Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 3:53 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Poltergeist
#31
RE: Poltergeist
(July 8, 2009 at 8:33 am)Tiberius Wrote:
(July 7, 2009 at 9:22 pm)LEDO Wrote: If fact neither me nor my sisters ever doubted that Mom could read our minds because she could tell us exactly what we were thinking.
Sounds like your mom should attempt the $1,000,000 challenge then!

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

Seriously, what has she got to lose?

She died 25 years ago.
"On Earth as it is in Heaven, the Cosmic Roots of the Bible" available on the Amazon.
Reply
#32
RE: Poltergeist
(July 8, 2009 at 5:38 am)dagda Wrote: Why is the 'real' thing so unbelievable? Seriously, no-one has told me. It seems to be a case of mock me long and hard enough and I will go away. Do you think the evidence is false? Is there another explanation that I do not see? So far I can only guess at what is wrong with the evidence presented (not just by me) for the poltergeist phenomenon. I am not psychic, you have to tell me your critisisms before I can react to them.

Because there is no validatable evidence, there is NEVER any validatable evidence ... there are tales, there are claims but when it comes down to producing, hard, investigatable, solid, verifiable evidence such claims fail again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and ...

In essence whenever science turns it's eye to these claims they ALWAYS fail ... if that were not true there would be evidence in reputable science journals but there is NONE!

Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!

Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Reply
#33
RE: Poltergeist
(July 8, 2009 at 2:57 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:
(July 8, 2009 at 5:38 am)dagda Wrote: Why is the 'real' thing so unbelievable? Seriously, no-one has told me. It seems to be a case of mock me long and hard enough and I will go away. Do you think the evidence is false? Is there another explanation that I do not see? So far I can only guess at what is wrong with the evidence presented (not just by me) for the poltergeist phenomenon. I am not psychic, you have to tell me your critisisms before I can react to them.

Because there is no validatable evidence, there is NEVER any validatable evidence ... there are tales, there are claims but when it comes down to producing, hard, investigatable, solid, verifiable evidence such claims fail again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and ...

In essence whenever science turns it's eye to these claims they ALWAYS fail ... if that were not true there would be evidence in reputable science journals but there is NONE!

Kyu

So who is tying my vacuum cleaner cord in knots?
"On Earth as it is in Heaven, the Cosmic Roots of the Bible" available on the Amazon.
Reply
#34
RE: Poltergeist
(July 8, 2009 at 2:57 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:
(July 8, 2009 at 5:38 am)dagda Wrote: Why is the 'real' thing so unbelievable? Seriously, no-one has told me. It seems to be a case of mock me long and hard enough and I will go away. Do you think the evidence is false? Is there another explanation that I do not see? So far I can only guess at what is wrong with the evidence presented (not just by me) for the poltergeist phenomenon. I am not psychic, you have to tell me your critisisms before I can react to them.

Because there is no validatable evidence, there is NEVER any validatable evidence ... there are tales, there are claims but when it comes down to producing, hard, investigatable, solid, verifiable evidence such claims fail again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and ...

In essence whenever science turns it's eye to these claims they ALWAYS fail ... if that were not true there would be evidence in reputable science journals but there is NONE!

Kyu


Please give me a link to these scientific enquiries which disproves the poltergiest phenomenon please.Smile


In what way has any case study I have ever produced in conjunction with psychoenergetic science ever failed? To the best of my knowledge no-one (exept Adrian in the case of the Ganzfeld experiments) has ever even made a half hearted attempt at de-bunking my evidence (and in the case of the Ganzfeld it was more a matter of diffrent opinion on what to make of the findings rather that a specific problem with the experiments themselves).
Reply
#35
RE: Poltergeist
(July 8, 2009 at 5:36 pm)LEDO Wrote: So who is tying my vacuum cleaner cord in knots?

You forgot the sock monster! Naughty boy!

