PROOF: Real-life case of demon possession documented

[cresur]

An American woman who levitated, demonstrated paranormal psychic powers and spoke foreign languages unknown to her was clearly demon possessed, according to a board-certified psychiatrist and associate professor of clinical psychiatry at New York Medical College.

News article (http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58835) - Original Paper (http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?print=1&did=0308-gallagher)

It was documented by nuns, some of whom also had medical and psychiatric training; and a christian psychiatrist, bitches! Where's your Darwin now‽

Ok, in all seriousness now: What the hell?

[Miss Whiplash]

An unnamed American woman? Wow! Just the proof the world is waiting for!

[Jon.]

Reported on WorldNutDaily, citing New Oxford Review, whose own masthead refers to it as "Catholicism's intellectual prizefighter" (because there is no greater intellect than, say, Mike Tyson!) and "Cheeky!"

Yeah, I won't be changing my worldview based on this one, thanks.

[Showmeproof]

I also find it interesting that most of the people to observe her had religous backrounds (nuns, preists). And the one psychiatrist that was most noted to observe these incidences is a Roman Catholic seminary. Can you get any more biased? And who were the "lay assistants" and what did their backrounds consist of? Also, what was their opinion on the matter? Interesting how they left that part out.

[godless dave]

I also find it interesting that most of the people to observe her had religous backrounds (nuns, preists). And the one psychiatrist that was most noted to observe these incidences is a Roman Catholic seminary. Can you get any more biased? And who were the "lay assistants" and what did their backrounds consist of? Also, what was their opinion on the matter? Interesting how they left that part out.

Those would all be legitimate questions if this article had appeared in a real news source. Since it appears in World Net Daily, there is a good chance that none of the nuns, priests, or psychiatrists even exist.

[JoeTheJuggler]

About the author: "Dr. Gallagher is the only American psychiatrist to have been a consistent U.S. delegate to the International Association of Exorcists, and has addressed its plenary session. "

So a guy who is an exorcist claims that he believes in demonic possession. So?

[Tanstaafl]

In other news today, Elvis is pregnant with twin aliens.

[four elevener]

I'm not convinced. Where was the head spinning and the vomit??

[Showmeproof]

In other news today, Elvis is pregnant with twin aliens.


When I saw a fat guy walking down the street and uncontrollably shaking his hips, I knew he looked familiar :)

[juryjone]

I understand that Dr. Gallagher's mother "sews socks that smell".

That is, unless "Julia" was saying something in another language that she couldn't know...

[plumjam]

Strange how when evidence is presented the materialists go into denial.

ETA: Actually, 'strange' is inaccurate. 'Entirely predictable' would have been a better choice.

[Gate2501]

Strange how when evidence is presented the materialists go into denial.

Bigfoot researcher sees Bigfoot!

You know that this is not evidence right?

If this is in fact *evidence* then I would have to say that not only is Bigfoot *proven* by *evidence*, but so is nessie, and every other beastie with a fanclub.

This Isn't evidence.

:p

[plumjam]

Bigfoot researcher sees Bigfoot!

You know that this is not evidence right?

If this is in fact *evidence* then I would have to say that not only is Bigfoot *proven* by *evidence*, but so is nessie, and every other beastie with a fanclub.

This Isn't evidence.

:p

Did you read the full article? Not a bigfoot researcher, a psychiatrist plus:

"Because of the complexity of this case, we assembled a team to assist. At varying points, this group comprised several qualified mental-health personnel, at least four Catholic priests, a deacon and his wife, two nuns (both nurses, one psychiatric), and several lay volunteers."

Is your position that all these people were lying?

[grayman]

When I saw a fat guy walking down the street and uncontrollably shaking his hips, I knew he looked familiar :)

And you may see him (http://www.vegas4locals.com/freebigelvis.html) at TAM6 (or in the neighborhood).

[Showmeproof]

Did you read the full article? Not a bigfoot researcher, a psychiatrist plus:

"Because of the complexity of this case, we assembled a team to assist. At varying points, this group comprised several qualified mental-health personnel, at least four Catholic priests, a deacon and his wife, two nuns (both nurses, one psychiatric), and several lay volunteers."

Is your position that all these people were lying?

Well, there is obviously a difference between outright lying, and stating what you truly believe to be true, despite the fact that it might not be true. Which one do you mean?

[Gate2501]

Did you read the full article? Not a bigfoot researcher, a psychiatrist plus:

"Because of the complexity of this case, we assembled a team to assist. At varying points, this group comprised several qualified mental-health personnel, at least four Catholic priests, a deacon and his wife, two nuns (both nurses, one psychiatric), and several lay volunteers."

Is your position that all these people were lying?

Some lying, some probably legitimately believing that a paranormal event was occurring.

The entire story is anecdotal. When dealing with anecdotes such as this, you must ask yourself. "Is it more likely that these people are lying/confused/delusional, or that a woman has been magically possessed by a demon from hell."

There is also the possibility that the entire story has been fabricated or wildly exaggerated (levitation lol).

[Showmeproof]

[QUOTE=grayman;3591951]And you may see him (http://www.vegas4locals.com/freebigelvis.html) at TAM6 (or in the neighborhood).[/QUOTE

I guess Elvis is still alive :)

[plumjam]

Some lying, some probably legitimately believing that a paranormal event was occurring.

The entire story is anecdotal. When dealing with anecdotes such as this, you must ask yourself. "Is it more likely that these people are lying/confused/delusional, or that a woman has been magically possessed by a demon from hell."
9 people, plus 2 severals. A several, to me, conservatively would be at least 4. So that's a total of at least 17 people who you are accusing of being liars, confused or delusional. Based on what, apart from your faith that these things can't possibly happen?

How do 17 people who are supposedly lying/confused/delusional manage to lie, confuse themselves or delude themselves into witnessing the same phenomena?
Is it some kind of conspiracy?


There is also the possibility that the entire story has been fabricated or wildly exaggerated (levitation lol).
Why would a practising psychiatrist risk his reputation by fabricating or wildly exaggerating?
Yeah, levitation, according to the psychiatrist it lasted for about 30 minutes, and it would appear that this was witnessed by at least 5 people.

And as for the "anecdotal", given that it was an event in someone's life how could it be anything other than anecdotal?

[JoeEllison]

No evidence, just lots of stupid for the superstitious to latch onto, and lie to themselves about.

Pathetic.

[JoeEllison]

And as for the "anecdotal", given that it was an event in someone's life how could it be anything other than anecdotal?
There's this thing called "video recording"... oh, wait, that's founded on reality-based science, and not the stupidity of ancient sheepherders, so maybe you aren't familiar with it.

