Ghosts.

[General-jwj]

If we take the basic principles of physics, ghosts are pretty shakey when it comes to existing. Unless they don't obey Newton's laws (which absolutely EVERYTHING does).

Simply put : they can't cross walls and walk on the floor if they're made of matter because every action has an opposite reaction : so if the ghost can "walk" without going through the floor then it must apply some kind of force to the floor and the floor reciprocates, this way the ghost walks. But then it couldn't cross walls seeing as they'd apply a force to the wall and recieve an opposite reaction force.

It could work if they're made of energy though.

But if they're made purely of energy, they can't manipulate air to make the noises you describe, it takes matter to make air vibrate at frequencies and shit. Unless whatever energy they're made of turned into Sound Energy somehow but you can't just transform from one form of energy to the other with no repercussions.

And obviously if it was pure energy it couldn't bang the shit out of your walls and doors and shit. It would need to be matter to interact with matter.

And as everyone knows transforming matter into energy is kinda ridiculous on humans scales of mass, as even a small mass is a ridiculous amount of energy (because of how E=mc² and c² is pretty fucking huge ergo E quickly becomes fucking huge) and if you go energy to matter it takes a similarly huge amount of energy to make mass again. So a ghost can't just turn from ethereal energy to physical matter or vice versa.

I damn well suck at physics but from the weak understanding I have of the matter that is damning evidence that ghosts don't work too well.

Unless you wanna go all paranormal and be like "bitch, they're dead dudes they don't give a shit about physics" and then there's no point in even trying to argue. It's religious people Vs non religious people all over again.

super fast edit : yeah I agree with everyone like LK and shit that it's the dude saying the thing is real that should be doing the work. I'm just typing this because I have a final in eight hours and I'm procrastinating.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

Again, how do you honestly expect someone to prove a negative?

Magical invisible unicorns exist and they feed on socks which is why you sometimes lose one. PROVE ME WRONG.

That's not what I'm saying. What is stopping people from saying something like "Ghosts don't exists because........" There ahs to be a reason why people believe they don't exist, just like people have reasons they believe they do exist. Atheists have reasons why they believe God doesn't exist.

Well first we'd need to know the layout of your place, any possible sources of drafts, locations of pets, frequency and strength of minor earthquakes in your area (including passing trucks, planes, trains, and other vehicles), how good your hearing is, any neighbours, the angle of the hinges (e.g if they slope), your mental state, if you were sleep-deprived, what (if any) existing medical conditions you have, medication taken... then maybe some logical explanations could be put forward.

How my rooms sit in my flat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=234voL15RqE

At night my town is dead for traffic/people between the hours of 12am and 6am on most nights. I am mentally stable, I have very good hearing, I have uPVC double glazed window units, no drafts that I know of. I'm way too far away from the train station and the last train for the night is at 12:10am back to the city and starts again at about 6am. My neighbours directly below me are in bed by 10PM as one works as a postman and is up at 5am each morning, the neighbour across the hall is also in bed early along with everyone else, I am the only one who stays up until 2am at the latest in this building. I sleep fine every night, hardly ever sleep deprived. The only medication I take are two different pills for my diabetes but I have had experiences way before I was diagnosed and started taking the pills.

 

[Zydala]

That's not what I'm saying. What is stopping people from saying something like "Ghosts don't exists because........" There ahs to be a reason why people believe they don't exist, just like people have reasons they believe they do exist. Atheists have reasons why they believe God doesn't exist.

Because any visualizations/experiences/communication of/with ghosts are easily replicated without the need of an apparition being present. Ghosts and other spiritual beings exist universally through all cultures, but nearly none share similar roles or features (i.e. if they're friendly, evil, beings of nature or of heaven, etc). Given this, it's pretty safe to conclude that they were 'created' by human cultures to explain things that they had no means of explaining themselves at the time (psychedelic experiences, near-death experiences, and so forth).

So, therefore, "ghosts don't exist".

 

[SnowFox]

I think the ghosts have infiltrated the ads on youtube and are implying your flat is a shit hole
You better invite Derek Acorah around to do some cleaning as soon as possible. This is serious shit you don't want to fuck around with.


What a waste of my 5000th post :[

 

[LizardKing]

That's not what I'm saying. What is stopping people from saying something like "Ghosts don't exists because........"

Because there's no way to disprove something that basically boils down to "Oh well it's magic". It doesn't matter how many things can be explained or physical laws explained, the answer is always "It was magic or some other dimensions and shit".

There ahs to be a reason why people believe they don't exist, just like people have reasons they believe they do exist. Atheists have reasons why they believe God doesn't exist.

