Does paranormal exist?

I think both ghosts and aliens are real. I KNOW they are, no one will change my mind. It's just some random personal certainty.

reply to post by wildtimes


Believe what you want, your little or holy book, or simple example that there is no single proof of paranormal so far, be in on Randi's challenge or on any other TV show.

Now, let's rise stakes a bit more....

Why all of those things happen only when person is ALONE? Why something really interesting and paranormal does not happen anywhere in public space, in front of group of people?!

What is purpose of those paranormal activity? Just to scare medium?

Really like to learn more... please explain it to me.


@Lunette - if ghosts were real - they would not be ghosts, would they?

reply to post by SuperFrog


SuperFrog, have you ever experienced something you cannot explain, something so bizarre that it could be something paranormal?

I suspect not.

When you do you will question everything you ever thought about the hallucination, sleep paralysis, half awake dreaming explanations.

Only those who have experienced the extreme weird can question science's mundane explanations.

reply to post by SuperFrog


No, I am not a believer in Dawkins. I have my favorites, but he is not one of them.

I do know that what I have experienced in my 40 years is something you haven't. That is evident.

reply to post by SuperFrog

Why all of those things happen only when person is ALONE? Why something really interesting and paranormal does not happen anywhere in public space, in front of group of people?!

What is purpose of those paranormal activity? Just to scare medium?

Really like to learn more... please explain it to me.

You have obviously never experienced nor have you investigated for yourself at lengths these questions you ask on ATS. Why do you want to be spoon fed? Google what you would like to know and then decide for yourself.

I am not trying to offend you in any way shape or form.

For some... paranormal is actually normal.

Have you ever studied quantum physics? Some of it seems pretty paranormal. lol Spooky..

Our reality, our Universe, is paranormal dude. It is what it is.

MamaJ
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

No, I am not a believer in Dawkins. I have my favorites, but he is not one of them.

I do know that what I have experienced in my 40 years is something you haven't. That is evident.

I have not asked you if you believe in Dawkins, but have you seen his TV show. It starts with astrology.

Apparently as many here have suggested, I have not experience any of those paranormal things.

For those interested, here is interesting video, full of paranormal stuff...

therealguyfawkes

.. especially as materialist "science" has been making that claim for hundreds of years--ever since they thought the earth was flat and the galaxy was geocentric--and they haven't been right yet.

Science: believing it has everything figured out--categorized and cataloged in neat little boxes with fancy labels, since time began...

Sorry to nitpick, but you've got some blatantly wrong statements going on.

Most true scientists never make comments like that, they understand that their knowledge can, and likely will, change over time as new information is learned and experimentation bares new results. There's a reason we have the whole hypothesis-theory-fact sequence.

Likewise science, as we know it, hasn't really existed since time began. And while it does love to categorize and label, that is kind of necessary to - oh I dunno - keep track of all the things we learned.

The only way to claim that's been happening since the beginning of time, or at least human history, is if you claim every spiritualist, shaman, witch doctor, priest, pope, witch, etcetera has also been a scientist; as they all have said at some point or another that they know the "Truth" and what the world is really all about.

Oh, they also like to categorize and label too. Last time I checked, I've seen dozens of different names for God(s), Angels, Demons, creatures, solar eclipses, lunar eclipses, the human spirit, magic, the soul, ki, chi, cosmic energy, dark matter....the list goes on and on.

As to the OP:

I am a very logical, scientifically minded person. The paranormal experiences we have in life are just that, experiences -beyond- our normal range, and usually ones that don't have a scientific explanation. This doesn't necessarily imply they are mystical, magical, demonic or angelic in nature. It doesn't imply they aren't either.

I have had had a number, a rather large number, of pretty strong and strange experiences. Ones that forced me to consider that much of what we know is only the surface layer. Hell, I have a thread about them on this subforum. However, as a rational human being, I owe it to myself and to society to evaluate each and every experience I have against all its possible causes before concluding it is "beyond normal" and label it as paranormal.

