Do you think this is weird? I cleaned the bathroom of water, then later in the night when nobody was there, there was water on the floor. And today the phone rang and i couldn't find it. I then looked and found it in a draw. Nobody was here. Just a random occurence that happened.

Do you think this is weird? I cleaned the bathroom of water, then later in the night when nobody was there, there was water on the floor. And today the phone rang and i couldn't find it. I then looked and found it in a draw. Nobody was here. Just a random occurence that happened.

Yes it's weird.

Wow... weird. I couldn't find a sock, then I found it.... UNDER THE BED!!! It's probably the resurrected spirit of a dead person.

Do you think this is weird? I cleaned the bathroom of water, then later in the night when nobody was there, there was water on the floor. And today the phone rang and i couldn't find it. I then looked and found it in a draw. Nobody was here. Just a random occurence that happened.

could be. my phone sometimes falls into the drawer. did you look for leaks?

if its a ghost more things will happen. than you will know for sure.:shrug:

The phone just randomly was found in a drawer. Even though i never put it there. I noticed the door was unlocked aswell. Even though i checked beforehand to make sure it was locked. Just weird things have been happening.

if its a ghost more things will happen.
No. :rolleyes:

The phone just randomly was found in a drawer. Even though i never put it there. I noticed the door was unlocked aswell. Even though i checked beforehand to make sure it was locked. Just weird things have been happening.

I've had the same thing happen to me however I came to another more reasonable conclusion. I've been watched for some time now and those people, whoever they are, have found a way into my home while I wasn't here. I know this because I do not believe in "ghosts" but try to figure things out logically. Things were moved, doors were left ajar and unlocked when I knew they were shut and locked.

Things were moved just a little bit so that it would make me think that "something" was here and there was someone here instead. There's many people that want to find out what I'm up to and the only way to do so is to break into my house and look around to see what they can find. Are you doing anything that suggests that you might be up to something no matter what that something is? If so then you might be having the same problem with unwanted guests as I do and I've set up a camera that activates upon any movement inside my house and since then nothing has happened.

If you can afford a cheap surveillance camera then set it up pointing at a place where people must walk through and see if anything can be captured. That would be the only way to prove if "ghosts" are there or someone is trying to spy on you.

And today the phone rang and i couldn't find it. I then looked and found it in a draw. Nobody was here.

If nobody was there how do you know the phone rang? Wierd...

Reminded me of a Rodney Dangerfield joke:
My girl friend told be to come over cause no one was home.
So when I got there and knocked on the door - no one was home...:D

Listen about the ghost I wouldn't worry about it. At the very worst case there is a ghost and you will get scared and stuff, which is cheaper than going to a movie to get scared. You can then call those moron ghost hunter fools on the scify channel and they can come over and you will be on TV.

Do you think this is weird? I cleaned the bathroom of water, then later in the night when nobody was there, there was water on the floor.

Leaky tap or toilet?

Condensation? Did you have a shower then leave for a while?

Did anybody else go into the bathroom while you weren't there?


And today the phone rang and i couldn't find it. I then looked and found it in a draw.

Maybe you mean a drawer.

Do you normally put your phone in a drawer?

Do you live with somebody else who puts the phone in the drawer?

Did you clean up and absent-mindedly put the phone in a drawer?

No such thing as ghosts. It's probably aliens.

I've never understood how believers can believe in guardian angels and not ghosts

No such thing as ghosts. It's probably aliens.
Yep. The Phone-hiding Aliens are much worse than Greys.

Yep. The Phone-hiding Aliens are much worse than Greys.

or gingers...unless it is the ghost of a ginger :eek:

It wasn't a ghost. It was a troll.

Most people would just say your crazy...that you must have forgotten where you put the phone....or that you thought you cleaned the water up...lol...However, I think its odd. That kind of thing doesn't just happen!

The phone just randomly was found in a drawer. Even though i never put it there.

This is what those in the medical community call "forgetting".


I noticed the door was unlocked aswell. Even though i checked beforehand to make sure it was locked. Just weird things have been happening.

If you're having memory problems such as this frequently then you may want to consult a neurologist as there may actually be a problem with your brain.

Hehe...among other things, I have a dissociative disorder...
"Why are your shoes on the dining-room table?"
"I dunno."
"Why are your keys in the freezer?"
"I dunno."

The phone just randomly was found in a drawer. Even though i never put it there. I noticed the door was unlocked aswell. Even though i checked beforehand to make sure it was locked. Just weird things have been happening.

It sounds like you've got something going on. Did someone recently pass away? Or did something new get brought into the place? Most the time its believed objects are haunted.

Other things that can trigger these kinds of activities are poltergeist. Trauma, puberty, a birth of a child, menapause are triggers to poltergeist activity. If its poltergeist activity, it is possible you could be haunted. its called having an attachie. Sometimes this occures in spurts for some reason and than suddenly stops just as fast. Other times you can end up with it getting worse. Usually this happens because of becoming a magnet to demons are entities which have never been human. than a possesion may start. seperating you from others. draining you in different ways. taking over where you have no memory. trance like states are mentioned. people believe they have special powers, like teleportation, making it rain, or being able to control fire.

extreme cases recorded.

edit: when i say recorded, to all those able to witness these things the people are able to manipulate things on observation. fire appearing at random, water droplets falling from no where or zooming across the room, things being thrown or stacked.

It sounds like you've got something going on.
Yep. Error or delusion.


Other things that can trigger these kinds of activities are poltergeist.
No they can't.


Trauma, puberty, a birth of a child, menapause are triggers to poltergeist activity.
False.


If its poltergeist activity, it is possible you could be haunted.
No, it's not.


Usually this happens because of becoming a magnet to demons are entities which have never been human. than a possesion may start. seperating you from others. draining you in different ways. taking over where you have no memory. trance like states are mentioned.
Yeah, but watching at least one Mickey Mouse cartoon will cure it. :rolleyes:

Usually this happens because of becoming a magnet to demons are entities which have never been human. than a possesion may start. seperating you from others.

Do you really believe that kind of crap? It would seem very implausible for any of that to exist and it as yet has never been proved to exist so how can you make such statements? :shrug:

Do you really believe that kind of crap? It would seem very implausible for any of that to exist and it as yet has never been proved to exist so how can you make such statements? :shrug:

yes i do believe. if everything else fails to help, i hope this will help. i don't mean don't find alternative explainations. but yeah, i do believe. Weather us humans are able to do it by tapping into another part of the brain, and is triggered by hormonal signals, that is something worth science looking into. imo.

yWeather us humans are able to do it by tapping into another part of the brain, and is triggered by hormonal signals, that is something worth science looking into. imo.
We aren't able to do it at all.
And it's not something that is worth science looking into since it has already been shown to be specious crap.

We aren't able to do it at all.
And it's not something that is worth science looking into since it has already been shown to be specious crap.

not true. its never been proven to be crap. its just people who never really done much research except trying to prove it crap that would make this claim.

heres one science link. google enfield poltergeist in london. I will be back with more links to research.

evidence of the after life is another good google. you can find tons of documented cases. why were you hoping for a personal story?

When i was working, a janitorial position at nights had some activity. My work for example would be done, leave a room and it would be totally wrecked.a few times caught on video some kids were responsible. that usually had to do with clogging toilets.

another job, different work, samething. i was fired.

i've been spanked, slapped around for locking doors from the inside to rooms. my parents punishment. blamed for constant problems with a transitor going out and lights blowing. my friends ended up with blown pipes when i visited. asked into a hot tub, only to double over in pain. my friends got burnt because somehow the temp was set to high. went to family to visit. their budda statues were all broken, the eletrical went haywire by an animal. coincidence. could be. but i know how i left a room.

not true. its never been proven to be crap.
That would be incorrect.


heres one science link. google enfield poltergeist in london. I will be back with more links to research.
How does that help your claim?
I quote:

In the book he Ghost That Haunted Itself, Jan-Andrew Henderson argues that "(b)oth [the Amityville and Enfield poltergeist cases] turned out to be fakes. The witnesses were misrepresented or had something to gain. Evidence turned out to be manufactured.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfield_Poltergeist
Fail.


evidence of the after life is another good google.
There is no evidence of the afterlife. Merely claims. lies or poor judgement.


you can find tons of documented cases
Er, fabricated cases, or mistaken cases. No actual cases.


caught on video some kids were responsible

coincidence
So straight away you're admitting there could be a rational explanation. Well done.

