Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 11 votes

The Paranormal is it Fake?


  • Please log in to reply
852 replies to this topic

#1    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:46 PM

Let's keep the thread simple, show me proof the Paranormal doesn't exist. Use verifiable sources, and if you're not an actual doctor don't make diagnostic theories you are not qualified to make.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#2    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 8,244 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:51 PM

*
POPULAR

The question i want to ask his How can you prove something that does not exist?


#3    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,677 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:52 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

Let's keep the thread simple, show me proof the Paranormal doesn't exist. Use verifiable sources, and if you're not an actual doctor don't make diagnostic theories you are not qualified to make.

Show me the proof that there is not an invisible dragon in my garage; you are not assigning the burden of proof correctly.  I think it'd be fascinating if we had verifiable sources that show the paranormal exists, so far no such luck.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#4    BlueBomber

BlueBomber

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 236 posts
  • Joined:28 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:54 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

Let's keep the thread simple, show me proof the Paranormal doesn't exist. Use verifiable sources, and if you're not an actual doctor don't make diagnostic theories you are not qualified to make.
It doesn't work that way. That would be like me saying "show me proof that Unicorns don't breed with Wookies".

A skeptical believer.

#5    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:59 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 30 May 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

The question i want to ask his How can you prove something that does not exist?
You can't just present something as fact without some sort of proof backing it..

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 30 May 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

Show me the proof that there is not an invisible dragon in my garage; you are not assigning the burden of proof correctly.  I think it'd be fascinating if we had verifiable sources that show the paranormal exists, so far no such luck.
So you're saying that someone coming to the conclusion that the paranormal does not exist is an opinion which does not need verifiable facts?
At the same time you're saying that someone who comes to the conclusion that the paranormal does exist, does need verifiable facts...

This thread is not about bias opinions, it is about verifying the validity of a conclusion that many seem to share.

In the Scientific Method, everything is either Proven or Disproven. If it cannot be proven or disproven, it is deemed Inconclusive.
The conclusion of the Paranormal being fake is still a conclusion, and all conclusions need be based on either facts or opinion.
I am merely asking for the facts that are used to make this conclusion because those who make this conclusion state that there are facts to be seen and evaluated.

Edited by xFelix, 30 May 2013 - 01:04 PM.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#6    HerNibs

HerNibs

    Grand Duchess Anaesthesia

  • Member
  • 12,187 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Colorado

  • Endless repetition does not make something true.

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:16 PM

I think your question is a bit off or poorly stated.

The current "scientific" consensus is that there is no evidence to support "paranormal" things and events.  Testable, repeatable, verifiable evidence.

Science is a method and doesn't "prove" anything.  

Science (from Latinscientia, meaning "knowledge"[1]) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe

Nibs

Just because it is a mystery to YOU doesn't make it unexplained.

STORM - a must watch - caution, some profanity and may cause you to experience reason.

#7    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,221 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:19 PM

Xfelix,

You are approaching the problem from the wrong direction. You cannot l disprove anything. You can only proove things. If you find no evidence of something you are considering then there is no reason to say that it exists. Of course with the 'paranormal' there is evidence just not of the sort that satisfies a material based ideology.

Instead of asking to disapprove something as broad as the paranormal, you should ask about a specific event or circumstance then ask what are the evidences that this is not what it appears to be.  In science you cannot say disprove that there is a spirit wold instead you can ask for evidence of why something like an NDE is not exactly what it appears to be. The other side then offers up evidence and you can make your case by scrutinizing the evidence. Once the evidences have been logically shot to peices the what is left is the phenomenon itself becoming more and more likely to be exactly what it appears to be.



Edited by Seeker79, 30 May 2013 - 01:23 PM.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#8    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,677 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:21 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

So you're saying that someone coming to the conclusion that the paranormal does not exist is an opinion which does not need verifiable facts?
At the same time you're saying that someone who comes to the conclusion that the paranormal does exist, does need verifiable facts...

So think about what the verifiable facts are that you would use to disprove that there is an invisible dragon in my garage.  As Nixon said above, how do you propose to prove that something doesn't exist?  The verifiable facts that I'm working from that leads to my disbelief in the paranormal are that there are no verifiable facts supporting the paranormal's existence, which works very well for defeating my invisible dragon example also.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#9    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:30 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 30 May 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

Xfelix,

You are approaching the problem from the wrong direction. You cannot l disprove anything. You can only proove things. If you find no evidence of something you are considering then there is no reason to say that it exists. Of course with the 'paranormal' there is evidence just not of the sort that satisfies a material based ideology.