Kyu
(July 9, 2009 at 3:22 pm)dagda Wrote: [quote='Kyuuketsuki' pid='22323' dateline='1247079420']
[quote='dagda' pid='22216' dateline='1247045881']Because there is no validatable evidence, there is NEVER any validatable evidence ... there are tales, there are claims but when it comes down to producing, hard, investigatable, solid, verifiable evidence such claims fail again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and ...

In essence whenever science turns it's eye to these claims they ALWAYS fail ... if that were not true there would be evidence in reputable science journals but there is NONE!

Please give me a link to these scientific enquiries which disproves the poltergiest phenomenon please.Smile

And you disingenuously miss dealing with the key point ...

(July 8, 2009 at 2:57 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: In essence whenever science turns it's eye to these claims they ALWAYS fail ... if that were not true there would be evidence in reputable science journals but there is NONE!

(July 9, 2009 at 3:22 pm)dagda Wrote: In what way has any case study I have ever produced in conjunction with psychoenergetic science ever failed? To the best of my knowledge no-one (exept Adrian in the case of the Ganzfeld experiments) has ever even made a half hearted attempt at de-bunking my evidence (and in the case of the Ganzfeld it was more a matter of diffrent opinion on what to make of the findings rather that a specific problem with the experiments themselves).

They are not in reputable journals of science.

Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!

Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Reply
#36
RE: Poltergeist
(July 9, 2009 at 4:07 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: They are not in reputable journals of science.
Kyu


Owned!
I used to tell a lot of religious jokes. Not any more, I'm a registered sects offender.
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
[Image: attemptingtogiveadamnc.gif]
Reply
#37
RE: Poltergeist
Quote:Please give me a link to these scientific enquiries which disproves the poltergiest phenomenon please.


I see you are still struggling with the notion of the burden of proof. It is you who are claiming poltergeists are real. The burden of proof is yours.

I'm not sure the phenomenum is falsifiable, as no one knows how many causes there may be lumped under the single heading. I'm not necessarily questioning the events per se. I'm questioning the interpretations of the events as proof of survival after death or some other supernatural cause.THOSE claims require extraordinary proofs.
Reply
#38
RE: Poltergeist
(July 9, 2009 at 8:44 pm)padraic Wrote:
Quote:Please give me a link to these scientific enquiries which disproves the poltergiest phenomenon please.


I see you are still struggling with the notion of the burden of proof. It is you who are claiming poltergeists are real. The burden of proof is yours.

I'm not sure the phenomenum is falsifiable, as no one knows how many causes there may be lumped under the single heading. I'm not necessarily questioning the events per se. I'm questioning the interpretations of the events as proof of survival after death or some other supernatural cause.THOSE claims require extraordinary proofs.


No, I have provided proof. You can not dismiss my evidence just because you would like me to be wrong, that is not how it works. If you do not think the evidence provided is suitable, that is another matter, but so far no-one has said why the evidence I have provided is un-suitable. Instead you have shouted that I am wrong without telling me why I am wrong.


Kyu, answer the question: why does my evidence fail? You say that it does not appear in scientific journals. How can you possibly know that? Are you omnipotent or perhaps all new scientific evidence is passed through your office before publication?

Anyway, your lack of a link suggests to me that articles about the poltergeist phenomenon (for or against) just have not reached the mainstream of scientific enquiry. Why is this grounds for dismissal? Are we just to blindly except that what is in the mainstream will always be mainstream? Remember, all scientific theories/hypothesis start on the fringes. I can hear your answer now 'there is no evidence to suggest that this is legitimate grounds for scientific enquiry'. I have provided evidence so to continue with this denial you must dis-prove the evidence at hand. Surely that is how science works?
Reply
#39
RE: Poltergeist
Are Nargals the same as poltergeist?
"On Earth as it is in Heaven, the Cosmic Roots of the Bible" available on the Amazon.
Reply
#40
RE: Poltergeist
No idea what a Nargal is.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)