[Gate2501]

9 people, plus 2 severals. A several, to me, conservatively would be at least 4. So that's a total of at least 17 people who you are accusing of being liars, confused or delusional. Based on what, apart from your faith that these things can't possibly happen?

How do 17 people who are supposedly lying/confused/delusional manage to lie, confuse themselves or delude themselves into witnessing the same phenomena?
Is it some kind of conspiracy?



Why would a practising psychiatrist risk his reputation by fabricating or wildly exaggerating?
Yeah, levitation, according to the psychiatrist it lasted for about 30 minutes, and it would appear that this was witnessed by at least 5 people.

And as for the "anecdotal", given that it was an event in someone's life how could it be anything other than anecdotal?

I do not mean to be a jerk, but you are seriously lacking in understanding precisely how anecdotal accounts are to be evaluated.

They are scientifically worthless for good reason. What if there was a news story on a UFOlogist website, that claimed that 50 people, some of them professionals, had talked to an alien?

You cannot trust these kinds of stories, there is simply no evidence, and you would need to be an utter fool to put faith in the anecdotes of any man when dealing with this extraordinary a tale.

You say that I am basing my belief on a "faith" that these things cannot possibly happen. The reality is that you are basing your belief in this anecdote on your own "faith" that they can.

[JoeEllison]

And, as an addendum to my earlier point, many cell phones also record video. Mine can record well over an hour of video with an add-on flash card.

[AliasN]

I understand that Dr. Gallagher's mother "sews socks that smell".
I have to admit that when I hear of people who are "possessed" I always think of Lorraine Newman, too. :)

I love the whole "a language they can't possibly know" schtick. Foreign languages might be scary, but they're not unknowable. A few words spoken in Latvian does not constitute some sort of supernatural ocurrence. How many cable stations in foreign languages can you pick up a few phrases from? Not to mention the internet. Heck, even on the transit system in my city you can learn a heck of a lot. Lamest claim ever.

[Foolmewunz]

Well, considering that one of the doctors (that self-same RC Seminary) is Richard E. Gallagher, who wrote the article for the Oxford whatsitsface, is there perhaps a little bias in all this?

Can anyone say "Confirmation Bias" in Latvian?


ETA: Oh, never mind. I see he's a confirmed exorcist. That makes it okay!

"a board-certified psychiatrist in private practice in Hawthorne, New York, and Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry at New York Medical College. He is also on the faculties of the Columbia University Psychoanalytic Institute and a Roman Catholic seminary. He is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Princeton University, magna cum laude in Classics, and trained in Psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine. Dr. Gallagher is the only American psychiatrist to have been a consistent U.S. delegate to the International Association of Exorcists, and has addressed its plenary session."

[plumjam]

I do not mean to be a jerk, but you are seriously lacking in understanding precisely how anecdotal accounts are to be evaluated.
So I guess we need to throw out most of history, autobiography, ...oh, and yes, the whole of your own life.. as worthless.

They are scientifically worthless for good reason. What if there was a news story on a UFOlogist website, that claimed that 50 people, some of them professionals, had talked to an alien?
Funny how 'skeptics' here are so willing to believe information on the web when it confirms their world view, but when it brings it into question the problem is that it's just stuff on the internet.
If that report happened I'd be interested to learn more, rather than scoffing and dismissing it. That frame of mind is completely against the spirit of inquiry (including science).

You cannot trust these kinds of stories, there is simply no evidence, and you would need to be an utter fool to put faith in the anecdotes of any man when dealing with this extraordinary a tale.
Extraordinary is in the eye of the beholder. To some materialists some events are so extraordinary that they are a priori ruled out. That is called blind faith.

You say that I am basing my belief on a "faith" that these things cannot possibly happen. The reality is that you are basing your belief in this anecdote on your own "faith" that they can.
No, I'm reading, with an open mind, a pretty impressive report about a case of possession. Of course, I don't 'know' it happened. But the knee-jerk denial from people here whenever any evidence that doesn't fit into their world view is very predictable, and it has nothing to do with science or reality. What it is maybe some psychologists need to investigate. Some kind of insecurity, perhaps.

[lionking]

Strange how when evidence is presented the materialists go into denial.

ETA: Actually, 'strange' is inaccurate. 'Entirely predictable' would have been a better choice.
If there was really "evidence" which stands up to scruitiny, do you think this would only be reported in an obscure and possibly dodgy internet journel three weeks ago? I mean levitation? Do you not think that someone in the mainstream press would pick this up?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

What no pictures? No a single one? No one named as confirming the levitation?

Let me guess -- when ever you show up with a camera, the evidence of possesion goes away.

Skeptical suggestion for exorcism -- keep a camera nearby at all times.

[JoeEllison]

What no pictures? No a single one? No one named as confirming the levitation?

Let me guess -- when ever you show up with a camera, the evidence of possesion goes away.

Skeptical suggestion for exorcism -- keep a camera nearby at all times.

No one in woo-woo land owns a cell phone.

[plumjam]

If there was really "evidence" which stands up to scruitiny, do you think this would only be reported in an obscure and possibly dodgy internet journel three weeks ago? I mean levitation? Do you not think that someone in the mainstream press would pick this up?

So you're sayng what? That the likelihood of a particular event having happened is determined by how the event is treated by the media? That would be silly.
I definitely just farted, but you won't be seeing that on CNN tomorrow over your cereal.
(hopefully)

[Space_Ed]

9 people, plus 2 severals. A several, to me, conservatively would be at least 4. So that's a total of at least 17 people who you are accusing of being liars, confused or delusional. Based on what, apart from your faith that these things can't possibly happen?

Excellent use of the word 'faith' there. I have noticed that a lot of people here, understandably, instantly assume that there has to be an explanation for freakish events like these other than what is being described.

Although I seriously doubt that this woman was possesed by 'the devil' it is still possible that these events really did occur and that the explanation for it is waaay too complex for us to even guess at at the moment.

[Space_Ed]

There's this thing called "video recording"... oh, wait, that's founded on reality-based science, and not the stupidity of ancient sheepherders, so maybe you aren't familiar with it.

Did you know that the Ptolemies who helped conquor Egypt with Alexander and ruled it for generations were descended from sheepherders? Clearly not stupid and clearly intelligent enough to work from nothing to ruling arguably the richest and most magnificent land in all the ancient world. Ancient does NOT necessarily equate to stupid!

[Gate2501]

So I guess we need to throw out most of history, autobiography, ...oh, and yes, the whole of your own life.. as worthless.


This is precisely what I mean when I say that you lack a basic understanding of how anecdotal evaluation functions.