That would be incorrect.


How does that help your claim?
I quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfield_Poltergeist
Fail.


There is no evidence of the afterlife. Merely claims. lies or poor judgement.


Er, fabricated cases, or mistaken cases. No actual cases.



So straight away you're admitting there could be a rational explanation. Well done.

thats your view to make it irrational. im just saying alternative possibilities could be taking place. how do explain the unnatural wave sounds recorded by scientist?

Something i learned long ago as a child. somethings can not be explained in the rational sense your talking about. when i was 8, walking in the park. felt something wet on the side of my foot. looked down and the side of my foot was open. nothing i could see could of done this. i found myself trying to get home crawling. when i was too slow and losing tissue, i had to walk on it. two flaps on skin were used to regraph my foot. how is it possible to be torn open like that but not know how for the second time that month? notice my other foot had just healed from a wound suddenly appeared on the side of my foot. we did find glass in the yard to put blame, but when getting hurt, your pain kicks in when it happens and you know, oh i stepped on something. this did not happen.

thats your view to make it irrational
Wrong.


im just saying alternative possibilities could be taking place
Also wrong. Science rules certain things out. Among those things are "ghosts" and "poltergeists".


how do explain the unnatural wave sounds recorded by scientist?
"Wave sounds"? Huh?


Something i learned long ago as a child. somethings can not be explained in the rational sense your talking about. when i was 8, walking in the park. felt something wet on the side of my foot. looked down and the side of my foot was open. nothing i could see could of done this. i found myself trying to get home crawling. when i was too slow and losing tissue, i had to walk on it. two flaps on skin were used to regraph my foot. how is it possible to be torn open like that but not know how for the second time that month? notice my other foot had just healed from a wound suddenly appeared on the side of my foot. we did find glass in the yard to put blame, but when getting hurt, your pain kicks in when it happens and you know, oh i stepped on something. this did not happen.
In other words you've decided on a supernatural explanation rather than try to explain it or simply leave it as "one of those things".
:rolleyes:
Less gullibility, more rationality.

Wrong.


Also wrong. Science rules certain things out. Among those things are "ghosts" and "poltergeists".


"Wave sounds"? Huh?


In other words you've decided on a supernatural explanation rather than try to explain it or simply leave it as "one of those things".
:rolleyes:
Less gullibility, more rationality.

you didn't read the information did you?

No im not just going after supernatural events. i've also asked questions. im sure the poster knows more than us.

its just asking the right questions and not just jumping to conclusions.

Had a neighbor talked to about some of the things talked here. He was paranoid and into conspiracies. One day shortly afterwards our house started to get activity. mainly though it was what i went through. A feeling of bloating and my pants too tight. smells of death and decay. The third day i was putting salt around the place and holy water. it didn't do anything. i than yelled at this presence to leave, which it did. I was calm and better. until the pounding on the door. It was another neighbor crying. he was sicken. apparently he just came across a dead body. It was our neighbor, he had went to watch movies and died. wasn't found until a week later. he had been swelling up from the heat.

i had talked to another neighbor, but the managers said that couldn't be. i asked why. they told me because hes dead, died the other day.

this is really weird. i was walking by the truck of my manager at the time. trying to talk with him. he turned out to be a ghostly apperition. gone. poof. the next day, i was told he died, after telling people this. the thing is he wasn't dead until the next day. so what was it i was seeing?

you didn't read the information did you?
I didn't find any mention of wave sounds. And Enfield is nowhere near the sea.


its just asking the right questions and not just jumping to conclusions.
Yet you do it so often.
What do you mean "the right questions"?


Had a neighbor talked to about some of the things talked here. He was paranoid and into conspiracies. One day shortly afterwards our house started to get activity. mainly though it was what i went through. A feeling of bloating and my pants too tight. smells of death and decay. The third day i was putting salt around the place and holy water. it didn't do anything. i than yelled at this presence to leave, which it did. I was calm and better. until the pounding on the door. It was another neighbor crying. he was sicken. apparently he just came across a dead body. It was our neighbor, he had went to watch movies and died. wasn't found until a week later. he had been swelling up from the heat.

i had talked to another neighbor, but the managers said that couldn't be. i asked why. they told me because hes dead, died the other day.

this is really weird. i was walking by the truck of my manager at the time. trying to talk with him. he turned out to be a ghostly apperition. gone. poof. the next day, i was told he died, after telling people this. the thing is he wasn't dead until the next day. so what was it i was seeing?
Oh good.
Just what we need. Uncorroborated stories, badly mangled in the telling and zero facts. :rolleyes:

actually i told facts of things going on in my life. with collaborating witnesses.

i also told another neighbor about what was going on. including about my body. she's much older than me. she was one of my witnesses with whats going on with my body. unfortunately soon afterward she hurt my feelings calling me a nephillian. the cabinets were falling out when i came by. she was experiencing pains. i mentioned giving up coffee. after her coffee pot exploaded she didn't want anything to do with me. later she jumped off the Aurora bridge and died. that is not fiction or story telling. its facts as i know it.

just recently, weeks ago, i got the sense of a presence. it felt like, im not a ghost, im not dead, im not a demon. than a hand appeared for seconds. freaked me out. coincidently i was told the neighbors lost someone that day named heidi. never knew her.

actually i told facts of things going on in my life. with collaborating witnesses.
I think you mean "corroborating".
However it still falls within the category of "Uncorroborated stories, badly mangled in the telling and zero facts"
You haven't given us the other accounts.


i also told another neighbor about what was going on. including about my body. she's much older than me. she was one of my witnesses with whats going on with my body. unfortunately soon afterward she hurt my feelings calling me a nephillian. the cabinets were falling out when i came by. she was experiencing pains. i mentioned giving up coffee. after her coffee pot exploaded she didn't want anything to do with me. later she jumped off the Aurora bridge and died. that is not fiction or story telling. its facts as i know it.

just recently, weeks ago, i got the sense of a presence. it felt like, im not a ghost, im not dead, im not a demon. than a hand appeared for seconds. freaked me out. coincidently i was told the neighbors lost someone that day named heidi. never knew her.
Please stop.
There is no point whatsoever to your homespun drivel.
All we're getting is your story (and we already know that you're, um, less than rational). We can't check anything, we have no other viewpoint...
All you're doing is sucking up bandwidth with semi-literate rubbish.

Originally Posted by whynot
if its a ghost more things will happen.
”
.

No. :rolleyes:So what is it about ghost behavior that leads you to believe otherwise?

So what is it about ghost behavior that leads you to believe otherwise?
Huh?
How can you have "ghost behaviour" if ghosts don't exist?

Huh?
How can you have "ghost behaviour" if ghosts don't exist?The ghost's existence was presumed via 'if'.

