If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   From the "This is why we can't have nice things" desk: 45% of Americans say they believe in ghosts   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 110
    More: Asinine, Americans, real ghosts, dead people  
•       •       •

4104 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2013 at 6:16 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
wee [TotalFark]
2013-02-02 03:17:21 PM
10 votes:
More than that believe in a god.  Some even believe that this invisible man in the sky will listen to them and do shiat for them.  They live their lives in the context of this imaginary friend advising them.  They give money to people who talk to them about this magical being.

That's far worse than believing in ghosts.
2013-02-02 03:06:49 PM
7 votes:
It is one of the more harmless beliefs. Not many people have been killed over ghosts, nor does belief in ghosts trash the political process.
2013-02-02 06:29:58 PM
6 votes:

ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.



"I can't explain everything I've seen, therefore the souls of the dead remain walking the earth in eternal torment, bound and imprisoned on this physical plane, forever seeking atonement for their sins and forgiveness that will never come!"

Sounds perfectly reasonable, anyone who doesn't accept that simple syllogism must be just smug.
2013-02-02 07:09:56 PM
5 votes:

GUTSU: wee: More than that believe in a god.  Some even believe that this invisible man in the sky will listen to them and do shiat for them.  They live their lives in the context of this imaginary friend advising them.  They give money to people who talk to them about this magical being.

That's far worse than believing in ghosts.

I'm willing to bet there are even more atheists who make snide and rude remarks about the vast majority of the population. I say this as an ignostic, you don't look smart when you say shiat like that, it just makes you look like an ass.


Here's the difference between us.  I care whether assertions are true.  You care whether an assertion hurts your feelings.
2013-02-02 06:51:12 PM
5 votes:

Ed Grubermann: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.

If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.


Explain to me how quantum entanglement works, then you can lecture me on how ghosts can't exist.
2013-02-02 06:24:56 PM
5 votes:
A billion people wandering around the globe with cell phone cameras, CCTV everywhere and not one has managed to capture a ghost. Nothing but obvious fakes, pareidolia, and "orbs" (as in, "Well, yeah, it was snowing and I used a flash, but those totally aren't snowflakes, they're like spirits or something"). Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and all we've been given so far is shiat.
2013-02-02 06:20:56 PM
5 votes:
While I don't believe in ghosts, I love reading books of "real" ghost stories. Ghosts are up there with the various cryptids in the "Most likely not real, but would be cool if they were" department.
2013-02-02 03:21:41 PM
5 votes:
Were they paying respondents? You'll get differing answers if you do that.

media.screened.com
2013-02-02 06:30:35 PM
4 votes:
I don't believe in ghosts as surviving spirits of people whose bodies have died, because they never seem to act appropriately. By which I mean, act how people typically act when given the slightest chance of not being retaliated against. They're always trying to keep people away from their property, or trying to get people to do things they tried but failed to accomplish before they died so they can "rest in peace," instead of waving their phantasmal genitalia around, invading large parties for the purpose of dry-humping the guests of honor, and otherwise trying to get away with things they didn't dare do when they were alive.

/I do, however, believe in ghosts as imaginary entities we conjure up to comfort ourselves with the possibility of having a second chance after we die
//imagination can kill you if you let it, but it can also save your life if you understand it
2013-02-02 09:34:17 PM
3 votes:

Kit Fister: Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.


You know what makes me sad?  Folks who don't understand WHY popular and scientific opinion about the existence of sub atomic particles moved from "that's ridiculous" to "well, duh".  Evidence is the reason.  When there is no evidence for your pet hypothesis and mountains of evidence against it then it's irrational to continue to believe in it.  Folks who do think ghosts exist should, by all means, test their beliefs, but they shouldn't assert ghosts exist without good evidence.

You know what else makes me sad? Comparing the state of science 200 years ago to a topic today.  We understand the underlying physics of the "everyday" world incredibly well now and that, obviously, wasn't the case 200 years ago.  Overturning conventional science (ex. ghosts exist) today would take some truly phenomenal new evidence.  The same could not be said of overturning conventional science 200 years ago.
2013-02-02 09:15:16 PM
3 votes:
People who don't believe in spiritual stuff can be even more obnoxious about it than people who do believe in spiritual stuff.

This thread, proof.
2013-02-02 08:46:44 PM
3 votes:

mekki: Ghosts are a silly concept until you come across one. Then they cease in being a silly concept.

CSB: Had a die-hard atheist friend, (he doesn't even believe in luck), comes across a Woman in White ghost. He was driving along Elbow Road in Virginia Beach, Va late at night. The road was one of those stereotypical horror movie roads; out in the boonies, woods on either side, no street lights, lots of twists. He was going down one of those dangerous turns when his headlights fall on a woman in white standing in the middle of the road. He slams his breaks but doesn't quite make it. He hits her only, the car doesn't hit anything. That doesn't prevent him from stopping the car and looking for the damage. His bumper is fine. His hood is fine. For a car hitting something, there is absolutely no damage. Hitting a possum gets more damage. There is also no sign of the woman. There's nothing or no one on the road. He checks the ditches on the side. Nothing. He goes up and down with a flashlight. Nothing. He keeps on looking for almost an hour. Nothing. The woman is simply gone.

With no body and not a speck of evidence to prove he's ever hit anyone, he goes home and watches the news. He looks to see if anyone has found a body on Elbow Road. Nothing.

Fast forward a few years later when I was talking to another friend of ours who believes in ghosts. She is talking about all the local ghosts and one of them is the Woman in White on Elbow Road. Until then, I had not heard of the legend. But at that moment, something clicks and I realize that my friend had hit a ghost with his car, though he dismisses the idea of it. He still laughs at the idea of ghosts. I think it's funny that the one of the guys that I know who has a personal encounter with a ghost is someone who does not believe in them. /end of CSB

/some people don't believe even if they hit proof head on.


I have a firm and unshakable belief in the existence of smoke, mist, fog, water vapor, the exhaust fumes from the vehicle ahead of me, so-called "highway hypnosis," and even hallucinations due to driving while tired.  Any one of those could explain your friend's experience.

The leap from "I don't know what it is" to "it must be supernatural" is not a logical or necessary one.
2013-02-02 08:08:57 PM
3 votes:

The Billdozer: Ed Grubermann: Tatterdemalian: jigger: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't that isn't real is a stupid simpleton

ftfy

Do you believe in wealth, laws, promises? None of those are real.

/this is why atheist ideologies end up just as insane as religious cults
//they believe in things that aren't real, they just try to change the definition of "real" to suit themselves

And this is where you show you're an idiot.

So they are an idiot for saying that the standard stereotypical atheist, when having their "core beliefs" challenged,


No, they are idiots for misrepresenting what Atheism means. It's not some sophistic horseshiat like Tardmedalleon claims it is. It is simply, and ONLY, the lack of a belief in a god. Nothing more. It is not the denial of social constructs or man-made institutions.

TLDR: He constructed a strawman.
2013-02-02 07:34:28 PM
3 votes:

TreeHugger: Like the time two of my friends had very specific dreams about the same event happening to me, a traumatic occurrence that led to my taking a plane flight.  And a week later it happened just as prophesied.  Nothing I had previously told them could possibly have clued them in, and anyway I had no idea that it was coming.  And the details they told me were fulfilled exactly.  You can't explain that!


Last year, I had an incredibly vivid dream in which my father died. In the dream, I was informed by a phone call late at night. I hardly ever remember dreams, but that one I remembered, because it seemed so real. Two nights later, just as we were about to go to bed, the phone rang. Out of nowhere, the thought, "My father is dead" flashed through my head. I answered the phone and, sure enough...

...it was a wrong number. My dad is still alive.

If it had happened the other way, I might have been inclined to believe something supernatural happened.

Coincidences, how do they farking work?
2013-02-02 06:43:50 PM
3 votes:

Zeppelininthesky: I don't believe in ghosts. Most of the phenomena can be explained by the human body reacting to a situation because of evolution. If a house settles it makes a noise. Because you don't know what the noise is, you react to it like there was something there. If you tend to believe in ghosts, then what you heard was a ghost. Even if you don't believe in ghosts, your brain is wired to be fearful of what you can't see and don't understand.


Basically this. Our minds are wondrous, but they also fark with us every day. It hasn't evolved to the point that it we are no longer cowering in caves or trees afraid with the good chance of being dragged off by a large predator.

*unfamiliar sound*
Rational part of the mind: What was that? I don't know what it is.
Instinctive mind: Run, asshole! It's some terrifying and huge with sharp teeth and you're going to die!

Very good when you're naked, hungry, and in the wild. Not so good when you're house is settling and you're half asleep.
2013-02-02 06:41:15 PM
3 votes:

Tatterdemalian: jigger: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't that isn't real is a stupid simpleton

ftfy

Do you believe in wealth, laws, promises? None of those are real.

