Why do only people who believe see "shadow people"?

[gelatin]

It seems that there are several explanations for why someone would see what is commonly referred to as a "shadow person". The wikipedia article states some good ones, and these are things that could affect anyone. However, it seems to me that it only happens to woo believers, which I find kind of strange. Is it that non-believers just write it off immediately and never discuss it?

I am 31, but I saw something when I was around 17. It was probably around 9 or 10 o'clock at night, and I was doing homework in my room. I was not extremely tired (although I can not recall how much or how little sleep I may have been getting at the time), nor had I ever done any drugs. I had come down the stairs from my well-lit attic bedroom and all the lights were off in the rest of the house below. I closed my bedroom door behind me, went to the kitchen and grabbed something from the fridge. I opened the door to my bedroom/attic, and at the top of the stairs was a black figure. It was just as is usually described, pure black (I recall it's form blocking the view of a window), and it was definitely in a form similar to that of a person.

It lingered for a few seconds and its entire body darted to the right (its left), where the stairwell wall blocked my view of it. The entire form moved, meaning that it did not step to the right. Here's the rub: I can distinctly recall the sound it made as it moved to the right. My room was carpeted and it made a noise as if it "scooted" on the carpet. I can't explain that one. Auditory hallucination, maybe.

I stood there for a maybe a minute, but I was not scared in the least bit and I made my way upstairs. And of course nothing was up there. I resided in that room for many years afterwards, and never saw or heard anything else out of the ordinary.

This is my only experience with something that would be considered to be "paranormal". I don't think it was, and it could have been any of the more sensible explanations, electromagnetic fields being the most likely I suppose.

Anyways, I'm a non-believer now, I wasn't necessarily when I was 17, but it really wasn't something I ever really thought about then. It's made me curious as to why these sort of experiences don't happen to more people considering the explanantions.

Any thoughts?

[Denver]

Any chance it was of similar shape to the fridge lightbulb?

One reason that I've heard given for unbelievers not seeing these things, is that their negative energy somehow drives the entities away (or perhaps the positive energy of the believers attracts them). A simpler explanation is that its dark, your eyes are trying to constantly adjust and pick out "differences" in the darkness, and you brain turns differences into shapes.

In the end, its just an anecdote, like a million others, with no other evidence. Video would be nice in these cases.

[gelatin]

Yea, I've thought about the fridge light thing. And that is a possibility, but to me that would cause a dark circular image (maybe?) when I opened the door to the lit room. Perhaps not. It could be chalked up to the firdge light, sure.

I'm not trying to portray my story as evidence of anything, I'm just using it start a conversation on something I find to be fascinating. Has anyone else myabe had a similar experience at all?

[Fnord]

I played futbol ("soccer") as a teenager. After one particularly nasty head-on collision, I began to see "Shadow People." It was later determined that a blood vessel in my eye had ruptured, and that the shadow I saw was actually a small clot floating around in my eyeball. Now that I'm in my fifties, I see more of these "floaters" as I get older. They are naturally-ocurring. Even though some people would swear that they see "Shadow People" (or "Ghosts"), I would suggest that they first have their eyes examined for internal debris, scratches on the cornea, or othe aberrations.

[Ysidro]

Believer: "OMG, a Shadow Person! AIIEE!"

Non-believer: "Huh, I wonder what that shadow was caused by. That was weird."

[Brattus]

Your remembering something that happened 14 years ago. A memory that shares space with 14 years of scifi and horror movies, books and stories you've seen or picked up along the way.
Perhaps your memory of that time has become a bit out of focus to what really occurred?
Like going back to a place you were at as a teenager and being amazed at how much smaller it is than you remembered.

[gelatin]

Yea yea, my experience could be a lot of things, and maybe I am misremembering the event. Regardless, my primary interest is in why these types of things tend to happen to people who believe it to be supernatural, but they tend to rarely ever happen to those who do not believe in such things. If there is a scientific explanation, then why aren't these events being reported more evenly throughout those who do and do not believe? Does that make sense? Is it just that no one talks about it?

I guess it's not really an answerable question, but those are the best kind.

[Brattus]

Believer: "OMG, a Shadow Person! AIIEE!"

Non-believer: "Huh, I wonder what that shadow was caused by. That was weird."

I believe this post gives you the answer you seek then.

[jasonpatterson]

I suppose that there are two explanations that make sense. The first, and the one that doesn't require us to explain an entirely new class of phenomena, is the response that was given above is the usual one for skeptics/believers.

The second is that people who are able to see these things tend to believe in them. I don't think that this is true, but it would explain the difference. The idea would be much like a color vision test. Only those with color vision can distinguish the number in the pattern of orange and green dots, so they are the only ones who see it.

Not surprisingly, I'm in favor of the former over the latter...

I wonder if it could have been your own shadow cast from the fridge light (or perhaps a passing car or some other changing light source.) That would explain the human form and might explain the sliding movement of the person as well, depending on the layout of the lights in the area. I just tried this in the doorway to my classroom and it definitely looked like my shadow slid across the wall when one of the two light sources that were illuminating the wall was blocked.

[bickerer]

I think that all of us (skeptics and believers) see things that are inexplicable, but the believers "rational explanation" is that it must be something supernatural. The answer to the question in the OP is that it isn't only believers who SEE these things, but it is only believers that attribute them to ghosties and ghoulies and bigfeet. The rest of us look for other causes, such as the ones that have already been listed, and, really, are much much more likely. I recall quite clearly seeing fairies dancing on a basement windowsill when I was about 6, but in hindsight, I'm pretty sure that it was a trick of the dimming evening light, coupled with being a sleepy 6 year old, and perhaps too much ice cream before bed. I would NEVER trot that story out as my personal and ridiculously far-fetched proof of fairies, but a more superstitious person might.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

I hit a ghost with my car, once. Really.

Being who and what I am, I went back after I stopped to figure out what had caused the event.

There was snow, tiny spherical... uhhh... flakes for lack of a better word, falling in a strictly delimited sheet about 18 inches thick across the road and nearby fields. What I had seen was my misaligned headlight shining up and to the left of my direction along the road illuminating the bits of snow falling across the road.

To this day, I can still remember the girl's face and gown.

How did that happen?

The brain is designed to make sense of stuff. In the absence of actual stuff, it's likely to fill in details from a common pool of similar entities from similar situations. In this case, my brain 'projected' a face and cloths onto the 'girl' I was about to run down with my car.

Instant ghost.

Seeing a shape in the dark, late at night, after coming in from a more brightly lit place? One explanation is the area of the eye where the optic nerve and a mess of blood vessels enter the eye. This large, spidery, hairy-looking area looks that way because the vessels obscure the seeing-businessey bits of the retina below them. it's also off to the side of the fovea, where you do most of your seeing, so if you try to look straight at it, it will swing away just as quickly as you move your eye.

(From the Vision and the Eye Image Gallery of the U. Florida website)
http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~avery/course/3400/vision/retina_picture_live.jpg (http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~avery/course/3400/gallery/gallery_vision.html)

Add to this that people are right-eyed, or left-eyed, and you get the general direction in which it will swing.

Your brain knows that there can't be an abstract, spidery, hairy entity standing at the top of your stairs (where you know there is a large, human-sized area full of nothing in particular through which you have recently walked) so it fills in details from your experiences, which means, human sized, capable of moving there by itself since you didn't put it there, and fairly ominous what with all that fuzzy hair and arms and things.

Unless your experiences differ significantly from other humans, that means another human. Instant Shadow Man... errr... Shadow Woman... Shadow Person... whatever.

As for the sound, people experience similar things all the time. You see something move and you hear typical house noise (creaks, clicks, water running in pipes, etc.) and suddenly you know that you have a rat in your roon large enough to move the thing you saw move.

Now, in this particular case, what our exemplar (let's call him Bob) actually saw move was a bit of paper in a draft, just coming out of his blind spot, and what Bob heard was a bit of a clunk from his house settling. His brain, knowing that he was alone in the house, added those details up to a rat large enough to move the bookcase on top of which the paper lay.

AAAIIIEEE! GIANT SUMATRAN RAT!!

Why?

There used to be three kinds of people in the world (and probably still are). One type, upon seeing and hearing something odd, ignored it, the second type had their attention instantly drawn to it, and the third pulled a Rincewind and immediately departed the area in all due haste... and maybe a bit more than that.

