Hello

[Kyuuketsuki]

Assuming that is a typo and he means atheist, atheisim really has nothing at all to do with any of the things posted.

Oh I know exactly what it was, I just happen to be a pedant and happen to note that ignorant individuals often seem to lack an ability to spell or use decent grammar ... oh yeah and you're a spoil sport!

Kyu

[Samson]

Something I just wanted to throw out there to anyone who believes in "Ghosts"...

I had a debate about "Ghosts/Spirits" a while back on a religious forum. Something needs to be taken in consideration when talking about the paranormal; if there are "Ghosts" then this would mean people do not actually go straight to hell or heaven when they die. (Of course that statement is not meant for Atheist..) You could almost say the Catholics would be correct in their little purgatory scenario. However in the Christian sect of non-Catholic, it has been said time and time again that when you die, you will be judged then, not later.....Hence the toss up about Ghosts/Spirits etc.

Now if you want to talk "Demons/Angels", that would be a different story, but then you have take in consideration that only "Demons" would be roaming and not Angels. God apparently didn't like the last time his Angels were roaming around Earth...Yes there was some baby making time in the process of them being here, but hey, at least we got the great flood out from it........(Sarcasm off)..

Angels, Demons, Devils, Goblins, Fairies, Unicorns, Trolls, Pixies, Cyclopes, Titans, Elves, Leprechauns, Muses, Genies, Ghosts, Spirits, and the list can go on and on........

Emotional changes...........Some to scare children, some to control man, some to make people feel good, some to fill voids......

Not a single one of them listed has an inkling of evidence other than hear say, word of mouth.

[Kyuuketsuki]

IMO it is ludicrous to believe in things like ghosts, they are last bastion of those reaching out to something they suppose (wrongly I think) will take them beyond life's clutches. Ghosts/spirits are, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the "real essences" of people and animals (usually dead). They continue to exist after we die and are a separate though (crucially) important part of our psyche ... in other words in the event of death (no matter how horrible) that person's spirit is released into the ether for a gay little life of its own. So one might reasonably expect a person's character to remain fairly consistent throughout their life ... yet curiously, in the event of an accident involving head trauma or an illness involving brain damage a persons intelligence, personality, thought and abilities almost always change to some degree (sometimes quite devastatingly as I shall show in a moment). Although it is not possible (or rather not considered good practice, LOL) to slice people's brains up and see how their behaviour changes the victims of many, many road accidents and war injuries have been carefully studied and our knowledge of the relationship between mind and brain is not as lacking as some would claim. Indeed there were, last time I looked, maybe a thousand serious science journals devoted to the subject of mind and brain and it strikes me that that many journals means a lot of associated workers in the field. We may not fully grasp it all yet but I think know more than some would have us believe ... a quick search on Amazon UK for "brain mind" reveals some 1200 books, I'm sure there's crap there but that's still a lot of books to publish about which some will naively claim we know so little.

To give a personal example an uncle of mine (who died about 20 years ago) was the most charming man and an absolutely doting and devoted husband but, at the age of about 60, had a stroke and became the most vicious, nasty individual ... he absolutely tormented his wife. There is no doubt in my mind that the latter him was real and so was the former him but the problem is that if ghosts are real which *him* goes on to this supposed afterlife? How can this be if these *ghosts* are real? To claim that only his good part went to this afterlife is insulting on every level (including intellectually) because if his good part was in him for the remaining decade or so he survived after the stroke (when he was nasty) it would have been screaming itself into a state of insanity trying to get out.

That and many other examples leads me to the conclusion that those who believe in life after death (of any sort) do so on faith and faith alone because there is absolutely no validatable evidence to support such beliefs. As Dawkins would say, they, "... do it without any evidence and sometimes in spite of it".

Now scepticism is all well and good but that still leaves the problem of explain such things and there are two explanations equally valid and both probably in various situations.

Firstly, mistaken identity i.e. it looks like a ghost,. Sounds like a ghost therefore it must be a ghost.