/this is why atheist ideologies end up just as insane as religious cults
//they believe in things that aren't real, they just try to change the definition of "real" to suit themselves


And this is where you show you're an idiot.
2013-02-02 06:30:39 PM
3 votes:

St_Francis_P: ecmoRandomNumbers: Don't believe in ghosts, but have seen weird shiat.

I've always wanted to see one, but never have. The strangest thing I've seen is my mom answer the phone before it rang. Twice. Each time it was my brother calling. She claimed she did it all the time. I was seriously wondering if she weighed more than a duck.


She must have very good hearing, old landline phones make a sound just before they ring. It is inaudible to the average person, but many animals can hear it. A friend had a dog that hated the sound of a ringing phone, he learned to knock the phone off the hook when he heard the first sound. I've heard of cats doing the same thing.
2013-02-02 06:25:51 PM
3 votes:
Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.
2013-02-02 03:22:48 PM
3 votes:

St_Francis_P: It is one of the more harmless beliefs. Not many people have been killed over ghosts, nor does belief in ghosts trash the political process.


Except it is a symptom of the kind of magical thinking that does trash the political process, when the electorate wants X amount of services and believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that those services can be purchased for some amount of money less than X. Or that something must be done about the 12 million illegal immigrants "ruining the country", while a few thousand bankers actually did tank the economy and any effort to punish them or even prevent it from happening in the future was defeated amid cries of socialism and tyranny.

Wow... maybe I should get more fiber or something.

Anyway, 45% of Americans are stupid.
2013-02-03 12:16:27 PM
2 votes:

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: What I am finding both fascinating and depressing is the apparently increasing rigidity and compartmentalization of scientific thinking. I've noticed it in some of the science journals, and it shows up here on Fark by what seems to be an arrogant presumption that there are really no mysteries left. "The science is settled and unless you believe X you are a moron and a fool....blah blah blah."  Some "scientists" and what I call "science groupies" who sharpen their self esteem by downputting others are beginning to sound like theologians. The science is never settled.


You're confusing our incomplete knowledge of how physical forces combine to operate on higher levels (a single neuron vs. the entire brain) with a dismantling of basic physics itself.  You're confusing refining and updating the frontiers of science based on better evidence with discarding well established science under the guise of "open mindedness".  The arrogant presumption comes from folks like you who know nothing about the subjects that their pet hypothesis contradict.  We understand the four fundamental forces.  There is no term for "ghostly interaction".  There's no mystery about how an electron behaves in "everyday" situations.  You're not forging some new frontier of science by suggesting some unknown force that has never shown up in any experiments.  What you're actually doing is shiatting all over the scientific process you claim to be advancing because you don't realize how much of our scientific understanding would have to be wrong for you to be right.

Believing in a soul or ghosts means you need a whole new branch of physics.  What, exactly, is a ghost? What particles are ghosts made of?  What forces govern their behavior? How do these new particles and forces interact with the ones we already know about?  Why have we never detected any of these particles and forces despite the claims of people who see them in the mundane, everyday world?
2013-02-03 10:20:52 AM
2 votes:
this thread is funny.  i love how the emotional need to allow for the possibility of god permits all sorts of rational loopholes, like ghosts and presumably dragons, elves and unicorns.  if you're going to be absurd, you might as well go all the way.  it seems people do this by adopting some philosophy of relativistic perception, as if reality is defined by one's feelings about it.  notice that you aren't consulted before major scientific undertakings: it's actually because your feelings  don't have a bearing on reality.  pro-tip: map vs. territory.  there is an objective truth, an objective reality, of which we may have limited perception, but which nonetheless exists.  if you deny this, and to clarify what i mean, go walk on air of your on will power.  your feelings about reality do not alter it.  suggesting that ghosts, god, dragons are viable candidates for belief is to suggest that mere thought alone qualifies something to exist in reality, barring any empirical proof or rational imperative.

and those claiming "string theory is incomplete, therefore string theorists are dogmatic / believers / unscientific  / faithful," or any other such conflation between faith in the supernatural and due scientific process, are fools.  the difference is that while string theory isn't proven, there is a reality-based rationale and evidence for it, founded on more established scientific ground.

while on the surface this topic is ghosts, it's more generally about rationality and evidence and faith and belief.  the divide between pro-ghost people and anti-ghost is the same as theist and atheist: faith v. science, belief v. reason, emotion v. proof.  if you think there is any rational difference between believing in ghosts and god, you don't understand what rationality means.

and for the guy up there who said being irrational and stupid are different things: how?  "stupid" is an inaccurate behavior descriptor (like 'evil' or 'good'), which can really only describe the difference between one's beliefs and reality, given the information available to the one holding the belief.  to hone in on it, stupidity IS the measure of one's irrationality.  still not a useful explanatory term since the kind of 'free will' necessary to merit one 'stupid' or 'smart' doesn't exist, but if we're going to use them, understand we're really describing one's rationality.
2013-02-03 12:53:23 AM
2 votes:
Three cheers for Subby for starting a great thread.

Repo Man:  Getting angry at skeptics does nothing to strengthen your case.


It actually strengthens their case quite a bit, just in the opposite way.

I love ghosts and cryptids, I read everything I can get my  hands on (I'm not a believer, if anything I'm a debunker).  I've come up with one flaw in ghost sightings  that even the most ardent believer can't defend: Location, Location, Location. Every good ghost story is about a haunted theatre, haunted old hotel, haunted cemetery etc. I've never heard one about a haunted tanning salon, haunted Midas Muffler, haunted TGIFridays. Every old theatre is supposedly haunted but I've never read about a haunted H and R Block. Lots of haunted houses but very few haunted timeshares. Not many haunted IHOPs.

If male ghosts existed, the number of sightings at strip clubs would be through the roof. Same with women's locker rooms, golf courses, football stadiums and bars. This is especially true when someone dies away from home and is never brought home, only to the funeral home etc. If a ghost can figure out how to get home, isn't he going to stop by the strip club first? The golf course?
2013-02-02 10:49:08 PM
2 votes:
There is nothing wrong with having an open mind.
As long as the screen door is secure.
2013-02-02 10:10:00 PM
2 votes:
Ultimately, one of the hallmarks of science is objectivity. The more we learn about how the human brain, consciousness, and memory actually work, more we realize just how unreliable subjective experience is.

This is why your anecdote about the time you dreamed your grandma's hairdresser was in a car accident two weeks before he actually was isn't evidence.

Having multiple viewpoints of an event helps, but delusion is contagious, so even that can't entirely be trusted.

If reality were a tree, then science's job is to shake that tree and see what falls out. We've been shaking the tree for 500 years, and so far nothing supernatural has fallen out of the tree.
2013-02-02 09:21:28 PM
2 votes:

cgremlin: People can believe or not believe whatever they want.  It makes no difference to me.  I know what I've experienced, and I also know there's not a "rational" explanation for it.  If someone wants to think I'm irrational or otherwise mentally deficient because they've not personally experienced the same thing, that's their problem.


I don't think anyone would tell you that you didn't have your "experience", but rather your interpretation of said experience is likely flawed.  The human brain just isn't all that reliable.

Tatterdemalian: Do you believe in wealth, laws, promises? None of those are real.


You're just confusing physical and real. Concepts, like laws, are useful abstractions, but they don't have physical forms.  The concept of a ghost is real (we understand the meaning and can explain it to others), but the "physical" manifestation is not.
2013-02-02 09:20:09 PM
2 votes:
 That's actually not what skepticism is, but carry on :)

To be fair, we can all define words differently.  I am just saying that the poster in question is grasping for straws.  If "psi" and other horse puckey existed, it would stand up to scientific inquiry.  It hasn't done so in thousands of years of trying.  How long are we supposed to pretend that ghosts could be real when there has been zero rational verification?


Kit Fister: Ivan Tudor C McHock: GUTSU: wee: More than that believe in a god.  Some even believe that this invisible man in the sky will listen to them and do shiat for them.  They live their lives in the context of this imaginary friend advising them.  They give money to people who talk to them about this magical being.

That's far worse than believing in ghosts.

I'm willing to bet there are even more atheists who make snide and rude remarks about the vast majority of the population. I say this as an ignostic, you don't look smart when you say shiat like that, it just makes you look like an ass.

No, it makes him look honest. You must remember that theists  actually are moronsand if stating that fact causes their buttocks to become hurty then that is tough titties. Telling it like it is, is very important in a world filled with bullshiat.

And why are they morons? Because you think it's silly to believe in something not yet proven? Fine, string theorists and half of quantum physicists are also complete morons, believing in something that doesn't exist.


