Do you believe in ghosts or the paranormal?

[rutger5000]

Nope, I believe in science

Well I believe in science as well, but then again, there's a psychic that my mom have gotten help from several times, and all of the times what he said was correct, and he don't even live in the same country. So how does science explain that?

Science, to me disproves all religions, not paranormal activity.

I always say that one who uses science to prove of disprove religion doesn't understand either. By definition science does disprove the paranormal though. If science would prove it, it would't be paranormal activity. So I don't agree with you on that note.
I won't argue with you on the psychic that helped your mom, as you already had a reply on that one.

Well fair enough, to my defence I posted late (atleast where I live) so I wasn't thinking straight, however, while science doesn't actually disprove all religion, it disproves many global events described in the bible etc like a global flood. But I rarely these days use science in my religion debates, when simple logic is so much better^^

But still, about the psychic, I can't say excactly what it was about, but seeing it with my own eyes I believe in it.

I know the bane of posting late. Said some really stupid things at 2:00 AM.
I didn't express myself properly I should have said: One who uses science to prove or disprove religion doesn't understand one of the two. A religion which consists only of miricals isn't a religion it is a fairy tale. A religion is more then the collection of supposed events. If you want to research the events described in say the bible (I seriously can't comprehend why, but lets say you want to do that), then you need to be much more flexible, and realize that is has been written thousands of years ago. People then didn't understand the world, a giant flood could just as well be a minor flood that just destroyed a tiny area. That area was considered as the whole world, because the people living there never had left it.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Well, there's gotta be a reason my pants lit on fire yesterday.

Maybe you should stop telling lies

Oh come on! I was just joking!

So was I, I was playing on the saying "Liar Liar pants on fire"

 

[AndyFromMonday]

what the fuck, ok i know my brain didn't screw with me. This isn't Inception here, a door opened by itself and slammed shut by itself, right in front of me and 5 others.

And there are loads of explanations for that but because you immediately linked the paranormal with the door opening you now remember it that way. In fact, every single one of your memories is tempered with except for your most recent ones. You remember everything the way YOU want to remember it.

They didn't scam their clients, they cured the whole fucking thing. That is the scenario of which I am speaking and which you CANNOT disagree is completely legitimate, no matter the method. Then, the person began believing that the cure didn't work. So then it didn't work anymore and the problem returned.

PLACEBO'S ARE NOT A CURE! PLEASE REMEMBER THIS!

Placebos are used to delay the inevitable. They only work for psychologically induced disorders and it does not cure it because ultimately the problem is still there. You don't treat the symptoms but the underlying cause. You don't treat a persons scizhophrenia with sugar pills hoping that at the very least he'll stop hallucinating.

Placebo's do NOT work and that 200 dollars can net you actual therapy from trained and experienced physicians that can actually help you. So would you rather those people spend the money on getting helped by trained, experienced physicians or spend them on bullshit?

CURE. The placebos which I am referring to would not simply cure short-term symptoms, but the whole shebang. The placebos WOULD cure the problem, if not by the same method as the genuine article.

You seem to have a gross misunderstanding of how placebos work. Placebos do not cure you, they can't. It's impossible for placebos to cure you because it's not the placebo that stops the pain or whatever you're experiencing, it's you. However, that does not treat the underlying disorder. If you have a brain tumour that's causing you headaches, the headaches might be gone but the tumour would still be there.

Bottom line, placebos CANNOT cure illnesses.

Like I've said above the "placebo" would actually cure the problem and supersede the "actual treatment." They aren't being tricked if they can actually cure everything via the placebo or their own will.

But they CAN'T cure everything. In fact, they cure absolutely nothing. How are you not getting this?

I myself was seriously ill once. My dad's girlfriend suggested (actually demanded is more accurate) that I take antibiotics. That was it for me. "Fuck this illness, I'm cured." AND I WAS. I didn't need the goddamn antibiotics. I didn't even know what the hell was wrong with me, I just concentrated every fiber of my being into being healthy again and I was. I have had no similar illness since. What do you think of that little anecdote?

You had a cold or possibly the flu. You didn't visit a physician so how the hell am I supposed to know what illness you had? You sure as hell didn't have a serious illness that's for sure.

If it works, I completely support it.

Sorry, it doesn't actually work. If you support "it" though when you contract pneumonia make sure to take sugar pills and not antibiotics and see how you feel.

*facepalm* I'm talking about hard, on-the-street, fuck-you-up-if-you-look-at-them-wrong drugs! And I am saying that IF IT DID FUCKING WORK THEN HE WOULD BE SUPERSEDING THE NEED FOR ACTUAL DRUGS. IF IT WORKED. I wouldn't be making any of these suppositions if that wasn't the case!

To bad placebos don't cure the underlying cause.