The "no" was prompted by the total lack of any supporting evidence (and much contradictory evidence) on the existence of ghosts.
I.e. the "if it's a ghost" is a dismissable "option".
It won't be a ghost so it's not worth consideration.

who says im the only one who can collarborate? lets see, the one telling me i was talking to a dead man is still around.

the lady i befriended whose cabinets fell and the coffee pot exploaded had her sister there at the time. the wife of the manager is a witness. lets see, the husband well that could be coincidence. she was just talking about how her and family escaped a burning house. later when i came by their dryer started on fire. ohh and her sisters on meds, so i guess she would be considered irrational too.

who cares what you think. my life doesn't evolve around your narrow idea of what science is.i won't fall apart if no one believes. most my life i've dealt with your kinda of attitude. got hit around and accused of being a liar. so what.

i was talking about the recorded rappings. unnatural sound waves, not the ocean smart ass. now your saying the wiki backs up a claim that these findings are false. how so? does it say these scientists didn't know what they were talking about? That is another thing im used to hearing. arguements that claim a more rational explantion and they come up with some really rediculous ideas on explaining things away. makes you wonder how rational people are of the unknown and being able to explain things away like that.

i by the way have not expected you to take any time with my post. you must have alot of endurance for the irrational, since your hear willing to read others accounts. or is that so you get the chance to name call again?

who says im the only one who can collarborate?
Corroborate. And no one said it.
But I do say you should learn to read.


the lady i befriended whose cabinets fell and the coffee pot exploaded had her sister there at the time. the wife of the manager is a witness. lets see, the husband well that could be coincidence. she was just talking about how her and family escaped a burning house. later when i came by their dryer started on fire. ohh and her sisters on meds, so i guess she would be considered irrational too.
It depends. Is she claiming this, or is it just you?


who cares what you think. my life doesn't evolve around your narrow idea of what science is.
I think the main point here is that I do have an idea of what science is. You don't.


i was talking about the recorded rappings. unnatural sound waves, not the ocean smart ass
Then why didn't you say "sound waves" instead of "wave sounds"?


now your saying the wiki backs up a claim that these findings are false. how so?
Did you read it?


does it say these scientists didn't know what they were talking about?
Which "scientists"?
It was investigated by Maurice Gross (an independent inventor) and Guy Playfair (a writer).


That is another thing im used to hearing. arguements that claim a more rational explantion and they come up with some really rediculous ideas on explaining things away. makes you wonder how rational people are of the unknown and being able to explain things away like that.
By investigation and thought, usually.


i by the way have not expected you to take any time with my post. you must have alot of endurance for the irrational, since your hear willing to read others accounts.
Because I'm irrational enough to hold out hope that you'll come to your senses.
And also doing my bit to discredit your nonsense for anyone else that reads this thread. I wouldn't want someone to start believing anything you claimed has actual validity.

ohhh cool, finally got to see a story i've seen on the news go on paranormal witness.

This guy has some problems with the law, just recently loses his uncle. on a weekend release, he goes home. only to be attacked by an entity he thinks is his uncle from the grave. has deep scratches on his arm. when pressed he told his family, i didn't do this. than he feels himself going into what i would call shock. but he says trance. it starts raining in the living room. no leaks or plumbing and no rain for the reason. the managers were called. than the police. all these witnesses seen water falling. not just down but up and across the room. he was picked up into the air infront of several members. when he went back to serve time, the police experienced raining inside the jail. they actually took it serious enough to call a preacher. i guess its easy to jump to conclusions when it happens to you.

Oh you're funny.
Really.
In a tragic sort of way.
It's hard to believe that someone in this day and age falls for this kind of crap.
Although, given your (mis)use of language I'd guess you haven't had much of an education.

The "no" was prompted by the total lack of any supporting evidence (and much contradictory evidence) on the existence of ghosts.
I.e. the "if it's a ghost" is a dismissable "option".
It won't be a ghost so it's not worth consideration.There is evidence contradicting the existence of ghosts?

There is evidence contradicting the existence of ghosts?
Sure. It's called science.

Sure. It's called science.Can you link me to the relevent research?

Can you link me to the relevent research?
I can link you to a thread here discussing the subject.
What science does is negate specific claimed "abilities" of ghosts.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=107280

Corroborate. And no one said it.
But I do say you should learn to read.


It depends. Is she claiming this, or is it just you?


I think the main point here is that I do have an idea of what science is. You don't.


Then why didn't you say "sound waves" instead of "wave sounds"?


Did you read it?


Which "scientists"?
It was investigated by Maurice Gross (an independent inventor) and Guy Playfair (a writer).


By investigation and thought, usually.


Because I'm irrational enough to hold out hope that you'll come to your senses.
And also doing my bit to discredit your nonsense for anyone else that reads this thread. I wouldn't want someone to start believing anything you claimed has actual validity.

He isn't just an inventor but an investigator of thousands of cases. wrote a book on those cases. also wiki never states that the claims were failed or false. in fact it talks about how many people were involved claiming to witness things happening. police, social workers, ect.

i guess the problem was some of the family members decided to play on it when the activity started to die down. for instance, they do have recordings of unnatural sounds. someone claims the metal was bent and others claim one of the family members were caught bending spoons. but doesn't explain other cases on the link. including pounds of couch levitated in the air and observed by police. so not all is discredited.

man my chest hurts like heart pains! bad timing here. :s

i will get more links.

the best kind of testing would be in a controlled environment with a personal haunting. i should volunteer to go see if something happens. who should i contact. shoot no loss in trying. i bet you would like to do the conducting of survellience, have handy gadgets and video ready. hook me up to electroids too would be cool. you never know. mind is a very still unexplored territory. like the ocean.

He isn't just an inventor but an investigator of thousands of cases. wrote a book on those cases.
But not a scientist.


also wiki never states that the claims were failed or false.
So my quote wasn't from Wiki then?
Please stop making a fool of yourself. Wiki, qua Wiki doesn't claim one way or the other. It provides both sides of the story.


i will get more links.
Don't bother. For every link can find I can find one showing it's wrong.


the best kind of testing would be in a controlled environment with a personal haunting.
:rolleyes:


mind is a very still unexplored territory. like the ocean.
So what?
Does that not suggest to you that most of these "happenings" are figments of the imagination? Made up or invented or imagined?

what i don't get and gets me angry is why...why if they have the chance could they not get good recorded evidence. or take them to a setting and try to get something. the answer keeps being, all their equipment started to go dead. same thing happened with fact or fake. the investigators recently did a show on how the ghost image was caused by vehicle lights flashing into the desert. but doing their own investigation ran into strange occurances, including their equipment all failing. thats because entities will drain electronics to gain strength.

what i don't get and gets me angry is why...why if they have the chance could they not get good recorded evidence.
Er, because it's bullshit. You can't get a "good recording" from bullshit.


the answer keeps being, all their equipment started to go dead
Keeps being?


the investigators recently did a show on how the ghost image was caused by vehicle lights flashing into the desert. but doing their own investigation ran into strange occurances, including their equipment all failing
You take a TV show as factual? :eek:


thats because entities will drain electronics to gain strength.
Utter nonsense.
Sheer tripe.

what i don't get and gets me angry is why...why if they have the chance could they not get good recorded evidence. or take them to a setting and try to get something. the answer keeps being, all their equipment started to go dead. same thing happened with fact or fake. the investigators recently did a show on how the ghost image was caused by vehicle lights flashing into the desert. but doing their own investigation ran into strange occurances, including their equipment all failing. thats because entities will drain electronics to gain strength.

agreed

yet I still think that an energy , bio-energy , has the ability to be different enough to be allusive for the moment

What is "bio-energy"?

But not a scientist.


So my quote wasn't from Wiki then?
Please stop making a fool of yourself. Wiki, qua Wiki doesn't claim one way or the other. It provides both sides of the story.


Don't bother. For every link can find I can find one showing it's wrong.