Yes, there is no difference between ghosts and a magic man in the sky and reasoned theories about subatomic particles that have been subjected to peer review.
2013-02-02 09:09:36 PM
2 votes:

italie: Explain to me how quantum entanglement works, then you can lecture me on how ghosts can't exist.


Quantum entanglement is pretty simple, really. Particles that have interacted can have quantum superpositions linked in such a way that, even at a distance, measuring the quantum state of one particle causes the probability wave function of the other to collapse.

Ghosts may exist. Russell's teapot may exist. Invisible pink unicorns may exist. The Flying Spaghetti Monster may exist.

Present me with compelling physical evidence of any of those, in an experiment that can be easily replicated that delivers statistically significant results, and I will accept that they're real.

/The problem that many have today is that their mind is so open that it dribbles out of their ears.
2013-02-02 07:42:50 PM
2 votes:
People can believe or not believe whatever they want.  It makes no difference to me.  I know what I've experienced, and I also know there's not a "rational" explanation for it.  If someone wants to think I'm irrational or otherwise mentally deficient because they've not personally experienced the same thing, that's their problem.
2013-02-02 07:39:43 PM
2 votes:
I'm a skeptic when it comes to ghosts, but only a small "s" skeptic. If you believe in ghosts, cool. I went on a ghost tour in St Augustine, it was a lot of fun.

/small "s" because skepticism is good when used for critical thinking and to debunk charlatans and scam-artists, but Skepticism, when used to ridicule or condescend to people deemed intellectually inferior, is ugly and small (see this thread for numerous examples)
2013-02-02 07:16:30 PM
2 votes:
...thus explaining why the farce that is the "Ghost Hunters" franchise on SyFy is still on the air, despite the simple fact that they haven't found a single credible ghost in their years of manufactured stupidity.
2013-02-02 07:14:34 PM
2 votes:

andyfromfl: In after 'There is no God who behaves how I think it should, therefore there is no God.'


What about "There is no god because the world behaves as though there is no supernatural deity and it's sillypants to believe in something for which there is no evidence."?
2013-02-02 06:43:11 PM
2 votes:
99% of all hauntings are cats.
2013-02-02 06:42:16 PM
2 votes:

Zombie DJ: I do. I've studied the Paranormal for over 30 years. I've got a great "laugh" from a cemetery I walked through.
When people ask me to give them proof there's ghosts, I just tell them it's not my job to make you believe.
That's YOUR job. Do your own homework. I do it for fun, not change the World.


That's how charlatans work.
2013-02-02 06:36:09 PM
2 votes:

Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?


Assuming you're not joking:

It's not people are "sure" there aren't ghosts. It's that there has never been any evidence to suggest it besides second hand accounts and poorly faked photographs/video/audio.

Russel's Teapot is the best explanation for why we don't assume something is true just because some people believe it without evidence.
2013-02-02 06:34:03 PM
2 votes:

BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.


If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.
2013-02-02 04:06:55 PM
2 votes:
It's fun to play pretend.
2013-02-05 03:11:51 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Further what is considered either logical or reasonable by an individual is based entirely on his own experience and belief.


And how they're defining "logical" and "reasonable".
imageshack.us


See also Lincoln's "How many legs does a dog have if you consider the tail a leg?"

Kit Fister: Again, everyone has their own standard of what is logical and reasonable, and it's better to have an honest discussion where people learn than having nasty fights and browbeating


Similarly, whether something is "better" or not depends on what ordering relationship over choices is given to define the term "better".

Kit Fister: Logic and reason, I find to be subjective based on the person.


So, you consider as subjective the commutativity of logical inclusive disjunction -- that (P OR Q) is equi-inferrable with (Q OR P)?

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Which means that you must be one (or more) of several things: (1) people similar to myself, who do NOT have science degrees and are faking your superiority to stroke your own fragile egos; (2) scientists who are out of work due to whatever reason (incompetence comes to mind as one possibility), or (3) actual working scientists who have so freaking much time on your hands that one wonders whether you've been sidelined by your colleagues(again, why? Due to incompetence?) into dead-end jobs where nobody cares if you produce.


Your list misses a number of options. For one thing, you ignore the entire fraction who, while having the intelligence enough to follow the work of others, may lack the ability to do new work themselves. Possibilities include those without the creativity to do original work of their own, those without the focus to sustain creativity until the new work is finished, and likely others. There's also those who have no life, and therefore do this sort of thing for an evening's amusement; and those who are simply killing some slack time while waiting for code to recompile or similar such necessary delays.

Also, science communication and science research are related but different fields. And there's other problems....

Social validation involves resisting the message by bringing to mind important others who share one's original attitude (Festinger, 1950, 1954, 1957; Festinger, Gerard, Hymovitch, Kelley, & Raven, 1952). Source derogation involves insulting the source, dismissing his or her expertise or trustworthiness, or otherwise rejecting his or her validity (Buller, 1986; Festinger, 1957; Festinger & Maccoby, 1964; Wright, 1975). Social validation and source derogation are responses that do not require message scrutiny, although both are likely to be coded as unfavorable thoughts in the general cognitive response approach. - (doi:10.1207/S15324834BASP2502_5)
2013-02-04 12:20:37 AM
1 votes:
Last post in this thread.

What I find fascinating in this thread, and certain other threads, is the virtually religious and uncritically dogmatic enthusiasm of some Farkers for their own takes on "Science." The word is invoked like you are saying your Rosary. And it is done so in the same breath used to accuse those who disagree with you of irrationality, stupidity, and general derpiness. So... who are you people?

I know quite well why I waste huge amounts of time here on Fark: After my twice weekly calls to employment agencies, and the daily checking and occasional resume response on Monster, Craigslist and other job posting sites, I've really got nothing else to do except sit in the truck, or the public library, or a Starbucks and amuse myself. Killing time, it's called.

I also read. A lot. Lots of science in various fields, as well as SF, detective novels, and so forth. My background, plus my non-fiction reading/study, has IMHO given me a fairly good "lay" handle on lots of sciency type subject matters.

I realize, however, that that knowledge is probably nothing compared to the intellectual and professional attainments of the many scientists who apparently spend so much time on Fark lambasting my own and others viewpoints.....  Oh, wait, that really doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense, now does it?

Why? Well, if you were actual, real life scientists - biologists, cosmologists, quantum physicists, climatologists, anthropologists, etc. - you would undoubtedly be working on wonderful and ground-breaking science... and really would not have either the time nor the psychological bias to spend hours arguing on Fark and putting down others who disagreed with you.

Which means that you must be one (or more) of several things: (1) people similar to myself, who do NOT have science degrees and are faking your superiority to stroke your own fragile egos; (2) scientists who are out of work due to whatever reason (incompetence comes to mind as one possibility), or (3) actual working scientists who have so freaking much time on your hands that one wonders whether you've been sidelined by your colleagues(again, why? Due to incompetence?) into dead-end jobs where nobody cares if you produce.

In other words, for all three cases, me thinks that you all doth protesteth far too much.

Confused lurkers should take note of this train of logic. Ask yourselves exactly what are the professional sciency credentials of some of these people. And, if they are so good, why are they wasting time on Fark?

Good night.
2013-02-03 09:26:44 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: I dunno about him, but I think that it's the tone of the discussions rather than the content


If discussions centered solely on the strength of the evidence were sufficient this thread would have been about 10 comments long.  Most of the ghost believers in the thread have failed to admit that they have shaky evidence at best and the rational position on the issue would be to say ghosts don't exist with the caveat that you can't prove a universal negative.

The argument gets shifted to bullshiat like "open mindedness" means believing something without good evidence.  The tone turns to ridicule because the people arguing in favor of ghost are confident to a degree far exceeding the strength of their evidence and then attack people who want more and better evidence (how DARE we do that!?) as "closed minded".  So they're not only believing something without good evidence, but they're also accusing everyone else for being closed minded for not automatically agreeing with them.

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: This - invoked religiously several times in this thread as if it is a cure-all excuse for non-thought - is beginning to sound remarkably like someone saying their rosary.


You just don't like actually presenting evidence that is strong enough to back up your claims.  When you want to overthrow vast swaths of physics you need a metric assload of evidence supporting your position.  When you want people to believe in the existence of a new phenomenon unlike any other then you need plenty of evidence to sway them.

The only one not thinking is you because you've decided you're right without actually weighing the evidence.  You're ignoring all the problems with your belief.  Every criticism, contradiction and problem with your belief are casually swept aside as if those objections are meaningless.  That's the pinnacle of not thinking and religiously sticking to what you want to be true.
2013-02-03 03:36:46 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?

Same way they're sure there isn't a god. Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.

It also makes me sad and angry that we as a human race simply cannot get by unless we're tearing each other down over our differences of opinion and personal experience.