Because it just doesn't make much sense. Even if only 10% of everyone that ever died becomes a ghost, there should be one in practically every house on the planet. With such vast amounts of them, why is the only evidence available a few shitty photographs and dodgy videos (that are frequently proven to be fakes anyway)? Why do all ghost stories seem to boil down to, "Oh this one time something made a noise/something moved a little but I didn't see what happened but it was totally a ghost"? It's not so much the reasons for them not existing, but the lack of reasons to think they do.

Frankly, Occam's razor cuts the shit out of ghosts. Oh no, there was some kind of odd noise! Either:

A) A fleshy sack of water and neurons can somehow create some sort of extra-dimensional being that not only remains on the Earth (along its wild journey through space) but seemingly lives forever, yet requires no sustenance, and can freely dissipate into thin air, or walk through solid objects, can somehow impart kinetic energy to objects, interact with light so it may be seen, and do all of this while breaking numerous known laws of physics

OR

B) something fell over

Yeah no thanks, I'll go for B.

How my rooms sit in my flat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=234voL15RqE

At night my town is dead for traffic/people between the hours of 12am and 6am on most nights. I am mentally stable, I have very good hearing, I have uPVC double glazed window units, no drafts that I know of. I'm way too far away from the train station and the last train for the night is at 12:10am back to the city and starts again at about 6am. My neighbours directly below me are in bed by 10PM as one works as a postman and is up at 5am each morning, the neighbour across the hall is also in bed early along with everyone else, I am the only one who stays up until 2am at the latest in this building. I sleep fine every night, hardly ever sleep deprived. The only medication I take are two different pills for my diabetes but I have had experiences way before I was diagnosed and started taking the pills.

Haha, I can't believe you actually went through all that. I could probably think of some more things if you like.

 

[8-bit]

and i live in the "real silent hill"

And I'm Princess Celestia.

 

[8-bit]

i live in a ghost town (the empty kind) so it is nickname

How can it be a ghost town if people live there?

 

[8-bit]

chirst i was just trying to see if the guy that made this thread would bleve me

Next time, make the story believable and use proper punctuation. To get back to the topic of ghosts, the only good ghost is a G-G-G-G-LADIATOR GH-O-O-O-O-O-O-STTT!

 

[Tao]

one time i was sitting in the bathroom then i saw a ghost
hi said the ghost
then he never again

 

[FlynnCoyote]

chirst i was just trying to see if the guy that made this thread would bleve me

It speaks volumes to your (lack of) intelligence to think anyone could believe what you said.

 

[General-jwj]

Everything LK said

I'm with him on this.

 

[triage]

when i was little and i was sitting in my home's living room i looked at the staircase and saw a hand

aside from that my house isn't very spooky and there are no skeletons popping out of closets

 

[Sai_Wolf]

How old are you? five or something?

He said they don't exist, where is his evidence? I have already given my examples of possibilities in this thread and I can give plenty more, yet not many have even tried to give me a logical explanation as to why I clearly heard a door, in my apartment, close twice within minutes of each other. How can we debate if only one side is doing any debating/evidence giving? that just makes it a one sided debate.

You guys can't prove their non existence so you are resorting to stupid childish behaviour. Santa clause was a piss poor example, every KNOWS he doesn't exist and never did.

I'm trying to debate here, hence why I asked for his evidence, but you guys seem incapable of doing such a thing. At the very least debunk my claims. Don't just come here to act like a kid.

Cry more, Randy. You sound like a Christian apologetic. Fuck, I dare say you sound like Rukh in that post.

This is the trouble that you lot run into. Ghost hunters, religious converters, religous apologetics, people who attempt to prove the supernatural, etc. You attempt to make us prove your work for you. YOU have made the assertion that ghosts exist.

I'll say that again. In bold. You have made the assertion that Ghosts exist in this thread.

Where's your proof Randy? Can you offer this thread something more than anecdotal evidence? Can you give us pictures of the afterlife? Can you give us something more concrete than a blurred set of dots on a shitty photograph? Can you give us a photo that wasn't obviously a double exposure? I'd want something more than "I heard a noise. MUST BE A GHOST."

You can not; else you would have done so already (Or so I assume, being as you're playing the "I JUST WANT AN HONEST DEBATE" card). Instead, you expect US, the skeptics, to do your work for you.

Atheists do not see the rationale, nor the need, for an existential being high in the sky. We find life's answers in Science and the world around us. Science is not a religion, nor a belief for us. It is a tool for answering our questions; not a dogma we must ascribe too or be punished.

I'll say it once more: The ONUS OF PROOF is on YOU, Randy. Not us. Don't you dare throw the debate card, when you; yourself, are not willing to do the work required to make your position solid.