:rolleyes:


So what?
Does that not suggest to you that most of these "happenings" are figments of the imagination? Made up or invented or imagined?

you can imagine all you want, but doesn't make another see things that can not be explained. the wiki did not put in those details. i searched out several different links, including those who think it all faked. i don't just read things i wanna hear. im open minded. your not. you admit to this by making a statement like you do. im open to what could be going on. i don't casually toss aside eyewitnesses, which you claim is the least credible type of evidence. which means science could not be based on observation, when that is exactly what science is about. collecting data. that means the investigator has made a science for himself on observations of thousands of cases.

you talk about facts being on the problems of a eyewitness. i say your findings along with others who make this claim , unsubstaniated dribble. no ability but hearsay to prove your claims but on the very things you claim, observation of a few.
you know as well as i do you have to have all the veribles and evidence before making such a claim. you can not do that because of lack of concrete evidence to say thats proof to eye witness testimony being the least credible. imo.

you can imagine all you want
I'm not the one imagining.


the wiki did not put in those details
Outright lie.
Try reading it again, look what it says under "Conclusion":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfield_Poltergeist#Conclusion


i don't just read things i wanna hear
And you're (falsely) assuming that I do?


im open minded. your not
Wrong.


you admit to this by making a statement like you do
Which statement?


im open to what could be going on
And you're also grossly ignorant as to what is possible and what isn't, in addition to being irretrievably gullible.


i don't casually toss aside eyewitnesses, which you claim is the least credible type of evidence. which means science could not be based on observation, when that is exactly what science is about. collecting data. that means the investigator has made a science for himself on observations of thousands of cases.
And once again you show that you fail completely to understand what observation is about. I have explained this before. Go back and read it. And also read the FACTS with regard to eye witnesses.


you talk about facts being on the problems of a eyewitness. i say your findings along with others who make this claim , unsubstaniated dribble. no ability but hearsay to prove your claims but on the very things you claim, observation of a few.
Please don't repeat your ignorance, I understood how badly educated you are the first five times.


you know as well as i do you have to have all the veribles and evidence before making such a claim. you can not do that because of lack of concrete evidence to say thats proof to eye witness testimony being the least credible. imo.
Another example that failed utterly to read my links.

science is based on observation.

are we on the same page here so far. a group of people in a court with a criminal defense lawyer draw conclusions about eye witness testimony being the worse credible evidence. based not on all facts but assumptions that can not be proven one way or the other. i am enough educated to know what science is. i also know you over generalise using the word. use it too much for a lack of arguement, so that you give yourself the ability to toss aside thousands of peoples testimony. now that is being irrational. and others can read enough to know what im talking about. your just full of put downs and hearsay. it doesn't stand up to a pile of beans. your saying that social workers, police, doctors, all only were able to give a one sided account, yet you were able to read also these people did say they witnessed things moving around with no sign of how it could happen. and so you claim all this attention was given because people were fooled.

fair enough for one case.

lets ignore all the thousands of people including myself as irrational, wild imaging people, who can't distinguish between whats real or not. how condesending to think an average person is so gulliable and unable to think for themselves.

science is based on observation
REPEATED observation. And measurement. And repetition. And verification.


a group of people in a court with a criminal defense lawyer draw conclusions about eye witness testimony being the worse credible evidence. based not on all facts but assumptions that can not be proven one way or the other
Wrong. Based on FACTS. You didn't read those links at all did you?


i am enough educated to know what science is
Not on the evidence so far.


i also know you over generalise using the word
Then you obviously don't know what science is.


use it too much for a lack of arguement
Wrong.


so that you give yourself the ability to toss aside thousands of peoples testimony
Really? Thousands of peoples' testimony? On what?
Thousands of separate and different "occurrences"?


now that is being irrational
Then you don't know what rational means either.


your just full of put downs and hearsay
Hearsay? Where have I presented "hearsay"?


lets ignore all the thousands of people including myself as irrational, wild imaging people, who can't distinguish between whats real or not. how condesending to think an average person is so gulliable and unable to think for themselves.
So how come we have not got one single case where "ghosts" have been proven to exist? How come we have not a single shred of scientific evidence? How come that, in the end, each and every case boils down to fraud, error, subterfuge or simply unexplained?

now you claim beyond a doubt that ghosts don't exists. you claim eye witness testimony is not good evidence and should not be taken at face value. that they are irrational if they jump to a conclusion other than explainting it as something you believe possible, which means no paranormal possibilities. that is stating flat out your close minded. not being scientific because you disreguard evidence. my arguement is you can not disreguard eye witness testimony on that basis.

which means no paranormal possibilities. that is stating flat out your close minded
Also wrong. Why should "paranormal" be considered? There is no solid evidence that the so-called "paranormal" exists or has any validity. If evidence does arise then it will be worthy of consideration.


my arguement is you can not disreguard eye witness testimony on that basis.
Then again, as we have seen, your "arguments" are hardly worth the effort to read.

Whynot should just post a poll asking people here wether or not they know scientifically that "ghosts" exist or are just something once more made up for the sheeple to talk about instead of discussing other important issues of the world today.

Whynot should just post a poll asking people here wether or not they know scientifically that "ghosts" exist or are just something once more made up for the sheeple to talk about instead of discussing other important issues of the world today.

Scientifically...well, empirically, ghosts are not provable.
You can gather anecdotal evidence in bulk, do surveys, study it as a human phenomenon...but whether ghosts exist in any empirical sense... :shrug:
Can't be proven, can't be totally disproven, what the H do we know.

At my current job, the tissue-donation facility, I was patrolling an empty floor, when I heard someone say in a nice clear voice:
"WELL! this is not what I expected!"
Male voice, in a mild latino accent. I immediately did a fast lap of the entire floor, listening for the stairwell doors and elevator...nobody there, and nobody left.

The ghosts have not stolen my phone.
I have an online friend who believes in demons; he goes to one of those churches. Umm...yeaaaah...dude. o.O

Scientifically...well, empirically, ghosts are not provable.Currently. And even that is in question. Perhaps we have the technology, but have no applied to this issue.

I can link you to a thread here discussing the subject.
What science does is negate specific claimed "abilities" of ghosts.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=107280
I don't think science works like this. If we do not know the exact nature of a phenomenon we cannot rule it out via deduction. Within the history of science what seemed impossible, using deduction based on then current science, certain things were ruled out and later found to be true. I am not going to read the entire rather huge thread, but this seemed the approach by skeptics there.

Rogue waves are a good example. Here oceanographers and fluid scientists rejected sailors and captains claims of lone very large waves. It did not fit with current science. Later helm cameras and finally satellites - iow changes in technology and one could also say focus of technology - demonstrated the existence of these large single waves. Scientists, now believers, if confused, went back to the lab and figured out how this phenomenon could be.

Deduction from current knowledge is not contradictory evidence. It can raise excellent issues and can raise serous doubts when specific mechanisms are proposed - say someone says 'ghosts can move through wall by changing from visible light to x-rays - but in the absence of specific scientific explanations, it is poor speculation.

I don't think science works like this.
Really?


If we do not know the exact nature of a phenomenon we cannot rule it out via deduction.
We're not "ruling it out by deduction".
We're ruling it out because some things are flatly not possible.

Really?Yup, really. This almost sounded like an argument from incredulity.



We're not "ruling it out by deduction".
We're ruling it out because some things are flatly not possible.Which is precisely ruling it out by deduction. It was certainly not a conclusion arrived at via induction. The 'flatly not possible' was precisely the way scientists reacted to rogue waves. The phenomenon did not fit with current theory. It was deemed impossible and people were told they were imaging things because of emotions. It was presumed that it had to be like other waves - which come in batches. IOW it was decided that they knew that this phenomenon could not take place because what they considered similar phenomena could not possibly extend into this kind. This was deduction - with a lot of assumptions about what the phenomenon would have to be if it existed and none of these could exist.

But then they did.

Yup, really. This almost sounded like an argument from incredulity.
Um, you made a comment...


Which is precisely ruling it out by deduction.
Nope.


The 'flatly not possible' was precisely the way scientists reacted to rogue waves.
On what basis?

Yes I get the rogue wave thing.

But: we know, for example that immaterial things can't cause sound waves, so how do ghosts speak?
How does an "energy field" (or whatever ghosts are claimed to be) maintain coherence?

Um, you made a comment...I made an assertion and then went on to hopefully support it or not, but it was part of an argument.



Nope.


On what basis?

Yes I get the rogue wave thing.

But: we know, for example that immaterial things can't cause sound waves, so how do ghosts speak?
How does an "energy field" (or whatever ghosts are claimed to be) maintain coherence?I think if instead of asking these questions you made them statements and supported your skepticism you would see that you are coming at the issue via deduction. You would have premises about the properties of sound, immaterial things, sufficient and necessary phenomena for other phenomena, etc.

IOW deduction.