So testimonials aren't evidence, even if the source is completely credible? Huh. That's a strange assertion, care to tell me where it came from?

The source is never infallible therefore the best kind of evidence is one that you can test and reproduce under the right conditions.

 

[Crazycat690]

Nope, I believe in science

Well I believe in science as well, but then again, there's a psychic that my mom have gotten help from several times, and all of the times what he said was correct, and he don't even live in the same country. So how does science explain that?

Science, to me disproves all religions, not paranormal activity.

I always say that one who uses science to prove of disprove religion doesn't understand either. By definition science does disprove the paranormal though. If science would prove it, it would't be paranormal activity. So I don't agree with you on that note.
I won't argue with you on the psychic that helped your mom, as you already had a reply on that one.

Well fair enough, to my defence I posted late (atleast where I live) so I wasn't thinking straight, however, while science doesn't actually disprove all religion, it disproves many global events described in the bible etc like a global flood. But I rarely these days use science in my religion debates, when simple logic is so much better^^

But still, about the psychic, I can't say excactly what it was about, but seeing it with my own eyes I believe in it.

I know the bane of posting late. Said some really stupid things at 2:00 AM.
I didn't express myself properly I should have said: One who uses science to prove or disprove religion doesn't understand one of the two. A religion which consists only of miricals isn't a religion it is a fairy tale. A religion is more then the collection of supposed events. If you want to research the events described in say the bible (I seriously can't comprehend why, but lets say you want to do that), then you need to be much more flexible, and realize that is has been written thousands of years ago. People then didn't understand the world, a giant flood could just as well be a minor flood that just destroyed a tiny area. That area was considered as the whole world, because the people living there never had left it.

Yes, that's exactly my point actually, they thought it was the entire world, and to me if they was acting directly under God they would have been more enlighted than that. But, that's what the bible, and religion is about, to force people to live in ignorance.

 

[Scar05]

Idk if I really believe in the paranormal or not - I can't really say that it does exist but I can't say that it doesn't either.

It's strange - despite evidence of the paranormal running through my entire family we are all sceptics (mostly - we won't admit it exists but won't deny it either). To put it into perspective, my family never wasted time believing in things that clearly doesn't exist -----SPOILERS ------ Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, etc. it was always straight up 'hey this is how it is and this is what happens'. They would never speak about experiences with the paranormal, or endorsed anything perceived or believed to be paranormal. However after experiencing it myself (in a way - mine is more "sixth-sense" rather than paranormal) I started to question what others had experienced and was surprised to discover how many people throughout my family had experienced it (situations beyond rational scientific, even far fetched, explanations). And it's not like they pooled stories or encouraged these behaviour or beliefs - most of them didn't even know others had experienced the paranormal as well. Most of these were not just one-off experiences, also it seemed that each person experienced / was aware of "their paranormal" differently.

Still these things are still very hard to prove properly - kinda like trying to prove colours exist through experiments made by and for the colour-blind. The only thing everyone can agree with is that not everyone experiences the paranormal (or what is perceived to be paranormal). Perhaps being aware of the paranormal only emerges through certain families and/or individuals, emerging from deep within our genetic makeup, or perhaps we're all just breeding crazy.

 

[Julianking93]

It is scary. The idea of something that can hurt me but I have no way of hurting it back is pretty scary. The video does look pretty fake. The thing at the end looks like an abomination from the Dragon Age games. I have never experienced any paranormal activity and I hope to keep it that way.

Not even that, but simply not knowing what it really is that has the ability to harm you. It's more of an unknown thing for me, I think.
And yeah, the video does look fake, albeit well done fake, but still fake. The weird red... garbage bag looking abortion thing looks like something from the original Resident Evil game but still, the whole thing is scary.

 

[Stublore]

I don't know what to believe.
I've seen some convincing stuff and some... really unconvincing stuff as well, so really I don't know what to believe.
I've had my own experiences with strange goings on but I can't instantly label is as "OMFGUGUISEGHOSTS!!!!" but I can't say it's nothing so basically.... I'unno.

Though, things like this, even if it's fake, make me pretty damn scared and question my ideals.

Even if it's fake??
Of course it's bloody fake!
Mind if I ask you a question?
Are you older than 10 or 11?
Do you really believe that the "reporter" was "driven insane" by what she saw?

 

[0986875533423]

sir or madam you are a fool, i'm fully aware of the behavious of light and how shadows are made, you don't need to explain it to me, and i know full well that for an invisible thing to cast a shadow is to defy physics, if the thing casting the shadow were visible then it would be fully explainable, however it is invisible which does of course contradict physics, which is why we call it "paranormal" which is why i brought it up, if all the stories on this thread included a logical explanation then they wouldn't be in the right place now would they?