Don't believe in something? Fine. But it's none of your goddamn business not do you have the right to judge others who believe differently than you do.


This x 10500 It also makes me sad that the so-called sciency people on Fark appear to be the narrow-minded and religiously fundamentalist rednecks. If this is the state of science in the real world, then we got big problems, folks.
2013-02-03 02:27:59 PM
1 votes:

udhq: italie: Ed Grubermann: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.

If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.

Explain to me how quantum entanglement works, then you can lecture me on how ghosts can't exist.

"Can exist" is meaningless.

Extraordinary claims, etc. etc.


This - invoked religiously several times in this thread as if it is a cure-all excuse for non-thought - is beginning to sound remarkably like someone saying their rosary.
2013-02-03 01:23:15 PM
1 votes:

Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?


The idea is in conflict with their Faith.
2013-02-03 11:58:11 AM
1 votes:

Rufus Lee King: Unrelated to ghosts and that, will some of you be a little more succinct with your posts? You're giving me a godamned headache.


Brevity is the ghost of wit.

I'll never stop being amused by anti-intellectual claims that atheism is somehow "as bad as religious fundamentalism" or "agnostics'" failed, anti-intellectual attempts to be clever, different, and compromising in their position that a total lack of evidence and violation of scientific laws nevertheless leave a realistic possibility that a claim is still true.

Why defend a dismissal of empirical reasoning?  Do the same people do this in their daily decision-making?  Do you dismiss evidence or contradict a lack of it when making decisions about your children and finances?
2013-02-03 11:40:03 AM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Why dismiss out of hand that which is unproven (and poorly studied because it is dismissed out of hand) simply because we have no evidence because we have no reliable, empirical studies to draw from?


Quick, name something that you feel has been dismissed out of hand.  Please name something you think hasn't been given its scientific due process.

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: The laws of physics and biology? Which ones? Newton's Laws? Or Einstein's, which proved Newton to be wrong. Darwin's evolutionary theory? Or what about the complications to that suggested by Lynn Margulis? And let's not even discuss the possibilities being suggested by quantum and string field theorists that may apply to both physics and biology.  Do you actually have the naive chutzpah to say that we know everything? We know less about the human brain than about the moons of Saturn.


Sorry to break it to you, but we know more than you think.  And we don't have to know everything about everything to point out ghosts aren't real and that there is no immaterial soul (or residual energy field or whatever you want to call it) which is responsible for consciousness and survives brain death.

Here is the Dirac Equation, which describes electrons:  blogs.scientificamerican.com

Please point out where the term for "interaction with the immaterial soul" is at.

 In order to say that there is a soul and it is the seat of our consciousness, personality, memory, etc and interacts with the physical world then you have to say this equation isn't right.  This is the problem with the "science hasn't discovered" everything argument when debating in favor of supernatural and pseudo scientific phenomena   Those phenomena aren't just confined to a realm where our science has yet to tread.  These supposedly supernatural phenomena are being "witnessed" in the everyday world!  Guess what? We know the physics of the everyday world pretty damn well.  In order to posit the existence of ghosts or the continuation of a mind beyond bodily death you have to trample on well established physics.
2013-02-03 03:52:03 AM
1 votes:

Ivan Tudor C McHock: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Ivan Tudor C McHock: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.

This.

Really? This?

If that sentence read the same, except the word "ghosts" was replaced any of "tooth fairy", "spaghetti monster" or  any other fictional character ever created,would you have given it a "this"? If not, why not?

Your ability to handle context sucks. There are gazillions of anecdotal accounts of ghosts. There are very few about tooth fairies and the FSM. I personally have seen a couple of things that I can't explain (see other post in this thread) and neither involves either tooth fairies or the FSM. They MAY involve ghosts - or possibly previously unknown physical laws (Einstein, for example. formulated a previously unknown physical law, so I assume that doing so is possible in the future). All I can say for certain is that I know of no physical cause for them.

Your ability to grasp the point sucks. As does your awareness of the fact that popular opinion does not add a nanogram of weight to an argument. And the very fact that there have indeed been gazillions of  anecdotal accounts of ghosts,  every one of which has been accompanied by a complete lack of evidence, should tell you that ghosts are a crock of should.


Lack of evidence? Or lack of repeatability under controlled conditions? Remember that the first step in any scientific endeavor is human observation (aka anecdotal data.) Science isn't a monolithic arbiter of truth vs falsehood. It's a tool that we humans use to investigate our perceptions about the world.

Saying "I do not believe in ghosts" is fine, and a perfectly reasonable position for most people. Saying "I know ghosts do not and cannot exist" is silly.
2013-02-03 03:31:19 AM
1 votes:
Belief in ghosts has ruined the SyFy channel.
2013-02-03 02:50:48 AM
1 votes:

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Ivan Tudor C McHock: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.

This.

Really? This?

If that sentence read the same, except the word "ghosts" was replaced any of "tooth fairy", "spaghetti monster" or  any other fictional character ever created,would you have given it a "this"? If not, why not?

Your ability to handle context sucks. There are gazillions of anecdotal accounts of ghosts. There are very few about tooth fairies and the FSM. I personally have seen a couple of things that I can't explain (see other post in this thread) and neither involves either tooth fairies or the FSM. They MAY involve ghosts - or possibly previously unknown physical laws (Einstein, for example. formulated a previously unknown physical law, so I assume that doing so is possible in the future). All I can say for certain is that I know of no physical cause for them.


Your ability to grasp the point sucks. As does your awareness of the fact that popular opinion does not add a nanogram of weight to an argument. And the very fact that there have indeed been gazillions of  anecdotal accounts of ghosts,  every one of which has been accompanied by a complete lack of evidence, should tell you that ghosts are a crock of should.
2013-02-03 02:34:04 AM
1 votes:

ThrobblefootSpectre: My only real complaint about atheism is that so many of it's followers are so utterly arrogant, self-righteous, self-important, and evangelistic.


It's hard to be humble when you're right.
2013-02-03 02:19:51 AM
1 votes:

Ed Grubermann: Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?

Well, there's the fact that there's no mechanism that we know of by which they can function. Being dead and all.


Fixed. Yes, the body is dead. But where does the ordered energy of the mind go? Dissipates? Probably, usually. But as an ex-ET in the Navy, I can tell you that it is possible to temporarily stabilize an ordered energy charge. It takes more than a bit of complicated circuitry for us to do that. Not sure what it might take for nature to do it (here on Earth). I think I read a while back somewhere that astronomers think the Sun might have stable (ordered) plasma fields that last for various lengths of time, and could theoretically contain information.

I think there comes a point where hysterical skepticism can hurt the scientific method and the advance of science. Howl about and ridicule something enough and it takes much longer to decide to seriously study it, and - if it turns out to be true - to accept and profit from it. You might want to touch base with the shade of Alfred Wegener about that, if he's not too busy having the last laugh.
2013-02-03 02:05:18 AM
1 votes:

Ed Grubermann: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.

If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.


There's tons of evidence. The only problem is that it is all anecdotal. As I mentioned in another post on this thread, I've personally seen/heard two things I can't explain: an electric battery shaver that would turn itself on, but only occasionally. And a goddamned radio that would change stations by itself. The shaver had a 2-position switch with a half-inch throw, and I took it apart and checked the simple electric circuit (I was an ET in the Navy a decade or so before). Ditto with the radio, which had a large manual dial. Neither device had any faults or shorts.

Now I don't expect you to believe me, since I have no PROOF of any of that. But I saw/heard what I saw/heard, and it's convinced me that - as of now - we don't know everything. Except you, of course. You do know everything.

The laws of physics and biology? Which ones? Newton's Laws? Or Einstein's, which proved Newton to be wrong. Darwin's evolutionary theory? Or what about the complications to that suggested by Lynn Margulis? And let's not even discuss the possibilities being suggested by quantum and string field theorists that may apply to both physics and biology.  Do you actually have the naive chutzpah to say that we know everything? We know less about the human brain than about the moons of Saturn.
2013-02-03 01:49:58 AM
1 votes:
It's the leap from "Can't explain it" to "Must be ghosts" that is so funny.
2013-02-03 01:24:08 AM
1 votes:
I sort of wish that ghosts existed, because it'd imply that there is something after death. But it sure doesn't look like it.

Atheism is the most depressing of the religions. My mind just can't believe in things that don't exist, though.
2013-02-03 12:47:32 AM
1 votes:
gimmegimme:

Friend, you don't need to explain yourself.  There's never been any documented case of supernatural haunting ever...until now.  Yours was the first.  Congratulations!

you know, I had you on ignore until well into this thread, and removed your from the list when I saw that you were starting to debate civilly to Kit Fister.