If an anecdote is not extraordinary, or is the sole account of a piece of history that corroborates what evidence we do have, those anecdotes become plausible, and in some cases become recorded history.

When an anecdote is extraordinary and has no scientific evidence backing it up, then the anecdote becomes less plausible as the measure by which it is extraordinary increases.

In this case, I feel that demons from hell possessing a woman is extraordinary. This leads to the fact that the anecdote is much less plausible at a rate proportional to the extraordinariness. Since I feel that anecdotes of demons from hell are very, very, very extraordinary. This particular anecdote has been labeled as bullpucky in my mind. There is a chance that it could be true, but that chance is very, very, very low.

[Space_Ed]

You say that I am basing my belief on a "faith" that these things cannot possibly happen. The reality is that you are basing your belief in this anecdote on your own "faith" that they can.

I am sure you are wrong about him there.

[Space_Ed]

If that report happened I'd be interested to learn more, rather than scoffing and dismissing it. That frame of mind is completely against the spirit of inquiry (including science).

I'm with you 100%

[JoeEllison]

Did you know that the Ptolemies who helped conquor Egypt with Alexander and ruled it for generations were descended from sheepherders? Clearly not stupid and clearly intelligent enough to work from nothing to ruling arguably the richest and most magnificent land in all the ancient world. Ancient does NOT necessarily equate to stupid!

Nope... the smart parts stand the test of time. By the same token, their stupidity is no less stupid now than it was then. In fact, it is MORE STUPID now.

[Jeff Corey]

...No, I'm reading, with an open mind, a pretty impressive report about a case of possession. Of course, I don't 'know' it happened. But the knee-jerk denial from people here whenever any evidence that doesn't fit into their world view is very predictable, and it has nothing to do with science or reality. What it is maybe some psychologists need to investigate. Some kind of insecurity, perhaps.
I am a psychologist. I suggest you need to investigate why it is that you so readily accept flimsy evidence from an unreliable source for something that only crazy people believe in.

[JoeEllison]

This is precisely what I mean when I say that you lack a basic understanding of how anecdotal evaluation functions.

If an anecdote is not extraordinary, or is the sole account of a piece of history that corroborates what evidence we do have, those anecdotes become plausible, and in some cases become recorded history.

When an anecdote is extraordinary and has no scientific evidence backing it up, then the anecdote becomes less plausible as the measure by which it is extraordinary increases.

In this case, I feel that demons from hell possessing a woman is extraordinary. This leads to the fact that the anecdote is much less plausible at a rate proportional to the extraordinariness. Since I feel that anecdotes of demons from hell are very, very, very extraordinary. This particular anecdote has been labeled as bullpucky in my mind. There is a chance that it could be true, but that chance is very, very, very low.

There's another element to this... the "people videotape ALL weird crap" element.

The source of this is the Catholics, the richest organization on Earth. They can always afford top-of-the-line electronic equipment. Thinking purely logically, and extrapolating from my relatively meager resources, one would assume that the Catholic Church would provide its exorcists with the latest in video and audio hardware. An honest-to-Satan exorcism would count as an "extraordinary event" and ANYONE with the resources would record as much of it as possible.

The fact that they've not presented ANY evidence, leads me to believe that nothing much happened. Hell, I have spent more on the junk in this room than it would take to produce convincing FAKE evidence of a demonic possession. The Catholics can't even come up with a photo slideshow and an audio recording?

[JoeEllison]

I am a psychologist. I suggest you need to investigate why it is that you so readily accept flimsy evidence from an unreliable source for something that only crazy people believe in.
I'm only in the first semester of psychology, and I noticed the same thing. I even made note of it in another thread.

My guess is that some people don't fit into the mainstream, because of a lack of intellect or social skill. By embracing ideas outside of that mainstream, those people feel both a sense of belonging, and a sense of being superior to people who by any common measure are counted as their betters.

[lionking]

So you're sayng what? That the likelihood of a particular event having happened is determined by how the event is treated by the media? That would be silly.
I definitely just farted, but you won't be seeing that on CNN tomorrow over your cereal.
(hopefully)
No, but if you levitated in front of 17 people I would have expected it to be picked up somewhere. Pick your crusades better pj. The chances of this happening as reported in the OP is so low that it can be safely discarded, and the only question is whether the "witnesses" lied or were deluded.

[Gate2501]

There's another element to this... the "people videotape ALL weird crap" element.

The source of this is the Catholics, the richest organization on Earth. They can always afford top-of-the-line electronic equipment. Thinking purely logically, and extrapolating from my relatively meager resources, one would assume that the Catholic Church would provide its exorcists with the latest in video and audio hardware. An honest-to-Satan exorcism would count as an "extraordinary event" and ANYONE with the resources would record as much of it as possible.

The fact that they've not presented ANY evidence, leads me to believe that nothing much happened. Hell, I have spent more on the junk in this room than it would take to produce convincing FAKE evidence of a demonic possession. The Catholics can't even come up with a photo slideshow and an audio recording?

I agree that this makes it even further implausible, however I felt it best to address the anecdotal evaluation bit.

I would also say that the website that the story was posted on is yet another red flag, but it is a much weaker negative than the fact that we are talking about demons from hell, and no one brought anything but stories to the table.

[Jeff Corey]

I'm only in the first semester of psychology, and I noticed the same thing. I even made note of it in another thread.

My guess is that some people don't fit into the mainstream, because of a lack of intellect or social skill. By embracing ideas outside of that mainstream, those people feel both a sense of belonging, and a sense of being superior to people who by any common measure are counted as their betters.

After another eight years you might be less sure of those generalizations. Well, I am, anyway. There is always the possibility that the poster is only playing a role, like credulous moron, to elicit interesting answers from others. Or, it might be a mindworm from the planet Smegma that has infected a 14 year old in Wantonka Wisconsin who is frustrated because the parental units blocked his porn access.

[rwguinn]

Did you know that the Ptolemies who helped conquor Egypt with Alexander and ruled it for generations were descended from sheepherders? Clearly not stupid and clearly intelligent enough to work from nothing to ruling arguably the richest and most magnificent land in all the ancient world. Ancient does NOT necessarily equate to stupid!

Nice straw man there...


Would you accept the following headline as absolute trooth, too:
"Priest, Nuns witness Virgin Mary Appearance"

[JoeEllison]

After another eight years you might be less sure of those generalizations. Well, I am, anyway. There is always the possibility that the poster is only playing a role, like credulous moron, to elicit interesting answers from others. Or, it might be a mindworm from the planet Smegma that has infected a 14 year old in Wantonka Wisconsin who is frustrated because the parental units blocked his porn access.Ummm... no, I accept the various possibilities, and have lumped them under the category "troll". And, since I'm 15 years older than most of my class, I'm not too uncomfortable with my generalizations, having found them to be worth re-evaluating on specific occasions but certainly a good rough guide in the main.

