|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
 Posted - 11/15/2004 : 19:21:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Your replies are interesting and somewhat true. Let us not sum all paranormal experiences into whether you have a dragon in your garbage or not. the evidence I have is that of my own experiences. Just because Science does not recognize it as true and real does not mean it does not exist. Have you not had what is termed a paranormal experience? Something you could not explain by scientifical means? We must be able to distinguish between the frauds and cons. But we must not let them cloud reality. Like I said before Science must release itself from the ball and chain of Spiritualism.
Hi, Storm. You're right, sort of. Just because "science" doesn't recognize something doesn't mean it's not real. But if this becomes a part of your argument, you're forced to accept all manner of things "science" doesn't recognize, from fire-breathing clowns on Mars to Zeus to pyrokinesis.
And just how valid is "personal experience" as an argument for the paranormal/supernatural? I think we've all had the experience where we pick up the phone to call a friend only to find that she's calling you that very second. For some, this might indicate some sort of psychic bond. But more rational minds would find it hardly surprising that two friends (who presumably call eachother often) would, on occasion, call eachother at roughly the same time. (Indeed, does anyone remark on all the calls made to a friend when she didn't dial you just seconds before?!?)
When researchers (I'd rather we not speak of science in anthropomorphic terms-- "science says this or that"-- as it's not "science" that tells us things, but rather people who study things in a specific and rigirous way that tell us things) attempt to find proof of, say, ESP, they never seem to be able to detect it. Why can a psychic read minds out in public, but fail to do so in a lab with researchers keeping track?
There might be ghosts, but why do we almost always hear about them in anecdotal stories involving something a cousin of a friend of a friend saw six years ago?
Why are skeptics accused of being closed-minded for rejecting the paranormal because of a lack of evidence, but not so for rejecting the notion that one can turn lead into gold, or that the apparent position of stars tens of billions of miles away when I was born has an effect on my personality?
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2004 : 20:18:12 [Permalink]
|
Storm wrote:quote:
Surely not all who see aliens, ghosts, etc are mad .
How very closed-minded of you to reject the possibility that, indeed, they are all mad. If you're rejecting the possibility because it is unreasonable to expect such extreme levels of delusion, then you are engaging in precisely the same process of thought that most scientists go through when they conclude that - due to a lack of concrete evidence - ghosts don't exist.
Of course, you're also being closed-minded by assuming that the only scientific answer is that all those people are loony. It is not. If you are, indeed, an open-minded person, you will quickly go find and enumerate for us here the many other possible scientific explanations.quote:
Let us not neglect the data just because it does not fit our theories.
How closed-minded of you to assume that data which does not fit theories is neglected. This, more than anything, demonstrates your unfamiliarity with the method by which science is done. If you are truly an open-minded person, you should quickly go and learn just how science progresses, and write us a blurb about it.quote:
What is science anyway? Just another invention of man.
How closed-minded of you to assume that because science is nothing more than a human philosophy, it is just as good as any other human philosophy. Very post-modern of you. If you've got an open mind, you should go learn about the differences between science and other epistemologies, and tell us about those differences.
In another post, you wrote:quote:
Just because Science does not recognize it as true and real does not mean it does not exist.
How tremendously closed-minded of you to assume that science doesn't recognize your experiences "as true and real." I wouldn't know how to get you to see the error of your ways on this one, as it is an indicator of a deep-seated emotional stranglehold on the idea that science is some sort of enemy. You've demonized the entire scientific method as being blind to your ideas, when such is not the case.
So, why do you get all the homework to do? Because you're the one who came here preaching about what science is or is not, when it is quite obvious that you don't know a thing about real science. Because you're the one screeching that we should all be open-minded, when it is crystal clear that you are not. I'm guessing here, but I would lay money on the idea that just about everything you think you know about science has come from books about the paranormal in which the authors sneer at science and take verbal dumps on its methods. Those are, of course, closed-minded and bigoted sources to be ignored if you've got any respect for the reality of science.quote:
Have you not had what is termed a paranormal experience? Something you could not explain by scientific means?
Absolutely. But to consider it as evidence of something paranormal is to jump to an unwarranted conclusion. Instead, it is simply something which I cannot explain. To think of it otherwise is to be as unreasonable and closed-minded as the person who claims that science denies that his/her experiences are "true and real."quote:
Like I said before Science must release itself from the ball and chain of Spiritualism.