I have to admit I am thinking about putting you back on. (I will remove the ignore mark if I see a quoted ignoree say something civil.)

It's not because I want to surround myself with like thinkers... I use orange to mark people who think different than me, so that I can take the time to try to see their point of view... in fact I find a great many times those people end up migrating to the palest orange and ending up on my green list of thoughtful farkers.

I would put you on ignore because you are caustic in your writing.  Again, It's not your stated opinion I hide from, because I agree with you in this.

It is because as rational as you claim to be, you cannot seem to refrain from talking down sarcastically to people as if they have personally insulted you for daring to speak their mind. If you think that you are justified to do so, that is evidence of another sort of delusion.

You seem to speak from a position of extreme confidence that everything is as you believe it is and all other opinions are foolish and wrong. It seems like you believe that is your position in life; to put these people in their place.

I was once like that, and I shudder at what a abrasive dumbass I was a decade ago. I am glad that patient people took me aside and explained my dumbassery to me.

Being right does not make it ok to be a dick and acting that way is very counter productive on so many levels.
2013-02-02 11:55:34 PM
1 votes:
The poll tax was wrong.  Now a poll quiz, I could wrap my head around that.  Just a couple of questions covering basic math, civics and cosmology.

Figure out the tip on a $20 restaurant bill, identify who is responsible for creating laws, and name explain why the sun rises in the east and sets in the west and you can vote.  Miss any of these and just let the rest of us decide what is best for you.
2013-02-02 11:31:46 PM
1 votes:

Gyrfalcon: They're not the same things. "I can't explain everything I've seen" does not translate into "Therefore there are ghosts"; and even "I believe in ghosts" does not perfectly translate into "I believe ghosts are the souls of the dead walking the earth in eternal torment."

For instance, I believe in ghosts; but in my case I only use the term "ghosts" because that's the only word that's readily available (and short) enough to be used in conversation when talking about the random apparitions that seem to be seen in empty houses and lonely places, usually after dark, usually when alone or in the company of other like-minded individuals, and often in response to an overall feeling of dread or loneliness evoked by other external stimuli. Do I think these people have really experienced something real? Absolutely. Do I think it was the lost soul of a dead person? Hell no. But I don't think most of these folks are making shiat up for fun or profit. Something really happened, and they ascribed it to "ghosts." (Or demons, or aliens, depending)

So dismissing anyone who claims to believe in ghosts as either frauds or fools is pretty smug, yeah. Not too long ago, it was discovered that the human inner ear and human eyeball both respond to very low frequency sound in a way that causes sensations of unease and fear AND a visual impression of "seeing something"--a low frequency that surprisingly is one used by big cats to communicate over long distances. These low frequencies are amplified by large, resonating spaces like caves, spaces that both humans and big cats used to compete for back in prehistory. So suddenly fear of "ghosts" becomes instead a residual survival trait, used to warn humans off of caves inhabited by big predators, and one you can't just "think" away. It's instinctive, not intellectual.


First, let me predicate my response with the comment that your posts show up in the "god-tier green" color that is shared by about four or five other people.  Anything you say is automatically assumed to be important, interesting, and worth reading, just because it's you who said it.  Your posts are in the group with abb3w, TMLO, Bathia_Mapes, and very few others.  So insofar as what follows is a disagreement, please understand that it is a respectful difference of opinion- you're one of my heroes on Fark and my disagreements with you should be interpreted in that light.

Second, I have to admit that (as usual on Saturday nights) I am really drunk, so I hope that you'll forgive me if I'm not entirely coherent.  I just finished my fifth whiskey and soda, so if my typing becomes cat-like, please forgive me.

OK, with that apology out of the way, I agree with you (or at least what I think you're saying) that the  experience of seeing "ghosts" is real.  The people who say they have "seen a ghost" most definitely did have a real experience.  I'm not questioning that at all.  I'm only questioning whether their interpretation of that experience as evidence of the continuity of consciousness after death is accurate.

To put it in context, at the end of my block, there is a Pentecostal church where, each week, people "speak in tongues" and engage in convulsive dancing.  A few miles away, there is a Houngan who knows how to get followers ridden by the Lwa and even evoke the gros bon ange.

I have absolutely no doubt that their experiences are "real."  I'm not dismissing them as frauds or fools.  They really are doing something, and the experience is completely "real" to all of them.

I'm just saying that there is no real evidence that the experience is "supernatural."  There are too many easier, perfectly natural, explanations

Do weird things happen that we can't explain yet?  Yes, definitely.
Can we conclude, from that fact, that "supernatural" explanations are correct?  No, not really.  "Not yet explained" is not equivalent to "unexplainable."

To put it in personal terms: all through this thread, I've heard people saying "I had an experience that I can't explain, and if you don't except a supernatural explanation for it, then you're just being 'smug' because you haven't had the same experience."

In fact, I actually have had similar experiences, lots of them, and have studied ways of inducing them (both with and without "chemical assistance"), and I've become rather proficient at it, and I haven't ever encountered anything I can't explain.

Is something happening?  Yes. Is it the souls of the dear departed?  No.  Am I simply "dismissing" people as frauds and fools?  No. Am I willing to accept their claims at face value?  Again, no.  Not because "you haven't been there man, so you don't know!" but precisely because I actually  have been there.

The  experience is real.  It's the  interpretation that I'm questioning.

/Again, please do not interpret my disagreement as a personal critique- you are one of my favorite farkers.
2013-02-02 10:59:11 PM
1 votes:

Gyrfalcon: There is nothing wrong with having an open mind.
As long as the screen door is secure.


This
2013-02-02 10:56:36 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Repo Man: Kit Fister: gimmegimme: Kit Fister: gimmegimme: Slow of Wit: Don't know about ghosts.  Never experienced a ghost.  But, I'd say reality may make room for consciousness to experience  more than what we can verify with the normal senses.  I'd even go so far as to say a proper scientist should keep an open mind to such phenomena -- somewhere in between all the myth and fantasy an ignorance there may be valid experiences that are key to a broader understanding of reality and its hidden or subtle dimensions.

Seriously.  Even though it has never happened before, I COULD happen to meet Kristen Bell at the supermarket and make dirty love to her in my car.  There's no reason for me to believe this CAN'T happen, so I should be open to the possibility, right?

All possible outcomes of all possible situations exist, only the act of observing collapses reality into a specific outcome. Also, if observation is all that determines what reality/dimension/experience we have happen, and all possible outcomes exist in alternate realities, then somewhere in the multiverse, you're having wild, kinky sex with Ms. Bell right now.

Umm...you have no idea how much I want to agree with you.  SADLY, the principles of reason dictate that there's really no point for this version of gimmegimme to believe that he'll ever make sweet, sweet love to this:

Not bad, not my cup of tea (not into the thinner, small boobie types) but not bad. Gimmegimme in reality XJ35791 is a lucky dog!

And in some other alternate, xenomorphs are real, and a very unfortunate Gimmegimme has been facehugged, and is awaiting the terrible final outcome. That would be the unluckiest Gimmegimme.

Whoa.  Whoa.

Whoa.

By Kit Fister's logic, this is as likely as some version of me making love to Kristen Bell.

Now I'm scared.


Likely? No. Possible? As possible as getting hit by a stray asteroid next Thursday.
2013-02-02 10:29:36 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Slow of Wit: Don't know about ghosts.  Never experienced a ghost.  But, I'd say reality may make room for consciousness to experience  more than what we can verify with the normal senses.  I'd even go so far as to say a proper scientist should keep an open mind to such phenomena -- somewhere in between all the myth and fantasy an ignorance there may be valid experiences that are key to a broader understanding of reality and its hidden or subtle dimensions.

Seriously.  Even though it has never happened before, I COULD happen to meet Kristen Bell at the supermarket and make dirty love to her in my car.  There's no reason for me to believe this CAN'T happen, so I should be open to the possibility, right?


All possible outcomes of all possible situations exist, only the act of observing collapses reality into a specific outcome. Also, if observation is all that determines what reality/dimension/experience we have happen, and all possible outcomes exist in alternate realities, then somewhere in the multiverse, you're having wild, kinky sex with Ms. Bell right now.
2013-02-02 10:16:27 PM
1 votes:

FloydA: ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.


"I can't explain everything I've seen, therefore the souls of the dead remain walking the earth in eternal torment, bound and imprisoned on this physical plane, forever seeking atonement for their sins and forgiveness that will never come!"

Sounds perfectly reasonable, anyone who doesn't accept that simple syllogism must be just smug.


They're not the same things. "I can't explain everything I've seen" does not translate into "Therefore there are ghosts"; and even "I believe in ghosts" does not perfectly translate into "I believe ghosts are the souls of the dead walking the earth in eternal torment."