Of the three, when faced with an actual threat, only the latter two tended to survive long enough to reproduce. You are the progeny of the second type and have apparently inherited their survivey tendencies so your brain is set up to filter unknown stimuli looking for the largest practical threat.

You're a survivor. Enjoy!

[gelatin]

Actually I was walking from a dark room into a lit room, but it's probably all the same.

[Mainiac]

I see things out of the corners of my eyes all the time, it's happening more the older I get (I'm 45 now). It started to happen about 5 years ago and I never thought it was anything paranormal. It only happens when I move my eyes rapidly from side to side (such as looking from left to right) and when it's dark (at home in the evening for example). It's just old eyes, but to my brain it looks like dark "forms". If I was inclined to do such a thing, I could call them shadow people.

I never recall having this happen when I was younger, which is opposite from your experience.

[gelatin]

Also, I was looking straight up the stairs at what I perceived to be a completely black mass right in front of me. This definitely was not out of the corner of my eye or anything like that. And although the whole ordeal only lasted seconds (maybe 10 or 15, not sure) it was long enough to register without much of a question.

I gotta chalk it up to bad wiring in the attic. I really don't know.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Believer: "OMG, a Shadow Person! AIIEE!"

Non-believer: "Huh, I wonder what that shadow was caused by. That was weird."
And this, my friends, is purty much the entire story, not just of shadow people, but of:

Believer: "OMG, an NDE! There is an afterlife!"

Non-believer: "Huh, my brain sure did some weird things while I was having surgery."

~~ Paul

[Ysidro]

And this, my friends, is purty much the entire story, not just of shadow people, but of:

Believer: "OMG, an NDE! There is an afterlife!"

Non-believer: "Huh, my brain sure did some weird things while I was having surgery."

~~ Paul

'zactly. Some folks have made up their mind as soon as they experience something. Others are willing to put explanation on the back burner, pending more data.

[jasonpatterson]

I see things out of the corners of my eyes all the time, it's happening more the older I get (I'm 45 now). It started to happen about 5 years ago and I never thought it was anything paranormal. It only happens when I move my eyes rapidly from side to side (such as looking from left to right) and when it's dark (at home in the evening for example). It's just old eyes, but to my brain it looks like dark "forms". If I was inclined to do such a thing, I could call them shadow people.

I never recall having this happen when I was younger, which is opposite from your experience.

Have you visited an optometrist lately? Just a suggestion in case the floaters in your eyes are a sign of some sort of preventable deterioration going on. I get them all the time, have since I was a kid. Looking back and forth rapidly stirs them up from where they've settled at the bottom of your eyes. The same thing should happen if you stare downward for a while then look up at the sky.

[dingogirl]

My 8 year old sees shadow people. She also saw a headless man once. She's so scared she won't sleep in her room at night, even though she knows it's not real. She's a normal child and isn't religious or spiritual.

[Brattus]

My 8 year old sees shadow people. She also saw a headless man once. She's so scared she won't sleep in her room at night, even though she knows it's not real. She's a normal child and isn't religious or spiritual.

AWW To have the imagination of an 8 year old again.
You just have to love the minds of children.

[Sparhawk]

The best I've seen is driving home one night from the inlaws, my wife and I both observed a white ghostly body, floating about 5 feet off the ground, moving out of a side street and towards us.
I stopped the car dead in the middle of the road, neither my wife or I said a word. As it got close it began to be clearer what it was ...

A teenager with blond hair and a white hoodie jacket and pants riding a ... wait for it ...
:eye-poppi PENNY-FARTHING! :jaw-dropp

Weird and unusual yes, a ghost no.:o

[SezMe]

I must confess I had to look up penny-farthing...funny story.

[Carnivore]

I think that all of us (skeptics and believers) see things that are inexplicable, but the believers "rational explanation" is that it must be something supernatural. The answer to the question in the OP is that it isn't only believers who SEE these things, but it is only believers that attribute them to ghosties and ghoulies and bigfeet. The rest of us look for other causes, such as the ones that have already been listed, and, really, are much much more likely. I recall quite clearly seeing fairies dancing on a basement windowsill when I was about 6, but in hindsight, I'm pretty sure that it was a trick of the dimming evening light, coupled with being a sleepy 6 year old, and perhaps too much ice cream before bed. I would NEVER trot that story out as my personal and ridiculously far-fetched proof of fairies, but a more superstitious person might.

Yep.

When I was a kid (under 10) I used to see "shadow people" fairly often. It was always the same thing. Outdoors, bright sunlight and in the corner of my peripheral vision I would see something like the shadow of a running figure about 3 metres away. It was always just for a spit second, as the figure/ shadow moved from level with the side of my head in the opposite direction to where I was looking. At the same time, I would hear about a seconds worth of running footsteps.

Now as a youngster I was well interested in the paranormal; poltergheists, UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, you name it. Interestingly, I don't recall ever thinking that these experiences were paranormal - I just thought they were odd and couldn't work out what was causing them. I still get auditory hallucinations when I'm overtired. They've never worried me much, either.

[Limbo]

And this, my friends, is purty much the entire story, not just of shadow people, but of:

Believer: "OMG, an NDE! There is an afterlife!"

Non-believer: "Huh, my brain sure did some weird things while I was having surgery."

~~ Paul


Looks like your non-believer decides to believe it's all in his brain - case closed?

[paximperium]

Looks like your non-believerScience decides to believe conclude it's all in his brain - case closed? No. Research into delusion, hallucinations etc. are ongoing. Science keeps looking while woo-mongerers love to claim things based on their arrogant pet delusions.

[Denver]

My 8 year old sees shadow people. She also saw a headless man once. She's so scared she won't sleep in her room at night, even though she knows it's not real. She's a normal child and isn't religious or spiritual.

Just please don't let her anywhere near Chip Coffey.

[Erigena]

Yea yea, my experience could be a lot of things, and maybe I am misremembering the event. Regardless, my primary interest is in why these types of things tend to happen to people who believe it to be supernatural, but they tend to rarely ever happen to those who do not believe in such things. If there is a scientific explanation, then why aren't these events being reported more evenly throughout those who do and do not believe? Does that make sense? Is it just that no one talks about it?

I guess it's not really an answerable question, but those are the best kind.
Maybe it's not that nonbelievers don't experience things like that as often, but because they have already come to a rational decision about it, they don't discuss it as often. Believers are most likely looking for a paranormal explanation to attach to the experience consciously or not. As with anyone, if you think something unique has happened to you, it is likely you will talk about it.

I experienced what I assume to be sleep paralysis once which produced an audio and somewhat visual hallucination. When it happened, I already assumed it was sleep paralysis, but it was still a pretty cool experience, simply because it was something new. I was under a lot of stress at the time and I attribute it to that.

[makaya325]

I once saw something that I could not explain. The figure i saw had a clear outline, and looked like it had an invisible cloak on.

[Vortigern99]

I once saw something that I could not explain. The figure i saw had a clear outline, and looked like it had an invisible cloak on.

[eerie whispering]Harry Potter....[/eerie whispering]

[BenBurch]

Some people just have that part of the mind that makes dreams active while they are at least mostly awake.

[Vortigern99]

Hallucination is a known and studied phenomenon, throughout the history of humankind and across the globe. Different people apply different religious, paranormal or otherwise metaphysical interpretations to these hallucinations, depending on their (personal or cultural) belief systems.

[makaya325]

[eerie whispering]Harry Potter....[/eerie whispering]

Im dead serious lol. That was the first thing when i saw it. It reminded me of predator.

[SlayerofCliffracers]

More skeptical prejudice at work again. If you see something that is unusual there exists no automatic reason to deny the reality of what you saw.

Why do people have to be so prejudiced? :mad::mad::mad:

[makaya325]

More skeptical prejudice at work again. If you see something that is unusual there exists no automatic reason to deny the reality of what you saw.

Why do people have to be so prejudiced? :mad::mad::mad:

You are being biased my friend. When i posted my encounter here, i would have expected questioning of my sighting. That is ALRIGHT, because they have no idea what I did or didnt see. They are only offering explanations on what i might have seen. I myself am not sure of the identity of it.