Is there something in our reality that escapes our daily perception? Yes, I believe so. Can we gain the knowledge and testing to prove it? Yes, I believe so - but I also believe many people are against such methods, because they don't want "science" to explain this mystical event, many refuse to believe it can. Which saddens me, because understanding something better doesn't diminish its significance at all in my mind. Then again there are some things we might just not be ready to understand yet.

So: Do I think that the apparition of a women I saw last weekend while working in a theater's auditorium, out of the corner of my eye, was a ghost? Considering that there is a history of sightings in this building with "her" I'd say yes, I do think it was. But that doesn't mean I did check the area, check the lighting off the glass in the room I saw it, and do what I could to see if I could replicate it through normal means. By failing to find a method to replicate it, that makes it more likely to have been a real event, and all the more poignant to me.


Do I think it's harmless? Not necessarily. There has been a lot of anecdotal evidence that indicate there could be malicious intent behind some of it. That doesn't mean it's all "evil" either.

Why do people get offended? The same reason Christians get offended, or Aethists get offended, or ANY human being gets offended: it's in our nature to become offended when someone challenges or mocks our beliefs. If it is something someone believes in wholeheartedly, they are going to get offended at some point if someone else comes along and tells them its all bullcrap and then continues to try to press them on it.

MamaJ
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

You have obviously never experienced nor have you investigated for yourself at lengths these questions you ask on ATS. Why do you want to be spoon fed? Google what you would like to know and then decide for yourself.

I am not trying to offend you in any way shape or form.

For some... paranormal is actually normal.

Have you ever studied quantum physics? Some of it seems pretty paranormal. lol Spooky..

Our reality, our Universe, is paranormal dude. It is what it is.

As atheist, I had to learn quite a lot about religion. I would say that i probably know more then most of religious people.

The same with paranormal. For me it was very interesting, since as kid I got hold of book called Parallel World (B. D. Benedikt) and made me research all those things.

I am not proving that paranormal does not exist, but I really would love if someone proves me that indeed it does exists.

EDIT: There is nothing spooky about about quantum physics.

reply to post by SuperFrog


That video was boring. haha. Sorry but it is.

I simply do not connect with people like Dawkins. Closed minded people that believe stagnant science is good, is again, boring.

Science has not advanced as it should, in my opinion because of people just like him. There is a lot science cannot explain and it's something that Dawkins and his fans need to get over.

We need more out of the box thinkers. The ones we do have is being and will be looked down upon first by the scientific community however I know one day, hopefully soon, one will break through the box and prove what most of us know to be true.

The unknown to some is scary, but for others it confirms there is a lot left to learn. Science unfortunately is still in the infant stage. We have a lot to learn and someone will break the box wide open. Its inevitable.

Everything evolves. Science will too.

SuperFrog

MamaJ
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

You have obviously never experienced nor have you investigated for yourself at lengths these questions you ask on ATS. Why do you want to be spoon fed? Google what you would like to know and then decide for yourself.

I am not trying to offend you in any way shape or form.

For some... paranormal is actually normal.

Have you ever studied quantum physics? Some of it seems pretty paranormal. lol Spooky..

Our reality, our Universe, is paranormal dude. It is what it is.

As atheist, I had to learn quite a lot about religion. I would say that i probably know more then most of religious people.

The same with paranormal. For me it was very interesting, since as kid I got hold of book called Parallel World (B. D. Benedikt) and made me research all those things.

I am not proving that paranormal does not exist, but I really would love if someone proves me that indeed it does exists.

EDIT: There is nothing spooky about about quantum physics.

edit on 13-11-2013 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)

Like Einstein, Schrödinger was dissatisfied with the concept of entanglement, because it seemed to violate the speed limit on the transmission of information implicit in the theory of relativity.[18] Einstein later famously derided entanglement as "spukhafte Fernwirkung"[19] or "spooky action at a distance."

en.wikipedia.org...

Have you not ever heard it being described as "Spooky"???

I can understand why you are on the fence and can understand others position, like Dawkins.

Thing is for me... I have experienced things I could not and cannot explain. Science cannot explain what I have felt and witnessed. It doesn't matter to me that they can't. What matters is that I know they are real experiences.