I'm guessing that you mean to suggest that old-fashioned, Fox-sisters-type spiritualism has so clouded the minds of scientists that they reject any/all modern spiritual claims out of hand. Sadly, that's not the case at all.
Ricky wrote:quote:
http://paranormalmoon.com/IMG004.jpg
White dots and you claim paranormal? My best guess are light reflections on the lense.
Actually, "orbs" are most-commonly caused by bits of dust or rain or bugs or pollen or whatever inches away from the lens, flaring due to the flash (and it's definitely a flash-photo), and out-of-focus due to their extremely close proximity to the lens. I kept meaning to go out into the snow last winter and get some orb photos, but never got the right opportunity. Perhaps this year. If I manage it, I'll make sure to post the photos here. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 07:02:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
It does not take much to be disappointed and this is where I run into closed minds. This diatribe is based on my own experiences and research with ghosts.
And you've provided this data and methodology of research......where?
quote:
Science is a dogma. To say it is not is to fool yourselves.
Prejudgical language fallacy, Subverted support fallacy. Provide proof for your assertation.
quote:
I have read Harry Price, Tony Cornell. Try reading Erich Goode Paranormal Beliefs or Terence Hines Pseudoscience and the Paranormal. I have done a fair amount of "copious" research my self. The evidence I have is my own personal accounts of investigations that I have conducted.
And, again you've presented the evidence for it....where?
quote:
and so my statement of Science must release it self from the ball and chain of Spiritulism holds true.
The two statements are unrelated. The reading you have done has no bearing on the truth value of science. The serious flaw in Harry Price's works as well as other works tends to be a reliance on spiritualism. Spiritualism is not scientific, but faith based. You have not presented any basis for your contention that science is tethered to spiritualism.
quote:
the copyright was a typo. No one is perfect.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 07:57:17 [Permalink]
|
Closed minded and post modern... I'll have to think about that one... I have read numerous other books that were not how did you say "bigoted" Look again at the authors. Read the Critical thinking of Terence Hines Erich Goode. By no means are they bigots to Science. By no means are they favorable of Paranormal claims. They are scientists. They represent Science.
Scientific methods demand that when new evidence comes to light then theories must change to accomidate this new evidence. Take for example Ghosts. Surely through the research of many creditable societies we as scientist have come to realize that what we call Ghosts Exist. If not then we live still with the ball and chain of Spiritualism. I use the examples of ghosts because someone said before ghosts do not exist.
Homework I can do my own Thank You..
Let us not confuse the word paranormal with supernatural. That is another ball and chain to cut loose The Catholic Church. Paranormal means next to normal, beside normal, not above or below.
Post Modern Yes Closed Minded No
|
Storm |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 08:33:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Take for example Ghosts. Surely through the research of many creditable societies we as scientist have come to realize that what we call Ghosts Exist.
Mmm. I'm bothered by this 'research of many creditable societies'. Care to explain? Tell sources?
Meanwhile, these scientists are not sure.
And, while I'm at it, more about paranormal and supernatural.
quote:
The supernatural involves faith, because it pretends not only that nature is not working the way it ordinarily does, but also pretends to be able to explain it -- those laws are being deliberately suspended by agents who are somehow "above" or "beyond" nature. The element of wilful action on the part of sentient beings (gods, by any other name), prevents an atheistic outlook from including any notion of the supernatural.
The paranormal does not (necessarily) go as far as the supernatural in either respect. The paranormal (for the most part) simply says that nature is not working the way we expect it to work. If they offer an explanation at all, it does not involve sentient agents. If they posit sentient agents (gods, etc.), I would categorize their claims as being of the supernatural variety.
Source.
Edited to fix the links. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
| Edited by - Siberia on 11/16/2004 08:36:09 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 08:37:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Scientific methods demand that when new evidence comes to light then theories must change to accomidate this new evidence. Take for example Ghosts. Surely through the research of many creditable societies we as scientist have come to realize that what we call Ghosts Exist. If not then we live still with the ball and chain of Spiritualism. I use the examples of ghosts because someone said before ghosts do not exist.