[paximperium]

More skeptical prejudice at work again. If you see something that is unusual there exists no automatic reason to deny the reality of what you saw. It is not denial. You see, science doesn't work like that. If you see something there is NO reason to say that YOUR interpretation of it is true. Little things called hallucinations, illusions, delusions and false memories are all well known neurological deficits.

Why do people have to be so prejudiced? :mad::mad::mad:Reality is like that.

[paximperium]

Im dead serious lol. That was the first thing when i saw it. It reminded me of predator.
I've seen some very interesting mirages, some well demarcated, in winter time. I once saw a blurry shaped manshaped thing moving especially near twilight time.

Unlike most people's natural tendency to freak out and run away, especially woo-ist who would have claimed it was a "ghost". Instead, I walked up to it and saw that is was a hot air vent distorting the street lights.

Meh, actual curiosity is sometime less fanciful than magic thinking but at least you'll find the truth.

[makaya325]

I've seen some very interesting mirages, some well demarcated, in winter time. I once saw a blurry shaped manshaped thing moving especially near twilight time.

Unlike most people's natural tendency to freak out and run away, especially woo-ist who would have claimed it was a "ghost". Instead, I walked up to it and saw that is was a hot air vent distorting the street lights.

Meh, actual curiosity is sometime less fanciful than magic thinking but at least you'll find the truth.


That is true. I never thought it was a ghost, only that it was a Figure that had a Chameleon like Camoflauge. I can say for a fact that I did see SOMETHING, but I will not say it is Paranormal at all, since the Paranormal can not exist. I may have been wrong, but who knows?

[Glite]

I keep seeing little firefly lights in the front yard, probably just the porch light hitting my glasses and I'm seeing it out of the corner of my eye. But if there are fairies at the bottom of my front garden, I'd like them to do some yard work while they're out there. It would be a great time saver.

Our bodies, and brains love to play tricks, when I'm alone at the cottage in the middle of the winter, it's hard not to notice every noise and movement of branches outside the windows. Are there ghosts and whatnot taking up residence there? Doubtful, more likley an active imagination playing games with me while I'm all alone in the dark.

[Pup]

More skeptical prejudice at work again. If you see something that is unusual there exists no automatic reason to deny the reality of what you saw.

Well, the problem is, mild hallucinations, pareidola, floaters, sleep paralysis, optical illusions and such, really aren't all that unusual.

[pleclair]

The best I've seen is driving home one night from the inlaws, my wife and I both observed a white ghostly body, floating about 5 feet off the ground, moving out of a side street and towards us.
I stopped the car dead in the middle of the road, neither my wife or I said a word. As it got close it began to be clearer what it was ...

A teenager with blond hair and a white hoodie jacket and pants riding a ... wait for it ...
:eye-poppi PENNY-FARTHING! :jaw-dropp

Weird and unusual yes, a ghost no.:o

That is the best story of all time!! :p

[makaya325]

That is the best story of all time!! :p

Ditto that Pleclair! Spar, thank you for sharing your story. It really provides solid evidence that People's testimony contradict the actual event.

[jakesteele]

[QUOTE=gelatin;4713079]It seems that there are several explanations for why someone would see what is commonly referred to as a "shadow person". The wikipedia article states some good ones, and these are things that could affect anyone. However, it seems to me that it only happens to woo believers, which I find kind of strange. Is it that non-believers just write it off immediately and never discuss it?


It could be that they became 'believers/woo woo' after they experienced something like this.

[godless dave]

If you see something that is unusual there exists no automatic reason to deny the reality of what you saw.


Human perceptions are known to be fallible. Hell, we have blind spots right in the middle of each eye that our brain fills in with a best guess at what is there.

[Azimer the Mad]

It was actually me seeing a ghost when I was a kid that made me a skeptic.

I saw Batman.

When I was 8-10. He was in my room. He was a fuzzy, static, life size 2D image that was the exact image from the Nintendo game label.

So, remembering so stuff from the Daniel Cohen books I read, I said, "Huh. That's my brain hiccuping images into my vision. That's what most ghost sightings probably are."

[Sparhawk]

Second story.
While at University a group of us went to a Pizza Hut for lunch. We were a bit early, and it didn't look like anyone was there, so we walked up to the (tinted) doors and peer in.
We all took a double take as we saw two armed me standing blocking the door.

After we recovered, (and were brave enough to take a second look), we realised that is was a couple of life size cut outs promoting the Men In Black movie.

Make of it what you will.

[Schwarzwald]

I think people who claim to see shadow people are subject to experiencing 'shadows' from the corner of their eyes.

I actually experience this sometimes where I can sometimes think I see something coming into my peripheral vision at times, but when i go to look, nothing there!

Although The only times that I can recall this ever happening is when I've been on the computer too long and havn't slept in more than 24 hours.

I think that a lot of it may come from people's ego not letting them come to the realization that their mind is having light visual delusions.

[Hourglassmemory]

I only see those sorts of things when I'm in a room with bad lighting and the door is only slightly open, and then I THINK about someone crossing. Sometimes I do see it. though it doesn't scare me or anything.
Something that happens as lot is that I see "flies"/tiny bugs but when I look there's nothing there. I hope it's nothing serious...

[makaya325]

People's reliability increase when they have evidence in the form of video, photo, physical evidence, etc. Too bad there are none

[Cainkane1]

You were bored and your mind was trying to entertain you. Thats what my psychiatrist told me. Pretty much the same thing happened to me in my house except my woo woo was walking a few inches above the floor in a darkened room. It hid behind a chair when it "saw" me and when I looked behind the chair no one was there. The fact that neither you nor I was scared is a dead givaway. Subconciously we wanted to see what we saw.

[makaya325]

You were bored and your mind was trying to entertain you. Thats what my psychiatrist told me. Pretty much the same thing happened to me in my house except my woo woo was walking a few inches above the floor in a darkened room. It hid behind a chair when it "saw" me and when I looked behind the chair no one was there. The fact that neither you nor I was scared is a dead givaway. Subconciously we wanted to see what we saw.

Is it true that a person sees at least one other person that is not really there in their lifetime?

[P.J. Denyer]

I remember after a 50 hour sponsered event with no sleep constantly 'seeing' human like movement at the very periphery of my vision. I still sometimes get it when I'm really tired but never to that degree again.

[Cainkane1]

Human perceptions are known to be fallible. Hell, we have blind spots right in the middle of each eye that our brain fills in with a best guess at what is there.
I house sat for my mother for two days once recently. She was gone on a senior citizens trip with her friends for two days. While I was thre I distinctly heard a cough that sounded like hers and footstep like sounds. The house is big and I'm not used to being there when there are no people around. Usually my Aunt or my cousins are there and the eerie silence of the house caused my mind topaly tricks on me.

[SlayerofCliffracers]

Human perceptions are known to be fallible. Hell, we have blind spots right in the middle of each eye that our brain fills in with a best guess at what is there.

Which doesn't include ghosts, shadow people etc. Nice try but no.

Those things are unusual things.

But there is no point in arguing with you lot. You are determined not to believe in certain things. And since as you mention human perceptions are fallible, you can essentially disbelieve in anything.

[paximperium]

Which doesn't include ghosts, shadow people etc. Nice try but no. And that is the point you refuse to even consider. "Ghosts" "shadow people" etc. are likely nothing more than hallucinations, illusions and delusions. You and many other "true believers" have never shown any of these things to exist.

Those things are unusual things. No. Not really. It is pretty common. Most people just don't make up fantasies.

But there is no point in arguing with you lot. You are determined not to believe in certain things. And since as you mention human perceptions are fallible, you can essentially disbelieve in anything. What complete garbage. We have evidence that human perception is fallible which is why we demand verifiable evidence. People with some modicum of intelligence and rationality don't take things at face value and question everything.

Your useless belief system's failure is yours alone. Don't blame others for the uselessness and complete failure of it.

[SlayerofCliffracers]

And that is the point you refuse to even consider. "Ghosts" "shadow people" etc. are likely nothing more than hallucinations, illusions and delusions. You and many other "true believers" have never shown any of these things to exist.

I have no reason to consider it. There is no reason to doubt the existance of observed objects without basis. Prove there is illusion, hallucination or delusion going on. Prove it. Don't just state it.


No. Not really. It is pretty common. Most people just don't make up fantasies.


If they were common, then they would be normal mundane objects. But I guess it all depends upon your definition of common.


