually associated bursts that have already occurred, as it is replaced by the next burst of generated Intellect. The fully viable human being is that entire mass of gathered bursts - the entire intellectual whole of the human being from the moment of birth until corporeal death - with the composite personality as the conscious awareness that puts the face on the whole thing (so to speak).

The result is probably not what we might expect it to be, and the difference between one human and another - at this level of existence - might be pretty significant, as far as motivation, focus, behavior and whatever else contributes to the character of an individual.

Keep in mind, too, that the contact between the fully viable human being and the gestational human being (which is what we are) is not a simple matter for the fully developed human being. Their realm (it is an informational realm) is extremely incompatible with the corporeal realm (which is based on cause and effect, with residual information setting up the channels of potential), which means that the only humans that find a way to bridge the gap are not what one would consider normally motivated (allowing for those moments when a loved one peeks through to set someone at ease - perfectly understandable). These individuals are extremely obsessive, and have very powerful reasons for working to maintain any level of connection.

That said, and with each of them knowing that we'll all get there soon enough anyway, the drive to impact the corporeal world is often egotism, and a need to be legendary in some sense. The saddest "ghosts" are the people who were psychologically/psychiatrically messed up, and after death, their gathered Intellect simply reflects the fact that their brains never worked right to begin with. Their motivations can vary significantly.

Trying to make a determination on the character of all passed people by the random examples offered by the rare few who've made the effort to be noticed is like judging all people by the few who do what it takes to draw attention to themselves online, on live TV, and on YouTube. If you did that, you'd think everyone was a friggin' idiot.

It has finally happened, I have been overcome by too many "logical" reasons for why I should stop investigating the paranormal, "ghosts", and even compiling the evidence and information based on those investigations. It has apparently been a huge waste of time. Not only a waste of my time, but also a waste of time for the 1,000's of other investigators and scientists currently involved in the research and study of the paranormal field. And why you may ask? Because we ultimately "care" that some people will not be convinced or allow themselves to believe in something extraordinary or unbelievable, because that is why we got into such an esoteric field in the first place, to change peoples minds and beg for "their" belief. Well it's not that easy, I personally could care less about whether fundamentalists and skeptics believe or not or whether the "evidence " compels them or not. I didn't get into the paranormal field primarily to take on skeptics and non-believers with photos,video, and audio documentation, it all stemmed from my own personal paranormal experiences from a young age. This also being the catalyst for why any legitimate investigator has gotten involved in the field, having to deal with a skeptical community just comes with the territory. The documentation of evidence on investigations isn't used as a means to convince the "masses", it is used as a means of reference relative to the investigation and research. It isn't about the, "Look, see, now you have to believe me!?" approach that many investigators, with hidden agendas, would instill in the public.

What I have to go on is what information, data, and documentation I have amassed on the cases that I have been "personally" involved in, or what other research and information I have studied from other "credible" investigators. And the majority of that data, "worthless" evidence, and "waste of time" investigation all strongly point to a correlation between "ghosts","spirit activity", and "life after death", whether you choose to believe it or not. This is not to suggest that "all" paranormal activity can be attributed to this, but the majority of investigations, studies, and research seem to point in that direction. I cannot and will not claim to have the answers..to be some sort of "paranormal answer man", I can only imply what my personal studies, case investigations, and the research of many others suggest. And if that isn't good enough for some then so be it, it hasn't stopped us yet and isn't going to, regardless how "illogical" it appears. And if in the end, all of this waste of time work and worthless evidence ends up proving that "ghosts" are NOT the "spirits" of the dead, I will be the first to speak out and admit that we were all wrong all along and it WAS just a waste of time. But until that day comes, I will continue to compile worthless evidence and do meaningless research and investigation. Because nothing is more of a waste of time and effort than doing nothing at all for distraught individuals, tormented families, and it seems, even a skeptical society who wants proof of the truth, even if some proof isn't proof enough. Science on any level is based on speculation, false positives, until founded results are proven and that also rings true for paranormal investigation. We have yet to find a definitive cure for AIDS or cancer, but that doesn't mean that the efforts of those involved in the research and study of those diseases are just their wasting of time and that their findings thus far are meaningless.

Originally posted by openmind444
We have yet to find a definitive cure for AIDS or cancer, but that doesn't mean that the efforts of those involved in the research and study of those diseases are just their wasting of time and that their findings thus far are meaningless.