For instance, I believe in ghosts; but in my case I only use the term "ghosts" because that's the only word that's readily available (and short) enough to be used in conversation when talking about the random apparitions that seem to be seen in empty houses and lonely places, usually after dark, usually when alone or in the company of other like-minded individuals, and often in response to an overall feeling of dread or loneliness evoked by other external stimuli. Do I think these people have really experienced something real? Absolutely. Do I think it was the lost soul of a dead person? Hell no. But I don't think most of these folks are making shiat up for fun or profit. Something really happened, and they ascribed it to "ghosts." (Or demons, or aliens, depending)

So dismissing anyone who claims to believe in ghosts as either frauds or fools is pretty smug, yeah. Not too long ago, it was discovered that the human inner ear and human eyeball both respond to very low frequency sound in a way that causes sensations of unease and fear AND a visual impression of "seeing something"--a low frequency that surprisingly is one used by big cats to communicate over long distances. These low frequencies are amplified by large, resonating spaces like caves, spaces that both humans and big cats used to compete for back in prehistory. So suddenly fear of "ghosts" becomes instead a residual survival trait, used to warn humans off of caves inhabited by big predators, and one you can't just "think" away. It's instinctive, not intellectual.
2013-02-02 10:15:39 PM
1 votes:
Why are you all still here? reillan won.
2013-02-02 10:13:22 PM
1 votes:
Don't know about ghosts.  Never experienced a ghost.  But, I'd say reality may make room for consciousness to experience  more than what we can verify with the normal senses.  I'd even go so far as to say a proper scientist should keep an open mind to such phenomena -- somewhere in between all the myth and fantasy an ignorance there may be valid experiences that are key to a broader understanding of reality and its hidden or subtle dimensions.
2013-02-02 10:12:44 PM
1 votes:

Ivan Tudor C McHock: gimmegimme: Kit Fister: Baryogenesis: Kit Fister: Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.

You know what makes me sad?  Folks who don't understand WHY popular and scientific opinion about the existence of sub atomic particles moved from "that's ridiculous" to "well, duh".  Evidence is the reason.  When there is no evidence for your pet hypothesis and mountains of evidence against it then it's irrational to continue to believe in it.  Folks who do think ghosts exist should, by all means, test their beliefs, but they shouldn't assert ghosts exist without good evidence.

You know what else makes me sad? Comparing the state of science 200 years ago to a topic today.  We understand the underlying physics of the "everyday" world incredibly well now and that, obviously, wasn't the case 200 years ago.  Overturning conventional science (ex. ghosts exist) today would take some truly phenomenal new evidence.  The same could not be said of overturning conventional science 200 years ago.

So we should all want to be just like you, unable to conceive of things larger than what science can prove?

If you provide proof to support your belief, I'll be happy to agree with you.  Why haven't ghosts been proven in thousands of years of trying?  More importantly, why do you believe things for which there are no proof?

Regarding the last sentence, it could be explained by Bullshiat Deprivation Syndrome. I have noticed that people who were brainwashed as children to be theists but have grown up, realised they were duped and become atheists are prone to swallowing other forms of bullshiat.

 A friend of mine was brought up catholic, saw the light and became atheist, and then proceeded to swallow every other form of bullshiat that crossed his path from ponzi schemes to reiki to racehorse-tipping software. All this with a tertiary degree and a 142 IQ.


People want to believe that they are special and that they know some sort of secret truth that most everyone else doesn't. Whether its the true path to heaven, the ability to commune with cryptids, or that kinoki footpads take the toxins from your body while you sleep, some people NEED to be one of the chosen who have super special knowledge. There's probably some sort of evolutionary reason for it that has become twisted into "I see dead people".
2013-02-02 10:11:18 PM
1 votes:

Smackledorfer: Flying Code Monkey: People who don't believe in spiritual stuff can be even more obnoxious about it than people who do believe in spiritual stuff.

This thread, proof.

I found it goes like this.

Least to most:

1. People who don't believe in things without evidence who mostly ignore the, let us call them 'fanciful thinkers'.

2. Fanciful thinkers who accept the sound logic that nobody else believes them for good reason.

3. Fanciful thinkers who expect others to take what is most likely their imaginations at face value.

3. The non believers who never shut up about it (not the same as people making a post or two in a thread on the topic).

4. Fancifuls who think they have some kind of superior open mind because they have active imaginations.

5. Idiots who found a way to feel superior to both groups by condescending to the fancifuls while playing a stupid game of what-ifs and piss-poor analogies.


7. People who can't count. :)

Seriously though, I've seen plenty of weird stuff that I can't explain (and plenty that I figured out), but can't truly attribute any of it to ghosts. I think there are elusive phenomena out there that we don't know how to fully explain yet, but to say it's dead people is a big stretch and that it's just our senses misfiring in every instance is needlessly dismissive.
2013-02-02 10:07:25 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Baryogenesis: So we should all want to be just like you, unable to conceive of things larger than what science can prove?


Unable? Hardly. Willing to go along with whatever fairytale appeals to us? No.
2013-02-02 10:00:42 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Kit Fister: TreeHugger: Prank Call of Cthulhu: did the friends tell you about the dreams before or after the event?

Before.  And I'm not misremembering any of this... It didn't happen very long ago.  Anyhow, no scientific evidence to hand you, it's just another whisper in the wind, another story in a world of billions... I've seen many more compelling supernatural stories than this, they just didn't happen to me personally.

/must...not...say ... "it is what it is"
//argh i said it

I dreamed that a friend's child would die a month and a half before it happened. :(

That's strange.  I dreamed last night about making sweet love to Kristen Bell.  (True story.)  Are you saying that will happen?


Only if you first provide Catherine bell to me. In her Charlies.
2013-02-02 09:51:26 PM
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Baryogenesis: Kit Fister: Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.

You know what makes me sad?  Folks who don't understand WHY popular and scientific opinion about the existence of sub atomic particles moved from "that's ridiculous" to "well, duh".  Evidence is the reason.  When there is no evidence for your pet hypothesis and mountains of evidence against it then it's irrational to continue to believe in it.  Folks who do think ghosts exist should, by all means, test their beliefs, but they shouldn't assert ghosts exist without good evidence.

You know what else makes me sad? Comparing the state of science 200 years ago to a topic today.  We understand the underlying physics of the "everyday" world incredibly well now and that, obviously, wasn't the case 200 years ago.  Overturning conventional science (ex. ghosts exist) today would take some truly phenomenal new evidence.  The same could not be said of overturning conventional science 200 years ago.

So we should all want to be just like you, unable to conceive of things larger than what science can prove?


If you provide proof to support your belief, I'll be happy to agree with you.  Why haven't ghosts been proven in thousands of years of trying?  More importantly, why do you believe things for which there are no proof?
2013-02-02 09:41:31 PM
1 votes:

Baryogenesis: Kit Fister: Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.

You know what makes me sad?  Folks who don't understand WHY popular and scientific opinion about the existence of sub atomic particles moved from "that's ridiculous" to "well, duh".  Evidence is the reason.  When there is no evidence for your pet hypothesis and mountains of evidence against it then it's irrational to continue to believe in it.  Folks who do think ghosts exist should, by all means, test their beliefs, but they shouldn't assert ghosts exist without good evidence.

You know what else makes me sad? Comparing the state of science 200 years ago to a topic today.  We understand the underlying physics of the "everyday" world incredibly well now and that, obviously, wasn't the case 200 years ago.  Overturning conventional science (ex. ghosts exist) today would take some truly phenomenal new evidence.  The same could not be said of overturning conventional science 200 years ago.


So we should all want to be just like you, unable to conceive of things larger than what science can prove?
2013-02-02 09:40:32 PM
1 votes:

Flying Code Monkey: People who don't believe in spiritual stuff can be even more obnoxious about it than people who do believe in spiritual stuff.

This thread, proof.


I found it goes like this.

Least to most:

1. People who don't believe in things without evidence who mostly ignore the, let us call them 'fanciful thinkers'.

2. Fanciful thinkers who accept the sound logic that nobody else believes them for good reason.

3. Fanciful thinkers who expect others to take what is most likely their imaginations at face value.

3. The non believers who never shut up about it (not the same as people making a post or two in a thread on the topic).

4. Fancifuls who think they have some kind of superior open mind because they have active imaginations.

5. Idiots who found a way to feel superior to both groups by condescending to the fancifuls while playing a stupid game of what-ifs and piss-poor analogies.
2013-02-02 09:09:00 PM
1 votes:
Kit Fister: Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

And it would have been religious folks doing the laughing. The thing is though, the people claiming all matter was made of tiny particles had some proof.

Whereas those other folks have burned toast, stained cloth and damp freeway underpasses as "proof".
2013-02-02 08:55:42 PM
1 votes:

Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?