What complete garbage. We have evidence that human perception is fallible which is why we demand verifiable evidence. People with some modicum of intelligence and rationality don't take things at face value and question everything.

Your useless belief system's failure is yours alone. Don't blame others for the uselessness and complete failure of it.

If human perception is fallible by default, then there can be no verifiable evidence for the existance or non-existance anything. No by default human perception must be accurate, else there is no evidence at all.

My belief system isn't failing me here. I just refuse to accept your baseless doubt for the existance of as you admit commonly observed entities at face value.

What special prejudice means that you are perfectly happy to normally accept everything else you might see as existing, while for some reason ghosts, shadow people etc are automatically dismissed?

[paximperium]

I have no reason to consider it. There is no reason to doubt the existance of observed objects without basis. Prove there is illusion, hallucination or delusion going on. Prove it. Don't just state it. No. Your claim, your burden of evidence. I don't have disprove something that does not exist.

Delusions(such as yours), hallucinations and illusions are known to happen. It can even be easily reproduced. None of your claims can.

If they were common, then they would be normal mundane objects. But I guess it all depends upon your definition of common. Common. Talk to a schizophrenic, fantasy-prone personality or someone on drugs. It is very common.

If human perception is fallible by default, then there can be no verifiable evidence for the existance or non-existance anything. No.

No by default human perception must be accurate, else there is no evidence at all. No. Human perceptions are fallible which is why it has to be confirmed and repeatable. Only using empirical techniques can we verify what is seen, smelled, heard etc. is real or error. Human thinking is also prone to multiple errors.

Scientists a well aware of these errors and design techniques to decrease and limit them.

My belief system isn't failing me here. I just refuse to accept your baseless doubt for the existance of as you admit commonly observed entities at face value. No, it has failed humanity. It is worthless and useless. It is a waste of time and money. It does nothing for mankind. it makes people stupid.

What special prejudice means that you are perfectly happy to normally accept everything else you might see as existing, while for some reason ghosts, shadow people etc are automatically dismissed?Yes because it is useless fantasy.

[Telaynay's G'son]

Hallucination is a known and studied phenomenon, throughout the history of humankind and across the globe. Different people apply different religious, paranormal or otherwise metaphysical interpretations to these hallucinations, depending on their (personal or cultural) belief systems.

I understand one of the possible root causes of such is being educated above your level of intelligence.

My "visions" seem to have a common origin...a certain establishment on Pestalozzi street in St. Louis. ;)

[gelatin]

Slayerofcliffracers, how many "ghosts" or "shadow people" have you encountered?

[SlayerofCliffracers]

No. Your claim, your burden of evidence. I don't have disprove something that does not exist.

You need no other proof for what you have seen or others have seen. How can you possibly prove something except with more experiances. If you doubt all experiance as a first principle, then there can be enough evidence for anything whatsoever.


Delusions(such as yours), hallucinations and illusions are known to happen. It can even be easily reproduced. None of your claims can.

Oh my, aren't we polite today. Yes they are known to happen. So? Proves nothing in and of itself.


Common. Talk to a schizophrenic, fantasy-prone personality or someone on drugs. It is very common.

My sister when she was ill saw rats. Does that mean that rats don't exist just because she saw hallucinogenic rats that weren't there.


No.

So what form of evidence do you know of that doesn't rely upon human perception of something somewhere along the line?


No. Human perceptions are fallible which is why it has to be confirmed and repeatable. Only using empirical techniques can we verify what is seen, smelled, heard etc. is real or error. Human thinking is also prone to multiple errors.

Like the error that ghost don't exist despite having been repeatedly seen for millenia. Where the 'empiricism' in that. None whatsoever.

Scientists a well aware of these errors and design techniques to decrease and limit them.

Good.



What is *it* here.

[QUOTE] Yes because it is useless fantasy.

Reality is not fantasy. What is seen is real unless proven otherwise. If you want to prove otherwise, be my guest but NOTHING gives you right to stand over the human race and dismiss what they have actually seen unless you were actually THERE!

Slayerofcliffracers, how many "ghosts" or "shadow people" have you encountered?

Shadow people, 1 maybe 2. I say maybe 1 because I never got that clear a view of the second one, while the first I looked right into it's red eyes.

Ghosts, I have seen only 1 of. Although I encountered that one twice. I saw a second one perhaps in a graveyard, but again I never got that clear a view of it because I was only walking past.

I have seen bright glowing orange eyes in the window twice when I was little.

I have seen a mysterious black cat.

I have seen a mysterious black dog.

I have seen a ghostly 'head' twice. Perhaps you could consider that a third ghost.

[Pup]

My sister when she was ill saw rats. Does that mean that rats don't exist just because she saw hallucinogenic rats that weren't there.

Well there you have it. Present the same kind of evidence for real shadow people, compared to hallucinogenic shadow people, that the human race has found for real rats compared to hallucinogenic rats, and people will believe in shadow people just like they believe in rats.

[paximperium]

You need no other proof for what you have seen or others have seen. How can you possibly prove something except with more experiances. If you doubt all experiance as a first principle, then there can be enough evidence for anything whatsoever. No. You have no idea what you're talking about. Go read up on Burden of Evidence and little things called statistics. All claims are suspect until enough evidence is available to support it. Your claims are not special.

Oh my, aren't we polite today. Yes they are known to happen. So? Proves nothing in and of itself. It does prove that delusions exist as oppose to your claim which has nothing of the sort. Your attempt at hand-waving is noted.

My sister when she was ill saw rats. Does that mean that rats don't exist just because she saw hallucinogenic rats that weren't there. No. False Analogy. The Hallucinogenic rats did not and does not exist. That was an error in brain chemistry. Real rats do exist and they can be tested for and repeatedly observed.

Unless you can tell me differences between "real" Shadow People and "hallucination" Shadow People or "fantasy" Shadow people, there is no difference between something that "exist" vs. "does not exist."

So what form of evidence do you know of that doesn't rely upon human perception of something somewhere along the line? None. Hence I shall repeat it AGAIN. All evidence MUST be empirical and repeatedble to determine if it is real and even then IT COULD STILL BE FALSE. That is science.

Human perception is flawed, not completely useless. Are you able to see anything except in "black and whites" at all?

Like the error that ghost don't exist despite having been repeatedly seen for millenia. Where the 'empiricism' in that. None whatsoever. Exactly. Oh you mean, that was suppose to be a counter? Oops, you've actually supported my argument. "Ghosts" a manmade cultural construct has been applied to mistaken observations through the millenia hence the multitude of DIFFERENT cultural variations of these "ghosts".

What is *it* here. Blind stupid Unevidenced Based Beliefs such as Astrology and other such woo. Completely useless and harmful.

Reality is not fantasy. What is seen is real unless proven otherwise. No.

If you want to prove otherwise, be my guest but NOTHING gives you right to stand over the human race and dismiss what they have actually seen unless you were actually THERE! No. The opposite. They can claimed to have seen "something". But there is no reason to believe what they claim whatsoever.

Someone could be telling the truth, mistaken or lying. The decision to believe which is up to the empirical evidence.

Shadow people, 1 maybe 2. I say maybe 1 because I never got that clear a view of the second one, while the first I looked right into it's red eyes. So decisions. Are you:
1)Telling the truth?
2)Mistaken?
3)Lying?
Maybe all of the above?
Tell me how do I decide?

Ghosts, I have seen only 1 of. Although I encountered that one twice. I saw a second one perhaps in a graveyard, but again I never got that clear a view of it because I was only walking past. So decisions. Are you:
1)Telling the truth?
2)Mistaken?
3)Lying?
Maybe all of the above?
Tell me how do I decide?

I have seen bright glowing orange eyes in the window twice when I was little. I've seen Santa and green goblins as well. Wow aren't fantasies special?

I have seen a mysterious black cat.

I have seen a mysterious black dog. Hey me too!! Mr. Muffins is truly mysterious. I don't know how he appears and dissapears under my feet all the time.

I have seen a ghostly 'head' twice. Perhaps you could consider that a third ghost. Never saw one of those...I have seen real human heads and bodies in a morgue and in hospitals and strangely never a "ghost" or "shadow person". Perhaps skeptics scare ghosts away.

