It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To all who believe in ghosts.. Let me put this myth to rest!

page: 6
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Matter creating for example gravity. THEORY... There isn't much matter to create anything with. If gravity is something else, some kind of unequal discharge in an electro magentic interaction, of wave function, hmmm....Pretty heavy. Wonder if our actions and positive or negative thoughts affect its since my theory is spirit is the realest thing in existence in this universe, all illusion.

www.newscientist.com...
It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

www.scitechantiques.com...

More than 99 percent of matter in the Universe exists in the plasma state though nature rarely produces plasma on Earth's surface. Earth's electrically neutral environment is a rare exception.


plasma, electrical?

We're just condensed energy aren't we, waves of it?
edit on 11-3-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Unity_99
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Well those with experiences do know, and yet, here we are talking theory. The OP thought his "theory" of reality was fact, it far from that.

Well, it may not be completely wrong.
OPs comes from a standpoint that he/she knows everything there is about the universe. Obviously the nieve opinion is laughable, however, its best to not counter that with a demand that they are wrong, because you know everything and it doesn't match up.

In the end, the experiences I had may have been any of the following:
Glitch in the matrix, powerful wild telekinesis by me, invisible people just as alive and solid as you and I, holographic imprinting, powerful temporary hallucination based insanity repeated for ? reasons, biblical demons, strange alien creatures (falls under the invisible people thing)..put in there also any other type of external creature, etc...
I say ghost not as a definition of what it is, but of what the experience relates to. As far as the question will I definitely have some form of conscious life after I die? well, to my knowledge, I don't know..but I have experienced enough, along with researched (based on trying to debunk my experiences) I suspect there may indeed be more to this entity I know as myself than what I know through the scientific understanding of self...and it makes no sense at all to be honest, but hey, I gotta be honest with what I have experienced.

but yeah...in the end, who knows who is right or wrong. We are all alive at the moment. inside the box trying to suggest the color of the box's outside.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   

br0ker
reply to post by NullVoid
 


What is this? It's not even a solid top to the dome...?? And looks like they're pulling it up there by a wire at an angle. David Copperfield did this on a bad monday....


If its a wire, that is a very thin wire isn't it ?
So these guys WANT to use thin wire or attach the dome and get the work done, actually ?
If its a wire, there wont be that many spectators.
They are like you and me, "with my own eyes!"
If its a wire, it wont even come out in news channel.
Dome attaching is a news ? LOL, since when ?

Dude, at least bunk scientifically and in full. If I call you names, you'll be angry, but your response already show your maturity. Dismissal like you doing would lower your own reputation in the long term.

as farewell, to non believer, keep confiding yourself that you are correct..
Yes, supernatural is hogwash, keep saying that, good luck, you need luck

edit on 11-3-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Its all wrong, the whole structure of the house of cards is not just error, but deliberate error, hiding the truth.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Cathcart

br0ker
My proof is math. Energy, time, mass and movement. Remove mass, and you have none of the others.


And what makes you think ghosts have no mass?


Yup when they slime people, they leave slime lol.
Sorry just watched Ghostbusters


I saw one once, a little girl in really old clothing but I was only about 9 so It could have been my imagination.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I always enjoyed this film in regards to -finding leads- on the whole ghost thing:


Its almost 2 hours, some parts are more compelling than other parts. If your truly interested in this area and want some actual evidence behind it (understandable), this is a fairly decent place to start.

The skeptical debunking can be found Here
Ultimately the biggest skepticism of the video is that the controls could have been better. It also suggests that though the credibility of the scientists and researchers was fine, they probably were being ignorant and didn't do due diligence.
There is of course back and forth between the researchers and such involved...its a pretty interesting convo going between them. but anyhow, the video itself is quite impressive as a start point in which you can then spring off of and research each thing individually. I recommend not having either side of the argument do the thinking for you.
edit on 11-3-2014 by SaturnFX because: fixed url



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:38 PM
link   

boymonkey74

Cathcart

br0ker
My proof is math. Energy, time, mass and movement. Remove mass, and you have none of the others.


And what makes you think ghosts have no mass?


Yup when they slime people, they leave slime lol.
Sorry just watched Ghostbusters


I saw one once, a little girl in really old clothing but I was only about 9 so It could have been my imagination.


The slime is real and is proven "oh so scientific" experiment. I never knew about the slime, until I read about the experiment. The experiment was observed by a few skeptic and they found its repeatable with that person.
and its proper name is ectoplasm.