Yes, there are always people playing a false role. Unfortunately, we cannot simply dismiss them as such for two very good reasons. First, they might NOT be faking. Secondly, someone who honestly agrees with them may have access to this conversation, and might take heed of the advice we give based on treating the first person as though they are honest.

[Jeff Corey]

So they may take heed of the fact that this credulous moron might be playing a role.

[JoeEllison]

So they may take heed of the fact that this credulous moron might be playing a role. And, if they themselves are NOT playing a role, they might consider the overall integrity and trustworthiness of those who ARE simply playing a role?

[Whack01]

Plumjam Please head over to http://www.DailyKos.com , http://www.alternet.org . Maybe then you'll understand why I dismiss very nearly everything I read on worldnetdaily. What we have here is a heavily biased source of blatant propaganda linking to another source of propaganda citing the propagandists as sources.

On another note, I believe that demonic possession is in fact possible ;) . I like to think that I would have a very strident bias in favor of any evidence to support the notion of demonic possession, as it would be a proof of the scriptures. However, I have never seen it nor to my knowledge experienced it, though I threw a few good temper tantrums as a kid.

As for why I dismiss the 17 witnesses. I dismiss them for the same reason I dismiss the proffessional parapsychologists that ran this experiment project alpha (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1CaAFI4FMI), as well as the reason I dismiss the 5,000+ people who would swear they saw a miracle at this fellows chruch (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4833149515093622763&q=benny+henn&total=4&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0).

[cresur]

*Yawn* plumjam, your posts are irrelevant. Please refrain from manifesting your superficially inflammatory thoughts in the future.

[lionking]

*Yawn* plumjam, your posts are irrelevant. Please refrain from manifesting your superficially inflammatory thoughts in the future.
Ok I disagreed with pj's posts here, but he has the right to post and your demand that he refrain is in fact the most inflammatory thing in this whole thread.

[chillzero]

Indeed. Please keep it civil, and do not attack members.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Indeed. Please keep it civil, and do not attack members.

Indeed. Indeed. There are prohibitions against this in the Bible. [Gord covers his crotch and looks around warily.] :(

[petra10]

Please dont insult our intelligence.In this day surely video, photo amd various other electronic devices can be used as evidence. Hearsay just doesnot cut it.

[rsaavedra]

9 people, plus 2 severals. A several, to me, conservatively would be at least 4. So that's a total of at least 17 people who you are accusing of being liars, confused or delusional.
Well, there are records indicating that at some points in history quite a few million people have been clearly lying, and/or confused, and/or delusional about certain topics.

[grayman]

Well, there are records indicating that at some points in history quite a few million people have been clearly lying, and/or confused, and/or delusional about certain topics.

Usually on weekends at churches, mosques, synagogues, temples...

[AliasN]

The other thing that makes me wary of this woman's veracity is the fact that she was described as "having been an avowed and prominent Satanist in her life". For these religious people this claim to be possessed and turning to Christianity to save her is very convincing to them.

Perhaps, but to me this points strongly to a motivation to take the urine with a bunch of credulous god-ites. You get to yell at priests, call nuns idiots and whores with them taking no actual offence (ooh, that devil's got such a potty mouth!). All you need to do is say "I don't remember saying that" when they ask you why.

Plus, you can laugh your butt off while they are chanting and praying for you and you're playing with the remote control on the thermostat. Just a theory.

[plumjam]

Ok I disagreed with pj's posts here, but he has the right to post and your demand that he refrain is in fact the most inflammatory thing in this whole thread.

Thanks Lionking. Very honourable of you.

[plumjam]

Please dont insult our intelligence.In this day surely video, photo amd various other electronic devices can be used as evidence. Hearsay just doesnot cut it.

Yes, if I'd been the investigator I'd have wanted lots of cameras there. Maybe there were. Probably there weren't. It would be understandable if the possessed person didn't want to be filmed making animal noises, writhing, verbally abusing people, etc...and then almost inevitably the footage being at some point plastered all over the internet.
I mean, would anyone here want that to happen to themselves?
(aside from the fetishists amongst you)

There is also something kind of disingenous going on. Some people are talking as though if there were video evidence they'd be likely to be convinced.
Be honest. No you wouldn't.
If a video of the exorcism were posted on youtube the entirely predictable reaction at JREF forum would be to look for any and every excuse to dismiss it as a hoax, hypnosis, acting, CGI effects, misleading editing, the use of fishing line to suspend the woman, a money-making exercise, an elaborate joke, a magicians trick...etc etc etc..

Folks, most of you here would not believe this kind of thing unless you were to witness it yourself, in person. And even then I reckon a good proportion would insist it was a trick that they hadn't quite yet worked out.
That, in a perverse kind of way, is part of the 'genius' of the Randi approach. If you don't want to believe something you witness yourself, you always have the get-out clause of believing it has to be trickery.. even if you have no idea how it could be.

For a lot of people no 'evidence' will suffice if it forces them to radically rethink a worldview which they are intellectually and emotionally strongly invested in.

[Gate2501]

There is also something kind of disingenous going on. Some people are talking as though if there were video evidence they'd be likely to be convinced.
Be honest. No you wouldn't.
If a video of the exorcism were posted on youtube the entirely predictable reaction at JREF forum would be to look for any and every excuse to dismiss it as a hoax, hypnosis, acting, CGI effects, misleading editing, the use of fishing line to suspend the woman, a money-making exercise, an elaborate joke, a magicians trick...etc etc etc..



I do not mean to be disingenuous at all, so I will just come right out and say, that if I saw a video of an exorcism with a floating woman screaming and making animal noises, I would think that it was likely a hoax.

CGI today has gotten so good that you really cannot even trust video unless it is reviewed by many neutral video editing experts. I would definitely say that, unless the video was taken by a neutral, objective party, in an extremely controlled environment, where all of the events taking place could be measured scientifically...

It would be about as believable to me as a Godzilla film.

In order for me to believe that a Demon from Hell had taken control of a humans body, I would need to understand how that is possible. The mechanisms by which it was controlling said human. I would also need to know exactly HOW the Demon was detected, and WHAT exactly it was.

This would all need to be peer reviewed of course and pass scrutiny.