Let me point out one of your assumptions - one shared by some believers of ghosts but clearly not all...

that ghosts must be/are supposed to be immaterial.

See this is why I think deduction is weak and why scientific journals would not take a paper demonstrating that ghosts are impossible. You have to make assumptions about what the phenomenon is or would have to be, really, before demonstrating - yes via deduction - that it is not possible.

For example,
Premise 1, sounds are made by vibrations in matter.
Premise 2, Ghosts are only immaterial.
Conclusion, Ghosts, therefore, cannot make sounds.

Scientists also thought elephants could not be communicating over very large distances, despite what some natives and some naturalists believed was the case. Sounds made by elephants could not travel those distances. One woman scientist got the impression she actually heard low tones and later discovered they communicated via infrasound through the ground. IOW the assumptions made by most scientists were used in deductive arguments that led to conclusions that a certain phenomenon was impossible. The arguments were valid, however there was a faulty premise about the type of sound and the medium.

There are quite a number of people who believe in ghosts who consider them natural phenomena of some as yet unclear form. They do not seem to think ghosts are immaterial and go after them with various devices, devices used to pick up phenomena lumped under physical phenomena - note: physical has come to include stuff that would have shocked early materialists or physicalists.

Yet the elephant uses a physical method.

With regard to my "deduction"
1) can you show how it is possible to make a sound without matter (given what sound is)?
2) ghosts have been claimed to be immaterial (we go, as said, on the claims)
3) follows from from the claims made (which is what I stated - "What science does is negate specific claimed "abilities" of ghosts") and reality.

Yet the elephant uses a physical method.That is not the point. So do migrating birds that use the quantum zeno effect, that is also a physical method, as any method that gets found and accepted in scientific community will be called physical, even if things without mass or fields or particles in superposition are involved. My point with the elephant story was the problems with deduction.


With regard to my "deduction"
1) can you show how it is possible to make a sound without matter (given what sound is)?You know, D. I specifically acknowleged that some believers in ghosts think they are immaterial - though these people probably have no idea what some now considered physical things are like within science. I then pointed out that it was an assumption by both them and critics that ghosts must be immaterial, but that other believers clearly think they are material. So this question shows me you did not understand my post. Could be my poor writing. I read it a second time and I think it is clear, but I am hardly unbiased. So who knows. But I just got pissed so that's when these kinds of discussions don't feel worth it for me.

2) ghosts have been claimed to be immaterial (we go, as said, on the claims)And I am sure you are aware of paraphychologists who go into houses with all sorts of devices with the expectation that ghosts will register. So they clearly feel that ghosts are physical, in some as yet unclear form of physicalness.

3) follows from from the claims made (which is what I stated - "What science does is negate specific claimed "abilities" of ghosts") and reality.That was not what you first stated, what you first stated was

The "no" was prompted by the total lack of any supporting evidence (and much contradictory evidence) on the existence of ghosts.



“
Originally Posted by Pineal
There is evidence contradicting the existence of ghosts?
”
Sure. It's called science.

So if you think this is an important distinction, it would have been honorable to acknowledge backing down from your original formulation.

I think the new formulation is problematic also....

Yes, if someone says ghosts are immaterial and they speak - in the sense that the air vibrates around their immaterial mouths - science can negate that.

But beyond arguments based on such self imposed restrictions around what ghosts must be by believers, I can't see science saying that there is evidence ghosts cannot have this or that ability. Only if specific claims about the mechanisms are made. As I said here....


It can raise excellent issues and can raise serous doubts when specific mechanisms are proposed - say someone says 'ghosts can move through wall by changing from visible light to x-rays - but in the absence of specific scientific explanations, it is poor speculation.

And the old material vs. immaterial is fairly naively looked at by most folk believers in ghosts and most skeptics - rather than say most parapsychologists who are aware that 'physical' does not mean the phenomenon must be already knows and understood and also does not have to mean it is like chairs and oboes. Stuff you can trip over or hit someone with.

IOW it is convenient to in a sense assume a kind of physics sophistication, hell even a biological one given some of the 'physical' abilities animals and plants have, on the part of most believers in ghosts. IOW when they claim something is immaterial, they know that matter now includes things that are right now coursing through the earth in the billions - more? - without touching it or various kinds of fields or whatever we will find out and then call physical as technology changes in the future.

Also the physical is not a closed set. It is an expanding one.

And this might also include some naivte about what it means when they speak, what the actual phenomenon is.

But I am going to drop this here, because, as I said, I am getting pissed. You'll mull over what I wrote or you won't. But I don't think you were open to it before now.

That was not what you first stated, what you first stated was

So if you think this is an important distinction, it would have been honorable to acknowledge backing down from your original formulation.
Backing down?
Did you not read post 43 where I stated: "What science does is negate specific claimed "abilities" of ghosts"?
In other words what science shows us is that ghosts, as claimed, cannot be.
This could, in the end, turn out to be a a multitude of differing phenomena, somehow all taken to be "ghosts" by the public, but, since science clearly negates specific individual "abilities" of ghosts then ghosts, as a phenomenon and as currently "lumped together" cannot be.


But I am going to drop this here, because, as I said, I am getting pissed. You'll mull over what I wrote or you won't. But I don't think you were open to it before now.
The main problem is that so many people are willing to accept a "supernatural" "explanation", as opposed to a psychological one. We know that the mind glitches, we don't know how the works and there's lots of fertile ground there. Yet the psychological explanation is nearly always pooh-poohed.
As for open-ness:
Hell, I've met a ghost, but not once, not for one second did I assign it to a supernatural cause. My first reaction was "Well, shit, doesn't the mind play weird tricks".

@Dyw --

I do hate that tendency of cranks like some of these ones to do the whole "science can't explain it, it must have been <insert supernatural/paranormal answer here>", it's so annoying. It's also self collapsing, which is nice I guess(but it does take some of the fun out of crushing it). Basically what they're saying is "this can't be explained so I can explain it".

The main problem is that so many people are willing to accept a "supernatural" "explanation", as opposed to a psychological one. We know that the mind glitches, we don't know how the works and there's lots of fertile ground there. Yet the psychological explanation is nearly always pooh-poohed.

Hell, I've met a ghost, but not once, not for one second did I assign it to a supernatural cause. My first reaction was "Well, shit, doesn't the mind play weird tricks".


And the old material vs. immaterial is fairly naively looked at by most folk believers in ghosts and most skeptics - rather than say most parapsychologists who are aware that 'physical' does not mean the phenomenon must be already knows and understood and also does not have to mean it is like chairs and oboes. Stuff you can trip over or hit someone with.

IOW it is convenient to in a sense assume a kind of physics sophistication, hell even a biological one given some of the 'physical' abilities animals and plants have, on the part of most believers in ghosts. IOW when they claim something is immaterial, they know that matter now includes things that are right now coursing through the earth in the billions - more? - without touching it or various kinds of fields or whatever we will find out and then call physical as technology changes in the future.

Also the physical is not a closed set. It is an expanding one.

And this might also include some naivte about what it means when they speak, what the actual phenomenon is.

I do believe that there may be some form of energy in existence in the universe that many people call ghosts. Like Pineal, I think that whatever phenomenon people through the ages have experienced is part of the natural order of the universe, but we have not yet been able to record it until recently. I'm talking about EVP's, photographic evidence, etc. by devices that seem to record something that we can't ordinarily hear with our ears or see with our eyes.

While I do believe that what we've learned about the nature of reality on the quantum level offers some basis for us to possibly postulate the existence of phenomenon known as ghosts, most people I've ever met are superstitious and completely unable to judge that bump in the night in any rational way. Too many people will assume that it's poor old Aunt Edie who died of a broken heart after dingos ate her baby :D, when it's really just wood contracting as it loses heat during the night.

Nearly all paranormal research shows that try to "investigate" these phenomenon, do a terrible job at it. They investigate in pitch blackness and in surroundings which psychologically and evolutionarily could by themselves be perceived by us all as dangerous. There's no better way to gather empirical, testable, measurable evidence about a subject that is already so open to scientific ridicule than to wander around blind in a pitch-black house scared totally shitless and jumping at every little noise. All the great scientific discoveries of our time happened in situations just like that!

