1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We've had very few donations over the year. I'm going to be short soon as some personal things are keeping me from putting up the money. If you have something small to contribute it's greatly appreciated. Please put your screen name as well so that I can give you credit. Click here: Donations
    Dismiss Notice

People who claim to see spirits, what explanation can we give them?

Discussion in 'Tilted Life and Sexuality' started by chelle, Sep 24, 2012.

  1. chelle

    chelle Vertical

    I was watching this documentary on science and how it explains NDE about energy, quantum mechanics/physics type stuff.
     
  2. highjinx

    highjinx "My phobia drowned while i was gettin' down."

    Location:
    venice beach
    right, and that's my whole problem. there's a ton of crap out there, but it's all very squirrely or explainable. in spite of all the seasons of paranormal reality shows we've gotten along with all the youtube iphone grabs, the best they ever come up with even when they go out of their way to find it is a weird e.v.p. or a chair moving an inch that probably had an intern pulling it on a string off screen.

    you'd think by now with all the people that have had experiences they swear by that if there was something concrete to have as evidence it would have been gotten by now, and if there was one solid piece of evidence, there should be a lot more with how common a thread it is in our cultures to have people going through them and how readily available the tools to collect evidence are now.
     
  3. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    But what constitutes "concrete" in terms of evidence? What video or photo could possibly be sufficient to dispel disbelief? If anyone has or is able to capture the real McCoy on film, won't questions as to its authenticity always arise? As simple as it may be to catch a ghost on tape, how simple as well to doctor a video?

    Evidence, if it exists and can be obtained, will come from science, not videos or photographs which will never be able to stand up to scrutiny or dispel absolute doubt.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
  4. highjinx

    highjinx "My phobia drowned while i was gettin' down."

    Location:
    venice beach
    well, i guess we'd know it if we saw it? there are professionals that can vet photo and video and say it's a legit capture. if so many people swear up and down that they've laid eyes on distinct apparitions or have had a plate fly across the room by itself or float and even more so that a lot of places have these things regularly happen by people's accounts anyway, it stands to reason that someone would be able to film this somewhat more believably than has been accomplished so far, especially 10 or 15 years after the advent of camera phones.
     
  5. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    Some still deny the existence of UFO's seen by hundreds, caught on video, and vetted by professionals.

    I daresay that spirits, if they exist, would/should be more difficult to capture on video considering their lack of mass and overall failure to adhere to physical law as we know it.

    I've seen plenty of videos and photos that have caused me to pause but can't imagine any that would nail the event down adequately to make a true believer out of me no matter the technology used or who vetted it. To be honest, I would question even those professionals who would label something a "legit capture." Legitimate of what? The most I would expect them to label it as is "unexplained."
     
  6. highjinx

    highjinx "My phobia drowned while i was gettin' down."

    Location:
    venice beach
    sure, i have a problem with ufo's and bigfoot and the loch ness monster for all those same reasons. maybe spirits are less corporeal, but if an eyewitness is able to describe a beard or a cowboy or civil war outfit and several people have the same account, that puts it in the same boat as the ufo's. i haven't seen quality believable footage of any of that stuff so it makes me skeptical. and maybe i wouldn't be completely swayed into believing with just a quality video, but it would sure be a start.
     
  7. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    I agree that it would nice to see a clear photo or video of a supernatural event. I'd even appreciate it if the corporeal aspects of it weren't as grainy or out of focus as the "ghost". Definitely too much of that sort of thing out there.
     
  8. MSD

    MSD Very Tilted

    Location:
    CT
    The interpretive brain has hundreds of thousands of years of evolution that optimized it for pattern recognition and was subjected to selective pressure to err on the side of interpreting nothing as something rather than discounting it because reacting to false alarms is a lot safer than discounting even one real warning or sign of danger.
    Anyone who claims quantum mechanics proves the existence of something supernatural is either a fraud trying to sell you something or someone who lacks the understanding of quantum mechanics to realize that the frauds are selling a bunch of made-up bullshit.
    This is special pleading. If something can be seen, it is emitting light in the visible spectrum. If something can be heard, it is producing sound in the range of audible frequencies. There are a few exceptions such as infrasound producing sympathetic resonance in the eye and producing the illusion of movement in the visual field or certain strong magnetic fields producing hallucinations, but those are also measurable.
     