[Showmeproof]

Yes, if I'd been the investigator I'd have wanted lots of cameras there. Maybe there were. Probably there weren't. It would be understandable if the possessed person didn't want to be filmed making animal noises, writhing, verbally abusing people, etc...and then almost inevitably the footage being at some point plastered all over the internet.
I mean, would anyone here want that to happen to themselves?
(aside from the fetishists amongst you)

There is also something kind of disingenous going on. Some people are talking as though if there were video evidence they'd be likely to be convinced.
Be honest. No you wouldn't.
If a video of the exorcism were posted on youtube the entirely predictable reaction at JREF forum would be to look for any and every excuse to dismiss it as a hoax, hypnosis, acting, CGI effects, misleading editing, the use of fishing line to suspend the woman, a money-making exercise, an elaborate joke, a magicians trick...etc etc etc..

Folks, most of you here would not believe this kind of thing unless you were to witness it yourself, in person. And even then I reckon a good proportion would insist it was a trick that they hadn't quite yet worked out.
That, in a perverse kind of way, is part of the 'genius' of the Randi approach. If you don't want to believe something you witness yourself, you always have the get-out clause of believing it has to be trickery.. even if you have no idea how it could be.

For a lot of people no 'evidence' will suffice if it forces them to radically rethink a worldview which they are intellectually and emotionally strongly invested in.

"It would be understandable if the possessed person didn't want to be filmed making animal noises, writhing, verbally abusing people, etc..."

For some reason, I cannot picture the possessed person having much say if they wanted to be filmed or not. For instance:

Priest: "so, can we record you and put the video on youtube?"
Possessed person: :::incessantly vomits green stuff::: "Please do not put my video on youtube. Thank you for your cooperation."

I really do not think the first thing on her mind is whether or not the video will be shown on youtube. For some strange reason, I think she is most concerned with ridding her body of DEMONS!! (that is if shes really possessed).

If a video was shown, I would still be skeptical. The only thing that would make me contemplate my beliefs is actually being there and even then I would still be somewhat skeptical.

[Czarcasm]

There is also something kind of disingenous going on. Some people are talking as though if there were video evidence they'd be likely to be convinced.
Be honest. No you wouldn't.
If a video of the exorcism were posted on youtube the entirely predictable reaction at JREF forum would be to look for any and every excuse to dismiss it as a hoax, hypnosis, acting, CGI effects, misleading editing, the use of fishing line to suspend the woman, a money-making exercise, an elaborate joke, a magicians trick...etc etc etc..
I am sick of this excuse for woos not backing up their claims. "Of course there is evidence, but you would only dismiss it,so I'm not going to show it to you!"

If you've got it, show it.
If you haven't got it, shut up about it.

[plumjam]

[QUOTE]"It would be understandable if the possessed person didn't want to be filmed making animal noises, writhing, verbally abusing people, etc..."

For some reason, I cannot picture the possessed person having much say if they wanted to be filmed or not. For instance:

Priest: "so, can we record you and put the video on youtube?"
Possessed person: :::incessantly vomits green stuff::: "Please do not put my video on youtube. Thank you for your cooperation."

I really do not think the first thing on her mind is whether or not the video will be shown on youtube. For some strange reason, I think she is most concerned with ridding her body of DEMONS!! (that is if shes really possessed).

Well there is the little matter of doctor/patient confidentiality. We already know she is anonymous, so she must have requested her name not be realeased. It's unlikely that someone would disagree to their name being released and simultaneously agree to their exorcism being filmed and released so people on internet forums could discuss it and mainly ridicule it.

If a video was shown, I would still be skeptical. The only thing that would make me contemplate my beliefs is actually being there and even then I would still be somewhat skeptical.
Yes, that's my point. I commend you for your honesty.

As an addendum to this I'll just say that this means that for people in your position there is no real point in learning second-hand about anything that you would find hard to incorporate into your worldview. So anything in that area you come across via books, articles, the media, the internet etc... will be kind of a waste of your time and effort paying any attention to.

[plumjam]

I am sick of this excuse for woos not backing up their claims. "Of course there is evidence, but you would only dismiss it,so I'm not going to show it to you!"

If you've got it, show it.
If you haven't got it, shut up about it.

Well there was the article written by the highly-qualified psychiatrist. Did you take that seriously, or primarily search for ways to dismiss it?

[Gate2501]

Well there was the article written by the highly-qualified psychiatrist. Did you take that seriously, or primarily search for ways to dismiss it?

I took it seriously, and I read the entire article.

It contained no evidence whatsoever. We are expected to believe the opinion of this professional as our proof apparently. But his opinion is biased as well.


Richard E. Gallagher, M.D., is a board-certified psychiatrist in private practice in Hawthorne, New York, and Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry at New York Medical College. He is also on the faculties of the Columbia University Psychoanalytic Institute and a Roman Catholic seminary. He is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Princeton University, magna cum laude in Classics, and trained in Psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine. Dr. Gallagher is the only American psychiatrist to have been a consistent U.S. delegate to the International Association of Exorcists, and has addressed its plenary session.


There are A LOT of woo woos out there who are professionals in their field.

I can remember a few years ago, a PhD mathematician stated that there was a 50% chance that god exists, because he either does or does not exist. This is obviously bunk, but the man had spent his entire life in the field of mathematics, and the theist crowd flocked to his statement as evidence, appealing to the authority of one biased man with a PhD.

edit: Actually he said it was 67%. He started with the 50/50 shot and worked from there using Bayes Theorem. A complete wackbag.

[Linda777NJ]

Did you read the full article? Not a Bigfoot researcher, a psychiatrist plus:

"Because of the complexity of this case, we assembled a team to assist. At varying points, this group comprised several qualified mental-health personnel, at least four Catholic priests, a deacon and his wife, two nuns (both nurses, one psychiatric), and several lay volunteers."

Is your position that all these people were lying?


Me an about 1000 other people saw David Copperfield make a car disappear! Some of the witnesses were military, doctors and shrink or two....

[Showmeproof]

[QUOTE=Showmeproof;3593881]
Well there is the little matter of doctor/patient confidentiality. We already know she is anonymous, so she must have requested her name not be realeased. It's unlikely that someone would disagree to their name being released and simultaneously agree to their exorcism being filmed and released so people on internet forums could discuss it and mainly ridicule it.


Yes, that's my point. I commend you for your honesty.

As an addendum to this I'll just say that this means that for people in your position there is no real point in learning second-hand about anything that you would find hard to incorporate into your worldview. So anything in that area you come across via books, articles, the media, the internet etc... will be kind of a waste of your time and effort paying any attention to.