Instead of asking to disapprove something as broad as the paranormal, you should ask about a specific event or circumstance then ask what are the evidences that this is not what it appears to be.  In science you cannot say disprove that there is a spirit wold instead you can ask for evidence of why something like an NDE is not exactly what it appears to be. The other side then offers up evidence and you can make your case by scrutinizing the evidence. Once the evidences have been logically shot to peices the what is left is the phenomenon itself becoming more and more likely to be exactly what it appears to be.

One can say that there is no proof or evidence to support the "paranormal" and arrive at the conclusion that it does not exist.. But that would be arriving at a conclusion without any verifiable facts, which means that it is solely someone's opinion or "theory".

In order to come to a factual conclusion that something does not exist, one must disprove the possibility of it existing..

^ That bit of evidence, or proof is what I am waiting for. Someone to show me that they have proven that there absolutely is no paranormal because there is no possibility for the paranormal to exist.

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 30 May 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

So think about what the verifiable facts are that you would use to disprove that there is an invisible dragon in my garage.  As Nixon said above, how do you propose to prove that something doesn't exist?  The verifiable facts that I'm working from that leads to my disbelief in the paranormal are that there are no verifiable facts supporting the paranormal's existence, which works very well for defeating my invisible dragon example also.

You know what else didn't have verifiable facts to support that it existed? Black holes.
There were also no verifiable facts that there was no possibility of a Black hole.
Now we have well-known Scientists finding proof that Black holes are not only possible, but probable.

What does this all mean? Unless someone proves that there is no possibility of something existing, coming to the conclusion that it does not exist is not a fact but an opinion.

I wasn't asking for opinions, I was asking for facts...

Edited by xFelix, 30 May 2013 - 01:41 PM.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#10    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,677 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:07 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

One can say that there is no proof or evidence to support the "paranormal" and arrive at the conclusion that it does not exist.. But that would be arriving at a conclusion without any verifiable facts, which means that it is solely someone's opinion or "theory".

You're being highly selective on which facts that you are willing to accept; it is a verifiable fact that there is no verifiable evidence in support of the paranormal existing, so my tentative conclusion concerning the paranormal is not 'solely' based on my opinion.

Quote

In order to come to a factual conclusion that something does not exist, one must disprove the possibility of it existing..

Name one thing that the possibility of existing has been disproven.

Quote

^ That bit of evidence, or proof is what I am waiting for. Someone to show me that they have proven that there absolutely is no paranormal because there is no possibility for the paranormal to exist.

Almost anything is possible.  Show me the factual disproof, using your methodology, that there is no invisible dragon in my garage, or is that solely your opinion?

Quote

You know what else didn't have verifiable facts to support that it existed? Black holes.

And fairies, and leprechauns, and centaurs...

Quote

What does this all mean? Unless someone proves that there is no possibility of something existing, coming to the conclusion that it does not exist is not a fact but an opinion.

This is just a semantic game, everything is ultimately an opinion.  It is not a fact that the paranormal does not exist, however the position that the paranormal does not exist is based on facts, it is not 'solely' opinion.  Science does not 'prove' things.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#11    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,221 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:14 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:



One can say that there is no proof or evidence to support the "paranormal" and arrive at the conclusion that it does not exist.. But that would be arriving at a conclusion without any verifiable facts, which means that it is solely someone's opinion or "theory".

In order to come to a factual conclusion that something does not exist, one must disprove the possibility of it existing..

^ That bit of evidence, or proof is what I am waiting for. Someone to show me that they have proven that there absolutely is no paranormal because there is no possibility for the paranormal to exist.



You know what else didn't have verifiable facts to support that it existed? Black holes.
There were also no verifiable facts that there was no possibility of a Black hole.
Now we have well-known Scientists finding proof that Black holes are not only possible, but probable.

What does this all mean? Unless someone proves that there is no possibility of something existing, coming to the conclusion that it does not exist is not a fact but an opinion.

I wasn't asking for opinions, I was asking for facts...
I hear you Felix, but black holes were not considered facts until there was sufficient evidence. There was evidence that black holes existed, it was just mathematical evidence which is really a form of circumstantial evidence not physical fact.