I do believe that there may be some form of energy in existence in the universe that many people call ghosts.
This is where you run into problems with physics...

I do believe that there may be some form of energy in existence in the universe that many people call ghosts.


This is where you run into problems with physics...

I take the opposing view and believe physics may (eventually) actually be a way to explain what these heretofore unknown phenomenon are.

As a case in point, both my wife and I have heard bluegrass music coming from one of the bedrooms of the home we live in. We've heard it more than once and at the same time. There was no radio/TV/mp3 playing anywhere in the house. There was no sound of music outside when we went to check. Still, we heard bluegrass music. It had a "tinny" sound to it, like you'd expect from an old-timey radio, but we ruled radio out as a source already.

What was going on? I don't know. Yet the phenomenon was experienced by two people simultaneously in at least three separate incidents. I can raise a hypothesis to explain it, even if there is no way to scientifically prove it. Many discoveries in science were predicted even before there was hard evidence for them.

For my example, we could be looking at something involving the field of space/time. Some paranormal researcher believe that an area can "imprint" with an event (usually emotionally powerful) and the human mind and some electronics can pick it up.

Why such a thing would happen in one bedroom of our home, only discernible at warmer times of the year (for some unknown reason) I have no answer for. To me, there is no grand event that I'm reliving. It's just that somehow, by a process still unknown, my wife and I heard bluegrass music coming from the middle of an empty room. The ordinary laws of physics should preclude us from experiencing bluegrass music out of empty space, but they didn't. So we're left with trying to find a cause/explanation based on sketchy hypotheses we try to develop.

I speculate that these "residual energies", or whatever they are, are able to interact with the phenomenon we know as consciousness. Our music might not have come from empty space as its starting point, but may have been heard only within our minds. The fact that it was two minds simultaneously is what begs an answer for me. Either way,we're still left with: how did this process occur? What laws of the universe allow for it.

Again, currently we only have speculations to which no one has any definitive answer. Still, that doesn't mean we don't stop exploring them. It's both intriguing and fun.

Those of us who are intrigued by these phenomenon really need to do a better job at NOT couching our conclusions about them so smugly and being so sure of ourselves about the explanation. The truth is, we don't know what the heck it is we're experiencing.

As Dwywyddyr posted earlier, it could be a glitch in our minds. It could be that, or it could be a process of the universe we've yet to understand fully. For me, it's not dumb to offer up possible explanations; the human mind almost demands them. What is dumb about the process for many who speculate on these things is that so many of us want to assign absolute certainty to our answers and immediately promote our sometimes half-baked ideas to "Gods-honest-truth" status. All we've been able to do, for the most part is merely throw darts in the dark.

Our music might not have come from empty space as its starting point, but may have been heard only within our minds.

I have auditory hallucinations under chronic stress, mentioned before...the hallucinations, if they get loud enough, sound tinny.

Mostly...they just sound like a radio might have been left on low in another room.

They are accompanied by a peculiar pressure sensation in the ears, as if my ears needed to pop.

:shrug:
I dunno. Maybe relevant...if nothing else I am a thinking-person's nutter....

Um, you made a comment...


Nope.


On what basis?

Yes I get the rogue wave thing.

But: we know, for example that immaterial things can't cause sound waves, so how do ghosts speak?
How does an "energy field" (or whatever ghosts are claimed to be) maintain coherence?
They can't? Can't type on this.

i can understand im a nut, hear exagerated foot steps up to my bed. but how is it i have bruise all the time, like around my ankle or just watching tv and my arms bruised to the bone, gonna accuse me of doing it?

You know this is kind of weird, I was missing some water right about when that happened to you. Then, I kept having to put my phone back in the drawer because it seemed to be popping out whenever I turned around.

...if nothing else I am a thinking-person's nutter....

That pretty much sums me up too, chimpkin. ;)

@Gandalf --


Some paranormal researcher believe that an area can "imprint" with an event (usually emotionally powerful) and the human mind and some electronics can pick it up.

I've heard that, but there's some problems. One problem is that they have no reason to speculate this, current explanations are more than powerful enough for the phenomena we're talking about. Another big problem is that they offer no possible mechanism to explain the phenomena, in other words their explanation doesn't actually explain anything. It's no different from the theists who just say that god did it.


The ordinary laws of physics should preclude us from experiencing bluegrass music out of empty space, but they didn't. So we're left with trying to find a cause/explanation based on sketchy hypotheses we try to develop.

I speculate that these "residual energies", or whatever they are, are able to interact with the phenomenon we know as consciousness.

There's a much simpler explanation, one that doesn't require amending or discarding the laws of physics. You and your wife experienced shared hallucinations, these aren't as rare as one would think.

@whynot --


They can't? Can't type on this.

Nope, they can't. A physicist once described matter as the stuff that kicks back, you need to give it some sort of kick(doesn't have to be an actual kick) in order for any interaction. Things which are immaterial are not made of stuff which can kick, and beyond that being immaterial by definition means not having any energy to do any work(energy being material by definition). So either ghosts can interact with the universe or they are immaterial, you can't have it both ways.


but how is it i have bruise all the time, like around my ankle or just watching tv and my arms bruised to the bone, gonna accuse me of doing it?

Do you find yourself loosing chunks of time before these bruises appear?

@Gandalf --
There's a much simpler explanation, one that doesn't require amending or discarding the laws of physics. You and your wife experienced shared hallucinations, these aren't as rare as one would think.

I'm not saying that what you're suggesting doesn't happen to people, it's just that I really don't think that this is a hallucination. It sounds absolutely nuts to me. If you'd of told me that I'd EVER walk into a certain room and hear bluegrass music coming from seemingly nowhere, I'd say you would be crazy. Yet it did happen, and I'm at a loss to explain it and I won't agree that I've lost my marbles (I do occasionally lend them out, but that's another story:rolleyes:)

I think that it's often too easy to explain this away with the "hallucination clause" given by skeptics. After having experienced it, I can say that it was real. Weird, but definitely real. I also will not offer any definitive answer for what I experienced. I might toss some things around in my mind to explain it to myself, but as far as proof, I got nada.

@Gandalf --

No, you can't say that it was real. The human brain is more than capable of generating an entire hallucinatory world complete with people, how do you know that your experience wasn't one of those? Especially since your experience doesn't accurately reflect reality.

@Gandalf --

No, you can't say that it was real. The human brain is more than capable of generating an entire hallucinatory world complete with people, how do you know that your experience wasn't one of those? Especially since your experience doesn't accurately reflect reality.

Real can often go beyond that which you can offer up solid empirical proof of. I'm just not going to call what I experienced typical reality, although I hope that one day (a thousand years from now) someone might use science to understand what I did experience.

@Gandalf --


Real can often go beyond that which you can offer up solid empirical proof of

Bullshit. This is just an unwarranted assumption on your part.

@Gandalf --



Bullshit. This is just an unwarranted assumption on your part.

So, YOU can offer empirical proof for everything that is in existence? Even things that we don't fully understand yet? The entire realm of science is constantly trying to explain things for which we don't yet have any empirical proof. So until empirical proof is offered, what does that mean? The things that are actually being studied throughout science aren't real???

You're lazy and vulgar, and if you don't have something more convincing to reply with than cussing, why don't you give us all a break and spin your crap somewhere else and let those who really want to discuss using arguments and counter-arguments a place to do it without wading through your inane, sloppy postings.

The entire realm of science is constantly trying to explain things for which we don't yet have any empirical proof. So until empirical proof is offered, what does that mean? The things that are actually being studied throughout science aren't real???
Um, if it's not empirical science doesn't look at it.

Um, if it's not empirical science doesn't look at it.I think you missed what he was saying. He was saying that there is a gap in time between scientists choosing to focus on something and the accumlation of evidence that makes them feel it is real. He is saying that, therefore, even in science, it is clearly acknowledged that real things do not yet have empirical evidence for them or what would be the point of many specific kinds of research. Like looking for a new particle, for example, or seeing if in fact there are so far unseen species high up in the jungle canopy that are nowhere else.