Well, all the woo that is out there, possession is something that I would find extremely hard to believe in. For example, even though I currently do not believe in UFO'/aliens, I am definitely open to the possibility that there is life somewhere else. For some reason, the idea that there is life out there beyond earth does seem rather plausible, and I would definitely be open to reliable evidence. I admitt that I am more biased toward some woo more than other types.

[RayG]

How do 17 people who are supposedly lying/confused/delusional manage to lie, confuse themselves or delude themselves into witnessing the same phenomena?

You've heard of organized religion, right?

RayG

[Olowkow]

NEW OXFORD REVIEW: Catholicism's Intellectual Prizefighter
There are some common psychiatric conditions that are apt to mislead the clergy or an overly credulous public in this regard.


So, four priests, a deacon, his wife, two nuns and a shrink walk into a bar...uh, sorry, wrong story.:D

The overly credulous were in attendance it would seem to me.

Now, at least nine people are witnessing levitation of a human (not a magic show) for 30 minutes, the first time in modern history at least, that such an event occurs, and no one says,"Quick, find a camera! No one is going to believe this!" Yeah, right. Where are the transcripts of all the interviews, to find out if all witnessed the same thing...or, uhm, well everyone will have a different interpretation since it is a god thing.

This is "an honest to goodness real psychiatrist" folks, not an overly credulous idiot. This is the real McCoy, not your counterfeit demon. And Gallagher is out there treating loonies, when he should be treated himself. Just laughable. But of course I am biased since I don't believe in demons. Double scotch on the rocks, please.:boggled:

[plumjam]

Me an about 1000 other people saw David Copperfield make a car disappear! Some of the witnesses were military, doctors and shrink or two....

Did no one let you in on the fact that he is a professional stage magician?

[plumjam]

[QUOTE=plumjam;3593983]

Well, all the woo that is out there, possession is something that I would find extremely hard to believe in. For example, even though I currently do not believe in UFO'/aliens, I am definitely open to the possibility that there is life somewhere else. For some reason, the idea that there is life out there beyond earth does seem rather plausible, and I would definitely be open to reliable evidence. I admitt that I am more biased toward some woo more than other types.

Yeah, I can never understand why anyone would see the possibility of intelligent life from elsewhere in the universe visiting us as "woo". It seems entirely possible to me, and could be easily accommodated into the materialist paradigm. As for possession, I have no direct experience of it. It seems quite rare, but also seems to be reported in all kinds of cultures all over the world and in different eras. I do believe in soul/spirit, so there is nothing for me that would - in principle - rule the possibility out.
I may actually prefer that it didn't ever happen. I don't see possession of a person's body by a malevolent spirit as anything much to be glad about.

[plumjam]

I took it seriously, and I read the entire article.

It contained no evidence whatsoever. We are expected to believe the opinion of this professional as our proof apparently. But his opinion is biased as well.
In what form does information have to be presented you in order to qualify as evidence? I'm suspecting you respect the veracity of information represented in charts and graphs more than information represented by the written word. If so, what is the logical rationale behind that?
Info on a chart can just as easily be a lie as info in a sentence.

There are A LOT of woo woos out there who are professionals in their field.
Perhaps you would like to move to Salem and institute some Woo Trials.

I can remember a few years ago, a PhD mathematician stated that there was a 50% chance that god exists, because he either does or does not exist. This is obviously bunk, but the man had spent his entire life in the field of mathematics, and the theist crowd flocked to his statement as evidence, appealing to the authority of one biased man with a PhD.

edit: Actually he said it was 67%. He started with the 50/50 shot and worked from there using Bayes Theorem. A complete wackbag.
Yeah, I agree that something like that is nonsense. Hey! A bit of harmony between us ;)

[Wolrab]

So the only thing stopping us from absolute proof of demonic possession is HIPAA ?
Is exorcism now considered a medical procedure?

[joobz]

If someone told me a report that someone drove a car to work, I'd have no reason to doubt this. I've seen many cars. I've seen many people drive them. Nothing in that story is unreasonable to presume. It may be a complete lie, but it's not improbable.

If someone told me a report that people drove a flew a car to work, i'd be a bit more doubtful. I can envision a car like thing being modified to fly, and someone developing it. So, from a mechanistic standpoint, I"m not that incredulous. As long as the description of the "car" fit with my understanding of what a flying vehicle should have (e.g, some air foil type structure), i'd be willing to believe. If the descriptions given didn't fit with my understanding, I'd need to see more evidence before I believe the situation. Afterall, it wouldn't be hard to make something that "looked" like it flew but didn't actually.

Now if someone told me that they teleported to work, no amount of stories will convince me. I've never seen it. I do not know or understand any part of science that would make it practically possible. And I do know that stage magicians frequently perform acts that "look" like teleportation. So I would need very controlled settings and well documented evidence to prove that this story is true.

Nothing in this is contrary to a skeptical view or is unreasonable. Science is always going above and beyond to prove/disprove hypotheses. Why would we lower the bar for demon possessions? That unfair level of expectation seems unreasonable. It lessens the credibility of all involved and doesn't serve anyone.

If demon possession is real, then it is a threat and we should be treating it as such developing our tools to preven it. If demon possession isn't real, then sick people may be prevented from seeking medical help. It is simply immoral for people to avoid using the scientific method to prove/disprove their existence in effort to maintain thier beliefs.

[plumjam]

You've heard of organized religion, right?

RayG

yeah, I've also heard of belief in macro-evolution via the natural selection of random mutations

delusion/confusion/lies are not the special preserve of any one side of the debate. At least with the exorcism there was supposed to be some kind of positive observation made... yet with the above it remains pure faith in theory, with no observation whatsoever, and has convinced billions rather than just 17.

[Gate2501]

In what form does information have to be presented you in order to qualify as evidence? I'm suspecting you respect the veracity of information represented in charts and graphs more than information represented by the written word. If so, what is the logical rationale behind that?
Info on a chart can just as easily be a lie as info in a sentence.


It has nothing to do with the manner of presentation, it has to do with the type of data being presented.

I need to see data that explains exactly what the "Demon" is, and how it is detected. The data would need to not be based in faith, or anecdotes, but hard objective science.

Lets reverse this for a second.

What would you say, if on an atheist website, an article was posted saying that the Flying Spaghetti Monster had been witnessed interacting with a human. The witnesses are exactly the same as in this story, however the religious faith of the witnesses is reversed(theists become atheists).

Would you think that this was valid evidence that the person had actually encountered the FSM? Or would you think that it was just an anecdotal account of an extraordinary event and therefore was implausible to the point of nigh impossibility?

