Paranormal?

Isn't there a law against preventing a body from getting a proper burial, or something like that?
 
At this point in time so far as I can tell the majority of people who believe in ghosts and the supernatural, including those who "investigate" have a very limited and loose understanding of science, the natural world and basically what is or isn't possible.

For example the extent of the measurements paranormal investigators often push themselves to is taking temperature readings, sound recordings, videos and photographs as well as electromagnetic readings. And if they get any sort of result it's counted as a positive indication of the paranormal. There just doesn't seem to be any real critical analysis or peer review of the raw data.
 
Rubbish. There was a huge scandal about hospitals keeping organs without permission a few years back. The hospitals had to apologise and return the remains they had kept for study.
 
So in all the time that paranormal investigators have been out there doing their thing, their results have never come under any real critical analysis or peer review of the raw data? You sure about this?

Also, given your feelings about people who believe in spirits and your comments about their grounding in reality, please provide links to the research that proves the continued, real existence of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit of the Holy Trinity of Christianity.
 
Read that again very, very carefully - then read what I wrote then come back and say you are sorry...I'll wait
 
No problem at all. I need something to do at work.



But if you're not observing it scientifically (using the scientific method and trying to falsify your theory - not necessarily using scientific equipment) then your conclusions aren't going to be accepted under a rational basis.



That's debatable. I'm very open-minded about things, but I do want to see evidence backing a theory before I'll change my mind. This tends to be the skeptical view. For some reason this draws the insult close-minded from those who have made up their minds, and decide to ignore evidence to the contrary. I admit the possibility of a lot of things - what I don't admit is their likelihood in the absence of any evidence.



Yep. Because we would never have needed to explain the phenomena, since we wouldn't be aware of it. With most fantastical stories though it's a slightly different matter, since people claim physical effects which cannot be objectively measured and verified.



I will admit that I do find it difficult to conceive of a phenomena which would be perceptible to the human senses, and would not be measurable through the use of other equipment. UFOs are supposedly visible to the human eye, which means they reflect light withint he visible spectrum. Ghosts are the same. These things could be measured and verified, we have the equipment to do so.



See my thought process is slightly different. The first test is 'is there any objective evidence which can be looked at regarding this?'. Generally things fail at that first test, as people are unwilling to provide any. The second test, assuming that there is evidence, is 'do current theories and knowledge provide for the phenomena?' If they do, and the evidence does not violate these theories, then there's no need to resort to an unexplained phenomena when an understood one will do.

Of course I do enjoy speculating on how weird phenomena would work under a different explanation of the universe. That's what fiction is for.



But accepting that something is/might be possible without evidence is actually more narrow-minded. When that's done the person holding the theory tends to extend it, and ignore or deny evidence that there's a rational explanation already in place.



It's that beyond scientific measurement or understanding I have trouble with. We are capable of analyzing the movement of a single wave/particle to the degree that we can determine it appears to be interacting with virtual wave/particles which only exist as a potentiality, yet somehow we're incapable of measuring a phenomena with gross physical effects such as ghosts, UFOs or faith healing other than through personal experience? That just doesn't seem plausible to me.

We recently took pictures of a collision between two distant galaxies. I really don't think that there is much that cannot be explained by scientific analysis, and resorting to that as an explanation appears to be more a case of giving up rather than making a serious attempt to understand the world.



Which I personally think is fantastic.



I'll examine and consider any evidence I can find, but beliefs are not necessarily based on evidence. Without evidence I won't hold to or accept a belief.



Such as believing in ghosts with no objective evidence, in the face of evidence of alternative explanations?



I don't say that's anything but a ghost - but I do tend to say 'that has most likely got an understood explanation, I wonder what it is' before saying 'it must be something unexplained'. I think we're actually agreeing here.



Part of my bitterness against supernatural explanations is that I truly, truly wish we were living in a universe where they were true. I want someone to prove to me that they are, but it's yet to happen.



See, now I'm going to have to write you into my will. You'll get a pint each week for a year after my death, just so that you know I'm still around. Watching.
 
Yes I'm fairly sure it's never received any sort of serious attention. The paranormal is automatically labelled as nonsense.

Why would i want to provide you with research proving the "holy Trinity" is real? I've stated many times here on MAP there is no direct evidence that Jesus Christ ever existed and what's written in the Bible is just ink on paper so far as I'm concerned. I think you may have me confused with someone else.
 
If you're talking to me, then I'm sorry but there isn't any that I'm aware of - and, lazy git that I am, I don't feel like going out and looking for it. Having said that, belief in one thing doesn't automatically equate with belief in the other - funnily enough, the attitude of the Catholic Church to paranormal events in this world is one of a healthy skepticism, mixed with a tentative concession that - what with God being all-powerful - if God decided to allow such a thing to happen, it probably will.

As for my personal view:

http://www.ihav.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1074515055&postcount=191

I make fun of a lot of things, not least among them myself. Doesn't necessarily mean anything, save that I got up on the wrong side of the bed that day.
 
It was brought up somewhere early on in this thread; basically, the exorcist is more likely to send you to a psychiatrist than to break out the holy water.

I'd look up the actual post but I'd have to pass by the cactus penis to do it, and it was pretty traumatizing the first time round.

EDIT:

You owe me for those synapses, PASmith!

http://www.ihav.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1074525927&postcount=40
 
I'll have to see if I can find one of the shows online, but I remember seeing a couple of shows where scientists were explaining away the paranormal and busting the science used. It was at the height of when psychic tv shows were fashionable. Not to mention Randi and his efforts. So why would you think that no serious attention has ever been paid to the matter?
 
So it's only the odd occasion when he reaches for the holy water that we should be worried? I'm sorry, but I'm struggling to see your point. Demonic posession is either horse manure or it isn't. There's no middle ground.
 
Where do I start...

You know what? I don't. Third time's the charm - sorry, K_E, not playing with you today.
 
Back
Top