Or to put this in the negative. It would be unscientific to say things do not exist only because there is no evidence for them. So many fruitful projects and of course many (nevertheless possibly useful) duds would never have been carried out.

I think you missed what he was saying. He was saying that there is a gap in time between scientists choosing to focus on something and the accumlation of evidence that makes them feel it is real. He is saying that, therefore, even in science, it is clearly acknowledged that real things do not yet have empirical evidence for them or what would be the point of many specific kinds of research. Like looking for a new particle, for example, or seeing if in fact there are so far unseen species high up in the jungle canopy that are nowhere else.

Or to put this in the negative. It would be unscientific to say things do not exist only because there is no evidence for them. So many fruitful projects and of course many (nevertheless possibly useful) duds would never have been carried out.

Well said, Pineal. And here, I don't mean to lump every bump-in-the-night superstition to the ad hoc committee of "undiscovered science." Some of these phenomenon are totally weird and the undeniable product of irrational minds, but there are others that may actually be explained by science... one day.

The anecdotal evidence for the existence of ghosts alone is tremendous. That doesn't mean every account in history has validity, but how do you simply discount literally millennium-worth of accounts by saying that all of them are simply hogwash?

I think you missed what he was saying. He was saying that there is a gap in time between scientists choosing to focus on something and the accumlation of evidence that makes them feel it is real. He is saying that, therefore, even in science, it is clearly acknowledged that real things do not yet have empirical evidence for them or what would be the point of many specific kinds of research. Like looking for a new particle, for example, or seeing if in fact there are so far unseen species high up in the jungle canopy that are nowhere else.
Er, but that's not quite how it is, is it?
They look for the particles because there is evidence to suggest that they're there. A gap where there "shouldn't" be one is a form of empirical evidence.
That's the whole point: the evidence leads to the search. Of course in some cases it may turn out that the actual particle being searched for does not exist, therefore science has another look at the evidence to see what else it suggests.

What is a ghost? A dead human being that is alive in a "spirit form" with the same body roaming around making noises?

Atleast let there be a theory for the pro-ghosts about forms going through dimensions and being stuck here or something, ghosts dont make any sense to me.

Ugh, I hate that woo-y usage of the term "dimensions". It really rubs me the wrong way.

What do you mean

What do you mean
Your terminology: "going through dimensions" makes no sense scientifically.
You appear to be using it in the science fiction/ Hollywood/ woo woo sense.

Okay if were going to take the statement out of context lets examine what it implied. "The many world interpretation" and an implication thereof would better explain the concept of ghosts in oppose to the traditional concept of ghosts roaming earth to complete something so they can rest in peace.

How are the concept of dimensions woo-woo'ish ?

Okay if were going to take the statement out of context lets examine what it implied. "The many world interpretation" and an implication thereof would better explain the concept of ghosts in oppose to the traditional concept of ghosts roaming earth to complete something so they can rest in peace.

How are the concept of dimensions woo-woo'ish ?

Um, the many world interpretation is nothing to do with "dimensions".
They are separate universe. The use of "dimension" (which has a specific meaning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension)) is the woo woo shorthand (due to lack of knowledge).

There also (at least) two problems with using MWI -
1) the majority of physicists don't actually claim that there are many worlds in actuality (although a small number do). It's simply a way of interpreting (hence the name) the results.
2) even if they did exist it's almost certain that they are cut off from us irrevocably.

If you examine my statement I used the word properly in my context.

If you examine my statement I used the word properly in my context.
No, you didn't.
How does something "go through dimensions"?

How would I know.

Okay, let's try this one: what do you mean by the phrase?

That the idea of ghosts are absurd and the pro-ghost supports should come up with a more creative premise for the concept.

In other words you were waffling just as inanely as the woo woos.
Okay.
In short, you don't know what you meant, therefore your claim to be using the word "properly in your context" is erroneous.

That is not correct

Really?
Yet you can't explain what you meant when asked...

@Joey --

If you truly want to understand what was wrong with your usage of the word "dimensions" then go and read Flatland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland) which was hailed by Isaac Asimov as the best primer available for this subject.

I have read it. I still havent understood what is wrong with my statement.

@Joey --

Then you obviously didn't retain it. It's pretty easy to figure out where you went wrong just from that book alone.

If you don't believe in Ghost come and stay in Room 1 at the Vulcan Hotel St. Bathans in Otago NZ.

@Rob --

If you're paying.

@Rob --

If you're paying.Well just remember it when you are down this way. She has been haunting the Hotel for about 100 years already.:)

@Rob --

I'd be willing to bet good money that the "observer effect" will take place.

That sure is one spooky ghost...

Jude told about her banking books mysteriously vanishing and eventually being found exactly where she had left them.
http://www.fourcorners.co.nz/new-zealand/st-bathans/

Wow!! My place must be haunted too because I generally find stuff exactly where I left it.

I have retained the information and in context it was appropriate although not the best of terms.

@Joey --

No, it was not an appropriate term. The word "dimensions" refers to the space through which we move(three physical dimensions and one of time), and while string theory and M-theory both postulate additional dimensions, they still refer to directions like the dimensions that we're used to experiencing. Furthermore, both string and M-theory both suggest that those additional dimensions are "curled" in on themselves and so small that we can't experience them due to scale differences(and the limitations of the human mind).

Your usage implies an alternate reality in which other things live. Not only is this inaccurate, but it confuses two entirely separate principles, that of extra dimensions and that of alternate realities.

too weird lol
but never let go of your haunted imaginations too much that you are actually seeing 'em happen. may be your mistaken or maybe it is just a "waking dream wish fulfillment"
never let it stress you.:)

someone moved the telephone or you did and forgot. ghosts dont move things. they just make noises.

Just want to share my experience:

One weekend, I was hanging out with my cousin when suddenly, he turned pale and pointed towards the house besides our house. It was too late for me but he swore that he saw a candle floating outside the 2nd floor window.

One week later, my buddy was dropping me off at home at around 11pm. This is when I saw the candle. My buddy hits the break and I asked him if he saw that. He said that he saw a candle floating outside the 2nd floor window. I didn't ask him if he saw a candle. I just asked him if he saw it too. So he basically confirmed what I saw.

So you jump to the conclusion that it was a ghost - that is laughable. I would go with the more likely scenario that it was a alien and he was trying to lure you over to try out some of his new anal probe equipment.

It's weird. Even though I have never seen Ghosts, but some of my fellow friends have seen. I still don't realize how these things actually happens.

Pretty simple. You hear something odd or you see something move out of the corner of your eye, which is creeps you out, which makes you scared and then your mind races a bit and next thing you know you have seen a ghost or alien or bigfoot or pixies or Kiebler elves.:eek:

It's weird. Even though I have never seen Ghosts, but some of my fellow friends have seen. I still don't realize how these things actually happens.

This is how - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T_jwq9ph8k

The problem with this subject and many people is that in order for them to believe that such paranormal activity happens they have to experience it themselves. Believe me, I think I can speak with more authority than most on this subject.

I really don't know what the whole thing means but I can assure you that if you'd lived in my house for the number of years that I have then you'd certainly have come around to the idea that ghosts, for want of a better term, do exist. The number of things that have happened to my family and friends down the years goes into the many dozens and many of these occurances have been of such a nature that, quite frankly, it seems impossible to come up with a rational explanation for them.

These events go from the simply odd, such as objects moving about, strange noises and various other stereotypical haunting behaviour, right through to the appearance of an apparition (an old lady in a black dress and shawl) and people being grabbed or pushed by something. I've also witnessed first hand some pretty freaky stuff in other locations too. If it's never happened to you yourself (yet), don't just dismiss it.

I dismiss it.

Then more fool you.

Then more fool you.

Then more fool you more.

The only "ghost" I've ever seen, is Casper.