 

[Gavrill]

i live in a ghost town (the empty kind) so it is nickname

The "Real Silent Hill" is based on a place called Centralia and it's in Pennsylvania. A constantly-burning underground fire caused all but like, 5 residents to leave. It doesn't have ghosts, it's just a safety hazard.

So unless you live there don't be dumb.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

Cry more, Randy. You sound like a Christian apologetic. Fuck, I dare say you sound like Rukh in that post.

Thing is, I'm not crying.

This is the trouble that you lot run into. Ghost hunters, religious converters, religous apologetics, people who attempt to prove the supernatural, etc. You attempt to make us prove your work for you. YOU have made the assertion that ghosts exist.

I said I was open minded, but you obviously missed it in one of my previous posts.

Where's your proof Randy? Can you offer this thread something more than anecdotal evidence? Can you give us pictures of the afterlife? Can you give us something more concrete than a blurred set of dots on a shitty photograph? Can you give us a photo that wasn't obviously a double exposure? I'd want something more than "I heard a noise. MUST BE A GHOST."

Never actually said it was a ghost. I titled the thread "ghosts" and described what I heard and found. In my OP I never said "I heard a noise it's definitely a ghost".

You can not; else you would have done so already (Or so I assume, being as you're playing the "I JUST WANT AN HONEST DEBATE" card). Instead, you expect US, the skeptics, to do your work for you.

I'm not expecting anyone to do work for me, If people say ghosts don't exist then there has to be a reason behind their view.

I'll say it once more: The ONUS OF PROOF is on YOU, Randy. Not us. Don't you dare throw the debate card, when you; yourself, are not willing to do the work required to make your position solid.

If I did go through that and give solid reasons for the existence of ghosts and provided what I felt was good evidence, you as a skeptic would most likely sit there and disprove, or maybe debunk, is a better word, my alleged evidence which in my opinion would be an attempt to prove me wrong.

I don't believe every video I have seen of alleged ghost activity is actually that, but I do believe some things can not be explained. I mean heck, there are shit tons of alleged ghost video's on youtube and 99% of what I have seen are obviously not real or easily explained.

I was more or less calling someone out for their reasons why ghosts don't exist, maybe saying prove it was the worst choice of words ever.

 

[Sai_Wolf]

Thing is, I'm not crying.

Coulda fooled me with your tone throughout this thread.

I said I was open minded, but you obviously missed it in one of my previous posts.

My arguments toward you are not based on how 'open minded' you are, so your statement is a non issue.

Never actually said it was a ghost. I titled the thread "ghosts" and described what I heard and found. In my OP I never said "I heard a noise it's definitely a ghost".

And yet, you've heavily implied throughout this thread that that's what you think it is. Someone even linked two earlier threads by you, in which you discuss your belief in ghosts.

I'm not expecting anyone to do work for me, If people say ghosts don't exist then there has to be a reason behind their view.

If you have read this thread, then you've seen the reasons why. But you keep making these baseless demands that we give you a reason behind our skepticisim, while ignoring that you yourself are the one asserting the existence of something you cannot prove.

If I did go through that and give solid reasons for the existence of ghosts and provided what I felt was good evidence, you as a skeptic would most likely sit there and disprove, or maybe debunk, is a better word, my alleged evidence which in my opinion would be an attempt to prove me wrong.

So now it's the "There's no point in trying" excuse? That's awful generalist of you, to paint me with such a wide brush. And of COURSE I would try to disprove it. That's the whole entire point! You present evidence, it's evaluated. We come to a consensus. 99% of the time, the consensus is that the alleged evidence presented is bullshit.

I don't believe every video I have seen of alleged ghost activity is actually that, but I do believe some things can not be explained. I mean heck, there are shit tons of alleged ghost video's on youtube and 99% of what I have seen are obviously not real or easily explained.

I smell back pedaling. And of course there are things that cannot be explained...yet. That's the beauty of Science. It is a tool that lets us refine our theories and gain a broader understanding of the cosmos. There might be a rational explanation for the after life, we just might not have the technology and understanding to find out yet. Or it could all be bunk and we just fade into oblivion after we pass on. But it still holds that proof is needed, and the one making the assertion has to provide it.

maybe saying prove it was the worst choice of words ever.

Won't argue with you there.

 

[Sai_Wolf]

Double post. How the hell'd that happen?

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

And yet, you've heavily implied throughout this thread that that's what you think it is. Someone even linked two earlier threads by you, in which you discuss your belief in ghosts.

Just because I believe in ghosts does not mean I believe that every weird noise I hear is caused by a ghost.

If you have read this thread, then you've seen the reasons why. But you keep making these baseless demands that we give you a reason behind our skepticisim, while ignoring that you yourself are the one asserting the existence of something you cannot prove.

I asked one person, but everyone else butted in.