Same way they're sure there isn't a god. Two hundred years ago if you said all matter was made of tiny particles, and that we could harness these particles to provide energy and a host of other things, you'd be laughed out of existence.

It makes me both sad and astounded that people are so sure that ghosts, god, whatever doesn't exist that they use it to belittle and browbeat anyone who isn't like them.

It also makes me sad and angry that we as a human race simply cannot get by unless we're tearing each other down over our differences of opinion and personal experience.

Don't believe in something? Fine. But it's none of your goddamn business not do you have the right to judge others who believe differently than you do.
2013-02-02 08:38:58 PM
1 votes:
Ghosts are a silly concept until you come across one. Then they cease in being a silly concept.

CSB: Had a die-hard atheist friend, (he doesn't even believe in luck), comes across a Woman in White ghost. He was driving along Elbow Road in Virginia Beach, Va late at night. The road was one of those stereotypical horror movie roads; out in the boonies, woods on either side, no street lights, lots of twists. He was going down one of those dangerous turns when his headlights fall on a woman in white standing in the middle of the road. He slams his breaks but doesn't quite make it. He hits her only, the car doesn't hit anything. That doesn't prevent him from stopping the car and looking for the damage. His bumper is fine. His hood is fine. For a car hitting something, there is absolutely no damage. Hitting a possum gets more damage. There is also no sign of the woman. There's nothing or no one on the road. He checks the ditches on the side. Nothing. He goes up and down with a flashlight. Nothing. He keeps on looking for almost an hour. Nothing. The woman is simply gone.

With no body and not a speck of evidence to prove he's ever hit anyone, he goes home and watches the news. He looks to see if anyone has found a body on Elbow Road. Nothing.

Fast forward a few years later when I was talking to another friend of ours who believes in ghosts. She is talking about all the local ghosts and one of them is the Woman in White on Elbow Road. Until then, I had not heard of the legend. But at that moment, something clicks and I realize that my friend had hit a ghost with his car, though he dismisses the idea of it. He still laughs at the idea of ghosts. I think it's funny that the one of the guys that I know who has a personal encounter with a ghost is someone who does not believe in them. /end of CSB

/some people don't believe even if they hit proof head on.
2013-02-02 08:11:20 PM
1 votes:
Ghosts do exist, but they are not the dead. Rather, they are evil spirits who exploit people's superstition. The same is true for dreams and so forth about loved ones who've died recently.

There is nothing in Scripture that even remotely supports the idea of the soul remaining on Earth after the death of the body. While the eventual destination of the soul is up for debate, it is safe to say that ghosts are not the soul/spirit/mind of the departed.
2013-02-02 07:53:47 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: The Billdozer: gimmegimme: The Billdozer: PsiChick: Bontesla: Bontesla: Zombie DJ: I do. I've studied the Paranormal for over 30 years. I've got a great "laugh" from a cemetery I walked through.
When people ask me to give them proof there's ghosts, I just tell them it's not my job to make you believe.
That's YOUR job. Do your own homework. I do it for fun, not change the World.

I would love to go "ghost hunting" but I've no one to go with. I've had a few dreams from people I've known who died. A few months ago - I had to dream about my cousin. She committed suicide two Easters ago. She wanted me to give her mom a message. It was weird. My dreams are always for other people. Rarely are they for me.

My mom is the same way.

Hell, my aunt (mom's sister) also dreams visits. It's how she found out her husband died in an accident.

Google an da shealladh. It's not exactly the same, but it sounds like you're using a variant.

/I have the more classic you-will-see-this-random-thing-and-it-will-literally-happen, sucks-to-be-you version, but from what I've found there's a few types. Exploring it and the history involved can be fun, if involving a ridiculous amount of research.

You also hear about this with people with death-bed visions (which apparently Steve Jobs possibly had), terminal lucidity with people who have damaged brains, and people who have Near-Death Experiences. They see people who have passed some time ago that they never knew or people who have just died that the person having the experience had no idea just passed. Its pretty crazy stuff.

Science is fun.  Much more fun than magic.

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Mediaskeptics/vanLommel.html - An early rebuttal to this type of "conclusion". I'd also suggest finding out more about Pim Van Lommel, Sam Parina, Peter Fenwick, and the currently debated experience of Eben Alexander. Just a few of the many doctors and scientists that would whole-heartedly agree with you that science is fun. But you keep being a good "sk ...

Sorry, friend.  Those folks are nutcases.

Skepticism is when you refuse to believe in something until you have proof.  Not when you believe in something because there MAY be proof.


That's actually not what skepticism is, but carry on :)
2013-02-02 07:52:19 PM
1 votes:
I'm surprised it's that low. They probably aren't counting all the ones who believe in "the Holy Ghost."
2013-02-02 07:42:01 PM
1 votes:
I can totally get why one can't or won't believe in ghosts given the obviously rational and orderly universe we find ourselves in. :)   But seriously, I totally get why people don't believe if they've never had an experience personally, but all I can say is that once you've HAD one (and I don't suggest seeking it out either) it won't change your life, but you'll never forget it.
2013-02-02 07:36:29 PM
1 votes:

Prank Call of Cthulhu: TreeHugger: Like the time two of my friends had very specific dreams about the same event happening to me, a traumatic occurrence that led to my taking a plane flight.  And a week later it happened just as prophesied.  Nothing I had previously told them could possibly have clued them in, and anyway I had no idea that it was coming.  And the details they told me were fulfilled exactly.  You can't explain that!

Last year, I had an incredibly vivid dream in which my father died. In the dream, I was informed by a phone call late at night. I hardly ever remember dreams, but that one I remembered, because it seemed so real. Two nights later, just as we were about to go to bed, the phone rang. Out of nowhere, the thought, "My father is dead" flashed through my head. I answered the phone and, sure enough...

...it was a wrong number. My dad is still alive.

If it had happened the other way, I might have been inclined to believe something supernatural happened.

Coincidences, how do they farking work?


Dude.  You had a prophecy.  It just hasn't been fulfilled yet.  Just you watch.  Someday in the distant future, your father will die.
2013-02-02 07:35:57 PM
1 votes:

bin_smokin: More people believe in ghosts than aliens.  This is because the majority is predominantly religious and most religions either promote or do not preclude the existince of ghosts.

Personally, I only believe that aliens have ghosts.


That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. If aliens had ghosts, why would they bother coming to Earth to steal ours?
2013-02-02 07:34:51 PM
1 votes:

Rufus Lee King: gimmegimme: Darnit, there's a ghost RIGHT HERE

Yes, indeed. I caught one at our local cemetery:

[i1041.photobucket.com image 320x213]

Tried to make the picture larger, but my computer's possessed, or something.


OMG.  Isn't it weird how ghosts look like lens flare or the reflection of light or a piece of crap on the lens?
2013-02-02 07:20:28 PM
1 votes:

bin_smokin: More people believe in ghosts than aliens.  This is because the majority is predominantly religious and most religions either promote or do not preclude the existince of ghosts.

Personally, I only believe that aliens have ghosts.


Are you a Scientologist?
2013-02-02 07:11:42 PM
1 votes:

gryf: I'm almost afraid to admit that I believe in ghosts. But it's cool if you don't. Can we play nice now?


No.

In fact, I think we should round up all your kind and put them in camps or reservations. Never allow the disbelievers and believers to mix blood or contact. Eventually we will become two separate people unable to mix our blood. It is only then that peace will be had. So what say you now?

/got nothing
2013-02-02 06:59:19 PM
1 votes:

Ed Grubermann: italie: Ed Grubermann: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.

If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.

Explain to me how quantum entanglement works, then you can lecture me on how ghosts can't exist.

Explain to me how quantum entanglement has anything to do with dead people. Your wishful thinking is no substitute for an education.


I never said it did, nor did I ever infer my beliefs on ghosts. I just want you to explain quantum entanglement to me.
2013-02-02 06:59:18 PM
1 votes:

Maggie_Luna: My family is from Mexico, it has a strong ghost lore/folk lore that is still very much alive. Although I was raised irreligiously it was there were still ghost stories a lot. I love ghost stories even though I don't believe it exists anymore than any figment of gods but I take that to be cultural. That said, ghosts are no more idiotic than any other belief such as gods, blessings, and four leaved clovers bringing luck.


Wait, I need to amend my last sentence. "Ghosts are no more idiotic than most other beliefs such as..." because there are some stupid things people believe, and they are by far stupider/nonsensical than above others.
2013-02-02 06:55:07 PM
1 votes:

italie: Ed Grubermann: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.

If you beleive in something that has no evidence and violates the laws of physics and biology, well you're an idiot. Show me the mechanism by which a ghost can exist.

