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.

 

Could we prove Ghosts or spiritual entities?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I was thinking recently that it would be interesting if we could establish to a jury that Ghosts/SPIRITUAL entities really do exist. So, I started to think that I bet we could. In the US there are three standards of proof: preponderance of the evidence (the evidence more than likely suggests that there is ghosts 51% of evidence most likely); clear and convincing evidence (requires about 70% surety as to the evidence establishing ghosts; and proof beyond a reasonable doubt (if a reasonable person could doubt that the evidence establishes this after looking at it objectively than the standard has not been met). I think we can prove that ghosts exist beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'd love to try to prove this to the ATS community. What does it require? It requires only evidence that you personally witnessed or you personally can authenticate. It requires first hand eye witness accounts or videos/pictures that you can authenticate as not being tampered with. So, I propose that we try to do this by telling our stories and showing our pictures and videos. Maybe we'll convince others who can look at this subject objectively and actually weigh the evidence as they would when determining whether someone murdered some one else.

I'll go first:


Story 1: When I was a younger kid my grandmother just died. My entire family was sitting around the table eating breakfast. We had a gallon of milk sitting at the edge of the table. That is when the lid of the milk started popping off the gallon going about six inches in the air and landing back on the milk gallon over and over again.

Story 2: Again, right after my grandmother died. She died of colon cancer, which spread to her lungs from smoking cigarettes. At the time my mom smoked. It was the morning and I was the only one up. I was going to eat cereal. In order to better illustrate this I'm giong to draw what my parent's house looked like at the time.

Ashtray area/Dishwasher/sink/drying rack
--------------------------------------
I_____________________I
Ime Cereal in here
------------------------------------------
back wall

(Ignore the solid lines, they are there only to make the space between that area. The area itself was open). Okay. So, I was heading to get the cereal. My dad had done the dishes the night before, including cleaning my mom's ash tray. It was sitting next to the drying rack face up drying. All of a suddenly the ashtray popped up and flipped over. This scared the crap outta me so I ran.


Story 3: This story is a bit more abstract but still happened. Again, this is the morning. I cleaned the basement because I wanted to surprise my parents. It was always a mess. Anyways, we had shelves in our basement and a bunch of books. I placed the books on the shelves so they were tightly stacked. There wasn't much else on the shelves. Anyways, as I finished our basement was set up so that the shelves acted as a divider between the stairs and the rest of the basement, and they were facing the opposite wall. So, when you walked up the stairs you couldn't see what was on the shelves b/c you were just looking at the backside of the shelves (aka a wall). So, as I walked up the stairs I heard what sounded like the books all falling. I was a bit upset but thought oh well I can just clean it up later. And you know how it sounds when a bunch of books fall, its several different thumps on the floor but in rapid succession because they all didn't fall at the same moment. Well, it was distinctly the sound of books falling. Anyways, I went to go check on it. Nothing was on the ground anywhere.

Story 4: My friend and I found this huge bible that used to belong to my great grandmother. We were flipping through it admiring how big it was. We actually weren't reading it. Meanwhile, we had the TV on in my room. Well, as we flipped through it we discovered a picture of either my great grandmother or my great great grandmother as a younger person. We looked at the picture. Decided enough was enough. We took the picture and placed it back in the bible. Then we shut the bible. As we shut the bible on the picture the TV turned itself off.

edit on 14-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-6-2011 by Ryanp5555 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I watch "Ghost Adventures" on the travel channel with "Zak" showing ghost exist.

Good enough for me.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
I watch "Ghost Adventures" on the travel channel with "Zak" showing ghost exist.

Good enough for me.


That is a good show. Although Zak is a bit of a douche. I always find it hard to believe when they are like did you feel that. Or they are like something is inside of me. Other than that, I think the show does a good job. I'd like to see a show spend a significant amount of time in a haunted place. Like say a week.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I think scientists should do the ultimate study on people who claim to have experienced ghosts. They can collect important background information and do a psychological assessment of their mental health. Give them a polygraph test to verify they aren't simply making these stories up. This wouldn't prove the existence of ghosts but it would get skeptics past the "You're just #ing crazy" cop-out.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by BirdOfillOmen
I think scientists should do the ultimate study on people who claim to have experienced ghosts. They can collect important background information and do a psychological assessment of their mental health. Give them a polygraph test to verify they aren't simply making these stories up. This wouldn't prove the existence of ghosts but it would get skeptics past the "You're just #ing crazy" cop-out.