Really? What research? Where? I did a search of the archives over at the New York Times for combinations of ghosts + evidence, proof, research, etc. I found no reports there from "creditable societies" establishing proof for ghosts. Similarly, Scientific American had nothing in their archives about new proof for ghosts. You'd think that if there were all this research out there, then two reputable media outlets would have made note of it!
A quick Google search turned up this site, but as you can see, the "proof" is really just the results of a guy playing with his camera.
Storm, don't read the above as more evidence that I'm "closed-minded." The reality is that I always want to learn new things, and I'm happy to change positions on an idea, belief, etc., in light of new evidence. And that's the key: in light of new evidence. Posting here that there is "research [from] many creditable societies" to show that ghosts exist just won't cut it. Indeed, it seems that none of us here have heard of this "research." So help us all out and document what research you're talking about so at least I can expand my horizons regarding the paranormal. |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 11/16/2004 08:39:39 |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 10:20:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Closed minded and post modern... I'll have to think about that one... I have read numerous other books that were not how did you say "bigoted" Look again at the authors. Read the Critical thinking of Terence Hines Erich Goode. By no means are they bigots to Science. By no means are they favorable of Paranormal claims. They are scientists. They represent Science.
Scientific methods demand that when new evidence comes to light then theories must change to accomidate this new evidence. Take for example Ghosts. Surely through the research of many creditable societies we as scientist have come to realize that what we call Ghosts Exist. If not then we live still with the ball and chain of Spiritualism. I use the examples of ghosts because someone said before ghosts do not exist.
Homework I can do my own Thank You..
Let us not confuse the word paranormal with supernatural. That is another ball and chain to cut loose The Catholic Church. Paranormal means next to normal, beside normal, not above or below.
Post Modern Yes Closed Minded No
You claim these sources exist, yet you don't list any of them or their methodologies. You are the claimant, the burden of proof is on you.
Prove that
1) Science is in collusion with the Catholic church (and explain why the science of ballistics was declared heresey by the Catholic church)
2) Science is mired in Spiritualism (since science rejects that which is faith based as being evidence, this will be a tough row to hoe indeed.)
3) There have been credible societies researching Ghosts using the scientific method and not supposition or faith. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 10:32:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Closed minded and post modern... I'll have to think about that one...
Well, you admitted to the post-modernist part, which includes a closed-minded insistence that human epistemologies are created equal. What more thinking needs to be done?quote:
I have read numerous other books that were not how did you say "bigoted" Look again at the authors. Read the Critical thinking of Terence Hines Erich Goode. By no means are they bigots to Science. By no means are they favorable of Paranormal claims. They are scientists. They represent Science.
Indeed, and you seem to have rejected the lessons they attempt to teach. As I said,I'm guessing here, but I would lay money on the idea that just about everything you think you know about science has come from books about the paranormal in which the authors sneer at science and take verbal dumps on its methods. Those are, of course, closed-minded and bigoted sources to be ignored if you've got any respect for the reality of science. Did I make it unclear that I'm not talking about every book you've ever read? It sure looks like you've read Hines and Goode, but have failed to understand what they're saying. The image you paint of what science is (or isn't) is seriously skewed from the practice of actual science.quote:
Scientific methods demand that when new evidence comes to light then theories must change to accomidate this new evidence.
You got that much right.quote:
Take for example Ghosts. Surely through the research of many creditable societies we as scientist have come to realize that what we call Ghosts Exist.
"Surely?" That word is at the root of this discussion. With that word, you're doing nothing but begging us to believe you. But as others have already pointed out, you've failed to present us with any evidence (credible or otherwise) that ghosts exist at all.quote:
If not then we live still with the ball and chain of Spiritualism.
"If not?" You've set up a false dichotomy: either we've got the evidence and ghosts exist, or scientists are simply blinded by dogma (and ghosts exist). There's a third choice: the evidence - if any - is insufficient to make the "pro-ghost" case. There's also a fourth choice: ghosts exist, but actively attempt to disguise the evidence they leave behind. A fifth choice: maybe ghosts don't exist. Numerous other possibilities might come to mind to explain the current state of knowledge about ghosts, but you, in your closed-mindedness, fail to see them.quote:
I use the examples of ghosts because someone said before ghosts do not exist.
