Why do ghosts wear human clothes?

Status
Not open for further replies.
How can something "show signs" of being "pure imprinted energy"?

Because of the nature of the events it presents with--usually repetitive actions of apparitions dressed in old fashioned clothes, repeated conversations, repeated footsteps down hallways and stairs, rtc.

How can something "display the traits" of a "psychically-amplified proto-entity"?

Because poltergeist activity is almost always linked to the presence of child or teen or young person that is particularly afflicted. It also doesn't respond well to communication with humans.

Besides sounding like gibberish, both statements are circular. For something to "show signs" or "display traits" of something, you have to assume a priori that that something actually exists.

Yes..the phenomenon exists as documented in thousands of accounts of haunted locations and investigations. It is totally a posteriori, not a priori.
 
usually repetitive actions of apparitions dressed in old fashioned clothes, repeated conversations, repeated footsteps down hallways and stairs, rtc.
How do you leap from that to "pure, imprinted energy"?

Because poltergeist activity is almost always linked to the presence of child or teen or young person that is particularly afflicted.
What does that have to do with a "psychically-amplified proto-entity"?

..the phenomenon exists as documented in thousands of accounts of haunted locations and investigations.
Still circular. You're assuming a priori that "haunting" is possible because "ghosts" exist.
 
How do you leap from that to "pure, imprinted energy"?

Because that's the property residual hauntings show--of imprinted energy replayed over and over again like place memory.

What does that have to do with a "psychically-amplified proto-entity"?

Dozens of poltergeist cases show the entity to likely be feeding off the psychic energy of the child or young person present.

Still circular. You're assuming a priori that "haunting" is possible because "ghosts" exist.

Ghosts do exist based on tons of evidence.
 
Because that's the property residual hauntings show--of imprinted energy replayed over and over again like place memory.
How is "pure imprinted energy" a "property" of anything. Give some other examples of "pure imprinted energy".

Dozens of poltergeist case show the entity to likely be feeding off the energy of the child or young person present.
Again: What does that have to do with a "psychically-amplified proto-entity"? Give some examples of other "psychically-amplified proto-entities."

Ghosts do exist based on tons of evidence.
The evidence exists but it doesn't point to "ghosts".
 
How is "pure imprinted energy" a "property" of anything. Give some other examples of "pure imprinted energy".

Another example would be psychometry, where psychic detectives can pick up information about events relating to a particular object or location.

Again: What does that have to do with a "psychically-amplified proto-entity"? Give some examples of other "psychically-amplified proto-entities."

Poltergeists are the best example we have.


The evidence exists but it doesn't point to "ghosts".

Yes it does. The evidence points to the existence of residual replays of the past as well as intelligent interactive spirits who respond to questions and requests.
 
Another example would be psychometry, where psychic detectives can pick up information about events relating to a particular object or location.
I meant real-world examples - i.e. something that everybody can agree on.

Poltergeists are the best example we have.
So no real examples at all of the gibberish "psychically-amplified proto-entities."

The evidence points to the existence of residual replays of the past as well as intelligent interactive spirits who respond to questions and requests.
HOW? For the evidence to point to something, there has to be a mechanism for how that something works.
 
I meant real-world examples - i.e. something that everybody can agree on.


Psychic detectives live in the real world and solve cases all the time. Residual hauntings are also examples from the real world.

So no real examples at all of the gibberish "psychically-amplified proto-entities."

Just dozens, perhaps hundreds, of documented cases of poltergeists.


HOW? For the evidence to point to something, there has to be a mechanism for how that something works.

No it doesn't. You can have evidence for a phenomena you haven't figured out the mechanism for. Black body radiation was one such case that concerned Einstein.
 
Psychic detectives live in the real world and solve cases all the time
All kinds of delusional people live in the real world. Living in the real world is not proof of sanity.

Don't you have any examples that non-believers can relate to?

Just dozens, perhaps hundreds, of documented cases of poltergeists.
So lots of confirmation bias but no external confirmation.

You can have evidence for a phenomena you haven't figured out the mechanism for.
You have to at least be looking for a mechanism. You have to have hypothesized mechanisms.
 
You have to at least be looking for a mechanism. You have to have hypothesized mechanisms.