I would gladly go through a psychological exam and polygraph test. However, neither would be necessary to judge the merits of someone's story or whether or not they are telling the truth. I think that first hand accounts from certain posters, can be shown to be false or less likely to be believed based on how certain posters respond. Sorry for how poorly that was worded. Just as a jury can use their experience and knowledge to determine if someone is lying, so can the people on ATS; including those who have legitimate stories.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by BirdOfillOmen
 


The thing is with ghosts and other apparitions is, quite a lot of them can be put down to hallucinations induced by infrasound interference or chemical agents (i.e. CO poisoning)

So that wouldn't show up on a polygraph, because they truly believed what they saw was a ghost, even though it was no more than a hallucination.

Polygraphs aren't 100% accurate either (something like 4% failure rate) and people can be so good at lying that they pass even though they are not telling the truth
edit on 14/6/2011 by Griffo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Ryanp5555
 


There is a book I think you would greatly enjoy. It's called "Ghost Hunters: William James and the Search for Scientific Proof of Life After Death." Written by Deborah Blum. She explores the history of ghost hunting, and its a really interesting read. Made me think hard about scientific thought and the paranormal.

Basically, the book follows William James and his effort to get science to investigate stories of life after death (i.e., ghosts). Its a great book.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Griffo
 

True. I think its also been proven that electromagnetic radiation can cause strong hallucinations in people. But the ruling out of schizophrenia and pathological lying (by means other than just a polygraph test) in the subjects would be a good start.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by BirdOfillOmen
reply to post by Griffo
 

True. I think its also been proven that electromagnetic radiation can cause strong hallucinations in people. But the ruling out of schizophrenia and pathological lying (by means other than just a polygraph test) in the subjects would be a good start.


Even if you did that, ghosts aren't just limited to stories. There are pictures and videos of them; which is what I'm hoping some people have here.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


I will be sure to check it out! Thanks for the tip.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555

Originally posted by BirdOfillOmen
I think scientists should do the ultimate study on people who claim to have experienced ghosts. They can collect important background information and do a psychological assessment of their mental health. Give them a polygraph test to verify they aren't simply making these stories up. This wouldn't prove the existence of ghosts but it would get skeptics past the "You're just #ing crazy" cop-out.


I would gladly go through a psychological exam and polygraph test. However, neither would be necessary to judge the merits of someone's story or whether or not they are telling the truth. I think that first hand accounts from certain posters, can be shown to be false or less likely to be believed based on how certain posters respond. Sorry for how poorly that was worded. Just as a jury can use their experience and knowledge to determine if someone is lying, so can the people on ATS; including those who have legitimate stories.

That's not the problem. The problem is the ATS "jury" who have to have no pre conceived ideas on the subject (just like a jury that has no fore knowledge of the case). People will dismiss evidence that conflicts with their pre-conceived ideas and therefore the assessment of who is or who is not lying is purely subjective and biased towards their existing beliefs.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

Originally posted by Ryanp5555

Originally posted by BirdOfillOmen
I think scientists should do the ultimate study on people who claim to have experienced ghosts. They can collect important background information and do a psychological assessment of their mental health. Give them a polygraph test to verify they aren't simply making these stories up. This wouldn't prove the existence of ghosts but it would get skeptics past the "You're just #ing crazy" cop-out.


I would gladly go through a psychological exam and polygraph test. However, neither would be necessary to judge the merits of someone's story or whether or not they are telling the truth. I think that first hand accounts from certain posters, can be shown to be false or less likely to be believed based on how certain posters respond. Sorry for how poorly that was worded. Just as a jury can use their experience and knowledge to determine if someone is lying, so can the people on ATS; including those who have legitimate stories.

That's not the problem. The problem is the ATS "jury" who have to have no pre conceived ideas on the subject (just like a jury that has no fore knowledge of the case). People will dismiss evidence that conflicts with their pre-conceived ideas and therefore the assessment of who is or who is not lying is purely subjective and biased towards their existing beliefs.


Or, as in real life when it is impossible in some cases to not have a preconceived idea about the case, they can agree that they are capable of weighing the evidence objectively. I.e. it would be possible for them to agree that ghosts exist. We can get to the accuracy of the finder of fact when/if that stage ever happens. For now, we should focus on actual people's stories, pictures, movies, documents, government documents (if applicable), or whatever evidence is said first hand by a person. For instance, if you have a video of a government official being interviewed about ghosts (which i do not believe there is one) and he says they do exist, we can use that. It's up to the people who are capable of objectively viewing this both ways to decide.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Ryanp5555
 

Hi Ryan
Gr8 thread topic!