You cannot accept one groups extraordinary anecdotes as valid evidence and not another's. As I have said previously, there are MANY PhDs and MDs out there that are into some serious woo, so you cannot appeal to the authority of the witness when all that you are dealing with is an anecdote. You also cannot appeal to the amount of witnesses. You need real scientific evidence.

If you accept this story to be probable, then you have no choice but to accept the anecdotes of every group of woo woos, of all religions, monsters and beasties...

Anecdotes are not evidence, no matter whose mouth they are coming from.

[plumjam]

Joobz, the only way out of your dilemma is to become a catholic priest, train as an exorcist, and go and see for yourself. I'll lend you my camcorder into the bargain. ;)

If through your experiences you became convinced it was real, what do you think your chances of convincing the majority here would be?

[JoeEllison]

Basically, it comes down to the fact that some people are deeply gullible, and consider their flaw to actually make them somehow more wise than people who are less gullible than they are.

[plumjam]

It has nothing to do with the manner of presentation, it has to do with the type of data being presented.

Ah, you mean that you'd give less value to types of data that you, as an individual, did not want to believe in. At least you're honest.

I need to see data that explains exactly what the "Demon" is, and how it is detected. The data would need to not be based in faith, or anecdotes, but hard objective science.
Have you seen any data that explains exactly what musical beauty is, and how it is detected? I think you haven't. To be consistent you would have to believe that no sound arrangements are any more or less beautiful than any others.
Have you seen data that explains exactly what a human consciousness is? No, you haven't.. and we have been all over the place for aeons, much more common than demons.
You are asking for the completely unrealistic.

Lets reverse this for a second.
What would you say, if on an atheist website, an article was posted saying that the Flying Spaghetti Monster had been witnessed interacting with a human. The witnesses are exactly the same as in this story, however the religious faith of the witnesses is reversed(theists become atheists).
My view would be informed by a much wider perspective. Flying Spaghetti Monsters AFAIK have not once been experienced or reported by any single human being, or group, in any culture, in any geographical location, in the whole of known human history.
On the other hand demonic possessions have been experienced and reported by a lot of different human individuals and groups, all over the world, in different cultures and different eras. How else do you think the whole 'art' of exorcism has developed in so many cultures, some of them entirely independently of influence from other cultures?

So a priori, due to the lessons of history and culture, demonic possession is a much more plausible prospect than the advent of the flying spaghetti monster.

That said, I would not automatically dismiss these reports of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Unlike dogmatic materialists I do not pretend omniscience as to what can and cannot exist in reality. I would properly investigate the reports of the SpagMon.

Would you think that this was valid evidence that the person had actually encountered the FSM? Or would you think that it was just an anecdotal account of an extraordinary event and therefore was implausible to the point of nigh impossibility?
I never ever dismiss anything on the grounds of being anecdotal. Otherwise I would have to dismiss my whole life experience. As would you.
I would keep an open mind. I'd go and see, without scoffing and pronouncing from on high.


Anecdotes are not evidence, no matter whose mouth they are coming from.
So you discount 90% + of human history do you?

[Gate2501]

I never ever dismiss anything on the grounds of being anecdotal. Otherwise I would have to dismiss my whole life experience. As would you.
I would keep an open mind. I'd go and see, without scoffing and pronouncing from on high.



So you discount 90% + of human history do you?

Argh... this has been explained to you BY ME on page 1.

This is precisely what I mean when I say that you lack a basic understanding of how anecdotal evaluation functions.

If an anecdote is not extraordinary, or is the sole account of a piece of history that corroborates what evidence we do have, those anecdotes become plausible, and in some cases become recorded history.

When an anecdote is extraordinary and has no scientific evidence backing it up, then the anecdote becomes less plausible as the measure by which it is extraordinary increases.

In this case, I feel that demons from hell possessing a woman is extraordinary. This leads to the fact that the anecdote is much less plausible at a rate proportional to the extraordinariness. Since I feel that anecdotes of demons from hell are very, very, very extraordinary. This particular anecdote has been labeled as bullpucky in my mind. There is a chance that it could be true, but that chance is very, very, very low.

[plumjam]

Argh... this has been explained to you BY ME on page 1.

Extraordinary is to a not insignificant extent in the eye of the beholder, and is informed by their beliefs about reality. Thus to a rabid Nazi a jew who was deserving of survival would have to be a very extraordinary jew. Yet to us it would be only an extraordinary jew who was deserving of death (e.g. a jewish serial killer)
To a 17th century scientist electrons would be seen as extraordinary, yet now in the 21st century they are seen as entirely ordinary throughout society... yet how many of us have, for ourselves, directly observed an electron?
So, what is extraordinary/ordinary is largely to do with beliefs... a kind of prejudice, if you like. Those who want to cling to their worldview will reject the extraordinary at all costs.. hence the dogma about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence... that's an aid to clinging... and yeah, willful ignorance.

What is learning?
It is the movement of the extraordinary into the ordinary.
In other words the unsuspected, surprising, 'magical', 'impossible', anomalous is gradually accommodated into the ordinary.

[Rasmus]

Yes, if I'd been the investigator I'd have wanted lots of cameras there. Maybe there were. Probably there weren't.

Please explain to me why

a) there probably weren't any cameras there, even though you agree it is something one would want to have on site. I would want to have cameras present, too, and I cannot imagine why anyone would decide not to.

b) if there were any cameras present, it is not mentioned anywhere - never mind me the actual footage being published.

It would be understandable if the possessed person didn't want to be filmed making animal noises, writhing, verbally abusing people, etc...and then almost inevitably the footage being at some point plastered all over the internet.

This, too, requires some explanation. Maybe this is common exorcist-knowledge and I ought to know these things - but I don't.

How do you talk with a person that is possessed? I mean, we are talking about a person who is under the control of some other entity, to the point where that person's body no longer is subject to the usual physical laws of the universe. Yet, at the same time it is possible to talk to the person and to accurately understand their personal desires - as opposed to the possessing entity just making the person say stuff?

I mean, would anyone here want that to happen to themselves?
(aside from the fetishists amongst you)

If I suffered under a rare disease or was somehow subject to something extraordinary as a possession: Yes, I would want it to be documented in as much detail as possible. In the case of a possession by another entity it would be so important that I might neglect some aspects of my personal safety, even.

It would be quite simple to have the video modified in a way that would not allow anyone to identify me, so no problem there. (Never mind the ridiculous idea that I would be worried about a silly video of me after having possessed by a demon. It sounds like a kinda drastic thing to go through, a life changing event and I wouldn't give a ******* about a silly video!)

There is also something kind of disingenous going on. Some people are talking as though if there were video evidence they'd be likely to be convinced.
Be honest. No you wouldn't.