Parapsychologists have been constructing theories and putting forth plausible mechanisms that explain the facts for centuries now. That's where the "imprinted energy" and "psychically amplified proto-entity" hypothesises comes from.
 
Parapsychologists have been constructing theories and putting forth plausible mechanisms that explain the facts for centuries now. That's where the "imprinted energy" and "psychically amplified proto-entity" hypothesises comes from.
So explain the hypothetical mechanism for how "pure imprinted energy" produces "ghosts".
 
So explain the hypothetical mechanism for how "pure imprinted energy" produces "ghosts".

"Just as the outer world imprints itself on one’s inner cognitive consciousness, so also is the activity of the psyche reflected upon the outer external world, which is often perceived clairvoyantly and even photographed. As there is no actual boundary preventing this mental and emotional psychic phenomenon from being projected onto the energy-mirror of the... physical world, psychic imprinting occurs. Both mind and world are in a constant state of interactively reflecting each other. C. G. Jung, in Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self, informs us that:

"The Psyche cannot be totally different from matter, for how otherwise could it move matter? And matter cannot be alien to psyche, for how else could matter produce psyche? Psyche and matter exist in one and the same world, and each partakes of the other, otherwise any reciprocal action would be impossible. If research could only advance far enough, therefore, we should arrive at an ultimate agreement between physical and psychological concepts."

Joseph R. Buchanan, an American professor of physiology first coined the name psychometry in 1842, a term derived from the Greek words psyche, meaning "soul," and metron, meaning "measure. He began running a series of psychometric experiment using his students, with the goal of identifying different unknown chemical substances in glass vials. The results of these experiments were successful, which he published in his book, Journal of Man in 1887.

Psychometry is the ability to be psychically aware of the energy patterns that we all leave on the objects around us. These impressions received through psychometry not only include images but often sounds, tastes, smells and emotions as well. As physical objects are not consciously aware of their surroundings, where do these memory-fragments of past events come from? They are imprinted on the objective world by a human mind – by the consciousness of an individual experiencing a particular psychological or physical event. Imprinting is a phenomenon that is constantly taking place between all of us and the things and places that we are constantly in contact with.

Imprinting can also occur in a particular place in which a very dramatic or emotional event has occurred, being literally imprinted on the surrounding atmosphere and remaining there for an extended period of time. I remember walking into a large retail store at Christmas time and being confronted with the negative atmosphere created by the hundreds of shoppers who had come and gone, all in a mutual state of distress over the urgent emotional need to finish their shopping in time. This is also what happens in the creation of residual haunting phenomena.."===http://esotericotherworlds.blogspot.com/2013/07/psychic-imprinting-101.html
 
So how do you propose to test this hypothesis? How would you falsify it? What would it take to show that the observations are not "ghosts"?
 
So how do you propose to test this hypothesis? How would you falsify it? What would it take to show that the observations are not "ghosts"?

It's tested all the time on haunted locations where traumatic events have occurred. Paranormal investigators often go out to the fields of Gettysburg at night and hear gunshots and cannons being shot off. That suggests residual imprinted phenomena. Old battleships also display the characteristics of residual activity.
 
But how do the observations confirm the hypothesis?

Besides, I asked how you would falsify it, not how you would confirm it.

By the repetitive and non responsive nature of the activity. If the ghost interacts with you intelligently otoh, that would falsify the residual haunting hypothesis in that case.
 
By the repetitive and non responsive nature of the activity. If the ghost interacts with you intelligently otoh, that would falsify the residual haunting hypothesis in that case.
The problem is that the observations are not repeatable in the first place. "Ghosts" seem to be unreliable and therefore not susceptible to scientific analysis.
 
The problem is that the observations are not repeatable in the first place. "Ghosts" seem to be unreliable and therefore not susceptible to scientific analysis.

So what? Lots of phenomena required field observations. Just because it isn't repeatable doesn't mean it isn't real. How do you think Darwin inferred the process of evolution? By repeating it in a lab?
 
Just because it isn't repeatable doesn't mean it isn't real.
It kinda does. At least, you can't say you've shown that something is real if it isn't repeatable.

How do you think Darwin inferred the process of evolution? By repeating it in a lab?
Well, yes, the inferences of evolution have been repeated in the lab.

Your method ends where Darwin's started.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top