[SlayerofCliffracers]

No. You have no idea what you're talking about. Go read up on Burden of Evidence and little things called statistics. All claims are suspect until enough evidence is available to support it. Your claims are not special.

Why do I need to read anything when you keep repeating it at me constantly and I at you. You are making a claim, the claim you are making is that all instances of a particular something being observed are hallucinations.

A claim you cannot prove or substantiate, but yet which is the basis of your entire position's validity.


It does prove that delusions exist as oppose to your claim which has nothing of the sort. Your attempt at hand-waving is noted.
No. False Analogy. The Hallucinogenic rats did not and does not exist. That was an error in brain chemistry. Real rats do exist and they can be tested for and repeatedly observed.

You evidently do not automaticly derive that all rats are hallucinations based upon an instance of hallucination. So what makes you leap to such a conclusion when dealing with ghosts and the ilk.


Unless you can tell me differences between "real" Shadow People and "hallucination" Shadow People or "fantasy" Shadow people, there is no difference between something that "exist" vs. "does not exist."
None. Hence I shall repeat it AGAIN. All evidence MUST be empirical and repeatedble to determine if it is real and even then IT COULD STILL BE FALSE. That is science.

Ghosts have been seen and even photographed. They are empirical. Ghosts are repeatadly seen all over the world. They are repeatable.

Is the only problem that you cannot round all the ghosts up and put them in a laboratory to be poked with a stick by your Scientific Elite. Is your only problem that you do not know how to control them.


Human perception is flawed, not completely useless. Are you able to see anything except in "black and whites" at all?

Now you agree with me. That is what I am saying. That human perception is flawed, does not mean it is completely useless. Which is why you shouldn't a-priori reject the existance of commonly observed entities simply because human perception *might* be wrong in percieving them.


Exactly. Oh you mean, that was suppose to be a counter? Oops, you've actually supported my argument. "Ghosts" a manmade cultural construct has been applied to mistaken observations through the millenia hence the multitude of DIFFERENT cultural variations of these "ghosts".


Ghost is a word. A manmade social construct attached to something which was observed to exist by enough people that a word was invented for it.


Blind stupid Unevidenced Based Beliefs such as Astrology and other such woo. Completely useless and harmful.

Astrology at worst has no more utility than Astronomy. That is none whatsoever.

No.

Yes you are correct to a degree. Only because I didn't add.

"should be assumed to real unless proven otherwise".


No. The opposite. They can claimed to have seen "something". But there is no reason to believe what they claim whatsoever.

Scientifically wrong. If you say I am lying then you are making a positive claim, a claim you have no evidence to back up.

While the claim that I am not lying is a negative claim. And you do not HAVE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE! Got that. Scientifically I am telling the Truth unless you can prove I am lying.


Someone could be telling the truth, mistaken or lying. The decision to believe which is up to the empirical evidence.
So decisions. Are you:
1)Telling the truth?
2)Mistaken?
3)Lying?


Telling the truth.


Maybe all of the above?
Tell me how do I decide?
So decisions. Are you:
1)Telling the truth?
2)Mistaken?
3)Lying?

Telling the truth.

Tell me how do I decide?

Scientifically. You do not have to prove a negative. You have no actual evidence that I am a liar or lying in this particular instance.

Remember you do not have to prove a negative paximperium?


I've seen Santa and green goblins as well. Wow aren't fantasies special?

No, you fantasised about seeing Santa and Green Goblins. You didn't see them. I never fantasised about seeing orange 'demon' eyes in the window, it is a clear and vivid memory of what I saw.


Hey me too!! Mr. Muffins is truly mysterious. I don't know how he appears and dissapears under my feet all the time.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Well maybe all Cats have supernatural powers. However I doubt you've ever seen a cat dissapear without actually turning around.


Never saw one of those...I have seen real human heads and bodies in a morgue and in hospitals and strangely never a "ghost" or "shadow person". Perhaps skeptics scare ghosts away.

Skeptics scare everyone else so why not ghosts. :D:D:D

You won't catch a ghost simply by hanging around dead bodies. It don't work that way in the real world paximperium, only in stories. I rather doubt the average ghost would be particularly interested in watching themselves rotting way.

The kind of places you tend to catch ghosts is places where the living beings they were liked to be and spent a lot of time.

[gelatin]

So, what do you feel a ghost would be particularly interested in? Anything?

[paximperium]

Why do I need to read anything when you keep repeating it at me constantly and I at you. You are making a claim, the claim you are making is that all instances of a particular something being observed are hallucinations.

A claim you cannot prove or substantiate, but yet which is the basis of your entire position's validity. No. Reread what I wrote and go fight your straw figurine at your own time. Your sad attempt at redirecting the burden of proof is unimpressive.

You evidently do not automaticly derive that all rats are hallucinations based upon an instance of hallucination. So what makes you leap to such a conclusion when dealing with ghosts and the ilk. Because rats are known to exist. Ghost no.

Ghosts have been seen and even photographed. They are empirical. Ghosts are repeatadly seen all over the world. They are repeatable. No. Something has been seen that is claimed to be ghost. Each claimant differs based on cultural indoctrination. There is no verifiability or even consistency.

Various things have been photographed and claimed to be ghost. Many are well known photographic errors, hoaxes or unknown. So now are you going to claim that ghosts are physical?

Is the only problem that you cannot round all the ghosts up and put them in a laboratory to be poked with a stick by your Scientific Elite. Is your only problem that you do not know how to control them. Yes. The scientific elite does not like things that does not exist and are useless.

Now you agree with me. That is what I am saying. That human perception is flawed, does not mean it is completely useless. Which is why you shouldn't a-priori reject the existance of commonly observed entities simply because human perception *might* be wrong in percieving them. Who is? I'm not.

I've just clearly stated that human perception is flawed and these "ghost" sightings are not reliable and many are definately hallucinations, illusions or delusions.

Ghost is a word. A manmade social construct attached to something which was observed to exist by enough people that a word was invented for it. So? Goblin and Santa Clause are words as well.

Astrology at worst has no more utility than Astronomy. That is none whatsoever. No. Astrology has no utility and leads to harm. It makes humanity stupid.

Astronomy adds to human knowledge and may aid in space exploration in the future. It makes humanity smarter.

Yes you are correct to a degree. Only because I didn't add.

"should be assumed to real unless proven otherwise". No. "What has previously be shown to be real can be assumed to be real until proven otherwise. What has NEVER been shown to be real should be assumed to not be unless proven otherwise."

Scientifically wrong. If you say I am lying then you are making a positive claim, a claim you have no evidence to back up. Yes. So? You forgot the "mistaken" category is still the most likely.

While the claim that I am not lying is a negative claim. And you do not HAVE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE! Got that. Scientifically I am telling the Truth unless you can prove I am lying. Yes. You could be telling the truth but mistaken in your perception or conclusion. You could be lying but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Claming to Telling the truth.

Claming to Telling the truth.
Corrected it for you. Again why should anyone believe you?

Remember you do not have to prove a negative paximperium? Yes. hence your claim is invalid and worthless unless you prove the positive. I don;t have to disprove your claim.

No, you fantasised about seeing orange 'demon' eyes in the window Santa and Green Goblins. You didn't see them. I never fantasised about seeing Santa and Green Goblinsorange 'demon' eyes in the window, it is a clear and vivid memory of what I saw. Try to keep up.

You won't catch a ghost simply by hanging around dead bodies. It don't work that way in the real world paximperium, only in stories. I rather doubt the average ghost would be particularly interested in watching themselves rotting way. So how do you catch a ghost?

The kind of places you tend to catch ghosts is places where the living beings they were liked to be and spent a lot of time. " It don't work that way in the real world paximperium, only in stories."

[makaya325]

How would ghosts ever be proven to exist? They are not thought to be of mass, so isnt it impossible to prove their existence?

[gelatin]

well, if someone can see them, or if they can be photographed, then yes, they'd have to be comprised of mass of some sort. But I suppose a lot of people claim that ghosts are made of nothing, yet somehow still claim that they "exist". I love this stuff.

[soylent]

Which doesn't include ghosts, shadow people etc. Nice try but no.

Happens all the time. Just this morning when I woke up I thought the fold in the sheets looked remarkably like a face. Took me a couple of seconds to completely wake up and realize it looked nothing at all like a face.