Explain to me how quantum entanglement works, then you can lecture me on how ghosts can't exist.


Explain to me how quantum entanglement has anything to do with dead people. Your wishful thinking is no substitute for an education.
2013-02-02 06:54:35 PM
1 votes:
Sleep paralysis=99% of ghosts.  The other 1% is cats.
2013-02-02 06:52:45 PM
1 votes:
I think it's closer to 47%.
2013-02-02 06:50:59 PM
1 votes:
I think people's brains are just broken in odd ways, making them believe things that aren't true.  Studies have shown that certain brain formations are much more susceptible to religious indoctrination, for example.  I'm betting the brains of ghost believers are similarly misformed somehow.
2013-02-02 06:47:46 PM
1 votes:

Rustblade: However I DO believe that certain traumatic and horrific events can leave an "imprint" on certain places.


And just how would they do that? Explain just how the emotional state in someone's brain can leave an "imprint". And does that "imprint" remain if no one alive knows what happened there?
2013-02-02 06:47:42 PM
1 votes:

Tatterdemalian: I don't believe in ghosts as surviving spirits of people whose bodies have died, because they never seem to act appropriately. By which I mean, act how people typically act when given the slightest chance of not being retaliated against. They're always trying to keep people away from their property, or trying to get people to do things they tried but failed to accomplish before they died so they can "rest in peace," instead of waving their phantasmal genitalia around, invading large parties for the purpose of dry-humping the guests of honor, and otherwise trying to get away with things they didn't dare do when they were alive.

/I do, however, believe in ghosts as imaginary entities we conjure up to comfort ourselves with the possibility of having a second chance after we die
//imagination can kill you if you let it, but it can also save your life if you understand it


I'll be damned if I can find it now, but I read a really interesting study a few years back that plotted on maps every location where a "ghost" had ever been reported to authorities.

A statistically significant number of them occurred within a short distance from power plants or electrical substations.  They hypothesis was that power electrical fields can interfere with the workings of the brain.
2013-02-02 06:46:04 PM
1 votes:

FloydA: By what mechanism can a human's emotional trauma be "imprinted" on a place?   What are traumatic emotions made of, and how is that substance transferred from the mind of the individual to the location?


And why does the mechanism only seem to work upon someone's death? Can't this imprint happen from someone that has been sufficiently traumatized without them dying? Why not?
2013-02-02 06:44:12 PM
1 votes:
Rustblade:

Umm nope. And who exactly said that? You? I don't believe that the souls of people wander around the earth in ghostly linens forever to be repeating their last moments. However I DO believe that certain traumatic and horrific events can leave an "imprint" on certain places.


How?

By what mechanism can a human's emotional trauma be "imprinted" on a place?   What are traumatic emotions made of, and how is that substance transferred from the mind of the individual to the location?
2013-02-02 06:41:30 PM
1 votes:
The haunting of a factory by George Bull will make you into a believer.
2013-02-02 06:40:54 PM
1 votes:

FloydA: ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.


"I can't explain everything I've seen, therefore the souls of the dead remain walking the earth in eternal torment, bound and imprisoned on this physical plane, forever seeking atonement for their sins and forgiveness that will never come!"

Umm nope. And who exactly said that? You? I don't believe that the souls of people wander around the earth in ghostly linens forever to be repeating their last moments. However I DO believe that certain traumatic and horrific events can leave an "imprint" on certain places.

2013-02-02 06:38:46 PM
1 votes:
I don't believe in ghosts. Most of the phenomena can be explained by the human body reacting to a situation because of evolution. If a house settles it makes a noise. Because you don't know what the noise is, you react to it like there was something there. If you tend to believe in ghosts, then what you heard was a ghost. Even if you don't believe in ghosts, your brain is wired to be fearful of what you can't see and don't understand.
2013-02-02 06:38:01 PM
1 votes:
I;ll have what their having!
2013-02-02 06:37:03 PM
1 votes:

jigger: BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't that isn't real is a stupid simpleton

ftfy


Do you believe in wealth, laws, promises? None of those are real.

/this is why atheist ideologies end up just as insane as religious cults
//they believe in things that aren't real, they just try to change the definition of "real" to suit themselves
///reality is that which doesn't disappear when people don't believe in it... try spending a million dollars in confederate money if you don't think wealth can disappear when people stop believing in it
2013-02-02 06:35:07 PM
1 votes:
I don't believe in anything paranormal or pseudoscientific.

But I love the legends and oral traditions around this stuff.  It's entertaining and I've been on a few ghost hunts and stayed the night in a "haunted" hotel room.  Nothing turned up, but it was still fun.  Same reason why I love the UFO stuff, Bigfoot and Republican social policy.
2013-02-02 06:34:52 PM
1 votes:

Rufus Lee King: How is everyone so sure that there aren't ghosts?


Extraordinary claims, how do they farking work?
2013-02-02 06:31:06 PM
1 votes:

FloydA: ItchyMcDoogle: Came for the smug leaving with a years supply of smug after only 22 posts.

Not saying I believe in ghosts but when you get around my age if you have not seen one or two things you cant explain then sucks for you.


"I can't explain everything I've seen, therefore the souls of the dead remain walking the earth in eternal torment, bound and imprisoned on this physical plane, forever seeking atonement for their sins and forgiveness that will never come!"

Sounds perfectly reasonable, anyone who doesn't accept that simple syllogism must be just smug.


Thank you for saying that in a much more amusing way than I was going to.
2013-02-02 06:26:52 PM
1 votes:
2013-02-02 06:24:17 PM
1 votes:
Who ya gonna call?
2013-02-02 06:23:27 PM
1 votes:

BillCo: Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't

that isn't real is a stupid simpleton

ftfy
2013-02-02 06:23:22 PM
1 votes:
People believe in all sorts of bizzare shiat. Not sure why we cant have nice things because of this subby...
2013-02-02 06:22:06 PM
1 votes:
Remember folks, everyone who believes in something you don't is a stupid simpleton. Doesn't matter if it's ghost, religion or global warming.  Don't even get me started on aliens.
2013-02-02 06:20:18 PM
1 votes:
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
2013-02-02 05:08:59 PM
1 votes:

Bontesla: Zombie DJ: I do. I've studied the Paranormal for over 30 years. I've got a great "laugh" from a cemetery I walked through.
When people ask me to give them proof there's ghosts, I just tell them it's not my job to make you believe.
That's YOUR job. Do your own homework. I do it for fun, not change the World.

I would love to go "ghost hunting" but I've no one to go with. I've had a few dreams from people I've known who died. A few months ago - I had to dream about my cousin. She committed suicide two Easters ago. She wanted me to give her mom a message. It was weird. My dreams are always for other people. Rarely are they for me.

My mom is the same way.


Hell, my aunt (mom's sister) also dreams visits. It's how she found out her husband died in an accident.
2013-02-02 05:06:13 PM
1 votes:

Zombie DJ: I do. I've studied the Paranormal for over 30 years. I've got a great "laugh" from a cemetery I walked through.
When people ask me to give them proof there's ghosts, I just tell them it's not my job to make you believe.
That's YOUR job. Do your own homework. I do it for fun, not change the World.


I would love to go "ghost hunting" but I've no one to go with. I've had a few dreams from people I've known who died. A few months ago - I had to dream about my cousin. She committed suicide two Easters ago. She wanted me to give her mom a message. It was weird. My dreams are always for other people. Rarely are they for me.

My mom is the same way.
2013-02-02 04:49:02 PM
1 votes:

Godscrack: Why do ghost's always have clothes on?


I assume that sucubbi don't wear clothes, since that would be counter-productive.
2013-02-02 04:38:55 PM
1 votes:
Why do ghost's always have clothes on?

Why aren't there more reports of dinosaur ghosts?
2013-02-02 03:36:29 PM
1 votes:

ecmoRandomNumbers: Don't believe in ghosts, but have seen weird shiat.


Same here.

My previous workplace, a public television station, was allegedly haunted by the ghost of this dude. Part of the studio consisted of Mr. Ray's old movie studio, which dates back to 1920. One of my former cow orkers told me about chatting with a repairman who was doing some work in a small screening theater on the property. The repairman told her that he thought someone had tapped him on the shoulder, but when he turned around, no one was there. She told him, "Oh, that's our resident ghost," and said that he turned pale.

One cow orker who used Mr. Ray's old office mentioned that occasionally he would arrive in the morning to find that various items had been moved to different areas in the room. Weird.

I sometimes wandered around the old studio buildings at night in hopes of seeing the ghost, but never had any luck. I DID encounter an albino skunk one evening (I thought it was a white cat, until it turned around).
2013-02-02 03:07:55 PM
1 votes:
Don't believe in ghosts, but have seen weird shiat.
 
Displayed 110 of 110 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report