  9. Strange Famous

    Strange Famous it depends on who is looking...

    Location:
    Ipswich, UK
    On the 1st year anniversary that my grandfather died, every clock in my grandmothers house stopped.

    I only see two possible answers

    1 - she is a lair
    2 - something "supernatural" happened,
     
  10. Joniemack

    Joniemack Beta brainwaves in session

    Location:
    Reading, UK
    Old people can't be trusted. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Strange Famous

    Strange Famous it depends on who is looking...

    Location:
    Ipswich, UK
    liar...

    And maybe she is...
     
  12. rogue49

    rogue49 Tech Kung Fu Artist Staff Member

    Location:
    Baltimore/DC
    My sense is all of the above...

    Science for the most part is a rigid set of scenarios...something that is provable, something that is repeatable.
    When it breaks down is when it is dealing with ambiguous, intermittent and dynamic scenarios. (ex. Chaos Theory)

    It is only recently that we've had the ability to record with some mobility and spontaneously. (and in some volume over time)
    And we are only as good as the tools we use.

    Some people can sense other things, not frauduently, but sincerely be "in tune" with other frequencies, EM wavelengths, emotion as heat, and so on...
    This is more often than not, inconsistent and not truly controllable, could be hormonal, emotional, or just plain luck.
    (ex. those who see sounds...or into the IR range)

    Certain areas may have scenarios that have occured that are imprinted...
    Again, these are also inconsistent, uncontrollable and dependent on the observer.

    Problem is this...like a computer problem, that you know is there, but never seems to occur in front of the tech...is not believed or addressed.
    Or that same computer problem is ambiguous in nature...a sense that something is "wrong", but its not identifiable.
    And these issues could easily be "mistaken" by any individual at any time for anything else. Justified or not.
    There could be something there, they may be completely wrong.

    I track these down all the time throughout my career...seeing, noting things that others don't...and fixing them. (on computers...)
    But this is done by my eyes, experience, talent and skill. Interestingly, other SME's can't see it or do it often...but I do get results.
    However, I'm constantly having to prove it, to get authorization to fix it.

    However, problem is this...these "spirits" or "encounters" or otherwise are not recordable...or at least not well, if at all.
    Because you cannot observe it, record it, repeat it...have tools that can trigger it...the skeptics are going to rip it to shreds. (or at least, doubt)
    And your "observers" may be questionable also...wanting to believe, or thinking something is another thing...or even worse, scam-artists.

    Science has been wrong before...and has come around, once something is there to refer to.
    Like a "pain" the doctor won't be able to identify until there is a pattern to draw their attention to it. (like a family trait found out...)
    That pain or ailment could be truly there...or it may not. But until others or you can point to it...or show a trend, people will not believe.

    I'm a scientist on the side...I deal with ideas that are true but not easily observed, through theoretical physics.
    I've invented tools that actually work, but haven't been sold or fully realized yet.
    One of the hardest things I'm going to have to do is convince others that they have some use...and then get them to use it.

    I'm not going to say that it IS true.
    But I'm not also going to say that it is NOT possible.

    The key is to identify it.
    The second challenge is to prove it.

    Remember, there was a time people didn't think the world was round...or the sun was the center of the solar system.
    Or certain DNA was "junk", which they found out it wasn't just recently. Science scales when it does. Knowledge does too.

    And there are also rationalists every year that say we've discovered everything. "FACT"
    We're just that awesome...then something comes along to tweak their nose or totally knock them on their asses.
    No, we don't know everything...likely not even close.

    Those things that people "sense" as "spirits"...if you're going to prove it and not sound "off-kilter"...
    Then you're going to have to...

    One, find a person/tool who with some consistency can detect these occurances.
    Two, find a area/entity that can be noted with some consistency.
    Three, find another person who can validate it. (the more, the better)

    Until then...it's just going to be a dull ache that others and the docs think is just "in your head"
    But ironically, psychology was just that also...some years ago. ;)
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2012