I'm quitting this thread, this is a troll thread, good to waste my time, no real value.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Perception - The reality beyond matter


The Brain Our Universe Within Perception

Brain structures world around us, like a computer. Energy waves go in, and our programs recreate a world, like a screen on the back of our head, akin to this.

www.naturalnews.com...
The discovery of DNA variability, holographic blueprints and the symphony of life

biophysics.50megs.com...


DNA projects a blueprint for the organism that is translated from the electrodynamic to the molecular level. Further, research strongly suggests DNA functions as a biocomputer. This DNA-wave biocomputer reads and writes genetic code and forms holographic pre-images of biostructures. We are more fundamentally electromagnetic, rather than chemical beings....

If we drop down another whole domain of observation from the juicy “wetware” described by chemistry and atomic structure, we enter the subatomic realm of quantum physics. At this level the behavior of matter, both organic and inorganic, is governed not by classical notions of cause and effect or even complex dynamics, but by those of quantum probability.

“Something” appears to emerge from virtually “nothing” which physicists have come to describe as a sea of infinite potential. They call it quantum foam, vacuum potential, or zero-point energy – we can call it the vacuum substructure. Subatomic particles wink in and out of existence on a continuous basis, like some subatomic froth. This “something” appears paradoxically in wave/particle form. This world is not transcendent to matter, but underlies it as a coherent unity, much like ecology underlies biology.

Within this context, some physicists (Miller, 1975; Bohm, 1980) have strongly suggested that the nature of reality is fundamentally analogous to that of a holographic projection. The optical process called holography uses interference patterns. Holography describes transformations of light and optical information mathematically in wave mechanical terms. The superposition of a split beam of laser light led to the laboratory development of holograms, or recordable holographic images demonstrated by Dennis Gabor beginning in 1949. In 1971, Karl Pribram applied this metaphor to neuropsychology, suggesting it was more than analogy, that the brain actually encodes information as holograms. The pattern holds the form.


There are a lot of co-connecting threads to follow. In the one material conventional theories, they exist assaulted by tons of other data and findings, whereas the competing data, that might be less advantageous to company heads to put in our heads so to speak, seems to be well fitting, it doesnt compete, and coincides nicely. Gee i wonder which model is the most logical to work with. Remember the toy with all the shapes you put through. Well conventional science, only puts the squares in what it perceives as a square hole, of course that hole really fits somewhere else, and it ignores all the other pieces.

But when you start to research, the other pieces all fit into their slots....

I run with Mind over matter, including the so called, "matter" brain.
edit on 11-3-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Chrisw0801
reply to post by br0ker
 


Gravity has no mass but it can bend time, move suns and is a form of energy eg a black hole is all about gravity


Nah, gravity is created by mass.. Amongst other things that can create "gravity"



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by br0ker
 


I'm not sure either about "ghosts" as such, as l think that that would too simple. When some things are seen, some of them are residual, and it's like a playback of a piece of history. Like where there has been reports of Roman soldiers marching along, but can only be seen from the knees up because a roman road has been built on.

I'm begining to think that some paranormal events, when there appears to be an intelligent response,could be down to someone else somewhere else have an OBE and there could be an interaction with their energy.

I have seen with my own eyes something that can only be poltergeist activity, as well as a very large clear ORB, no clear idea what they could be classified as.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 09:54 PM
link   
OP I sat in my living room in the middle of the day and saw a woman appear, she looked at me, grabbed the hem of her dress and turned as she was turning she disappeared. If that was not a ghost as you call them, what did I see? I was not drinking, was not on drugs or even smoking the green. I was mearly watching TV.

You seem pretty sure of your theory and you base it on what, speculation? My experience was seen with my own eyes. I do not need science or the church or even you telling me I did not see some sort of entity. Recently I threw a spent lighter in the waste can, a few hours later it was back on my desk and no one was here but me and no one had come in during that few hours. Can I explain either of these? No. But that does take away from the fact that they happened.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   

br0ker
This should be extremely reasonable to most people. Yet I'm shocked how you can be so unscientific about the fact.

I'm sorry but when I see sloppy logic and reasoning being presented as "scientific" then, as a rational empiricist, I have to comment. To avoid the being labeled as biased, i will state right now that I do not "believe" in ghosts, nor do believe that the phenomena described as ghost sightings offer any proof that people are seeing spirits of departed humans.



