Do you believe in ghosts or energies in objects?

[Qgirl]

Do you believe in ghosts and other ectoplasmic beings? Whether or not you believe in ghosts precisely, do you believe inanimate objects can have certain energies?

[DirtNap]

No, I don't.

[Solumina]

We already have threads devoted to ghosts, energies, and all things paranormal. In the future please do a quick search before starting a new thread as there is a good chance that one already exists.

[Unimatrix 00]

Nope. Not at all. Entirely illogical.

[Opteron_Man]

No I don't. That is a load of science fiction mumbo jumbo, and has no place in rational thought or real life. When I WAS preparing to move to Toronto, I had asked my mom if she wanted my beautiful
dining room table along with my couch and chair.
She said "no, things carry negative energy from their past owners, and that table belonged to me and your Dad when we were together". Or something fucktarded like that.

Well, when she found out that I was planning to give it to my friend Steve, she hit the ceiling! She blathered that she didn't give it to me but “loaned” it to me and that I owe it back to her. I said that is nuts, you gave me a load of crap and I sanded it and refinished it and made it look beautiful again. It is the way it is because of me and my sweat and elbow grease and time, and you certainly did GIVE it to me. Well she backed down. I have family, that if they give you something, it is blown up like it is a brick of gold, and they watch it like a hawk when they can, if they ever hear that you are not polishing it and fawning over it, or god forbid, thinking of giving away, they get all possessive and demand it back. That also goes for a broken TV I was given.

But back to the issue:
Even if something was owned by that nastiest man who ever lived it is completely off the wall and flakey for somebody to think it has a personality or a memory or what have you because of its past owner.

[Drake Dun]

Originally Posted by Unimatrix 00

Nope. Not at all. Entirely illogical.

Inanimate objects with "certain energies"? Don't make me laugh! We all know that the only time inanimate objects are magical is when a properly ordained clergyman intones the appropriate incantation (in Latin, because Latin is spiffy and serious sounding), and turns them into Jesus giblets. Then they become human flesh, which we eat, although the appearance remains the same as for little tasteless wafers - how miraculous is that? Truly truly Allāhu Akbar.

[Alarica]

Of course I believe in ghosts. I am a ghost. A facebook quiz said so! I died on the 31st October 2008. I'm not sure how yet. I'm sure there'll be another quiz soon to tell me this.

[Jack of Tears]

Nope. Not at all. Entirely illogical.

Defined by which logic? I find it amusing that a belief in the supernormal can exist for so long, with many very intelligent, very talented individuals entirely convinced in the existance, yet after a single century a couple countries which define themselves by their wealth can decide that the paranormal is unrealistic.

There are still quite a few nations which hold strong spiritual beliefs ... I find it amusing that a small handful feel they can speak for the planet.

Items do hold on to energy, the paranormal does occur, ghosts and spirits do exist, as do any number of things people feel obligated to scoph at in order to call themselves intellectual.

[Drake Dun]

Evidence, please?

[Jack of Tears]

You mean aside from testimony from millions, if not billions of people all over the world?

Photographic evidence of spirit manifestations?

EVPs recorded by researchers for years?

Eye witness accounts from professional people, well respected in their societies?

Multiple eye witness accounts of people whom have never met in their lives?

Testimony of scholars and authors whom have experienced the events first hand?

Records of the very few recognized excorcisms performed by churches throughout the last century?

The photographic evidence of physical injury done to humans and property?

The very strong belief of cultures to this day in first world countries?

Seances held by reputable mediums?

Scienfic studies to measure such things as ESP, Sixth Sense, and similar powers of the mind which have demonstrated non standard, non expected results?

The problem is, you want a ghost in a bottle ... but until science achieves the skill to bottle a ghost we can't provide that.

But, then, a few centuries ago the idea that invisible particles in the air caused disease were rediculous ... bathing was rarely considered an important element of health care ... the theory that the earth revolved around the sun was blasphemous ... for science nothing is proven until they can capture it, categorize it and disect it ... but that didn't stop any of these things from being true.

Science may not be up to the task, but that in itself disproves nothing.

[Vivi]

I believe that there are undiscovered energy fields in existence that can cause things such as levitation or telekinesis. I do not believe such things to be in any way supernatural, though. Just a complex form of science that we are far from coming to an understanding of in the near future.

[Drake Dun]

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

...for science nothing is proven until they can capture it, categorize it and disect it ... but that didn't stop any of these things from being true.

No, it just stops it from being known to be true - a precondition for the type of certainty you're projecting. Meanwhile, a number of the phenomena you're describing fly directly in the face of everything we do know about our world. That makes them bullshit until some stunning kind of evidence is forthcoming to show us that our most fundamental principles of understanding about that world are wrong.