No, I wouldn't. Else I would have been convinced a long time ago. Right after seeing "the Exorcist" for the first time, in fact.

Necessary and sufficient conditions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_sufficient_conditions)

If a video of the exorcism were posted on youtube the entirely predictable reaction at JREF forum would be to look for any and every excuse to dismiss it as a hoax, hypnosis, acting, CGI effects, misleading editing, the use of fishing line to suspend the woman, a money-making exercise, an elaborate joke, a magicians trick...etc etc etc..

Yes. So?

Folks, most of you here would not believe this kind of thing unless you were to witness it yourself, in person. And even then I reckon a good proportion would insist it was a trick that they hadn't quite yet worked out.
That, in a perverse kind of way, is part of the 'genius' of the Randi approach. If you don't want to believe something you witness yourself, you always have the get-out clause of believing it has to be trickery.. even if you have no idea how it could be.

Funny, that.

What you seem not to understand is that not only wouldn't I have any idea how the trickery is acomplished, I would also not have any idea how something like that could be achieved for real.

But I do know that trickery is possible. (I saw The Exorcist, remember?) So of course I will assume that it is trickery.

If you watch a magician and can't figure out how he cut the lady in half, would your explanation involve "real magic"?

On second thought: Never mind that, I'm afraid of having to listen to your answer.

For a lot of people no 'evidence' will suffice if it forces them to radically rethink a worldview which they are intellectually and emotionally strongly invested in.

You know what?


We'll talk about that when there is a video of this possession and the exorcism available, okay?

[soulhill]

Do you know what would be great proof? A clear explanation of the mechanics demons employ to levitate. They can head spin and speak Latin all they like, but if they can help me get a flying car, then I'm ready to believe.

[Gilmar]

I wonder how much mass a levitating demon-possessee can carry? Could we finally have flying cars by carefully strapping them to the undercarriage? For propulsion, a nozzle could spray holy water at them so they'd try to move away from it.

Edit: Dang, Soulhill beat me to the flying car idea!

[rsaavedra]

How do you talk with a person that is possessed? I mean, we are talking about a person who is under the control of some other entity, to the point where that person's body no longer is subject to the usual physical laws of the universe. Yet, at the same time it is possible to talk to the person and to accurately understand their personal desires - as opposed to the possessing entity just making the person say stuff?

Filthy demon: (in growling voice) damn you priests of lies, I will so enjoy your torture when I have you in hell (makes the nice possessed and levitating lady puke at their faces)

Priest: (In solemn voice) We command you to leave this body and go back to the shadows from whence you came..

(Priest throws some water at the levitating lady, and the water boils when touching her vomit...)

Filthy demon: AAAARRRRGHH!....

Priest: We command you, demon of darkness, to leave this body. But before you go, we need to ask you a favor. We want to post videos of this demonizing process on youtube as proof of the existence of demonic possessions. We are not sure whether this nice lady you are possessing agrees with that. It could be taken as an invasion of privacy, you know. Do you mind asking her, and letting us know whether she is ok with this?

(Priest throws some water again...)

Filthy demon: AAAAARRRRGHHHH... ok one second.

(Lady's head starts spinning like crazy while vomit splatters all over the place)

(After a couple of minutes the head stops spinning)

Filthy demon: No she is not ok, she says this ordeal looks way too messy, so she'd rather have the video herself, but not post it on youtube. But hey don't worry, this event will certainly make the news, you gullible believers will make sure of that. There will be discussions about this event even on skeptics forums, HA HA HA HA HA!!!

Priest: Ok now filthy demon, I command you to leave! (Threatens to throw some more water...)

Filthy demon: Ok, bye.

[Showmeproof]

If I was possessed, I would want to be possessed by Richard Dawson (host from family feud from the 70's) when he dies. He used to practically make out with all the female contestants. He was a ladies man.

[joobz]

Joobz, the only way out of your dilemma is to become a catholic priest, train as an exorcist, and go and see for yourself. I'll lend you my camcorder into the bargain. ;)

If through your experiences you became convinced it was real, what do you think your chances of convincing the majority here would be?
That's an unusual set of requirements. Why would I need to be a catholic priest to be convinced?

I don't need to be a doctor to know cancer is real.
I don't need to be a psychiatric to know that mental illness is real.
I don't need to be a pilot to know planes are real and flying is possible.
I don't need to be a woman to know that child birth is real.
I don't need to be a man to know that erections are real.

If it is real, you can document the set of cases and provide enough physical evidence that it is real. There are many medical conditions and events that were considered mere Legends until they were well documented. I'd have no problem being convinced they are real once the evidence demonstrates it. But, as has been already stated, You would also have to prove the existence of demons. This can occur in tandem, but would need to be proven.

Again, Why should we lower the standard of evidence for demon possession compared to other things? Before a drug goes on the market, it has to under go under a minimum of 5 levels of testing.
1. Prove conclusively effective in blinded animal studies
2. Prove that it is not harmful (phase 1)
3. Prove conclusively that the drug does what it says it does in double blind trial (Phase 2, Small scale).
4. PRove conclusively that the drug does what it says it does in a large randomized multicenter double blind trial and that it doesn't induce severe side effects (Phase 3)
5. Prove that after market, pateints are responding well and no major previously undetected side effects arise (Phase 4).

I'm not even asking for that level of testing. The level that we demand of modern medicine. I'm simply asking, provide the evidence that it is real. It's an easy thing to do. IF it can't be done, I think that gives us the answer, don't you?

[imjohn]

I know a man who believes strongly in demonic possession and has taken part in more than one exorcism.

I have the greatest respect and admiration for this individual, and know him to be a kind honorable, honest human being.

I also believe in the matter of demonic possession and exorcism he is irrational.

[Miss Whiplash]

This incident didn't involve large spiders did it?

[I Ratant]

"9 people, plus 2 severals. A several, to me, conservatively would be at least 4. So that's a total of at least 17 people who you are accusing of being liars, confused or delusional."
.
Tens of thousands of the faithful saw the sun's gyrations at Fatima.
Oddly, the millions involved in WWI,another outdoor activity just a country away failed to notice anything unusual that day.
Peer pressure can make people "see" what their peers have already reported, if only to be seen as with the group.
The religious experience does this to people.
And of course, there's way-back-when ...
"2 "Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, sun stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, moon upon Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies."
Another odd event unremarked by anyone else in the immediate area... Egyptian astronomers, Babylonian astronomers, and on the other side of world, the Chinese astronomers failed to notice the long night.

[Moochie]

Wasn't the case mentioned in the OP covered here some time ago? I remember a link to some Catholic journal which had the entire story as written by the psychiatrist.

M.