Why do ghosts wear human clothes?

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Mar 24, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,880
    See ya troll...
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,644
    Magical Realist:

    As I mentioned previously, the concept of quantum entanglement would not exist but for the mathematical theory of quantum mechanics. Quantum states evolve according to well-established laws of cause and effect. You are right that the spin of one particle does not cause the other to change. The 2 spins in the case of entanglement are better thought of as a single quantum state. When a measurement is made on that state it "collapses" to an outcome in the usual way that quantum states collapse. The "cause" (if you want one) is the measurement. The correlation of the spin states was there all along - it was built into the way that the state was created in the first place.

    You seem worried about the "instantaneous" nature of the collapse of the wavefunction. Maybe if you explain to me why you think that is a problem or inconsistent with known laws, then I can help you understand it.

    Suffice it to say that entanglement very much conforms to laws as we know them. In fact, we wouldn't have a name for the effect without those laws-as-we-know-them.

    I'm not familiar with Jung's principle, and do not see its relevance at this point in the discussion. But maybe you will explain.

    What makes you think there were no laws of physics "before" the big bang? Nobody actually knows what was there before the big bang. You don't. I don't. So as far as I can tell, you're in no position to say there's no conformity to "laws" here. At best, you can only mean that you're not aware of any laws that explain the big bang. That's very different to saying you know the laws and you can explain how the big bang doesn't conform to them.

    Step 1 is to show that anything paranormal exists. Step 2 is to explain it, if it exists. We haven't completed step 1 yet, so step 2 is premature. If there's no paranormal, there's nothing that needs explaining.

    I'm sure you're much better at finding that kind of stuff than I am, if you're truly interested.

    Anecdotes are not the only evidence of the Holocaust, the Civil War, 911, etc.

    Any scientist who proved that ghosts exist would get a Nobel prize. What scientist wouldn't want that?

    The main problem with "ghost" photos is in identifying the "something". If only the somethings turned out to be ghosts rather than dust particles or lens flare or the moon, eh? Wouldn't that be a nice change?

    No! That would be terrible evidence for ball lightning. Surely you understand why (!?)

    When it's a clear voice, we can't rule out that it was the voice of an ordinary person who was there (or dubbed on afterwards).
    When it's not clear, then we're into the usual realm of interpretation, wherein the ghost hunter hears what he wants to hear.

    I agree! But if the possibility of fakery is there and you can't rule it out, then it remains a possibility. Understand?

    It must be scientific bias and conspiracy that is preventing them collecting their Nobel prizes then.

    No. Plausible is plausible. To get to a final answer - to go beyond possibilities - that requires evidence either way. And extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The default is the mundane plausible explanation.

    Not really. I can go down to my local bookshop and purchase plenty of recent myths and fables. I can't see much difference between a myth written 2500 years ago and one written yesterday, other than longevity. One must ask similar questions in either case if one is considering whether the myth might be real. It may well be easier to investigate the recent myth than the older one, but that's a practical consideration.

    Remember how I talked about steps 1 and 2, above? Well, step 1 was showing that things fall down when you drop them. I think we can safely agree that we've established the fact that gravity exists. Step 2 is working out what it is, exactly - what causes it, how to create it etc.

    I can personally vouch for the fact that I increase the gravity in the lab every time I walk in there, and not just because I'm a serious person.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    What about an internet-fame-obsessed, self-promoting, self-labelled paranormal investigator? No doubt you'd trust him without question.

    What you're telling me is that you have never bothered to read any "boring ass" science. That probably explains why you're so willing to believe any pseudoscientific hogwash that grabs your attention while you're trawling youtube.

    Ignorance of science is not a badge of honour I'd be proud to wear on a science forum. You, on the other hand...
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Well said!
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,237
    Even more succinctly:
     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,880
    Like most laymen, no I don't read boring ass technical papers on a new species of tree snails in Madagascar or statistical properties of brownian motion in gases or any of the bulk of research done in science. And I bet you don't either. Only a very small sliver of science research has enough relevance to my life to interest me, and this is usually read in online science magazines and science news sites that condense the information in non-technical language. It doesn't mean I'm ignorant of science at all. It means that just like 100% of all people on earth I read what has relevance to my life and to mankind in general. So you can apologize for your childish insult now or later. Doesn't matter to me either way.
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,644
    Magical Realist:

    Recall what you wrote:
    Your claim was that "Nobody reads those boring ass science journals anyway." Now you've backup off somewhat, so that you're saying that laymen don't read the science journals. But the experts in the field certainly do, as I'm sure you'll agree.

    Moreover, you defer to the authority of your own preferred experts, namely "the experts who have actually researched [ghosts] in hundreds of haunted locations ...".

    How would you react if I were to tell you "I wouldn't trust a so-called ghost hunter as far as I could spit. Nobody reads those boring websites or watches those boring youtube videos from those 'expert' ghost hunters anyway, so why should I pay any attention to anything they have to say?"

    It seems to me that you are claiming that I know very little about ghost hunting, while I am claiming that you know very little about the scientific method and how to conduct a scientific investigation. You apparently find my claim to be insulting, but at the same time you're happy to regularly disparage all scientists as egotistical elitists who are only out for money and career security.

    I suggest that if you want respect for your "experts" you should show similar respect for other kinds of expertise.
     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,880
    LOL! You already said as much. You claim all ghost investigators are either faking evidence or bungling readings and making mistakes left and right. What if I said the same about your holy scientists? I didn't even go that far. I just said I don't trust a person just because they're a scientist. There's so many motives there to fudge results for peer approval and funding and competing against collegues that we'd be fools to take their word for everything.