Auditory hallucinations are especially common. I've heard voices while I'm fully awake and just a bit stressed out. Since nobody else heard it, it would be reasonable to conclude it was just me and not make up stories of ghosts nobody else can hear uttering an uninteligible sentence fragment directed at me.

Those things are unusual things.

No, they're not. They're things your brain is always looking for, every second of your entire life. Because it's harmless to occassionally see an aligator in a mud puddle where there is none, but very harmful to not see an aligator where there is one it is reasonable to expect your brain to be highly prejudiced to see threats at the drop of a hint.

[makaya325]

well, if someone can see them, or if they can be photographed, then yes, they'd have to be comprised of mass of some sort. But I suppose a lot of people claim that ghosts are made of nothing, yet somehow still claim that they "exist". I love this stuff.

Well Dark matter has a mass, yet is not made of atoms. I wonder if Ghosts could represent a new undiscovered natural phenomona?

[paximperium]

Well Dark matter has a mass, yet is not made of atoms. I wonder if Ghosts could represent a new undiscovered natural phenomona?
Dark matter has mass and a measurable effect on reality. It has been measured, not just claimed to exist by some.

[makaya325]

Dark matter has mass and a measurable effect on reality. It has been measured, not just claimed to exist by some.

You are Correct Pax. I was not trying to suggest that Ghost's exist, just to point out how they COULD possibly exist without having mass.

[gelatin]

That would be amazing, and just my luck. A ghost is captured and it turns out is completely made of "non-mass", or even "unmass", but it's a ghost all the same. And then everyone who believes in ghosts would pretend to understand that precisely. Meanwhile, the science (and common sense) we have now continues to be ignored by the masses.

Looking forward to that discovery.

[Brendy]

It seems that there are several explanations for why someone would see what is commonly referred to as a "shadow person". The wikipedia article states some good ones, and these are things that could affect anyone. However, it seems to me that it only happens to woo believers, which I find kind of strange. Is it that non-believers just write it off immediately and never discuss it?



Any thoughts?

I think you are completely wrong. However you may be slightly right lol.
I was a non-believer who started hallucinating, didn't question it at the beginning because I thought this was just was every human experienced. It starts slowly, you don't realize something's wrong at first. Then when it got worse, I questioned, but it was too late.

Obviously most people who start to have hallucinations will be believers. Most people are believers to begin with. However not all people who hallucinate and were skeptics will just write it off.

Maybe i should reread your post, but this only happened to you once right?


When i started hardcore hallucinating, it was constant, 24/7.
At first I kept telling myself it couldn't be real. However a mentally ill mind doesn't have much conscious control over what it beliefs. It is controlled by the subconscious and imagination. Every time I would think of an explanation for why it couldn't be real, my mind would come up with a solution to that and "prove" to me it was all real. You lose your ability to question logically. Your imagination does all of your thinking. Every delusion starts to make sense no matter how weird.

The questioning didn't last long because there was just overwhelming evidence the hallucinations were real.


And even if you realize you are sick, you still can't always tell what's real and what's not. I think you are putting too much emphasis on skeptics being intelligent. Your mind changes in psychosis.

[Brendy]

Auditory hallucinations are especially common. I've heard voices while I'm fully awake and just a bit stressed out. Since nobody else heard it, it would be reasonable to conclude it was just me and not make up stories of ghosts nobody else can hear uttering an uninteligible sentence fragment directed at me.


.

Yah, I find auditory hallucinations are easy to write off now.

Though i only hear mine inside my head, not off in the distance. So that makes it simple.

[SlayerofCliffracers]

No. Reread what I wrote and go fight your straw figurine at your own time. Your sad attempt at redirecting the burden of proof is unimpressive.

As is yours.

Because rats are known to exist. Ghost no.

Circular arguments are great aren't they?


No. Something has been seen that is claimed to be ghost. Each claimant differs based on cultural indoctrination. There is no verifiability or even consistency.

And no two people percieve the same thing exactly the same way. I remember this vaguely from psychology class back at A-Level. If absolute uniformity in interpretation is required, you are in trouble because you will never get it.

And besides, what makes you think that the 'cultural differences' don't originate in actual differences in the types of ghosties that haunt different regions of the world?


Various things have been photographed and claimed to be ghost. Many are well known photographic errors, hoaxes or unknown. So now are you going to claim that ghosts are physical?

Where did ghosts being physical sneak in? Ghosts have a physical effect evidently, but that does not necceserily mean they themselves need be physical.


Yes. The scientific elite does not like things that does not exist and are useless.

It's all about power paximperium. The Scientific Elite don't like that they cannot control which is to say useless to them. And the existance of such bruises their own sense of power, so they would prefer to think of them as non-existant, simply because they cannot control them.




Many may well be. But does that mean that all are? The conclusion you arrive at is unwarrented.

As mentioned above with the rat analogy, the mere fact that some people hallucinate and see rats does not mean that all rat sightings are hallucinations.


[QUOTE]So? Goblin and Santa Clause are words as well.

Exactly, I was simply responding to your social construct argument. The mere fact that ghost is a social construct does not mean that it does not refer to anything real. Since all words are social constructs are they not?


No. Astrology has no utility and leads to harm. It makes humanity stupid.

Astrology allows you to determine the character of people and predict the future supposadly. As for leading to harm, it has certainly done less harm than physics, since it does not help you invent weapons of mass destruction like the Atom Bomb.

I know you are going to object that it's all about how it is used, but that is pretty much my counter-argument.


Astronomy adds to human knowledge and may aid in space exploration in the future. It makes humanity smarter.

Astrology also adds to human knowledge (which is largely why I study it). The only utility that Astronomy has is Astrology, that is why Astronomy was invented in the first place. People derived stuff based upon the stars and for this reason they decided it was worth it tracking the movement of stars.

Again, all that Astronomy has told us is that the rest of the universe is either barren rocks or so impossable remote it is physically impossible to get there in several centuries or even millenia. Some utility.


No. "What has previously be shown to be real can be assumed to be real until proven otherwise. What has NEVER been shown to be real should be assumed to not be unless proven otherwise."

Exactly. The problem is that there is no basis whatseover to claim that Ghosts have not been shown to real, when they have been consistantly observed for millenia all across the world.


Yes. So? You forgot the "mistaken" category is still the most likely.

You do not explain why? Why is observation of commonly observed entities likely to be mistaken?


Yes. You could be telling the truth but mistaken in your perception or conclusion. You could be lying but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

That is a universally valid response paximperium.

Corrected it for you. Again why should anyone believe you?

Because you have no evidence either that I am mistaken or that I am lying.


Yes. hence your claim is invalid and worthless unless you prove the positive. I don;t have to disprove your claim.

You didn't get a word I am saying did you? Observation is evidence for existance, the only sort of evidence that exists ultimately.

If you deny that observation is valid evidence for something existance, what is valid evidence? Since I have observed the entities in question, I have positive evidence for their existance. Evidence you have to debunk.

Try to keep up.

Whatever. There is nothing to keep up with only a nebulous set of 'arguments' all of which contradict another argument you made earlier.

Indeed I sometimes wonder why I bother wasting my finate lifespan here.

So how do you catch a ghost?

You don't.


" It don't work that way in the real world paximperium, only in stories."

The ghost I saw outside of the bathroom, one of the things I remember about it was that it was kind of swarthy. I told my mum this and apparantly the man who was living here before who died before we arrived at the house was Greek.

I didn't know this when I saw the ghost originally.

[Cainkane1]

I was watching an episode of Ghost Hunters and there were in a brew pub and restaurant in savannah Ga. The had a video of a "ghost" walking back and forth in a very rat like manner and I believe they were actually filming a rats shadow. The shapes wasn't rat like but the behaviour was.

[paximperium]

As is yours. You mean asking someone to support their claim is pathetic? Interesting insight into your thinking process.

Circular arguments are great aren't they?
Please read up on Circular Arguments before attempting to flaunt your ignorance in public.
Circular Arguments: Ghost exist because I saw a ghost therefore they exist.
Proper logic: Rats exist=/=things perceived as hallucinogenic rats.

Try again.

And no two people percieve the same thing exactly the same way. I remember this vaguely from psychology class back at A-Level. If absolute uniformity in interpretation is required, you are in trouble because you will never get it. No. Perfection when it comes to empirical evidence is not required. Science has evidence within a certain error bar. Woo has "evidence" within the spectrum of random noise.