If a ghost should be able to move things, manifest itself to be viewed, or make sounds then it HAS to be a physical entity. A non-physical entity can not, in ANY way MOVE physical things. To be seen it needs to be physical as well, otherwise there is NO way to reflect light.

counter examples

1. Holograms are not physical objects but they can be manifested to be viewed.
2. Just because you hear something doesn't mean that the source has to be physical. For example certain kinds of EM radiation stimulates the auditory nerve to produce sounds (the crackling of lighting is heard as it is seen, yet the boom of thunder comes much later -- this discrepancy in the time it takes sound of the crackle to reach the listener (instantaneous since it is the result of a direct Em effect on the auditory nerve and travels at the speed of light) and the boom of the thunder (traveling at the speed of sound) show that two different mechanisms for producing the sound are in play. Or consider the person who hears voices -- should the fact that a person hears a voice mean that there must be a physical source?
3. "A non physical entity cannot move a physical thing." really? Let me introduce you to something called gravity. It moves lots of things. Even better, consider dark matter which has a great effect on how things move, like the rotational speed of the galactic disk but certainly isn't physical
4. "To be seen it needs to be physical" back to holograms again. "


And most of all, to interact with you, it would need a brain. No physical entity=no brain=no mind and thought.

hmmm lots of things interact with me that don't have brains -- viruses, bacterial, plants.. As for the idea that there can be no thought without a brain is totally unscientific. How do you know? Where is your data? How do you know that a plant doesn't think? how would you measure it? You can propose a hypothesis that a brain is necessary for thought but until you can design an experiment to measure thought and the absence of thought and prove it, it is not scientific rather it is mere doctrine.
And the physical part of what you call a ghost is long gone and buried. It is only buried bones, if anything at all.


So, lets put this to rest. Unless you have some kind of scientific facts that would make all this mumbojumbo possible?

I would ask you now to do no more that what you are asking of others. Please present some scientific facts (experimentally verified of course, please use citations, that demonstrate your assertion that a brain is necessary for thought. I look forward to reviewing your data.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
I'm still waiting for this myth to be put to rest....

Have not seen anything yet that even remotely comes close to disproving the spirit world.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   

br0ker

So you experienced a ghost. An entity of a dead person.
Tell me,
How long did you look at it, directly?
What did it look like?
What did it do?
Had you taken any substances or were you under pressure at the time?
And how do you explain what you experienced and why?

I really encourage people to try and give SOME kind of scientific reasoning to their belief, and or encounter.

Sure, some people can argue, but I really encourage people to look at this from a scientific POV. Like in the OP subject.


I'll bite with the above questions, seeing as I have one experience locked away in my memory.

1. How long did you look at it, directly?

I looked at it for roughly 2-5 minutes total. Lighting was ambient - No LEDs, Florescents, energy efficient bulbs. No significant shadows of any kind or sort. Also I'm not counting the time it spent in peripheral vision - this was the amount of time that I saw it in front of me. Only other object of interest was that the TV was on - Shark Week. I bring this up because the particular documentary was focused on Megalodon, and there were no people on the TV.

2. What did it look like?

Honestly, to me it looked like my brother - I almost called out to ask him why he was just standing there. Red baseball cap, blue jeans, typical T-shirt that someone his age (8-10) would wear. The image was fairly solid; not "ghostly" in any way, at least when not directly in my sight.

3. What did it do?

Like I said above, I first noticed it out of the corner of my eye - it was in a well-lit spot. Just when I was about to ask why my "brother" was still out of bed, it moved (glided would be a better term; no leg movement whatsoever). Went from right to left, and to do so it crossed in front of the TV.

I was still able to watch the TV as it went in front of it - Looked like dust or dirt clouded in front. 2-5 minutes is about how long it took to follow the figure with my eyes until it vanished.

4. Had you taken any substances or were you under pressure at the time?

Nope - at age 11.6, I'd hope there wasn't anything in my system. No pressure whatsoever either.

5. And how do you explain what you experienced and why?

At the time, I just rushed upstairs as soon as the entity had vanished, and told my parents I saw a ghost. Naturally, they were skeptical, as both didn't believe in them. For me, the shocker was that it wasn't like those horror movies, where when you see a ghost it's instantly out to get you - I was more curious than scared.

Now, looking back - I can think of four possible scenarios, but I'm inclined toward the first two.
A. I saw a doppelganger of either myself, or my brother. There are some pretty significant cases floating around of this phenomenon, and because it does meet some of the classic criteria, I cannot rule this one out.

B. What I saw was actually a ghost - I'm sure if I dug deep enough into the history of the place, I'd find that a little boy around that age loved the house so much, that when he had to move away a "recording" if you will of him was left behind. Or, he passed away there. Or, he was just curious. Again, I cannot rule this one out, as there wasn't any evidence to support either side.

C. I saw my brother's astral body (if we must throw around metaphysical terms), while he was having an astral projection or an OBE. My only problem with this theory (with myself practicing astral projection), is that I should have "seen" more entities if it was someone astral projecting - the fact that I have not tends to lean towards this as a non-example.