Some of the things I can imagine fitting under your the rubric of what you're calling evidence are plainly subject to objective inquiry (i.e., would in fact be evidence, exactly as you propose) - yet always seem to fail when objective eyes are brought to bear. And the rest of the evidence you're talking about may be impressive to someone who's determined to believe beforehand, but it's no better than the evidence Sathya Sai Baba or Benny Hinn can provide. It's all smoke and mirrors (and in not a few cases, barefaced lies).

Tell you what, though. It may not be practical to go chasing down every little thing that has been forwarded as evidence of this stuff, but we can put the question to a less rigorous test within practical limitations. How about if you put just one specific piece of evidence on the table (not just broad descriptions of sorts of evidence claimed to be available)?

[iroti]

I've had some experiences that can't be explained so I'm on the fence. I can't affirm or deny it. We are conscious and alive, while there are things as trees that are unconscious yet alive...I think there is a potential for something that is conscious yet not alive. As thoughts and energy are immaterial, perhaps, in the future, ghost or not, there will be other immaterial things found that will shake human foundation. There is a big paranormal research university somewhere in England (I think), so who knows?

On a different note, I did a thesis paper last year for a social science course on scientific studies on psychic ability. Psychics usually make me laugh, but I was surprised that there was some scientific testing that showed 'psychic ability.' Meh, I need to find the paper, but I found some surprising, potential proof at least of psychic ability from scientific studies. I'll try to find the studies from the paper, because I think it would make some interesting discussion here.

[Drake Dun]

I would like to see that.

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

Defined by which logic? I find it amusing that a belief in the supernormal can exist for so long, with many very intelligent, very talented individuals entirely convinced in the existance, yet after a single century a couple countries which define themselves by their wealth can decide that the paranormal is unrealistic.

Uhh, that was before we gained a decent grasp of how the world works, the causality of the physical world. There came a point in history where we came to understand processes like precipitation, and stopped worshipping rain gods. The rain did not cease to come. Strange, that.

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

There are still quite a few nations which hold strong spiritual beliefs ... I find it amusing that a small handful feel they can speak for the planet.

Yes, generally speaking they tend to be situated in undeveloped countries. See above.

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

Items do hold on to energy, the paranormal does occur, ghosts and spirits do exist, as do any number of things people feel obligated to scoph at in order to call themselves intellectual.

I really don't think the correlation between "scophing" at the above statement and possessing intellectual inclinations is based on posturing, so much an utter lack of empirical support for these claims. In fact, I'm surprised to see someone as broad-minded and intellectual as yourself make such a faulty generalization.

[Jack of Tears]

So what qualifies as proof? Apparently eye witness accounts, studies from scholars, practitioners, and photographic evidence don't qualify as proof ... so how do you define proof? Typically skeptics will make "proof" something completely unachievable while believers will over simplify it ... there has to be a middle ground ... where is it?

[Alarica]

There is already a thread on ghosts. several infact. Or does Qgirl lack the necessary skills to search for such threads?

[Apathy's_Child]

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

So what qualifies as proof? Apparently eye witness accounts, studies from scholars, practitioners, and photographic evidence don't qualify as proof ... so how do you define proof? Typically skeptics will make "proof" something completely unachievable while believers will over simplify it ... there has to be a middle ground ... where is it?

Perhaps there's a gap in my knowledge, then, because I have never seen a reliable study which has produced conclusive proof of ghosts or items holding onto energy. Photographs are unreliable because they can be (and have frequently been proven to have been) altered. Eye-witness accounts are likewise unreliable when taken alone, because some people lie or seek attention, some are highly suggestible, and some are just plain crazy. If you'd be good enough to provide one such study, your argument would be on far stronger ground.

However even a basic study of cultural history demonstrates that supposed manifestations of the paranormal adapt to suit the beliefs of the time in which they occur. For example, there were no tales of alien abduction before we became aware of the possibility of life on other planets.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Jack of Tears

You mean aside from testimony from millions, if not billions of people all over the world?

Irrelevant, people are stupid. Millions, if not billions of people from all over the world will swear that Jews have horns, or that some mundane good fortune reveals the hand of god in their lives.

Photographic evidence of spirit manifestations?

Where?

EVPs recorded by researchers for years?

I've heard some of these. If you listen for "HELP ME" in some dissonant ambient noise, you'll hear "HELP ME". If you play that one Judas Priest song backwards, you can hear "DO IT".

Eye witness accounts from professional people, well respected in their societies?

See my response to your first 'point'.

Multiple eye witness accounts of people whom have never met in their lives?