Like I said, you can HELP people with what YOU know, but no matter how much evidence you throw at people, it won't make them BELIEVE anything they don't wish to believe. See AIDS denialism

If you're doing it to make other people BELIEVE you are wasting your time. If you want to cure AIDS or help get rid of ghosts from their house and HELP them, that's fine. However, don't be surprised if the people you help turn right around and say they don't believe in ghosts after they just watched you help them. Don't be suprised if people still say HIV doesn't cause AIDS even after we find a cure for it based on that assumption. They'll take the cure, then turn right around say HIV doesn't cause AIDS. That's just the way people are. Evidence doesn't make people believe.

But I see here I'm wasting my time. I could give you evidence all day, but it will never change what you BELIEVE will it?

reply to post by NorEaster


Nice theory with no proof=worthless.

reply to post by kevinunknown


It's hard for me to look at several very level-headed individuals and tell them that they must either be crazy or on drugs. It's even harder for me to tell four very honest people who had the exact same experience in broad daylight that they're either lying or crazy.

I think of the ghost phenomenon as analogous to other things in the past. We know now that a lot of what used to be considered curses are actually caused by germs. We know now that what would have been considered possession back in the day is actually caused by schizophrenia. I believe what people are seeing, hearing, feeling, and having done to them. I also believe that it's the result of some natural phenomenon we don't yet understand.

reply to post by tinfoilman
Okay, so what is your point of being here on this thread..to talk just for the sake of talking and to kick around symantics?..Is there even a point that you are trying to make other than reinforcing your own opinion? I have gotten that you think that paranormal investigation and the evidence obtained is worthless? So what is your next move, what do you hope to accomplish by remaining here? I have replied and replied....you tell us, what is your purpose with continuing on this thread?

reply to post by tinfoilman
I also made it quite clear why I do what I do and why many others do what they do, it isn't to convince people to believe...it's about furthering the research to get closer to answers...for the field and for the individuals afflicted with paranormal activity...it's not about convincing anyone of anything nor forcing anyone to believe..as I have said over and over...how many times do I have to say it before you understand that point. It is about trying to understand something that we really know little about, but we are trying. And if you were an investigator, as you claim you were in the past, then I would expect that you would understand that, but considering your hard-headedness to possibility and the unknown, it doesn't surprise me that you were as ineffective as an investigator as you appear to be.

reply to post by tinfoilman
I believe you are a lost cause my friend...nothing anyone says is going to resonate with you...you are just too closed off to plausibility and possibility, regardless of any personal experiences that you have had in the past.

Originally posted by openmind444
reply to post by tinfoilman

 

I also made it quite clear why I do what I do and why many others do what they do, it isn't to convince people to believe...it's about furthering the research to get closer to answers...for the field and for the individuals afflicted with paranormal activity...it's not about convincing anyone of anything nor forcing anyone to believe..

It isn't? This isn't about you, it's about what you said to me remember?

Originally posted by openmind444
reply to post by tinfoilman
you have to document this activity with photographs or video to be taken seriously.

And my point to you was, there's already plenty enough evidence out there that shows ghosts are real. What about your evidence? You say you have all this evidence? Is anyone taking you seriously? No, not really. Paranormal research is considered a joke in most scientific circles. Look at how many people don't take your evidence seriously, brush it off, and STILL refuse to believe in ghosts.

My point was, if I want to be taken seriously I'll just tell my story to someone I know will take it seriously. You don't need anymore evidence from me cause there's already MOUNDS of it out there that people just ignore and brush off.

Like I said, if you want people to take paranormal research seriously you need to convince an authority figure to indoctrinate society with it such as the government to tell the people that it is serious.

People only listen to their authorities. Evidence won't do it. For example religion. A lot of people say there's no evidence of religion, but people believe in it because the authority figure TELLS them to. Politicians run on it. Parents indoctrinate their children at a young age. Preachers preach it in church that the kids are forced to attend. It's not because people looked at the evidence. 99.9% of people either don't have time to look at evidence, don't know how to analyse it, or aren't interested in it.

