JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags "The Poltergeist" , poltergeists , William Roll

Reply
Old 14th October 2012, 06:07 PM   #241
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
OK, I have read two pages and been commenting, but if I responded to everything of interest I'd probably triple the length of the thread and bore everyone away. I will give up reading here, and mention my blog POLTERWOTSIT -- http://polterwotsit.wordpress.com/ which may be of interest

My academic area is poltergeists, and i'm sorely tempted to stick around and discuss them, but I don;t want to kill the thread with my tedious wittering, so I'll shut uo till someone else posts now

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:10 PM   #242
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by I Ratant View Post
Ghosts rattle chains and make "hooooo hoooo" noises. Without any material existence.
My house creaks and groans when it cools down in the evening in the summer.
It's just structural parts moving around.

Never heard it described as "hoo hoo" before. However I refer the honourable gentleman to my other blog for a short history of ghost noises

http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2011/0...-woo-part-one/

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:16 PM   #243
I Ratant
Penultimate Amazing
 
I Ratant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 18,787
I heard that very noise a couple of nights ago outside my house.
I'm betting it was an owl!
How could something as insubstantial as a ghost vibrate air at all to make any kind of a noise?
I Ratant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:22 PM   #244
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
I once had a lengthy conversation with a ghosthunter who claimed while investigating an alleged haunt, she witnessed a book "fly" off a shelf.

She claimed it shot from the shelf eight feet across the room in an arcing trajectory, a claim I found suspicious. After ruling out seismic activity, it came down to embellishment, hoaxing by fellow investigator or the homeowner, an out and out lie, an anomaly, or a "ghostdidit."

She of course chose ghostdidit. I did not.

I have had two experiences of this type (though in 20 years of actively investigating cases, though admittedly I do not set out to actually witness the phenomena, being more involved in recording testimony and trying to establish causes.) I think I have told both before on this forum - the more "exciting" involved a red teddybear moving. (I'm currently in communication with a lady who came to me through my UK sceptical community contacts who has had a very similar experience this week.)

The other case, involving nothing more exciting than a cup and saucer moving, is mentioned in this post on my Polterwotsit blog - http://polterwotsit.wordpress.com/20...rt-3/#comments - and Matt who was present there that night then came forward and added a comment.

Of course you can assume that I am mad; in this case however, there were three witnesses (two of whom really did not get on, as it happens). Whatever the cause, the coffee cup ended up broken, and Matt's fingers burnt. Yes I may be a credulous woo, but I can not deny the evidence of my senses as to the facts of the matter. The underlying causes, those I remain open minded on...

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:29 PM   #245
Resume
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,336
Resume has a birthday
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
The underlying causes, those I remain open minded on...

cj x
I would certainly hope so.

I once watched a bourbon glass make it's way nearly off a desk where I worked. Of course the condensation from the ice and the impetus cause by my typing might have had something to do with it. No, it had everything to do with it.

A credulous observer on the other hand . . .
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:29 PM   #246
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by I Ratant View Post
I heard that very noise a couple of nights ago outside my house.
I'm betting it was an owl!
How could something as insubstantial as a ghost vibrate air at all to make any kind of a noise?
One wonders if they do, or the noises are in the head. Then again if they can chuck teacups around perhaps their insubstantiality is overrated? Voices groand and whistles feature in 28% of Gauld & Cornell's "better testimony" sample btw, in 27% of European + US cases, but only 8% of those from other cultures.

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:31 PM   #247
Resume
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,336
Resume has a birthday
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
One wonders if they do, or the noises are in the head. Then again if they can chuck teacups around perhaps their insubstantiality is overrated? Voices groand and whistles feature in 28% of Gauld & Cornell's "better testimony" sample btw, in 27% of European + US cases, but only 8% of those from other cultures.

cj x
By what mechanic does a non-physical entity manifest any physical effect?
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:33 PM   #248
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
I would certainly hope so.

I once watched a bourbon glass make it's way nearly off a desk where I worked. Of course the condensation from the ice and the impetus cause by my typing might have had something to do with it. No, it had everything to do with it.