I have just carefully re-read this thread, and can find no instance of anyone stating that ghosts do not exist. This leads me to wonder just what sort of epistemology you are using. Is it "whatever Storm believes to be true is therefore true?"quote:
Homework I can do my own Thank You..
The reason I gave you homework to do is so that you could demonstrate your open-mindedness. You have failed.quote:
Let us not confuse the word paranormal with supernatural. That is another ball and chain to cut loose The Catholic Church. Paranormal means next to normal, beside normal, not above or below.
And? Why isn't it normal?quote:
Post Modern Yes Closed Minded No
As has already been shown, your own words betray the truth value of that last declaration. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 15:34:32 [Permalink]
|
What makes you think I have failed because I stand besides my own convictions. I reade Terence Hines And Erich Goode daily. I would not call that failure.
Everything I know about Science does not just come from Paranormal books although they have been a wonderful enlightenment. I have urned my degree in business management mathematical scientific methodology. I urned my degree in Sociology Just about urned a degree in Divinity. I just do not come from reading Paranormal books.
I can agree to the fact that human epistemologies are created equal. They all offer knowledge.
As for the evidence of ghosts just type in the word ghost on the yahoo search engine. 5,300,00. That is no typo Valiant Dancer!!! There is your evidence. Surely they all cannot be fakes. I know for sure there is evidence in those sights. As a person who definetly believes in scientific methodolgy it is quite easy to distinguish the fakes from the questionable to the real.
credible societies:
The Ghost Club
The Society for Psychical Research
Phantasms of the Living Podomore, Gurney, Myers(read between the lines very much a product of spiritualism but none the less useful}
http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/wallace/S434.htm (check out this website)
http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/wallace/S430.htm
Check out these websites |
Storm |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 16:28:32 [Permalink]
|
Siberia,
As far as "these scientists" are concerned just look at the words used by the scientst/dr. These Spiritualists he says. These mediums. Of course he is going to be more swayed toward environmental explanations. Hence my releacement of the ball and chainn of Spiritualism Another phrase I read through this article is "prior knowledge hypothesis" That prior knowledge, history, etc induce these hallucinations. I know through my own investigations to haunts around the Tampa area that this is not always the case. Dr. Wiseman agrees with this although it is the same in all reality to his summarization that People are affected when they get there instead of before. I do believe however that the environment plays a tremendous factor on sightings. |
Storm |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 16:39:17 [Permalink]
|
Just reading your claims list. How interesting that next to every claim except ghost there is some comment. A typo? |
Storm |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 17:05:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Just reading your claims list. How interesting that next to every claim except ghost there is some comment. A typo?
Ah, thanks for reminding me. I've been meaning to contribute one for awhile. How's this?
Ghosts: Blurry photos, garbled recordings, and hallucinations resulting from self-induced panic.
quote:
As for the evidence of ghosts just type in the word ghost on the yahoo search engine. 5,300,00. That is no typo Valiant Dancer!!! There is your evidence. Surely they all cannot be fakes. I know for sure there is evidence in those sights.
What an interesting standard of proof. I had no idea search engine hits are now considered a sufficient research method. Using google, I was able to prove the existence of several things which prior to today I had assumed to be ficticious. Surely all these cannot be fakes as well.
2,010,000 for elves
783,000 for narnia
8,070,000 for dragons
193,000 for klingons
1,450,000 for trolls
538,000 for werewolves
2,910,000 for vampires
2,390,000 for mickey mouse
4,510,000 for miracles
7,390,000 for aliens
2,030,000 for bigfoot
1,470,000 for hogwarts
And I even found proof for something called the shit monster with 2,460 hits, a creature I thought I had made up on the spot. Here is a lovely illustration. |
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/16/2004 17:32:27 |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 17:18:14 [Permalink]
|
| Very interesting but let us not ignore some very credible evidence. The point is that 5,300,00 websites are not wrong. All you need to do is read between the lines. But other than the yahoo searches look at the other websites I suggested. It is interesting to me though how coincidental that the topic of ghosts were left out. Oh but then I guess we could have a whole conversation on skepticism and coincedence. I typed in "Skeptics" on the search engine only 976,000 came up. Not Even half of what "ghosts" constitute. Just some number comparison. |
Storm |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2004 : 17:20:39 [Permalink]
|
"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great."
-- Mark Twain
|
Storm |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