D. I saw a hallucination, or a projection from a bright source of light in the room. Can't rule it out, but I also cannot claim it as fact either. Seeing as I don't have a history of hallucinating (unless I'm pulling an all-nighter, which it is perfectly acceptable by then), this sort of rules it out.

There you go - an almost "Ghost Hunters"-worthy scientific analysis of my first experience, without the fancy gadgets. I expect br0ker, you'll get several more of these replies. It's like telling someone who has seen bigfoot that they didn't see anything at all (unless they were looking at my feet). If you're ever in my neck of the woods, I'd invite you to a cemetery and have you call out all the spirits you want - I kid you not that you'd become a believer, even in the daytime. This is coming from a guy that did everything you weren't supposed to do to an Ouija board, event to the point that I slept with it in the same room, planchette on. All that I got out of it was frustration, and probably some entity laughing in the background seeing me fail to provoke it.

-fossilera



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Really good point! So a ghost is really the physical embodiment of the soul (absent the physical body), just the same as wind is the physical embodiment of air or light is the physical embodiment of energy? I'm no sure of what myth you are putting to rest.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   

br0ker
This should be extremely reasonable to most people. Yet I'm shocked how you can be so unscientific about the fact.

If a ghost should be able to move things, manifest itself to be viewed, or make sounds then it HAS to be a physical entity. A non-physical entity can not, in ANY way MOVE physical things. To be seen it needs to be physical as well, otherwise there is NO way to reflect light.

And most of all, to interact with you, it would need a brain. No physical entity=no brain=no mind and thought.

And the physical part of what you call a ghost is long gone and buried. It is only buried bones, if anything at all.

So, lets put this to rest. Unless you have some kind of scientific facts that would make all this mumbojumbo possible?
edit on 11-3-2014 by br0ker because: Spelling



For someone who attempts to use science as the basis of their argument, you sure DO have a VERY, VERY limited view of scientific principles.

First of all, let's address the ability to move things.

I can turn up my car stereo, and vibrate things with it. You can use sound, electromagnetic waves, and other things to react with physical objects.

As far as communicating with humans....what exactly makes you believe you need a brain to do this? Science has yet to localize consciousness, and we certainly do NOT know that a brain is needed for consciousness, nor transferrence thereof.

As for ghosts being visible. Most of the time, it seems ghosts are not, although apparitions do happen. I think it would be possible for being made of a subtle substance to reveal themselves, although their methods are unknown to me.


Science was NEVER developed for the purpose of holding on to limited viewpoints and rigid belief systems....it was used to create, build, learn, discovery, invent, and ultimately to test theories and validate things. Science is a tool, and like every tool, it can be used for good, or for bad.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 02:45 AM
link   
my own personal experience tells me there is something out there....maybe not as in how ghostbusters portrayed it but i can tell you for a fact there is paranormal out there



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   

br0ker
reply to post by mysterioustranger
 


Ok then, explain to me how a ghost can move a door...


I am broadening the definition of Ghost to include other types of entities not just human souls who currently are not in a body in the physical.

If you believe in the 4th dimension then there is an explanation. There are 4 dimensions, the first exists at a point, no breadth or width, the second has only width in all directions, the third is where we exist, the fourth is a cube.

Picture a sheet of paper on a table, this is representive of the second dimension. We being in the third cannot go down into this dimension physically. Now if we have no physicality and our spirit is free we could perhaps manifest in that dimension. We could also interact with the second dimension by reaching into it using tools of some type. using tools we could interact with it physically. Thus you have physical movement.

Those looking "down" on us from another dimension can interact with us in many different ways, using spirit and technology/tools. Eventually science will catch up with the unknown (occult) and all this will be understood. until them it is impossible to prove something does not exist, you can't prove a negative.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by supermarket2012
 





I can turn up my car stereo, and vibrate things with it. You can use sound, electromagnetic waves, and other things to react with physical objects.


You had me there for a sec but then I saw a flaw in your logic.

I just wanted to point out that your car stereo is a physical object. You needed a physical object to create those sound waves.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by br0ker
 


Google her : Julie Beischel

She's done experimental work on pressure changes by "discarnate spirits" with Boccuzzi.

You can further go to Gary Schwartz's experimental research and perhaps start with Photonic Measurement of Apparent Presence of...

You can do the rest yourself, if your interested. What you decide, is up to you.

However, if you decide what you have with your current knowledge, you are guilty of drawing a conclusion with too little data and mostly prejudice.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join