A credulous observer on the other hand . . .
Back around 2003/2004 I was giving a public talk on poltergeists with Richard Felix from Most Haunted at Derby Heritage Centre. I placed my wine glass down on the counter, and as I spoke it slid forward and off the bar we were sitting on, just being caught by me as i was alerted by everyone in the audience shouting excitedly. They were highly amuses and assumed I had done it as a trick: actually it was simply the usual case of an air pocket under the base of the glass on a wet bar, and complete coincidence that ti happened as it did at that moment. Despite mine and Richard's protests, no one believed it was anything but trickery, even when we explained exactly what it was Context determines much. At least no one thought it was a ghost!

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:36 PM   #249
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
By what mechanic does a non-physical entity manifest any physical effect?

Define physical here? Radio waves count as physical? They manifest physical effects? What about your consciousness? That manifests physical effects? I'm not sure that these phenomena are not physical anyway. They seem pretty much physical and following some kind of natural laws, even if I can't understand them at the moment. Roll's book has an interesting chart on this actually -- I might post a link to the diagram when I have a moment to scan it...

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:46 PM   #250
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
I was sufficiently curious to follow your google books link and search for this quote. Can't find it. Google books only found two instances of the word 'poll' in the book and neither match that quote.

Trivially, it appears to me unsurprising if there are differences between experiences which people attribute to ghosts and experiences which they attribute to alien abduction, otherwise people probably wouldn't give them those different attributions. For one thing, only one of them involves a sense of having been abducted.
I think the term is survey not poll. Chris French was involved as i recall. The research may well be cited on his webpage - I have Houran and Lange Multidisciplinary Perspectives here if anyone wants me to look it up, but it is also in Smith (edited) Anomalous Experiences:Psychological & Parapsychologial Perspectives (Macfarlane 2010) and I'm pretty sure cited in Cardena et al Varieties of Anomalous Experience (2001) Tony Jinks (2012) has a section on it, and French et al (2012) ditto. Different psychological factors are found in the two groups. I chatted to Chris French a while back at Skeptics in the Pub and like most researcher he was pretty dismissive as i recall of cognitive deficits theory on paranormal belief, though he did find certain psychological traits stronglys associated with certain types of conspiracy thinking. I have a thread on cognitive deficit theory from earlier in the year elsewhere on the forum, so I won;t repeat it here in detail. The relevant section is

"OK, we often see alleged round these parts that paranormal believers are prone to be dumb or mentally unwell. Let's take a look at what science tells us on this question. This is what parapsychologists call the Cognitive Deficits Hypothesis Wilson & French look at it in Wilson, Krissy and French, Christopher C.. 2006. The relationship between susceptibility to false memories, dissociativity, and paranormal belief and experience. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(8), pp. 1493-1502. ISSN 01918869 if anyone has access to the Journal by database but I'm going to look at what French et al 2012 have to say in their 2012 book Anomalistic Psychology as the most up to date source. It is excellent and I highly recommend it.
1. Are believers bad at judging probability, prone to misunderstanding randomness?

We see this asserted all the time, so what does the research say? The history of this one is interesting - the excellent Susan Blackmore raised it back in 1985, with two experiments testing if believers in ESP were more likely to be bad at judging randomness in things like the Shared Birthday conundrum than non-believers. One experiment was significant; the other not, but a 1991 replication gave the idea credence and now it is popularly believed by sceptics. Since that time four more studies, including a very large (6000 participant) 1997 study by Blackmore have failed to replicate the effect, showing no difference in the two groups, and it not now considered to be "a robust... or even genuine effect" French (2012) p. 21

Anyway I intend to do ten of these. For those interested in checking it out, you can read the largest experiment here -- Blackmore, Susan (1997) Probability Misjudgment and Belief in the Paranormal: A Newspaper Survey, British Journal of Psychology, 88, 683-689.


2. Are paranormal believers less intelligent than non-believers?
The short answer according to French (2007) is no. Irwin (2009) writes "the cognitive deficits theory appears to be more successful as a polemical device for sceptical commentators than as an empirically grounded theory of paranormal belief." The issue is that some forms of paranormal belief may or may not be related to lower intelligence -- paranormal beliefs cover a wide spectrum -- but generally no correlation can be found, and I was unable to identify any support for the hypothesis for any given aspect of paranormal belief from Cardena et al. (2000)

The claim seems to originate with well known skeptics, as with 1 above. The first paper to propose the link I have seen referenced is Alcock, J & Otis, L.P. (1980) Critical thinking and belief in the paranormal, Psychological Reports, 46, 479-482. However more recent research has failed to find this link: see Irwin (1991) The reasoning skills of paranormal believers, Journal of Parapsychology, 43, 205-220 and Roe, C. A. (1999). Critical Thinking and Belief in the Paranormal: A re-evaluation. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 85-98. The current position appears to be that paranormal believers are no less intelligent than non believers - in fact paranormal belief appears in the USA to be positively correlated with educational achievement, with the higher your level of academic qualification the more likely you are to believe."