If others exist, I'm out of the loop.:shrug:

Origin - I was pointing out that to dismiss these things outright, when so many people have experienced them, appears to me to be a nonsensical standpoint to have. I'm not some gullible idiot and my post simply aludes to the fact that certain things I have experienced, along with others, do not fit anything that science currently understands as far as I am aware. If I dismissed these things out of hand then I would certainly be a fool myself.

Spadge:

Have you got a photo on the woman in the shawl, or any other physical evidence of what you have experienced?

Firstly, what physical evidence would, for want of a better word, 'ghosts' leave behind? Ectoplasm maybe? In hindsight I'm quite glad we didn't get any of that stuff on the bathroom floor. It could have been a bugger to clean it up.

Also, funnily enough she declined the offer to stand there posing while my wife ran to get the camera. She quite bashfully decided to vanish instead of electing to appear in one of the national newspapers. I don't know why. Maybe she hadn't had her hair done that day or maybe she couldn't stand the idea of being a celebrity. I can't say I blame her actually.

Anyway, seriously, photos can be faked and, as I am sure that your are aware, there are a number of 'ghost' photos that have been taken down the years that have not conclusively been proved to have been faked but they don't provide evidence to the sceptics do they? Before we get into the usual, we need scientific evidence before we believe in these things, then I'd just like to point out that I was simply sharing the fact that these things have happened to my friends, family as well as myself. I don't even pretend to know what it means and I'm not making this up as I have a lot better things to do with my time. People can choose not to believe me (and all the other countless anecdotal evidence of hauntings) if they want but they are missing out on accepting what is undoutedly an important part of the human condition. How important a part of the human condition it actually is would be anyone's guess. People do see and experience 'ghosts'. Fact!

Origin - I was pointing out that to dismiss these things outright, when so many people have experienced them, appears to me to be a nonsensical standpoint to have.

I dissagree and dismiss them outright. I have (unfortuantely) watched one or two of those ghost shows on TV and watched as those fools conviced themselves of all sorts crap. People are terrible witnesses.


I'm not some gullible idiot and my post simply aludes to the fact that certain things I have experienced, along with others, do not fit anything that science currently understands as far as I am aware. If I dismissed these things out of hand then I would certainly be a fool myself.

As I said people are terrible witnesses that is why science needs data and not feelings, impressions or fleeting images seen out of the corner of your eyes. I am sure that there are milllions of people that think they have seen, felt, or percieved ghosts and I think they are all wrong. Until there is hard evidence to the contrary I will continue to believe that.

So you're dismissing the entire subject on the basis of a fact that you've watched an entertainment show and the fact that you think people are terrible witnesses???? Is everyone a terrible witness on every single occasion? Personally I won't accept that.

I didn't feel something, have an impression of something, or see something out of the corner of my eye. I was looking directly at this thing and I saw it clearly for a number of seconds. I know exactly what I saw and I saw it on three occasions, not just the once. I wasn't drunk, on drugs, just waking up, or just going to sleep on any of these occasions. My wife also witnessed the same thing independently of me on two separate occasions.

You can sit there smugly knowing that you're right and continue to dismiss these things outright for as long as you like but it doesn't change the fact that you're incorrect about this.

Maybe you'll experience something one day that will change your mind instantly. I've seen this happen to a freind of mine, a person who was the biggest sceptic going. He was completely terrified actually and he wasn't on his own. Now that little incident was videotaped.

I am dismissing the entire subject not based on a show but based on the fact that there have been beliefs in ghosts and monsters and demons from the begining of history, but there has never been any hard evidence indicating it is anything other than superstition. In short there is no good reason to beleive that it is true.

People have visions, hallucinations and just plain weird experiences all the time - but they only exist in your head which makes sense why there is no hard evidence collected - there is none to be collected!


Maybe you'll experience something one day that will change your mind instantly. I've seen this happen to a freind of mine, a person who was the biggest sceptic going. He was completely terrified actually and he wasn't on his own. Now that little incident was videotaped.

I would love to see it. Typically it will turn out that the video was lost, or the subject is too scared to show it, or it was mysteriously erased - yada, yada, yada.

Origin - I was pointing out that to dismiss these things outright, when so many people have experienced them, appears to me to be a nonsensical standpoint to have. I'm not some gullible idiot and my post simply aludes to the fact that certain things I have experienced, along with others, do not fit anything that science currently understands as far as I am aware. If I dismissed these things out of hand then I would certainly be a fool myself.

Not being able to explain something is not evidence for ghosts. I don't dismiss your experience, only your conclusions.

...People do see and experience 'ghosts'. Fact!

Incorrect. They experience something, but you cannot say that something is a ghost. What is a fact is that our perceptions can be influenced by what we expect to see, and what we believe exists.

I will solve the OP "weird" occurrences once and for all. It's called sleep walking or the feeling of being so sleepy you do things that doesn't make sense because your mind is 1/2 shut (so to speak). I've had plenty of times when I'm in front of the computer after being awake for 20+ hours and I'm dozing in and out and find myself awake on the couch or bed without ever remembering how I got to it in the first place. Sleep walk! That's the answer!

Ghost don't exist! I believe it's another field of science we haven't explored into yet because we don't have the technology or a breakthrough in research. Everything can be explained once a logical answer has been found. I've seen unexplainable incidents that doesn't make sense, I just shrug it off as something I don't understand yet.

Spidergoat - I am not incorrect when I state that people experience 'ghosts' and I currently have no conclusions. You appear to be assuming that I use the term 'ghost' to mean a dead person or the like. Why do you think I chose to put the word in speech marks? If you read my posts you'll notice that I've never once said that I believe 'ghosts' to be dead people, spirits or whatever. I simply stated that the experience is real and unexplainable by current science.

jayeeyee- I also think that science may one day find answer to 'ghosts'. Your sleep walking idea would only fit in certain 'ghost' experiences however.

The one thing that does bother me about these types of weird experience is that there sometimes appears to be some sort of inteligence behind it. Yes, I'm fully aware of how crazy this sounds but I have seen this type of thing many times now. Sometimes the way this intelligence seems to manifest itself can be truly astonishing and sometimes even more than a little frightening. Even if the answer to this is down to something to do with the power of our own minds then it would still be something that we don't currently understand. This is why I am interested in the subject. There is something to learn here that we can't currently explain in a way that would fit all of the typical experiences that make up a true haunting.

Origin - These experiences cannot all be put down to being hallucinatory or vision based in some way. This would only explain certain cases. It would not explain instances where objects move in a way that is completely impossible according to the laws of physics. We have real problems when this movement, as sometimes happens, also implies an intelligence.

Origin - These experiences cannot all be put down to being hallucinatory or vision based in some way. This would only explain certain cases.

There is no reason to have a supernatural cause for any case.


It would not explain instances where objects move in a way that is completely impossible according to the laws of physics. We have real problems when this movement, as sometimes happens, also implies an intelligence.

Really? Then prove that it sometimes happens. You can't, because all of you evidence is anecdotal which is not trust worthy.

I never said I could prove it. I'm simply stating what happened. If you refuse to believe people who experience these types of things then that is your problem, not mine. You were not there. You did not witness it. I, and two others, did. There was aboslutely no possibility that this particular object (a heavy glass decoration with a totally flat bottom) could possibly move on its own in the way that it did. The object in question is simply too heavy and stable. Believe me, we did try to come up with a logical explanation but there wasn't any that were even remotely plausible. Sceptics will spout the usual line about annedotal evidence not being trust worthy, and I would have to say, in this particular instance that I agree. However, I was there and witnessed the event first hand.

Maybe you'll experience something one day that will change your mind instantly. I've seen this happen to a freind of mine, a person who was the biggest sceptic going. He was completely terrified actually and he wasn't on his own. Now that little incident was videotaped.

So are we going to get to see that video tape?

The video tape only proves that the event did happen but unfortunately you don't get to see exactly how. Therefore, although interesting, it is inconclusive as proof. To be fair, I shouldn't have mentioned it.