I've had plenty of weird experiences and would love to be able to PROVE other entities exist. We have proven things in our microscopic world ..So I believe that eventually , we will be able to prove these other entities exist without a shadow of doubt! Surely one day, some kind of technology will become available to see in other dimensions.. and we'll have invented the "dimension scope"


Look fwd to reading others experiences here and hopefully this thread will make folk think more outside of the box.

Love how you put this in a court room situation. Some folk are not 'sick' and truly are experiencers.
And you'd win in a court of law.

People do have their own belief systems which could hinder their personal spiritual growth: Hopefully, this thread will wake folk up.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
I watch "Ghost Adventures" on the travel channel with "Zak" showing ghost exist.

Good enough for me.


If you believe any thing you see on TV, especially those silly ghost hunter shows.. Than you my friend are under their control.

TV is a tool to control the thoughts of the weak, nothing more.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
I was thinking recently that it would be interesting if we could establish to a jury that Ghosts/SPIRITUAL entities really do exist. So, I started to think that I bet we could. In the US there are three standards of proof: preponderance of the evidence (the evidence more than likely suggests that there is ghosts 51% of evidence most likely); clear and convincing evidence (requires about 70% surety as to the evidence establishing ghosts; and proof beyond a reasonable doubt (if a reasonable person could doubt that the evidence establishes this after looking at it objectively than the standard has not been met). I think we can prove that ghosts exist beyond a reasonable doubt.


There's one BIG problem with proving the existence of ghosts to any jury........lack of repeatable scientific evidence in a lab.

Now don't get me wrong.......I don't disbelieve in ghosts.......in fact I have had a few experiences that I believe can be attributed to ghost or spirits.

What I am getting at is that I don't believe ghosts perform "on command" like those numerous "Ghost Hunter" tv programs like "Most Haunted" in the UK would have you believe.
Those programs are more aimed at entertainment.....after all it would make rather dull viewing if nothing remotely strange occurred during a 1-3 hour investigative program.......and they would lose their viewer ship and likely get axed.

As far as I am concerned ghosts are VERY rare and usually occur when you are least expecting anything to occur.

What are ghosts?.........well in my opinion genuine "ghosts", that aren't the result of infra sound or electromagnetic forces, dreams & hallucinations or plain old vivid imaginations..........are and probably will remain as mysterious a quantum physics currently is........indeed who is to say that "ghosts" and quantum physics aren't linked in some way.

edit on 14-6-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Logical one
 


There never has nor will there ever be a requirement that either side must prove repeatable scientific evidence in order to demonstrate something beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously, Ghosts cannot be proven scientifically. Instead, you have to look at accounts(testimonial evidence) and documents (photos/pictures). Certainly if you could prove that you were credible, and that all people were credible with their first hand accounts and pictures you could easily establish this to a jury that was remaining objective.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm the tech manager for a Paranormal group and we have a website and a youtube channel.

There isn't much on either one right now but I will keep adding stuff as I get permission to do so.

I would post links but every time I do the mods delete them.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I'd rather some neutral scientists doing their own studies and experiments than a jury looking at what already is there.

Then, even with evidence that there's "something" not currently registered by science, It would take a lot more to be able to prove exactly what that is.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I'd rather some neutral scientists doing their own studies and experiments than a jury looking at what already is there.

Then, even with evidence that there's "something" not currently registered by science, It would take a lot more to be able to prove exactly what that is.



LOL okay. That's fine. But here's the thing: I'm talking about using this board solely. So preferences aside, the most logical way to do this is via a "jury" type thing. I'm not talking about bringing something to an actual court. I'm talking about posting your stuff on this thread, as long as it truly happened to you or you took the picture/video/whatever. I'm hoping we could make some people question things.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555


There never has nor will there ever be a requirement that either side must prove repeatable scientific evidence in order to demonstrate something beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously, Ghosts cannot be proven scientifically. Instead, you have to look at accounts(testimonial evidence) and documents (photos/pictures). Certainly if you could prove that you were credible, and that all people were credible with their first hand accounts and pictures you could easily establish this to a jury that was remaining objective.


But how on Earth can you "prove" anything that anyone writes here as "credible".



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join