And this is a perfect example of the "us and them" attitude to science that I hate so much. You cannot have something that "contradicts" physics. Physics is science, and science is our understanding of the world around us. You are a scientist, and so am I.

You can't say "I have someething that contravenes our generally accepted idea of its parent field, but that's inconvenient for both me and others so I'm just going to say my example is an exception to the rule and carry on regardless" because that is called "religion" and I would slap you for perpetuation of such foolishness were you physically in front of me.

When there is a scientific rule there are no exceptions to the rule. If there are, the rule is wrong and needs to be redefined. When you say "This invisible thing casts a shadow" what that also entails is "I think our current understanding of how light behaves when confronted with invisible or transparent objects is wrong, or too simple, as there is an eventuality it does not cover" and if you aren't prepared to do that, I would give up now and start looking for an alternative explanation than "invisible trees".

It is quite evident from your previous posts that this is something you do not understand, so I'd keep the "fool" comments to a minimum.

 

[mandaforever]

I find it interesting that people can just straight up write this off, thinking they know everything.

I do not personally believe in ghosts, but I do believe there are things going on we are not aware of as human beings. I've had at least 5 horror movie status paranormal experiences happen to me in my own house. I felt someone lying on top of me in my bed every night for 3 months, and it tapped on my foot a few times. I saw a flash of light and heard a scream (not an ordinary scream). Music has played out of my computer speakers when no music station was on and the volume was tuned all the way down (I wouldn't call it music though...)

ya. I can't just write those experiences off, but I wish they had never happened. No theyre not all in my head, because I was wide awake every time these things happened. No I am not mentally unstable. It just happened.

But did you automatically assume a dead person was responsible? It could have been extra-dimensional phenomena, fnords, or Invisible Sasquatch. Any of those explanations is better than "dead guy, but not." It's like someone hearing The Bloop and insisting that it's Cthulhu. I'm usually content to just chalk things up to "weird shit."

Also, that presence on your chest? Might want to look up the Grey Hag scenario. More common than you think.

uhhhh, I NEVER said it was a ghost..haha, I jsut said it happened.

 

[penguindude42]

Why shouldn't I believe in stuff like that?

It was my JOB to make stuff like that exist out in the real world!

~Tom*

 

[Julianking93]

Even if it's fake??
Of course it's bloody fake!
Mind if I ask you a question?
Are you older than 10 or 11?
Do you really believe that the "reporter" was "driven insane" by what she saw?

You're a really nice person, you know that?
Yeah, it's fucking fake but I find it scary and entertaining. I'm using "if" not as a question to the legitamacy of the video, but as a statement to any and all "ghost" videos.
I don't give a fuck if it's fake or not. It's scary to me and it still leads me to question the existence of the supernatural.
And even if I did think it was real, that doesn't give you the right to insult me.

 

[Rin Little]

Oh trust me, I've paid attention pretty well up til now. For right now, I just need to give it all a rest

That's fine, I just figured that a warning was better than an unexpected boot up the rear.

I've had my fair share of those >.< Never a fun time lol

 

[KaWaiiTSuKI]

Wow... why are people being such dicks in this thread over nothing?
If one wants to believe in the supernatural, let them, jeez >.>

 

[Roadface]

I believe it's all nonsense. Sure you can get scared when going through a strange place and start thinking the worst, only natural. I imagine the closest I would feel to this would be walking through a bad part of a city at night alone. I kinda want to go to those haunted houses that always do the trick on scaring people or w/e but wouldn't exactly go out of my way if you know what I mean.

 

[blindthrall]

I'm not asking people to personally experience anything, I'm just saying that they blatantly disregard or even attempt to disprove other people's personal experiences. That is the mark of a complete douche. I'm providing potential evidence, you are just ignoring it in favor of an explanation that is more comfortable to you.

Really, I'm insulting people because they deserve to be insulted and because it makes me feels better about this whole inane conversation. If you don't understand either of those reasons then you really should go elsewhere.

"Potential evidence." Even you couldn't call it evidence without that wiggle word in there. Also, you're insulting people because it's you're only argument. Your mother preys on people afraid of their own mortality, simple as that. How about instead of insulting me, tell your mom to lay a curse on me.

When was I insulting you? And why would anyone lay a curse on you when you're perfectly willing to doom yourself?

It's potential evidence because apparently nobody else is a credible source. I'm insulting people in addition to my argument, because people should be named for what they are.

All you're trying to do is make me angry, so you have no place here.

So you're all out of mana, so you can't curse me. Fair enough. But people should be named for what they are? You do not want to open that can of worms, because I can think of some pretty horrible names for people who sell voodoo cancer cures. If everyone thought the way you did, we'd still be huddled in caves trying to figure out fire. And you made me angry first, so we're even.