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 06:58 PM   #251
Resume
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,336
Resume has a birthday
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
Define physical here? Radio waves count as physical? They manifest physical effects? What about your consciousness? That manifests physical effects? I'm not sure that these phenomena are not physical anyway. They seem pretty much physical and following some kind of natural laws, even if I can't understand them at the moment. Roll's book has an interesting chart on this actually -- I might post a link to the diagram when I have a moment to scan it...

cj x
Oh I'm pretty sure these phenomena are physical all right.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 07:02 PM   #252
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
OK I have had a look at Houran and Lange (2001) but have no idea which of the chapters contains the stuff in question. It does not appear to be in Tony Lawrence's magisterial discussion of CDT, or in Pekkala's chapter following, so it may well be from one of the three chapters by Persinger. I'll hunt it down in the morning if Andy does not have a page reference.

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th October 2012, 10:39 PM   #253
Andyman409
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 111
Quote:
OK, I have read two pages and been commenting, but if I responded to everything of interest I'd probably triple the length of the thread and bore everyone away. I will give up reading here, and mention my blog POLTERWOTSIT -- http://polterwotsit.wordpress.com/ which may be of interest

My academic area is poltergeists, and i'm sorely tempted to stick around and discuss them, but I don;t want to kill the thread with my tedious wittering, so I'll shut uo till someone else posts now

cj x
Yeah, I hate to be rude, but your posts would take up a lot of space. At any rate, I'll happy shadow your blog (s).
Andyman409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:16 AM   #254
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,284
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
...My academic area is poltergeists, and i'm sorely tempted to stick around and discuss them, but I don;t want to kill the thread with my tedious wittering, so I'll shut uo till someone else posts now
...
Come, come, cj, we're approaching Hallowe'en!
Think of the reason for the season and witter away, please!
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:27 AM   #255
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
Define physical here? Radio waves count as physical?
Yes.

Quote:
They manifest physical effects?
Yes.

Quote:
What about your consciousness?
Yes.

Quote:
That manifests physical effects?
Yes. (Ignoring some finer semantic points.)

Quote:
I'm not sure that these phenomena are not physical anyway. They seem pretty much physical and following some kind of natural laws, even if I can't understand them at the moment.
That gets you out of the dualist swamp, at least.

The problem with your position, though, is that (a) these events are physically impossible and (b) there is absolutely no physical evidence that they happen.

I can tentatively accept the theoretically impossible if the evidence is strong enough, and I can accept the mundanely possible without demanding rigorous observation, but claims of the utterly impossible with no supporting evidence whatsoever can only be answered with the harshest derision.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:30 AM   #256
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 5,926
Originally Posted by Andyman409 View Post
Yeah, I hate to be rude, but your posts would take up a lot of space.
Useful space, given that they are far more interesting and informative than anything you've posted.

And it's a bit disingenuous of you to create three almost identical threads and then complain that you're finding it hard to follow a conversation across them. Why not just report one of the OPs and get a mod to merge them?
__________________
"The correct scientific response to anything that is not understood is always to look harder for the explanation, not give up and assume a supernatural cause". David Attenborough.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:32 AM   #257
Lusikka
Critical Thinker
 
Lusikka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
I'd disagree. I would start with Alan Gauld and Tony Cornell's 1979 book Poltergeists. Roll's book is a good read, a classic, but actually I think if you want the bigger picture Gauld & Cornell is where to start.
I agree. I have both books on my shelf. But unfortunately it is useless to speak about books on a skeptical forum. The books are not peer reviewed and don't "prove" anything. It is too much work to waste your time in reading a silly book. Naturally this does not concern skeptical books, they are very useful and give good background against woo.

They forget the fact that it is needed a whole book to give a rather detailed big picture of something.
__________________
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
-- Herbert Spencer
Lusikka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 12:35 AM   #258
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by Lusikka View Post
I agree. I have both books on my shelf. But unfortunately it is useless to speak about books on a skeptical forum.
No.

It's useless to attempt to support supernatural claims with other supernatural claims.