And besides, what makes you think that the 'cultural differences' don't originate in actual differences in the types of ghosties that haunt different regions of the world? So now all ghosts are different? Some are physical? Zombies? Spirit? little floating heads, glowing balls of stuff?
So what exactly are ghosts now? Why are they different based on differing cultural beliefs? Perhaps because they are cultural interpretations of the fear of death? Why is it in some cultures with no concept of an afterlife or soul, ghosts don't exist? Weird huh?

So you want me to believe in something more exceedingly complicated with no evidence and based on nothing but conjecture as opposed to a simple explanation that is known to happen?

Where did ghosts being physical sneak in? Ghosts have a physical effect evidently, but that does not necceserily mean they themselves need be physical. No. If anything has any physical effect, it means it is physical and can be tested.

It's all about power paximperium. The Scientific Elite don't like that they cannot control which is to say useless to them. And the existance of such bruises their own sense of power, so they would prefer to think of them as non-existant, simply because they cannot control them. Thanks for sharing your paranoid delusional fantasy.

Well, you got one thing totally right. The "scientific elite" cares about power alot. The power to change and improve science and technology. Some actually care about improving mankind. They tend not to care about things that don't exist and they tend to ignore completely useless beliefs with no utlity(except to scam gullible people out of their money). Why should they care about something completely and utterly useless and a waste of time and resources?


Many may well be. But does that mean that all are? The conclusion you arrive at is unwarrented. It is completely warranted. Your inability to grasp such a simple concept is telling.

As mentioned above with the rat analogy, the mere fact that some people hallucinate and see rats does not mean that all rat sightings are hallucinations. False Analogy again. Hallucinogenic rats are not rats. Rats are known. Ghosts are not known. Your analogy falses miserably. Except to link ghosts with hallucinations.


Exactly, I was simply responding to your social construct argument. The mere fact that ghost is a social construct does not mean that it does not refer to anything real. Since all words are social constructs are they not? So now you are playing the semantics game huh? Same thing. Referring to something as ghost/goblin/elves/Bangabanga/Ooogie makes no difference. There is no evidence of such occurances and so such claims are still not valid.

Astrology allows you to determine the character of people and predict the future supposadly. While leading people to make wrong choices, believing in magic and losing money.

As for leading to harm, it has certainly done less harm than physics, since it does not help you invent weapons of mass destruction like the Atom Bomb. Gotta agree with you there. Knowledge with the power to change the world can be dangerous as oppose to fantasy.


Astrology also adds to human knowledge (which is largely why I study it). Astronomy started out as Astrology just as Chemistry started out as Alchemy. It is an outdated and useless ancient belief system that has failed countless times to show its validity or utility.

Again, all that Astronomy has told us is that the rest of the universe is either barren rocks or so impossable remote it is physically impossible to get there in several centuries or even millenia. Some utility. Well, I guess the study of the formation of star, planets, curved space, black holes, etc., you know KNOWLEDGE, has no utlity in your eyes.

Exactly. The problem is that there is no basis whatseover to claim that Ghosts have not been shown to real, when they have been consistantly observed for millenia all across the world. No.

You do not explain why? Why is observation of commonly observed entities likely to be mistaken? Because there is nothing common about them unless you want to loosen your definition of "observed entities" to anything SPOOOOKY or "I'm too dumb to figure it out so I'll call it a ghost".

Because you have no evidence either that I am mistaken or that I am lying.
This the classic example of an uncritical thinking mind. No.

Any and all claim is suspect. To think otherwise to become a gullible idiot who accepts any claim based on "faith".

You didn't get a word I am saying did you? Observation is evidence for existance, the only sort of evidence that exists ultimately.
No. An observation is a perception of an external phenomena. It is subject to error especially with hallucinations.

If you deny that observation is valid evidence for something existance, what is valid evidence? Something that can be confirmed by yourself or others.

Since I have observed the entities in question, I have positive evidence for their existance. Evidence you have to debunk. No, I don't have to do anything. You can keep believing in it but you don't have to right to expect others to.

Whatever. There is nothing to keep up with only a nebulous set of 'arguments' all of which contradict another argument you made earlier. Really? Do tell or am I suppose to take your word for it again?

Indeed I sometimes wonder why I bother wasting my finate lifespan here. Don't know. I enjoy arguing and sometimes I learn new things and sometimes I change my mind based on good arguments.

You don't. Back this up. How do you know a ghost is uncatchable?

The ghost I saw outside of the bathroom, one of the things I remember about it was that it was kind of swarthy. I told my mum this and apparantly the man who was living here before who died before we arrived at the house was Greek. Of course it is. Did you confirm this or is your mom mistaken?

I didn't know this when I saw the ghost originally. I saw a swarthy man!!! Well, It must be because the guy was Greek(...or was it Turk...or perhaps Arab...is he still alive? Meh perhaps he died?)

[gelatin]

I prefer to believe that if ghosts exist, then they are all "swarthy".

[paximperium]

I prefer to believe that if ghosts exist, then they are all "swarthy".
"Man, it was a big black dude...about this tall. Uh, he wore a blue no black shirt."

[Azimer the Mad]

I have no reason to consider it. There is no reason to doubt the existance of observed objects without basis. Prove there is illusion, hallucination or delusion going on. Prove it. Don't just state it.

--

No by default human perception must be accurate, else there is no evidence at all.
---
What special prejudice means that you are perfectly happy to normally accept everything else you might see as existing, while for some reason ghosts, shadow people etc are automatically dismissed?

You can't prove a negative. You can refuse to accept an extraordinary claim until there is extraordinary evidence. We don't "see" electrons & other subatomic particles, but we can experiment with them and produce evidence


Astrology also adds to human knowledge (which is largely why I study it). The only utility that Astronomy has is Astrology, that is why Astronomy was invented in the first place. People derived stuff based upon the stars and for this reason they decided it was worth it tracking the movement of stars.


I encourage you to post a testable example of accurate astrology. I would also say that astronomy was not invented for astrology, astrology was a byproduct of early human ignorance about the stars and germ theory, i.e. thinking the planets influence the flu.

If skepticism offends you, politely, why ARE you posting on JREF?

[SlayerofCliffracers]

You can't prove a negative. You can refuse to accept an extraordinary claim until there is extraordinary evidence. We don't "see" electrons & other subatomic particles, but we can experiment with them and produce evidence

What's an extraordinery claim? Who decides such things? To an Astrologer, Astrology isn't extraordinery, to a person that sees lots of ghosts, then ghosts aren't extraordinery.


I encourage you to post a testable example of accurate astrology. I would also say that astronomy was not invented for astrology, astrology was a byproduct of early human ignorance about the stars and germ theory, i.e. thinking the planets influence the flu.


Astrology is easily tested. Just get an aweful lot of people and look to see if there are any correlations between particular Astrological factors and the results.

If skepticism offends you, politely, why ARE you posting on JREF?

If I don't agree, it doesn't mean I am offended.

You mean asking someone to support their claim is pathetic? Interesting insight into your thinking process.

Other way around. I mean rejecting observations that support the existance of something without establishing their invalidity is pathetic.


Please read up on Circular Arguments before attempting to flaunt your ignorance in public.
Circular Arguments: Ghost exist because I saw a ghost therefore they exist.
Proper logic: Rats exist=/=things perceived as hallucinogenic rats.

Try again.


No, Ghosts might exist. I saw a ghost, therefore ghosts exist.

Circular argument is. Ghosts don't exist, therefore ghosts are delusions, therefore all observations of ghosts are invalid automatically.


No. Perfection when it comes to empirical evidence is not required. Science has evidence within a certain error bar. Woo has "evidence" within the spectrum of random noise.

And who decides what level of evidence is enough?


So now all ghosts are different? Some are physical? Zombies? Spirit? little floating heads, glowing balls of stuff?
So what exactly are ghosts now? Why are they different based on differing cultural beliefs? Perhaps because they are cultural interpretations of the fear of death? Why is it in some cultures with no concept of an afterlife or soul, ghosts don't exist? Weird huh?

What are these cultures with no concept of an afterlife or soul and how do you know there aren't any ghosts in them?


So you want me to believe in something more exceedingly complicated with no evidence and based on nothing but conjecture as opposed to a simple explanation that is known to happen?