Now the authority figures are starting to go the atheist route. Taking the 10 commandments out school/court rooms. Not allowing prayer in school. What do we see? Atheism on a small rise. But the evidence for religion is the same as it always has been. The only difference is, now our authority figures, politicians, parents, school teachers, and scientists are starting to say, there might not be a God. This is also why so many people are against abstinence education in schools. Because it doesn't work, but they know the kids are never going to look at the evidence. They'll just go by what they're TOLD to do.

If you want to be taken seriously and I want to be taken seriously. Evidence don't matter. You have to start out with someone that'll take you seriously in the first place, and you have to start with someone that'll take ALL the other evidence that's already out there seriously.

My point to you is taking more pictures is a waste of my time and your time. If you don't already believe the evidence out there, more won't help you. The people that think all ghost photos are fake, are still going to think all ghost photos are fake until someone that has authority over them, tells them that the evidence we already have, is valid.

That's the problem with paranormal evidence. Scientists tell the people it's NOT valid evidence. Until that changes, most people will believe that.

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by NorEaster

 

Nice theory with no proof=worthless.

You would have to say the very same thing about the Theory of Relativity, the existence of wormholes, dark energy, dark matter, black holes, the speed of light as a definitively measurable rate of velocity, and the majority of cosmological physics as depicted by scientists within the theater of open space. You'd have to dismiss the Big Bang Theory, monotheism, theism in general, string theory, most of Quantum Theory, and every single religion that exists if proof means laboratory replicable evidence. You'd have to deny the existence of consciousness itself if that was the criterion. It's a good thing that "proof" is not what the scientific community uses to validate an acceptable theory.

What they use to establish the plausibility of each and every theory - or the lack of plausibility, as the case may be - is what's known as logical extrapolation, and the more responsible the extrapolation, the more plausible the theory. I just published a book called "Taking Down the Curtain - God, Man, and the human being" that lays out the logical case for what I suggested in that post that you just dismissed. It takes - literally - 118,000 words to properly present the logical basis for the notion that consciousness is an ultra-sophisticated form of information, and that the corporeal brain is the only way that such information can be generated. It also establishes that the human brain generates a unique version of consciousness that we call Dynamic Intellect, and that Dynamic Intellect is what people have witnessed when confronted by the "Intelligent Haunting".

If you are actually interested in what has been uncovered concerning what we humans are, and why we exist, then the Amazon.com link for the book is in my signature, and it's all there for less than the price of dinner at an Outback Steakhouse. If it doesn't mean that much to you, then don't go around pretending that it does with these bully-boy skeptic threads. Yeah, there are a lot of idiots and hucksters out there, and some really well-meaning folks who've been taken in by them. And a lot of those folks wander through these threads from day to day. But there is a reality that does exist, and just like the invisible gases within the breeze that moves the leaves as it sweeps on by, it makes its presence known by affecting the stuff we can see. It's knowable if we simply take the time to examine what sits all around us with the right frame of mind.

There's nothing supernatural about anything, and no such thing as miracles. Just a bigger world out here than science has been able to document, but then that was the case 400 years ago, when quarks didn't exist, and viruses didn't exist, and decent folks didn't challenge the notion that demons were responsible for the bad things in life. Hell, 60 years ago they were still treating mental illness by drilling holes in people's heads and hooking their brains up to car batteries, although that may have been more for the benefit of the doctors' psychological relief than the patients' but still, it was a practice that was widely sanctioned. 100 years from now, I wonder what it si that we believe that they'll laugh at, or cringe over?

So, your dismissal - due to a "lack of proof" - is both baseless (since you haven't examined the proof that I may have) and inappropriate (since successful logical extrapolation is the criterion for all scientific theory). I challenge you to do your research (get my book and see what I have uncovered) and then to debate me on the subject in this forum. I will gladly take you, or anyone else who's done that required research, on and would actually appreciate it if anyone can prove that my extrapolations are either illogical or if the sum total of what I have gathered does not successfully indicate the conclusions that I have reached. If what I have does hold up to scrutiny, then this is a very new direction for serious research to take, and definitely worth launching as a viable premise.

reply to post by tinfoilman
You can say what you want, you pick and choose what you want from my posts to suite your own needs and arguments, it's cool, do what you do. But I will say this, we have been called in on many cases where those who contacted us had no preconceived notions or belief system in ghosts or paranormal activity as a whole. They were just as skeptical as most people and remained so through-out the entire investigative process.. that was until they were confronted with the scientific data, logged with scientific measurement devices of various kinds, that accompanied and corroborated with the photographic, video, and audio evidence. This evidence facilitated their belief, yet they didn't have the President of the United States or the head of M.I.T.'s technology and research department to tell them what they should accept as real.