Present evidence, and you'll find an entirely different reception.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:23 AM   #259
Lusikka
Critical Thinker
 
Lusikka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by PixyMisa View Post
No.

It's useless to attempt to support supernatural claims with other supernatural claims.

Present evidence, and you'll find an entirely different reception.
Evidence? What do you mean? Examples.

I don't like the word "supernatural", it is not needed at all. It is often only a way to make unexplained perceptions and research results suspect.
__________________
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
-- Herbert Spencer
Lusikka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:29 AM   #260
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,284
You might be right, lusikka.
It's OT, but I notice you use a bent spoon as your avatar.
Are you familiar with the Monroe Institute?
There's a thread here that discusses, among other things, their claims to teach spoon-bending.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=24245
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:31 AM   #261
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by Lusikka View Post
Evidence? What do you mean? Examples.
Serious question: What do you think I mean?

Quote:
I don't like the word "supernatural", it is not needed at all. It is often only a way to make unexplained perceptions and research results suspect.
Not my problem. If you want to claim that it's a poltergeist rather than just a story, that's your choice.
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:42 AM   #262
Lusikka
Critical Thinker
 
Lusikka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
I once watched a bourbon glass make it's way nearly off a desk where I worked. Of course the condensation from the ice and the impetus cause by my typing might have had something to do with it. No, it had everything to do with it.
Anecdotes are worth of nothing, I have learned. But this kind of case is very common, I have seen it told many times. I guess the explanation is the wet glass, smooth table and the warming air in the hollow under the glass. Typing may also have an effect.
__________________
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
-- Herbert Spencer
Lusikka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:47 AM   #263
Lusikka
Critical Thinker
 
Lusikka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by PixyMisa View Post
Serious question: What do you think I mean?
Unfortunately I happened to ask first and you did not answer. I would call it irresponsible discussion strategy. But I agree, the answering would have required a little thinking work.
__________________
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
-- Herbert Spencer
Lusikka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 01:55 AM   #264
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by Lusikka View Post
Unfortunately I happened to ask first and you did not answer. I would call it irresponsible discussion strategy. But I agree, the answering would have required a little thinking work.
I'm not being difficult, I'm honestly trying to understand you. When a skeptic asks for evidence, what do you think they mean?
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:08 AM   #265
Lusikka
Critical Thinker
 
Lusikka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by pakeha View Post
You might be right, lusikka.
It's OT, but I notice you use a bent spoon as your avatar.
Are you familiar with the Monroe Institute?
There's a thread here that discusses, among other things, their claims to teach spoon-bending.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=24245
Still a short OT if allowed. I have not been interested about the Monroe Institute, because I have nowhere seen the results of their courses. I suspect strongly it is only a commercial enterprise.

I could not find the spoon bending stuff there. I think the bending cannot be taught. The bending situation is important, for example the spoon bending parties are a good situation with many results. Unfortunately it has not occurred in their minds that they could have recorded those successes. Also William Roll and Dean Radin have been present there.
__________________
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
-- Herbert Spencer
Lusikka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:18 AM   #266
Andyman409
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
OK I have had a look at Houran and Lange (2001) but have no idea which of the chapters contains the stuff in question. It does not appear to be in Tony Lawrence's magisterial discussion of CDT, or in Pekkala's chapter following, so it may well be from one of the three chapters by Persinger. I'll hunt it down in the morning if Andy does not have a page reference.

cj x
Shoot... this is what happens when you try to run three threads at once!

That claim was a complete mistake on my part. I thought the guy stated he got it from a survey. Turns out, when I reread the page, the guy was merely relying on past experience. The chapter immediatlet after it went into statistics, so thats probably why I made the mistake.
Andyman409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:28 AM   #267
Andyman409
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Useful space, given that they are far more interesting and informative than anything you've posted.
With all due respect, CJ is more experienced than me, and seems to be better at spelling things out than I am.

Anyways, it was probably hasty of me to make that request. I wont stop him if he wishes to continue dialoguing with you. hell, a little debate sounds like it would be a lot of fun, particularly during Halloween season! So you guys fire away and have a grand conversation.

Quote:
And it's a bit disingenuous of you to create three almost identical threads and then complain that you're finding it hard to follow a conversation across them. Why not just report one of the OPs and get a mod to merge them?
It would be if they were identical. One discusses poltergeists, and the other collective apparitions. They are very different phenomena, with different explanations. I concede to your point that the third thread was useless. When I made it, I figured it could involve all sorts of claims, from bigfoot to ET. However, it has made things more difficult than easy. I'll try to get them merged- thanks for the suggestion!