Life is all about experience.... the eye of the beholder.

Why do some experience while others do not? Experience is either needed or not.

Mamaj,

I really wonder if we are talking about the same video. Here is first part of enemies of reason, interestingly called 'Slaves to Superstition '.



You would really call someone like him 'close-minded'?! Interesting...

Your so called experience, in my opinion is the same as some can 'experience religion'. Something you believe, but most likely it would be explainable scientifically (or medically) given condition and someone's mind status.

Quantum physics is today described by physicist as complicated, but not so much spooky anymore. We are still learning it... One of my favorite scientists, Neil DeGrasse Tyson often talks about it in such a way that even normal person can grasp some basic meanings...

Here is his take on Psychics and Paranormal

If you think you got something, bring it to lab. If we can duplicate it, we call it a science. Until then - its people exploiting ignorance of other people.

reply to post by SuperFrog


We really are talking about the same videos. lol

You would really call someone like him 'close-minded'?! Interesting...

Your so called experience, in my opinion is the same as some can 'experience religion'. Something you believe, but most likely it would be explainable scientifically (or medically) given condition and someone's mind status.

Do I sense some defensiveness in your tone?

Look, my so called experiences (plural--more than one) is not superstition nor does it "attack" science. Paranoid Scientism is just as bad as paranoid Christendom.

I like Neil as well but again, he is strapped. The ones who want to "fit in" the box do not have what it takes to bring Science to another level all together.

"So sensitive" to others is how he explains psychic phenomena. Failing in the laboratory is a broad statement in my opinion.

What does a neuro-surgeon have to say who HAS experienced the unexplained? I am sure since he told his story he has been labeled all kinds of negative things... but he broke out of the box. Someone like him... I respect.

What is "Normal"? There is NO normal. This is the world we live in. Anything is possible.... that is the thought process by which I call OPEN.

The skeptics cannot explain the woman--the guardian angel he spoke with. The adoption story makes his story credible beyond scientific explanations. Just because science cannot explain something doesn't make it less real.

You have a spirit. You have a soul. You will one day be free from the burdens you carry on Earth. This I know OP.. and it will be proven to you when you take your last breath.

SuperFrog


I am not proving that paranormal does not exist, but I really would love if someone proves me that indeed it does exists.

you want PROOF?

ROFL

to provide you such would be absolutely pointless.

the problem with this proposal is that you are wishing to believe something shown to you rather than prove directly to yourself what is true.

think it through.

to acquire evidence that is reliable you must do it yourself.

otherwise you cannot know whether you've been tricked/fooled.

it is necessary with these matters to personally acquire proofs.

"seeing is believing" [as many who "saw" the sun revolves around the earth would have told you, once upon a time]
but "direct testing is knowledge"

if you are sincere in your curiosity and not a congenitally lazy materialist "transhuman"ist just trolling,
[if so read below + my sig]
then what you want is knowledge, not more beliefs.

PS google randi pedophile and learn a thing or 2


I'm also seeing that the anti-life/anti human transhumanist crowd really needs to update their playbook
as they're using long refuted arguments.
Debunking Common Skeptical Arguments Against Paranormal and Psychic Phenomena

This article rebuts the most common arguments made by skeptics regarding psychic phenomena and the paranormal, and shows the flaws and limitations in their thinking and methodology. I’ve listed their common arguments one by one and pointed out the problems in them based on years of experience in debating and discussing with them. Skeptics who use these arguments include honest doubters, cynics, debunkers, Atheists, Humanists, certain scientists bent on materialistic reductionist world views, those for whom science is their God (even though they won't admit it), scientific materialists, haters of religion, etc. With the exception of sensational pro-paranormal programs, these skeptics are often given the chance to present their arguments and explanations in the media, national magazines, and certain television programs, without rebuttal from the other side, even when their explanations contradict the facts of the case. As a result, there is often an imbalance in the presentation of paranormal and psychic phenomena in the media, leaving most viewers and believers uninformed. This article attempts to counteract the imbalance. It is written both for the education and knowledge of the believer who deals with skeptics, and for skeptics who are willing to hear counterarguments to their positions.