So now it's the "There's no point in trying" excuse? That's awful generalist of you, to paint me with such a wide brush. And of COURSE I would try to disprove it. That's the whole entire point! You present evidence, it's evaluated. We come to a consensus. 99% of the time, the consensus is that in the case of the supernatural that the alleged evidence presented is bullshit.

You're twisting what I said. I'm not painting anyone with a brush, nor am I being generalist, nor am I playing the "no point trying" excuse. No one asked me to provide any form of proof.

I smell back pedaling. And of course there are things that cannot be explained...yet. That's the beauty of Science. It is a tool that lets us refine our theories and gain a broader understanding of the cosmos. There might be a rational explanation for the after life, we just might not have the technology and understanding to find out yet. Or it could all be bunk and we just fade into oblivion after we pass on. But it still holds that proof is needed, and the one making the assertion has to provide it.

I'm not fucking back pedaling. I'm not some stupid cunt who believes every video he's see's of some weird thing going on is a ghost.

 

[Sai_Wolf]

I asked one person, but everyone else butted in.

Because you told him to prove a negative. You committed the fallacy of offloading the burden of proof onto him, when the burden is yours to carry.

You're twisting what I said. I'm not painting anyone with a brush, nor am I being generalist, nor am I playing the "no point trying" excuse. No one asked me to provide any form of proof.

And I quote:

If I did go through that and give solid reasons for the existence of ghosts and provided what I felt was good evidence, you as a skeptic would most likely sit there and disprove, or maybe debunk, is a better word, my alleged evidence which in my opinion would be an attempt to prove me wrong.

You're essentially saying that it's not worth it and thereby assuming that I would not give you due process and I would not consider your evidence. That's making an awful big assumption about me, Randy. And it hurts your credibility to make such an excuse in the first place.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

Because you told him to prove a negative. You committed the fallacy of offloading the burden of proof onto him, when the burden is yours to carry.






And I quote:



You're essentially saying that it's not worth it and thereby assuming that I would not give you due process and I would not consider your evidence. That's making an awful big assumption about me, Randy. And it hurts your credibility to make such an excuse in the first place.

I'm not saying it's not worth it at all, you're assuming that is what I am saying. You certainly enjoying twisting peoples words don't you. I can't talk to people if all they are going to do is twist what I said to suit their side. I never said, at all, that I can not be arsed to sit here and show some alleged evidence. I also said it's "most likely" as a skeptic you would disprove my evidence, I never said it's what you would definitely do like you are implying I said.

You're complaining about me making assumptions but you're doing a good job of it yourself.

 

[Sai_Wolf]

I'm not saying it's not worth it at all, you're assuming that is what I am saying. You certainly enjoying twisting peoples words don't you. I can't talk to people if all they are going to do is twist what I said to suit their side. I never said, at all, that I can not be arsed to sit here and show some alleged evidence. I also said it's "most likely" as a skeptic you would disprove my evidence, I never said it's what you would definitely do like you are implying I said.

You're complaining about me making assumptions but you're doing a good job of it yourself.

And. I. Quote.

If I did go through that and give solid reasons for the existence of ghosts and provided what I felt was good evidence, you as a skeptic would most likely sit there and disprove, or maybe debunk, is a better word, my alleged evidence which in my opinion would be an attempt to prove me wrong.

That was your reason for not backing up your position. You didn't want to provide evidence because you felt that I would 'most likely' debunk it. There's an invisible "So what's the point?" to that quote, Randy. I can only interpret your words as you write them. If you feel that I'm 'twisting' your words, then perhaps it's a failure on your part in how you wrote your response?

"I can't talk to people if all they are going to do is twist what I said to suit their side" also sounds like you're trying to weasel your way out of the argument.

So be it, Randy. I don't want to keep repeating myself, so I'll bow out now.

 

[Randy-Darkshade]

And. I. Quote.



That was your reason for not backing up your position. You didn't want to provide evidence because you felt that I would 'most likely' debunk it. There's an invisible "So what's the point?" to that quote, Randy. I can only interpret your words as you write them. If you feel that I'm 'twisting' your words, then perhaps it's a failure on your part in how you wrote your response?

"I can't talk to people if all they are going to do is twist what I said to suit their side" also sounds like you're trying to weasel your way out of the argument.

So be it, Randy. I don't want to keep repeating myself, so I'll bow out now.

Again, I never once stated I did not want to provide evidence, again you assume that is what I meant. I will provide evidence when asked too, but as I said once already no one has asked me to provide any proof. All you are doing is putting words in my mouth, this is the reason I don't want to debate anything with you, you are making assumptions, wrong assumptions at that and putting words in my mouth. If anyone else wants to debate this topic further I will, but I wont with you.