Yes, because your simple explanation is baseless. It has nothing backing it up, except your need to explain stuff away that doesn't fit your notions of reality.


No. If anything has any physical effect, it means it is physical and can be tested.
Thanks for sharing your paranoid delusional fantasy.

And that is an utterly baseless assumption. What makes you so sure that a non-physical being cannot have a physical effect? Nothing whatsoever.


It is completely warranted. Your inability to grasp such a simple concept is telling.
False Analogy again. Hallucinogenic rats are not rats. Rats are known. Ghosts are not known. Your analogy falses miserably. Except to link ghosts with hallucinations.

Your ability to even get what I am saying is definately telling.

Hallucinatory Ghosts don't exist. The claim that ghosts are unknown is also wrong, since otherwise we wouldn't be here discussing the matter.

Rats exist because people have seen them.
Ghosts exist because people have seen them.


So now you are playing the semantics game huh? Same thing. Referring to something as ghost/goblin/elves/Bangabanga/Ooogie makes no difference. There is no evidence of such occurances and so such claims are still not valid.
While leading people to make wrong choices, believing in magic and losing money.
Gotta agree with you there. Knowledge with the power to change the world can be dangerous as oppose to fantasy.

:mad::mad::mad: Look how can you say there is no evidence, when people have seen ghosts.


Astronomy started out as Astrology just as Chemistry started out as Alchemy. It is an outdated and useless ancient belief system that has failed countless times to show its validity or utility.

Astronomy was invented in order to facilitate the practice of Astrology.


Well, I guess the study of the formation of star, planets, curved space, black holes, etc., you know KNOWLEDGE, has no utlity in your eyes.

Yes it does have completely no utility whatsoever. At least in so far as we have any evidence for.


Because there is nothing common about them unless you want to loosen your definition of "observed entities" to anything SPOOOOKY or "I'm too dumb to figure it out so I'll call it a ghost".

What are you saying exactly?


This the classic example of an uncritical thinking mind. No.

Any and all claim is suspect. To think otherwise to become a gullible idiot who accepts any claim based on "faith".

Babbling on about uncritical minds is just a distraction. You do in fact have no evidence. So by your own standards you are wrong.


No. An observation is a perception of an external phenomena. It is subject to error especially with hallucinations.

Sure is. However nobody presumes hallucination automaticly.

Something that can be confirmed by yourself or others.

How many ghosts do you have to see then before it's confirmed?


No, I don't have to do anything. You can keep believing in it but you don't have to right to expect others to.

Sure you can dig your heels in if you wish.

Really? Do tell or am I suppose to take your word for it again?

Yes, otherwise the practice of history is impossable. If everything written by everyone else is automaticly a lie, how can you learn anything from anyone in the past?



Don't know. I enjoy arguing and sometimes I learn new things and sometimes I change my mind based on good arguments.

But you don't ever say anything that makes the slightest sense or has the slightest consistancy to it.

Back this up. How do you know a ghost is uncatchable?

Because if it were catchable someone would have caught one and wheeled it into the JREF to claim to $1,000,000 prize.


Of course it is. Did you confirm this or is your mom mistaken?

My Mum might be mistaken, but I have no evidence this is so.


I saw a swarthy man!!! Well, It must be because the guy was Greek(...or was it Turk...or perhaps Arab...is he still alive? Meh perhaps he died?)

Is this supposed to be funny.

[paximperium]

Other way around. I mean rejecting observations that support the existance of something without establishing their invalidity is pathetic. False. Anecdotes are well known to be unreliable. Several well known CFI Ghost Hunters actually take the time to document to reliability and do actual investigations of "hauntings" unlike those idiots with IR cameras and magnetic field detectors who have no clue.

No, Ghosts might exist. I saw a ghost, therefore ghosts exist. Invalid. There is no logic there at all.

You saw something you believe to be a "ghost". Based on your cultural indoctrination, you believe whatever you saw was a ghost therefore you believe ghost exist. That is circular logic.

Circular argument is. Ghosts don't exist, therefore ghosts are delusions, therefore all observations of ghosts are invalid automatically. Who are you arguing with? The voices in your head? I don't see anyone claiming that at all?

And who decides what level of evidence is enough? It depends. You may want to look at those silly statistic things.

Studies are designed to try to get a signal above random noise, not a blip at the level of random noise. So an experiment at a nuclear reactor. electron microscope etc. has a narrower "noise" level than say studying donkeys or the psychology of woo.

What are these cultures with no concept of an afterlife or soul and how do you know there aren't any ghosts in them? I read. Go read a book sometime.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Dont-Sleep-There-Are-Snakes/Daniel-L-Everett/e/9780375425028
The Piraha have no concept of an afterlife or of ghosts. They do believe in "spirits", that of rocks, jaguars and even living breathing animals.

Yes, because your simple explanation is baseless. It has nothing backing it up, except your need to explain stuff away that doesn't fit your notions of reality. YOUR claim; YOUR burden of evidence.
I noticed the complete lack of an answer. Dodge noted.

And that is an utterly baseless assumption. What makes you so sure that a non-physical being cannot have a physical effect? Nothing whatsoever. Physics contradict your blind nonsense. Your ignorance is your problem. Don't project it onto others.

Your ability to even get what I am saying is definately telling.

Hallucinatory Ghosts don't exist. The claim that ghosts are unknown is also wrong, since otherwise we wouldn't be here discussing the matter.

Rats exist because people have seen them.
Ghosts exist because people have seen them. Well, that's great logic. I am assuming that Zeus exist? Optimus Prime exist? Pink Elephants? Flying Griphons and what about ants crawling out from your body during a drug addles haze? Any observation is real in your useless belief system.

Sorry, but your Useless Belief System will continue to be completely and utterly worthless unless you deferentiate between fantasy, hallucinations and reality. But then you don't do that do you? You pick and choose what you like, like a child at a candy store.

So far, all you've done is equate hallucinations with ghost. Good job.


:mad::mad::mad: Look how can you say there is no evidence, when people have seen ghosts. They have CLAIMED to have seen something they CALL a ghost. Is that too complicated for you?

Astronomy was invented in order to facilitate the practice of Astrology. No my dear ignorant astrologer, astronomy grew out from astrology. Astronomy was needed to determine the location of the planets for your wonderful charts but soon left all that nonsensical magic nonsense behind.

Astrology is the dross and useless waste of astronomy. Keep wallowing in it.

Yes it does have completely no utility whatsoever. At least in so far as we have any evidence for. Your GPS and nuclear clocks disagree.

What are you saying exactly? You have no idea what a ghost is so you label anything unknown, spooky or "just because I like it" as a ghost. You don't have a moving goalpost because you have no goalpost to begin with.

Babbling on about uncritical minds is just a distraction. You do in fact have no evidence. So by your own standards you are wrong. Wow. A "You are too!" insult. What are you, eight years old?:rolleyes:

Sure is. However nobody presumes hallucination automaticly. Yes. I don't.

How many ghosts do you have to see then before it's confirmed? It depends. The world is not black and white.

Sure you can dig your heels in if you wish. That was the stupidest come back in history. You have no idea what I said do you? Go reread it and come back with something at least semi-intelligent.

Yes, otherwise the practice of history is impossable. If everything written by everyone else is automaticly a lie, how can you learn anything from anyone in the past? Verification and confirmation. You have no idea how history is assessed and studied at all do you? Why am I not surprised.

But you don't ever say anything that makes the slightest sense or has the slightest consistancy to it. You seem to have this believe that by siomple stating this, it somehow magics your statements into reality. You actually have to provide evidence and a justification but then you believe you don't have to.

Because if it were catchable someone would have caught one and wheeled it into the JREF to claim to $1,000,000 prize. Wow. The $1million dollar prize is so amazingly powerful. Think about how dumb your statements is for a moment.

My Mum might be mistaken, but I have no evidence this is so.

Is this supposed to be funny.
Very much so. It goes to show the complete unreliability of your "anecdote".

[godless dave]

I have no reason to consider it. There is no reason to doubt the existance of observed objects without basis.

Other than human biology and human psychology, no reason at all.



If human perception is fallible by default, then there can be no verifiable evidence for the existance or non-existance anything.

That doesn't follow.

What special prejudice means that you are perfectly happy to normally accept everything else you might see as existing,

No, I certainly do not.