I have found certain "skeptical" arguments confusing. Part of the confusion seems to involve the use of certain words, such as "believe" and "evidence." Because of this, I have come to call people with a certain viewpoint "selective skeptics." They seem to be extremely skeptical of claims of the paranormal, but, are not equally skeptical in other areas, such as the claims of supposed "circlemaker" hoaxers.

The selective skeptics tend to use techniques similar to political spin doctors. They often setup their arguments by painting a picture of their opponents as "believers" in various paranormal claims. This hints that the claim is to be taken as an absolute belief. The suggested "spin" is that such a big claim must be proven absolutely. In most cases, I think, the word "belief" is not intended to be an absolute. It is not claimed to be a scientific fact that everyone should accept. In most cases the claim is simply that there is some evidence or reason to think that a certain phenomenon is paranormal.

Theories presented are often attacked as if they were claims of fact. The "spin" suggests that absolute proof must be given along with the theory, otherwise the theory is to be rejected. In my view, various theories should be presented, including non-paranormal theories, and then the evidence can be compared to the theories. Each person can determine for themselves which theory, if any, seems most supported by the evidence.

Selective skeptics sometimes say that there is no "evidence" at all to support certain paranormal claims. The "spin" seems to be that the "evidence" must absolutely prove the claim. In my view, the word "evidence" in these cases is intended more like that used in a court of law. The "evidence" can always be disputed. Judgments are made based on the convincing power of the evidence, but the judgments are not considered absolute. Yet, we act on the results, such as a death sentence based on a single reliable witness.

By carefully setting up the "spin," the selective skeptics attempt to put their opponents in the position of having the burden to "prove" the paranormal claim. The "spin" is that the selective skeptics must be considered "right," if such proof is not presented. The "spin" is that all science is on the side of the selective skeptics. As I see it, the selective skeptics simply have alternative theories, not a case that has been scientifically proven. They are in the same boat as the rest of us.

In the worst cases, the selective skeptics use the technique of ridicule. This is sometimes subtle, such as statements indicating that the opponent is childish or gullible. Another "spin" technique is to suggest the opponent's motive is to make money , get attention, or the like.

Another technique is to offer alternative explanations that fit with accepted views. In the case of crop circle formations, human hoaxing is the common explanation. There is nothing "wrong" with this, of course. But, one should keep in mind that it is just one theory that is also not conclusively proven.

In my view, the spin doctoring of the selective skeptics make them suspect. It would seem that they or those they follow intend to turn attention away from certain paranormal claims. For some reason, they seem bent on halting research into claims of the paranormal.

There may be "military" or "religious" reasons behind the position of the selective skeptics at the inner core. Howard Blum, in his "UFO" book, Out There, dealt with people in the secret elements of government. He proposed that such people approached the subject from a "national defense" point of view. If extra terrestrials do indeed exist, from their perspective, it is imperative that the information be kept secret. Otherwise, a high technology could fall into the hands of our enemies and put us at risk. Established religions may have reason to suppress information of a paranormal nature, as it may tend to pull followers away.

In my view, this is not the "proper" scientific approach. A true scientist is skeptical, yet he or she remains open minded. A true scientist does not approach a subject with an axe to grind, or an agenda to force. True scientists do not cause confusion by setting up "spins." They do not attempt to shut down investigations or attention to investigations with techniques of ridicule.

Imagine if such techniques were used in other areas, such as history, psychology, or sociology. Would we turn away from these areas of research because each claim cannot be absolutely, scientifically proven, or from fear of ridicule? I doubt it.

Do not be fooled. Most crop circle researchers are not claiming scientific proofs. They present evidence (that can be questioned), such as photographs and reports of crop circle formations, indicating that the phenomenon is worthy of further attention and research by those interested.

I say, be skeptical of the selective skeptics.

www.greatdreams.com...

I wonder what Neil or Dawkins would say about Colton's story? How did he KNOW his mom had miscarried his sister? There are too many stories that have no explanation from Science.



Our brains are not our consciousness. It is a transmitter while in the physical body... for our consciousness.