Last edited by Andyman409; 15th October 2012 at 02:35 AM.
Andyman409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:39 AM   #268
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 5,926
Originally Posted by Andyman409 View Post
CJ is more experienced than me, and seems to be better at spelling things out than I am.
Quite. So why didn't you encourage him to continue posting, instead of telling him that his posts were taking up too much space in your thread?

Quote:
They are very different phenomena, with different explanations.
They are very similar phenomena, with identical explanations - mostly misperceptions, and the occasional deliberate fraud.
__________________
"The correct scientific response to anything that is not understood is always to look harder for the explanation, not give up and assume a supernatural cause". David Attenborough.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 02:45 AM   #269
Andyman409
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Quite. So why didn't you encourage him to continue posting, instead of telling him that his posts were taking up too much space in your thread?
Thanks for te suggestion. I just edited my post to encourage him. Hopefully, we can get a discussion going about famous cases and stuff. Looks like some people like Lusikka are pretty knowledgeable on them.

Quote:
They are very similar phenomena, with identical explanations - mostly misperceptions, and the occasional deliberate fraud.
I wouldn't say they are identical phenomena. Skeptics tend to explain poltergeists as fraud/seismic activity/etc, while explaining apparitions as hallucinations. They both rely on testimony, however, which is very unreliable when it comes to these kinds of things.
Andyman409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 03:11 AM   #270
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 5,926
Originally Posted by Andyman409 View Post
Skeptics tend to explain poltergeists as fraud/seismic activity/etc, while explaining apparitions as hallucinations.
http://www.skepdic.com/poltergeist.html

Quote:
Another possibility, however, is that some poltergeist experiences are simply perceptual misinterpretations, e.g., seeing things move that never moved or attributing sounds or movement of inanimate objects to spirits when one can't detect the source.
http://www.skepdic.com/ghosts.html

Quote:
Scientists who have investigated haunted places account for both the temperature changes and the sounds by finding physical sources of the drafts, such as empty spaces behind walls or currents set in motion by low frequency sound waves (infrasound) produced by such mundane objects as extraction fans
.

I think "mostly misperceptions and the occasional deliberate fraud" pretty much covers both. Pareidolia probably plays a bigger part in apparitions, but that's also just a misperception.
__________________
"The correct scientific response to anything that is not understood is always to look harder for the explanation, not give up and assume a supernatural cause". David Attenborough.

Last edited by Pixel42; 15th October 2012 at 03:12 AM.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 03:38 AM   #271
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by Andyman409 View Post
It would be if they were identical. One discusses poltergeists, and the other collective apparitions. They are very different phenomena, with different explanations.
Evidence?
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 05:21 AM   #272
Resume
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,336
Resume has a birthday
Originally Posted by Lusikka View Post
Anecdotes are worth of nothing, I have learned. But this kind of case is very common, I have seen it told many times. I guess the explanation is the wet glass, smooth table and the warming air in the hollow under the glass. Typing may also have an effect.
As you say, this phenomenon is common, mundane, the conditions easily replicated; observable, repeatable, unlike, I dunno, poltergeists.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 06:28 AM   #273
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by PixyMisa View Post

I can tentatively accept the theoretically impossible if the evidence is strong enough, and I can accept the mundanely possible without demanding rigorous observation, but claims of the utterly impossible with no supporting evidence whatsoever can only be answered with the harshest derision.

Yep, when you have ruled out the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable... The question is how do we know what is impossible? Have you seem my response to Brian Cox (& Wiseman, Hood & Ince) on the claim ghost are impossible? Firstly, how are you defining the entity you propose is impossible? People clearly have anomalous experiences -- the underlying causes are the issue. So what is impossible? Actually I asked this in another thread, more succinctly I think!

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 06:31 AM   #274
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
As you say, this phenomenon is common, mundane, the conditions easily replicated; observable, repeatable, unlike, I dunno, poltergeists.

Other well established phenomena do not meet your criteria; eg. transient ischaemic attacks? Or for example the First World War? Or for example Evolution, to use Popper's famous example? Not all phenomena are reproducible at will. The "WOW!" signal is a classic example.

