Infinity Lover

Hey psssssssst Seraphim.

Click on Amie's profile.

The Lone Ranger

Aime:

You might find the writings of Susan Blackmore interesting. She's a psychologist who firmly believed in all sorts of paranormal things. She entered the field of psychology because she wanted to document the existence of these things. As it turned out, though, all of her tests failed to detect any paranormal activity once she ruled out operator bias.

After years of investigation, she was forced to conclude that no evidence could be found to support the existence of paranormal abilities or phenomena.

The James Randi Foundation has for years now offered a prize of over $1,000,000 for anyone who can demonstrate the existence of paranormal abilities or entities under controlled conditions. Lots of people have tried to claim the prize, but for some odd reason, these abilities and entities always vanish in the presence of knowledgable skeptics.

Randi has written about this sort of thing quite a lot. So has Joe Nickel, who is also a paranormal investigator who has so far failed to find any actual evidence of paranormal phenomena, despite decades of trying. Randi sometimes comes across as rather harsh in his writings, I'll admit, but he freely admits that this is because he has investigated so very many "paranormal" cases only to find that they're very often the result of deliberate fraud.

It has been mentioned before, but I'd very highly recommend Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World.

Cheers,

Michael

Seraphim

"Re: Ghosts - there have always been some things that didn't make sense to me. First, how is it we are allegedly able to see them? Are they made of matter? "

My reply : Well, I can say is that "Ghost" is simply energy which gathered enough matter to take semi solid form. And the reason why some sees it could be that those some (myself included) have "senstive" eyes which enable them to detech this energy.

You may ask where this senstivity come from. I could say (my personal opinion) is that it comes from the brain itself. I have faced death several times in the past 30 years to the extend that I almost died a couple of times. Maybe those near-death experience somehow altered my brain chemistry to enable me to detech such energy patches. At least, that is the most logical thing I could think of.

"The only ways I know of to experience 'sight' are 1) photons that reflect off matter strike the receptors that make up the retina which stimulate neural pathways to generate an image; 2) a chemical directly stimulates a neuron or group of neurons that make up a visual pathway. So, either ghosts are made of matter, or they somehow "cause at a distance" our brain to chemically induce the appearance of sight. The same objections apply to other senses, like those who claim the ghosts speak, or make noises of some kind."

My reply : Both this theories is good but it doesn't fit the profile.

The light bounching of your eyes or chemical imbalance in the brain doesn't produce human-like appritions to appear and move like a human being for several seconds nor does it make you hear your name been called several time in a dark room ALONE.

"Second, are ghosts equipped with the personalities/memories of the bodies they once inhabitied? This is, of course, a variation of the same objection made to the notion of a soul. It seems that, if these 'ethereal people' retained all or most mental faculties, this would render the brain mostly or entirely superfluous. If not, is there some mechanism that triggers a "haunt here" directive when the spirit leaves the body? "

My reply : If we start a debate on the soul, it will last till next year.

I'm not sure what you guys think about the soul but for me, the soul simply something separate when comes to the brain. In that context, the Soul/spirit could exist without a brain.
As for haunting concern, various incident could makes haunting possible :

1. Unnatural and untimely death.
2. Strong attachment to something in life which the dead doesn't wish to lose - including his or her family or some sort of unachieved condition.
3. A person's attachment itself to life, unable to accept death.
4. Suicide.

In condition 1 and 3, according to Hindusm and Buddhism, it is said that a soul has only up to 40 days to exist in physical realm before he or she loses energy and disappear (maybe reborn).

Condition 2 however is a bit tricky since it depends solely on the person itself. If he or she have strong mind (will power) and do not wish to disappear, he could somehow gather energy and force himself to stay on the physical plains for longer time thus producing haunting effect.

Condition 4 (suicide) is another one dealing unwilling person to accept death. It is said that a person who commits suicide will stay on physical realm till his appointed time comes (according to Hindusm and Toaist).

Seraphim

"Hey psssssssst Seraphim.
Click on Amie's profile."

My reply : I did. Looks pretty (assuming that is the real picture), complement to the chef (her parents).

Infinity Lover

Yeah, thought I'd better mention that, because you called her a he in another post.

Seraphim

"Yeah, thought I'd better mention that, because you called her a he in another post. "

My reply : I did? hmm ... must have been thinking about someone else. Thanks for the information.

Hmmm ... I can understand now why she seems to be happy "meeting" an angel (not sure whether it is a dream or anything, but I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she did saw something).

echidna

People used to believe that the earth was the centre of the universe. They used to believe that God lived in the clouds. Jeez, they still believe that Genesis is a historic explanation. And each time, science refutes them by objective, repeatable reasoning, and each time, the feelings of the believers are hurt by science’s intolerance of their errors & they are made to feel “freaks”. Personally I think this unfortunately necessary if we are to improve on Medieval superstition. I for one would prefer people were no longer burnt at the stake because someone once claimed to have seen a witch.