A friend of mine went round with some colleagues to a neighbours' house to investigate a claimed haunting ... every night at the same time there was terrible groaning & moaning and a ghostly figure would appear on the landing and walk across it. My friend and his team investigated and it turned out the explanation was as follows ... there were old dust covered pipes above the landing and every night at that time the central heating would come on, pipes would expand and begin to vibrate with the water flowing through them and this caused the groaning/moaning sounds. At the same time the shaking pipes would shed some of the dust that lay upon them and it would fall to the landing floor but passed through a ray of light from a street light shining from outside the house and form the angle people would view the "apparition" would appear to resemble for a few seconds a ghostly female figure. So the explanation for the event was entirely natural and this is just one of many similar explanations where the cause of a claimed phenomenon turned out to be something else.

Secondly, all in the mind i.e. you can see it but no one else can.

The following is an interesting idea which, to my mind, completely explains most, if not all, supernatural events.

When you look at something you assume that something is external to you but, because everything you perceive is merely data that has already entered your brain, what you perceive as external is actually a neurologically constructed model inside your brain of the real world outside your brain. This has to be so because your eyes, your ears, your skin, your tongue and so on are not intelligent enough to sense AND interpret things directly so the brain must perform the interpretation function. The key point is you NEVER perceive the external world directly you only ever perceive second-hand "messages" from where it was processed into the three-dimensional model of the real world that you “see”. The things that you perceive as being the genuine articles "out there" are actually simulations of them inside your brain.

So you interact with the real world through a simulation and as long as that simulation is an exact analogy of the real world you do not experience problems. However when that internal model falls out of sync with the real world you begin to experience problems and paranormal, insane or non-sober experiences result ... one only has to drink three or 4 beers to get a good idea of what this can be like.

Since the internal model is a construct it is obvious that other brain (possibly abnormal) activities can interfere with that model ... for example if the neurological program that places the “virtual” you in one location in the model places you in a different location in error an out-of-body experience might result. If your imagination intrudes upon your "real-world" model you might have hallucinations with consequences varying form mildly entertaining, through spiritual to total insanity.

“The location of your consciousness could appear to expand and engulf the entire world-model, resulting in a "cosmic consciousness" experience. Or, inside your brain's program, experiences like pain could be placed in a location outside your simulated body, such as in the perceived location an amputated leg used to be, resulting in a "phantom pain" apparently outside your body. In each example, only the parameters of a simulated body inside the brain are transcended, and thus the evidence of a spirit body disappears like a ghost.” Ian Williams Goddard, 1999

In essence this idea easily explains how such paranormal experiences occur.

Oh and for those of you who are fans of the current cult of TV ghost reality and spiritual medium shows it's worth pointing out that any TV show (Derek Acorah's especially) is not the place where objective events are demonstrated ... they are out to make money and the people who believe their rubbish are being taken for a ride.

Kyu

[dagda]

The Big Bang has heaps more evidence thanks very much...

Oh, and there is no such thing as an "impartial witness" in science, other than the evidence at hand. Could you give details of the experiments performed, because without any references you could simply be making this all up.

As for the fire claim, the psychic did not give any specific dates (in your version anyway) so all he has to do is wait for a fire to break out in Copenhagen. Fires break out all the time; it's the reason we have a fire service.

Anyway, you probably haven't heard how scientists can be easily fooled, just as James Randi fooled a load of scientists in the 60's by planting two magicians into a psychic test done under the most strict conditions.

So, when science disagrees with you, it is bad science? I could be making it up, but I am not, and to suggest so is rather insulting. Take the initiative and type his name into google. The experiments I will go into at a later date (probably Friday). At that time I may add in other case studies of ghosts/mediums. This is not a one off event/medium (although there are more frauds than the real deal).

[Tiberius]

So, when science disagrees with you, it is bad science?

No, when people claim something is science and yet provide no empirical evidence or experiments, it is bad science.

I could be making it up, but I am not, and to suggest so is rather insulting.

If you take it as insulting that is your problem. We are skeptics at this site, we demand evidence of something before believing it. You provided a very nice story of something that purportedly happened, but you failed to give any references. Note that I never suggested you made it up, I said that without any references you could simply be making this all up. The fact that I asked for details alone should have revealed this.