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 06:37 AM   #275
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
http://www.skepdic.com/poltergeist.html



http://www.skepdic.com/ghosts.html

.

I think "mostly misperceptions and the occasional deliberate fraud" pretty much covers both. Pareidolia probably plays a bigger part in apparitions, but that's also just a misperception.
Some good stuff here . Unfortunately the Infrasound hypothesis is pretty much dead and buried. It was a brave attempt by Tandy, Lawrence et al, but Braithwaite, Cornell, and most recently Parsons have debunked it pretty substantially, and I fear it is now considered to be an irrelevance. Parsons latest is here http://www.parascience.org.uk/articles/INFRASND.pdf I made a common sense argument against the idea on this forum many years ago (low frequency sound is pretty bloody ubiquitous, as are standing waves.)

I'm afraid I'm not very interested or knowledgeable on the subject, but SkepDic is woefully out of date here and offering unsound information. I think Dr Braithwaite occasionally posts here, and his pioneering sceptical work covered the area in detail.

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com

Last edited by cj.23; 15th October 2012 at 06:39 AM.
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 06:39 AM   #276
Stray Cat
Philosopher
 
Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Land That Time Forgot
Posts: 6,805
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
Yep, when you have ruled out the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable... The question is how do we know what is impossible?
Not sure that quoting a fictional character's words written by a man who believed in fairies is a good tactic

As for "what is impossible" obviously at it's broadest sense, it is things which are deemed to be impossible at the moment.

Which is why evidence for their possibility is required.

At the moment, there is zero evidence for poltergeists or ghosts being anything more than tricks of the mind or tricks of people.

I don't think that the fact that people experience these phenomena is being refuted here, just their interpretation as anything other than mundane.
__________________
It's only my madness that stops me from going insane!
Stray Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 06:40 AM   #277
Resume
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,336
Resume has a birthday
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
Other well established phenomena do not meet your criteria; eg. transient ischaemic attacks? Or for example the First World War? Or for example Evolution, to use Popper's famous example? Not all phenomena are reproducible at will. The "WOW!" signal is a classic example.

cj x
Is poltergeist phenomena well-established? Wow, who knew.

Is it reproducible at all? If so, let's see.

Last edited by Resume; 15th October 2012 at 07:51 AM.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 07:45 AM   #278
R.A.F.
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,204
Originally Posted by I Ratant View Post
How could something as insubstantial as a ghost vibrate air at all to make any kind of a noise?
I've been asking essentially the same question for many years in regard to EVP. How in the hell can insubstantial "ghosts" produce voices, when they have no "mechanism" to do so?

Voices are produced by passing air through our vocal chords...how can "something" without vocal chords make any noise at all?


Any "takers" on that last question?
R.A.F. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 08:03 AM   #279
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 15,830
Originally Posted by cj.23 View Post
Yep, when you have ruled out the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable.
Right.

So, poltergeists, for example, are impossible and don't exist.

Those are separate statements. It's not that they don't exist because they're impossible, they don't exist and they're impossible.


Quote:
The question is how do we know what is impossible?
Science.

Quote:
Have you seem my response to Brian Cox (& Wiseman, Hood & Ince) on the claim ghost are impossible?
No, I haven't.

Quote:
Firstly, how are you defining the entity you propose is impossible?
I don't. I'm not proposing anything.

Quote:
People clearly have anomalous experiences -- the underlying causes are the issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_memory_biases
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th October 2012, 08:04 AM   #280
cj.23
Master Poster
 
cj.23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kadath in the Cold Waste
Posts: 2,830
Originally Posted by R.A.F. View Post
I've been asking essentially the same question for many years in regard to EVP. How in the hell can insubstantial "ghosts" produce voices, when they have no "mechanism" to do so?

Voices are produced by passing air through our vocal chords...how can "something" without vocal chords make any noise at all?


Any "takers" on that last question?

Given I have no interest or belief in EVP or knowledge thereof this may be nonsense, but I could make a case. The voice is created as you say: the act of hearing the voice is as I understand it based upon the resonating of the eardrum. Now electrical devices can therefore be "stimulated" to produce sound that can not be heard by the human ear, if the microphone is sensitive to those frequencies. So the voice could simply be a EMF signal in the capacity range for the device's sensitivity: no voice would be heard for human observers if it fell outside the tolerance range of the eardrum, but it could still register on the equipment.

cj x
__________________
I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell

My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com
cj.23 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.