    Hey you're the one flaming me as scientifically ignorant here and believing in whatever pseudoscientific hogwash I find on Youtube. Where have I come even close to flaming you that way?

    I already know what you think of my experts. Excuse me if I find yours somewhat lacking in virtue and
    honesty and objectivity as well.
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,237
    It's not really a pissing contest, but if it were...

    My experts have given us longer lives, cancer treatments, space travel, cell phones and the information age. What have your experts done to make a better world?
     
  12. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,880
    Yeah..and nuclear bombs, nuclear waste, pollution, genetically modified produce and grains, cancer causing EMF fields, etc.
     
  13. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,439
    Nuclear bombs resulted in a massive life-savings in ending WWII without the need to invade Japan (which has been shown time and again would have been far more costly in terms of lives).
    Nuclear Waste - far less dangerous than burning coal or oil in the long run.
    Pollution - would you rather we go back to being a hunter/gatherer society living in stick and mud houses?
    Genetically Modified Produce/Grains - we've been "genetically modifying" crops since the introduction of agriculture via selective breeding, cross-pollination, etc. GMO foods aren't the "absolute evil" some people try to make them out to be... yes, there is the potential for abuse, but that is true of anything.
    Cancer causing EMF fields - This is utter bunk. Non-ionizing ElectroMagnetic Fields CANNOT cause cancer. For evidence, I submit:

    http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/abo...ions/does-electromagnetic-energy-cause-cancer

    Simply put, the "increase" was within the margin of error of the study.

    http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/...k/radiation/electromagnetic-fields-fact-sheet

    http://www.biology-pages.info/M/MagneticFields.html

    Simply put, our experts have done a LOT to improve the overall quality of life for everyone... where as your "ghost hunters" have been nothing more than a minor source of entertainment.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    good point. you wouldn't be imagining people in clothes especially not from your own time.
     
  15. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    the stupidity of the naysayers is when they ask for 'scientific' evidence in a ghost, bigfoot, etc thread. it's actually stupendously hilarious. it's like they are pretending they are that naive.

    but on the other hand, they don't realize that video footage and anecdotes can be true and real.
     
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Tulpas can be of any character. Of course the scary ones are the most fascinating, because they are usually associated with something gruesome.
     
  17. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,068
    Can be, sure. But because that kind of thing is so easy to fake, either unintentionally or completely deliberately, it simply can not be the "extraordinary" evidence required to support extraordinary claims.
     
  18. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    and my point is are people supposed to deny their experiences and ignore them just because the establishment cannot verify it as scientific or yet? many people have these experiences and they are supposed to play cognitive dissonance with themselves? is that fair?
     
  19. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    In general, the less you know the more you have to rely on your imagination. When you know more about how the world works you tend not to see magic, voodoo, and gods as the cause of everything that you don't understand.

    When you know a little more about probability you don't see coincidence as something more.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2017
    exchemist likes this.
  20. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,688
    Earlier full stop

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    and you and others still don't know what i am talking about. we didn't see any gods or magic, numbskull. isn't that what you called others?

    we just had unusual experiences that cannot be explained. try again. it's insulting for people who believe they know what they are talking about to tell someone about something they know absolutely nothing about. you are actually, like many here, making points though ignorance and don't even know it.

    i wasn't seeing god or magic when i saw an dark apparition draped in a kneeling position where my mother prayed obsessively at 3am in the morning in the exact spot the very next night.

    consider yourself fortunate that you haven't had such dark experiences.

    people like you really need to stop underestimating other's experiences. and i don't appreciate your assumption i believe in magic, voodoo or gods. i am lucid enough to just not readily dismiss what i know i experienced and saw and that is unexplained. i can explain it philosophically as i pretty much know the reason why it happened but i dont' know the mechanism behind it.

    why don't people like you actually try to learn something in these fringe subjects instead of coming in here assuming you know what the fuk you are talking about? eh?

    don't feign you are schooling me or anyone because magic, gods and voodoo is a cop-out but so is dismissing just the same. i can be as literal about reality as the next person. that's easy.

    i don't defend the fringe section just to do so. there is a reason why i have been.

    fact:

    the truth is people on the other side of the issue like you are pulling explanations or dismissals out of your ass are as oblivious as those who have no paranormal experience and make up hoaxes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2017
  22. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    i've realized now that this forum being a science forum really does need the fringe section deleted. final and done. it's because members do not deserve to be privy to these experiences that are not understood and the discussion will go nowhere. it will just end up in either ridicule or dismissal because there is simply no way to understand these occurrences as of now and whatever explanations may be in circulation can't account for all of them.

    if people want to believe that the only reality is what is the physical as they know it, then by all mean we can play that game as well partition out what doesn't fit. water off a duck's back. even those who have had paranormal experiences can go along with conventional reality just the same.

    trying to discuss these subjects with people this close-minded and believe they know all of reality is really starting to piss me off as much as those who are annoyed at the fringe section for their own reasons.
     
  23. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    i know one thing i figured out. there was a definite correlation between the unbelievably intense amount of negative energy she was giving off so much so that i winced and taken aback as if it was a literal force and that dark apparition that jarred me and shook me to my core.

    if people don't want to believe or recognize there are positive and negative forces in the world, so be it. i hope you stay lucky enough not to have to admit it or face it.

    hell, i realized now that even if it all could be figured out literally, it doesn't change a thing now so maybe it's best to just leave it alone and not explore it anymore. just like most fuked up and evil things in this world, nothing really stops them from happening anyways.

    yeah, delete the fringe. so be it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page