Take the initiative and type his name into google.

Sorry, but that's not how things work. You make a claim, you back it up. The burden of proof is on you, not me. I don't have the time to go hunting around the internet every time someone relates me a story and refuses to give evidence for it.

The experiments I will go into at a later date (probably Friday). At that time I may add in other case studies of ghosts/mediums. This is not a one off event/medium (although there are more frauds than the real deal).

Then I will await your Friday post, where I expect some references as I have asked for.

You are quite right about one thing though; there are more frauds than the real deal (they represent 100% of the claimants).

[Kyuuketsuki]

Sorry, but that's not how things work. You make a claim, you back it up. The burden of proof is on you, not me. I don't have the time to go hunting around the internet every time someone relates me a story and refuses to give evidence for it.

Adrian is right Dagda ... you are the one who is making the extraordinary claim, you are the one who must provide the extraordinary evidence.

Kyu

[Samson]

KYU WROTE:

To give a personal example an uncle of mine (who died about 20 years ago) was the most charming man and an absolutely doting and devoted husband but, at the age of about 60, had a stroke and became the most vicious, nasty individual ... he absolutely tormented his wife. There is no doubt in my mind that the latter him was real and so was the former him but the problem is that if ghosts are real which *him* goes on to this supposed afterlife? How can this be if these *ghosts* are real? To claim that only his good part went to this afterlife is insulting on every level (including intellectually) because if his good part was in him for the remaining decade or so he survived after the stroke (when he was nasty) it would have been screaming itself into a state of insanity trying to get out.

Kyu, till your post, I had never really thought about that scenario of separation between a stroke victim. I guess it's because I've never had anyone in my family have one, along with, any type heart attacks. Cancer yes, but nothing else.

That's really interesting, but you know as well as I do a Christian will tell you that "IF" before he had his stroke and believed in blah blah blah, he will go to heaven when he dies.

When I lived in a Norway there was a Biology professor that had to be the nicest person a human could typically meet. He was as Atheistic as the next Atheist, but he died at 73 (12 years ago). I remember when i moved back to the U.S. Christians telling me that he was in hell burning etc. etc. Well, needless to say, I became the "ANGRY ATHEIST" that they love to header when every talking about an Atheist.

Bottom line is.....If any Christian ever wonders why an Atheist may seem a bit angry at times...My above paragraph is a good start, and number two, all the above when your arrogance takes presidency over common sense.

P.S. Thank you Kyu for the past story ...... Very interesting concept......Again, I had never thought about that in my years of research and debating.....(Truly do learn something new everyday)

[Kyuuketsuki]

P.S. Thank you Kyu for the past story ...... Very interesting concept......Again, I had never thought about that in my years of research and debating.....(Truly do learn something new everyday)

My pleasure (though it wasn't at the time) and, although I am sure that theists will try and argue out of it in some way like you describe, we both know they don't have a real answer to the question (the kind of scenario I told of). The events were distressing enough to me as a casual visitor to their house ... it must have been hell on Earth for my aunt (and she still loved him to the day she died which, as I recall, was about 5 years after him).

Kyu

[Samson]

Kyu, your story brings up another side example as well.

What about people who were good as a child and did well etc. but at the age of 20 or 30 ended up having Hydrocephalus (Too much fluid on the brain) which caused the person to become mentally uncontrollable/unstable)...

I guess this person is going to hell as well or like you stated only half of him/her...

The first thing that would come up from a Christian would be; "Man's Sin".......I've argued with a few people and preachers for replying to me with an idiotic answer as that.

[binny]

I don't believe in ghosts, I don't believe in psychics, I don't believe in demons, I don't believe in UFO's, not to say that I don't believe there is other life forms in the universe I just don't believe they come here to visit us, why would they (but I love Star Trek), I don't believe in God, Jesus, Santa or the Tooth Fairy either. I don't believe in Bigfoot (even tho I live next door to him), I don't believe in Champ or the Loch Ness Monster or crop circles. I'm just another silly atheist