Look, if you want to believe in ghosts, fine, but don’t wave their existence around at a sceptical atheist website which promotes metaphysical naturalism, and expect not to receive … well … scepticism. It’s the same scepticism which rejects all the unsupported assertions made by religion. Just because the paranormal isn’t religious doesn’t mean that it’s exempt from the same scrutiny. Forgive my attempt to be … consistent.

Yes, Australian Aborigines were / are largely animistic. But just as there is no evidence for a Christian Trinity, there is no evidence for tree spirits, river spirits or desert spirits either. As such I live my life as though none existed. So what ?

There's an old songline "two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong". When unsupported assertions clash (as religions and the paranormal inevitably do) it seems fairly safe to say that someone is Wrong. So who is it ? Not you I take it. Well, I'm glad we got that sorted out.

Seraphim

"People used to believe that the earth was the centre of the universe. They used to believe that God lived in the clouds. Jeez, they still believe that Genesis is a historic explanation. And each time, science refutes them by objective, repeatable reasoning, and each time, the feelings of the believers are hurt by science’s intolerance of their errors & they are made to feel “freaks”. Personally I think this unfortunately necessary if we are to improve on Medieval superstition. I for one would prefer people were no longer burnt at the stake because someone once claimed to have seen a witch. "

My reply : OK, I think tension is rising from some of you. Let not get carried away, shall we? Let's treat this as discussion as it is.

As for religious "mistakes", especially the Midieval times, that is true as you are said. People who said different things was prosecuted harshly. But now, why do you (those with science) repeating the same mistakes those with religion did in Midieval times? You take a culture which is over a 1,000 years old and assumed that 100 generation in that culture had lived a false life OR that when someone experienced something which doesn't fit into the normal senario, he or she is a herectic?

Science is about proving what is possible and what could be achieved, NOT about hiding behind facts. I always have such notions about science and freethinkers.

"Look, if you want to believe in ghosts, fine, but don’t wave their existence around at a sceptical atheist website which promotes metaphysical naturalism, and expect not to receive … well … scepticism. It’s the same scepticism which rejects all the unsupported assertions made by religion. Just because the paranormal isn’t religious doesn’t mean that it’s exempt from the same scrutiny. Forgive my attempt to be … consistent. "

My reply : I don't mind scepticism nor criticism as long as the person giving it willing to answer my questions properly. A forum is a place to discuss, right?
Then again, you could always close one eye and leave this thread, pretending it doesn't exist. Sooner or later, Amie and I (among others) will get tired of talking to each other and this thread will disappear like a ghost.

"Yes, Australian Aborigines were / are largely animistic. But just as there is no evidence for a Christian Trinity, there is no evidence for tree spirits, river spirits or desert spirits either. As such I live my life as though none existed. So what ?"

My reply : Hmph ... In another word, you judged them to have lived/living in self-delusional world. Very well, that is your opinion.

"There's an old songline "two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong". When unsupported assertions clash (as religions and the paranormal inevitably do) it seems fairly safe to say that someone is Wrong. So who is it ? Not you I take it. Well, I'm glad we got that sorted out. "

My reply : You assuming that one is right while the other is wrong. There could be a 2 more possiblities - that both are wrong or both are right.

Both are wrong means that both of them are not Jesus as they claimed. Which means both religion and Science didn't hold the proper explainations toward a certain phenomena and believing in one (any one) will lead to the wrong conclusion.

Both are right means that both person could have the same name (Jesus) but not the same person. In that context, they both tell the truth (They are Jesus) and a lie (that they are THE Jesus) at the same time. Which means also that Science could prove what religion had said but the picture is different due to the method of both been put forward (Science by means of telling through models and mathematics etc and Religion through the usual method - talking to death).

No offence attended. I simply feel that one shouldn't live with notion that what he sees is all there is to see. Open your mind and your heart, learn, think and relearn.

Oxymoron

Hmmm... not sure what to call this technique, but is the use of the word 'nut' intended to deflect skeptical inquiry? In order to further this line of argument, we might have to call someone else a 'nut', which might cause offence. Therefore said person evades questioning.

So let's not use loaded language. Forget 'nut', too much value judgement in there. Is it feasible that Seraphim had one or more schizophrenic hallucinations?

Fact: schizophrenia exists - in many forms. For some, there are well known chemical, mental and behavioural manifestations. For some, there are treatments. Many millions suffer from some form of this disease.

Fact: ghosts have never been definitively observed by multiple simultaneous objective viewers. Not one. Ever.

On the balance of probability, which is the more likely reason: ghost or hallucination? Sorry, it's a no-brainer.

Mageth

Hiya Amie!

Mageth and Gerald I wish you two would have tagged along when they made The Blair Witch project. That would have been comedy at best

Well, if I'd been there, they'd have never gotten lost in those damn woods in the first place.