Scientifically, eyewitness testimony can only serve as the ground for further inquiry, not as conclusion on the matter in question in and of itself. That people who purport themselves to have seen ghosts haven't met each other is irrelevant, as pop culture has assured that the nature of the standard 'ghost encounter' is well known.

Testimony of scholars and authors whom have experienced the events first hand?

See above.

Records of the very few recognized excorcisms performed by churches throughout the last century?

To say this is equivalent to saying that the performance of pagan rites effectively establishes the existence of Zeus.

The photographic evidence of physical injury done to humans and property?

Now, this is just silly. Showing you my shoveled driveway proves my driveway to be shoveled, but not that Loki shoveled it.

The very strong belief of cultures to this day in first world countries?

Again, see my response to your first 'point'.

Seances held by reputable mediums?

Reputable... mediums, huh?

Scienfic studies to measure such things as ESP, Sixth Sense, and similar powers of the mind which have demonstrated non standard, non expected results?

What studies were these? Who conducted them? Helmut Schmidt?

The problem is, you want a ghost in a bottle ... but until science achieves the skill to bottle a ghost we can't provide that.

We only want replicable results-- that's how science arrives upon truths. We know, for instance, that plants require sunlight to live because, if two identical plants are kept under identical conditions save that one is deprived of light, the one denied this vital resource will die. We have been unable to definitively establish the existence of ghosts because investigations into alleged eyewitness' spectacular claims have never yielded anything conclusive, save some scratchy recordings wherein one can hear 'get out' if one tries to do so.

But, then, a few centuries ago the idea that invisible particles in the air caused disease were rediculous... bathing was rarely considered an important element of health care ...

Yes, the existence of pathogens was dismissed, in that primitive age we believed diseases to be caused by things like evil spirits.

the theory that the earth revolved around the sun was blasphemous ... for science nothing is proven until they can capture it, categorize it and disect it ... but that didn't stop any of these things from being true.

The heliocentric model could be easily proven in Galileo's time-- the establishment, which rejected science in favor of belief in unseen, immeasurable forces, simply refused to admit the truth.

Science may not be up to the task, but that in itself disproves nothing.

As I've stated, science is entirely up to the task of establishing ghosts as a fallacy. Every shred of 'evidence' subjected to scientific scrutiny has been dismissed.

[Unimatrix 00]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Irrelevant, people are stupid. Millions, if not billions of people from all over the world will swear that Jews have horns, or that some mundane good fortune reveals the hand of god in their lives.



Where?



I've heard some of these. If you listen for "HELP ME" in some dissonant ambient noise, you'll hear "HELP ME". If you play that one Judas Priest song backwards, you can hear "DO IT".



See my response to your first 'point'.



Scientifically, eyewitness testimony can only serve as the ground for further inquiry, not as conclusion on the matter in question in and of itself. That people who purport themselves to have seen ghosts haven't met each other is irrelevant, as pop culture has assured that the nature of the standard 'ghost encounter' is well known.



See above.



To say this is equivalent to saying that the performance of pagan rites effectively establishes the existence of Zeus.



Now, this is just silly. Showing you my shoveled driveway proves my driveway to be shoveled, but not that Loki shoveled it.



Again, see my response to your first 'point'.



Reputable... mediums, huh?



What studies were these? Who conducted them? Helmut Schmidt?



We only want replicable results-- that's how science arrives upon truths. We know, for instance, that plants require sunlight to live because, if two identical plants are kept under identical conditions save that one is deprived of light, the one denied this vital resource will die. We have been unable to definitively establish the existence of ghosts because investigations into alleged eyewitness' spectacular claims have never yielded anything conclusive, save some scratchy recordings wherein one can hear 'get out' if one tries to do so.



Yes, the existence of pathogens was dismissed, in that primitive age we believed diseases to be caused by things like evil spirits.



The heliocentric model could be easily proven in Galileo's time-- the establishment, which rejected science in favor of belief in unseen, immeasurable forces, simply refused to admit the truth.



As I've stated, science is entirely up to the task of establishing ghosts as a fallacy. Every shred of 'evidence' subjected to scientific scrutiny has been dismissed.

lol i love you. x

[gothicusmaximus]

Uni, you're hurting my credibility and weakening my argument. Please put me back on the list of people you hate.

[Unimatrix 00]

Sorry, just what you were saying about "ghosts" was exactly what I was thinking.

[gothicusmaximus]

Really? Now you're seriously starting to scare me.

[Opteron_Man]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Really? Now you're seriously starting to scare me.

Yeah Gothicus, that is NOT a good sign, that you are thinking in parallel with Unimatrix 00. I feel sorry for you.

[Unimatrix 00]

LOL Opteron_Man you're so pathetic. Just because I said I didn't want to speak to you ... GET OVER IT.