What I am getting at is that in these cases and countless similar others, by other investigators, the evidence is what does the talking and the convincing...not an authority figure from the government or even an investigator saying, "This is what I think is happening here." We allow the clients to make up their own minds as to what they think of the documented evidence, they don't need someone to make up their minds for them, or to tell them what to think or feel. So regardless of your personal opinion as to evidence being worthless, there are plenty of people that feel that it is invaluable, not only that, but a necessity to the research and advancement of the paranormal field, which is what is important..not whether or not Barack Obama says that it is worthy of belief. What is the point of living as an open-minded individual in a free society, if people like you still feel that the citizens need to be told what is real, worthy of belief, or what to do. That is a dissolution of freewill, maybe that works in the land of Oz tinfoilman, but this is the "real world" and people don't operate that way nor will stand for it. And as much fun and frustrating as it has been batting this back and forth with you, I am bowing out of this thread. I hope for your sake, at some point in the future, that Stephan Hawking will rise from his chair and announce that ghosts and paranormal activity is a reality. That way the millions of believers from across the globe and down through the ages won't have to be made to feel silly and inferior because they finally have someone important and authoritive to "allow them to accept" a phenomena that they already accepted as real.

Originally posted by kevinunknown

Then we have those who believe in ghosts either because they have seen a ghost themselves or have read the testimony of another who claims to have seen a ghost. There could be a whole multitude of reason that a person has “seen a ghost” they could be drunk, dreaming, hallucinating, have a neurological impairment or a mental illness or they could just be stoned. These explanations are all much more logical then meeting a dead Elvis on the train to work. And to form your beliefs in Ghosts on the basis of somebody else’s testimony is just ignorant unless they have hard proof that they saw a ghost.


My question then is why you believe in Ghosts and paranormal energy?

I believe in ghosts because I have seen them with my own eyes and have felt their presence. I confirm to all of ATS that i was not impaired by alcohol or drugs in any way, shape or form. That the apparitions were not an hallucination or due to any neurological impairment and that I have no mental illness. That these were and are personal experiences, not the related tales of others.

Unfortunately I can offer no hard proof other than my word. Except that my wife was witness to one of the worst of those apparitions. The thought of which still causes her to break into a sweat.

Openminded444, You feed their hunger for debate. Don't let them use you to prove their point. You said that it doesn't matter if they believe or not and that you are not here to convince them, then stop feeding them. with arguments. Feed them instead with your personal experiences. If you were of sound mind and state then they cannot refute anything you say. Let them starve.

reply to post by palg1
Feeding some of theses individuals with accounts of personal experiences really does nothing but feed another debate and another argument all together for these types of people, believe me I have tried. If the available evidence, from various mediums, isn't enough to satisfy this jolly lot, then tales of personal ghostly and paranormal encounters are just as unlikely to have any affect. These folks have their opinions and beliefs, and obviously, will not be dissuaded. I don't mind arguing and debating, I have just noticed that there are not too many paranormal investigators around ATS that are willing to go to bat for the paranormal field, but I will because this is what I do, and I am most certainly not going to let someone downplay it's relevance, because in their minds it isn't good enough or is worthless. Though, I also realize when it is time to stop debating and move on to other, more worth while, endeavors.

reply to post by openmind444


I really hope your right. I do, I hope I'm wrong. But if you're right I have to wonder why people don't already take the evidence that already exists seriously. I don't think more will convince the masses. It'll just be more of the same old stuff. I still believe seeing is believing. If people don't experience it for themselves, the evidence just never seems to convince anyone. Not in my experience.

I think I just found one! Check it out and actually check the entire thread out if you haven't already. At least the video in the op. It will explain the screenshot.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

We can only go through experience on this. Some people have a more open view and often say, "There's more between heaven and earth then we'll ever know" while some are dead set in their beliefs dismissing anything presented to them.

In my opinion, there are tons of evidence out there that supports an after life. I used to be a "ghost hunter" for quite a few years, I've caught things which I cannot debunk. Mostly EVP's and apparitions in TV sets that haven't worked for YEARS.

I can't say for certain, that what I and others have caught are what people call "ghosts", but it's something outside the normal, i.e. paranormal.

But what is a ghost? When people hear this, they think voodoo magic. Things that just can't be explained. Things that are so far from anything scientific that is *has to be nonsense*. Well, if you think about it, many agree that our spirits, *ghosts* are nothing more then energy. They say you can't just destroy energy, so wouldn't it be a little more logical to say that our energy is released from our body when we die?

That we continue despite the destruction of our body? Maybe there's a scientific way to prove that ghosts exist, beyond that of EVP's and apparitions. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone invents something which can gauge exactly *what* is around us. (Other then electromagnetic fields often tied to ghosts.)

And there have been ton of reports about animal ghosts. Ranging from dogs to cats to even rats. I've even heard the story about a cow that had passed on many years ago after being hit by a truck make drivers swerve off the road after seemingly standing in the middle of the road only to disappear.

My own 0.2 of course.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by NorEaster

 

Nice theory with no proof=worthless.

You would have to say the very same thing about the Theory of Relativity, the existence of wormholes, dark energy, dark matter, black holes, the speed of light as a definitively measurable rate of velocity, and the majority of cosmological physics as depicted by scientists within the theater of open space. You'd have to dismiss the Big Bang Theory, monotheism, theism in general, string theory, most of Quantum Theory, and every single religion that exists if proof means laboratory replicable evidence. You'd have to deny the existence of consciousness itself if that was the criterion. It's a good thing that "proof" is not what the scientific community uses to validate an acceptable theory.

Those things aren't my field. I'm a computer scientist . When it comes to black holes, big bangs and quantum theory, I don't know if those things are true/false. I haven't looked at any of evidence for that. Even if I did, I wouldn't understand the math behind it and I don't have time to do that with the work I already do. It's not my field. I have to take the word of the scientists that are in that field like astronomers.

Like I said, I believe there might be black holes because that's what someone TOLD me. I have no idea if it's true. I'm not even smart enough to go over the evidence to know if it's true. Throw all the evidence in the world at me and it won't help. It's not my field, I won't understand it!

Now, if you do really have proof of ghosts, there's no point in debating me cause I already believe in ghosts. If you have proof about what the afterlife is like, you need to debate someone, but not me. It's not my field and I'm not an authority on the subject.

You need to be debating neuroscientists and astronomers and other REAL paranormal researchers of which I am not anymore. Like I said, I only did it for fun. I would love to read/watch your debate and see how things go. And I would love to see you prove your theory and win a Nobel prize, which you probably would, but it's not going to help to debate it with me because if there is evidence to prove you wrong, that evidence probably is not in my head. It's probably in the head of someone that specializes in the field.

You could prove it to me by debating someone else more knowledgeable on your theories, but if you debate me, even if you convince me you could still be wrong. If you really have proof of the afterlife you need to get it peer reviewed and I'm not one of your peers. That doesn't mean I won't check out the book though.

Personally I do not believe in "ghosts" i do believe that what people claim to be ghosts are real, just that they are not ghosts. I am a Christian an as such the Bible says that to be absent from the Body is to be present with the Lord, and that it is appointed once for man to die, then the judgment. So I do not believe that ghosts are dearly departed spirits. Although i do believe they are spirits. Demonic ones. They may lie and pretend to be human but are not.

reply to post by Jermicide
Wow..

Originally posted by tinfoilman
You could prove it to me by debating someone else more knowledgeable on your theories, but if you debate me, even if you convince me you could still be wrong. If you really have proof of the afterlife you need to get it peer reviewed and I'm not one of your peers. That doesn't mean I won't check out the book though.

Believe me, I'd love to have this thing peer reviewed. The b*tch is that there arent any "peer" disciplines that exist to deal with the breadth of this premise as a whole. Metaphysics is the closest, but that field has been hijacked by a lot of magical thinking and smoke and mirrors, and the paranormal research community seems to be the folks closest in focus that are still dealing with facts and responsible extrapolation.

We're working to get this book into the hands of serious people for critical review, and I still hold out hope for forward movement in that effort. I'm very confident with what's been detailed, and there's no one that's published anything that comes anywhere near it in scope or sheer application as an open door to solving some of the biggest mysteries that exist. That's a big statement, but I'm not afraid to make it because the premise backs me up on it.