You are falling into a trap felix. I'm trying to steer you away from it. You are asking for physical facts about a nophysical world. The non physical world is only going to have non physical evidence. It's apples and oranges. Materialists are philosophically incapable of accepting any of the actual evidence of the spirit world because they where a certain set of goggles that cannot be taken off. They define reality based on barionic reactions., therefore other things not associated with barionic matter cannot exist despit evidences that fundamental reality has nothing to do with matter and evidences that there probably is another type of reality.

The elephant of an assumption, that you mentioned, is that things exist wether they fit the materialist  criteria for proof or not. Reality does not bend with our methodologies we must follow the clues In front of us. Even if they take us to places that are counter to our bias.

Yes it is more than an opinion that there is no 'paranormall' it's a philosophical assumption built on fundamental materialism, which has already been prooven to be false. ( that word is useless by the way in fact there is no 'paranormal' what ever the 'paranormal' is is actually quit normal)





"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#12    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,423 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:22 PM

You'll be hard pressed to prove to me the paranormal doesn't exist since I have seen a ghost.  I couldn't prove that it does either.  Its one of those things you have to see to really believe.


#13    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:29 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 30 May 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:

I hear you Felix, but black holes were not considered facts until there was sufficient evidence. There was evidence that black holes existed, it was just mathematical evidence which is really a form of circumstantial evidence not physical fact.

You are falling into a trap felix. I'm trying to steer you away from it. You are asking for physical facts about a nophysical world. The non physical world is only going to have non physical evidence. It's apples and oranges. Materialists are philosophically incapable of accepting any of the actual evidence of the spirit world because they where a certain set of goggles that cannot be taken off. They define reality based on barionic reactions., therefore other things not associated with barionic matter cannot exist despit evidences that fundamental reality has nothing to do with matter and evidences that there probably is another type of reality.

The elephant of an assumption, that you mentioned, is that things exist wether they fit the materialist  criteria for proof or not. Reality does not bend with our methodologies we must follow the clues In front of us. Even if they take us to places that are counter to our bias.

Yes it is more than an opinion that there is no 'paranormall' it's a philosophical assumption built on fundamental materialism, which has already been prooven to be false. ( that word is useless by the way in fact there is no 'paranormal' what ever the 'paranormal' is is actually quit normal)

I understand what you're saying, I am just making a point that Skeptics continue to claim that this or that is not true and they have the facts... Well I want the facts they claim to have.

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 30 May 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

You're being highly selective on which facts that you are willing to accept; it is a verifiable fact that there is no verifiable evidence in support of the paranormal existing, so my tentative conclusion concerning the paranormal is not 'solely' based on my opinion.

This is just a semantic game, everything is ultimately an opinion.  It is not a fact that the paranormal does not exist, however the position that the paranormal does not exist is based on facts, it is not 'solely' opinion.  Science does not 'prove' things.
So your verifiable evidence is that of not having evidence? Do you see the problem with that?

I'll make it simple for you, you cannot NOT have a conclusion and use that as a conclusive true or false.
If you do not have a conclusion, the results are Inconclusive.

So the belief that the paranormal does not exist is based on the fact that you can't prove that it either exists or not? WHAT????

Edited by xFelix, 30 May 2013 - 02:36 PM.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#14    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,677 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:30 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 30 May 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:

The elephant of an assumption, that you mentioned, is that things exist wether they fit the materialist  criteria for proof or not. Reality does not bend with our methodologies we must follow the clues In front of us. Even if they take us to places that are counter to our bias.

What is the non-materialist criteria for proof?  I always find the sidestepping of the facts concerning the lack of evidence by resorting to accusations of 'bias' to be pretty unconvincing.  You really don't understand how people come to the conclusion that there is no good reason to believe the immaterial exists, that makes no logical/empirical/rational sense to you?  It would be the most ground-breaking discovery in history, but everyone who disagrees is just doing so because of pre-existing bias?  Because non-materialists of course do not suffer from this bias?

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#15    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,677 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:37 PM

View PostxFelix, on 30 May 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

So your verifiable evidence is that of not having evidence? Do you see the problem with that?

So the belief that the paranormal does not exist is based on the fact that you can't prove that it either exists or not? WHAT????

You're being very selective again about what you are replying to.  What position should you take when there is no evidence of something existing yet someone claims it does?  Do you just gullibly believe that since someone said it that that is verifiable evidence of it existing, or are do you disbelieve what people claim exists solely based on opinion.  Yes or no, is it solely your opinion that leads you to believe, I assume since you keep editing it out, that there is not an invisible dragon living in my garage?  Can you prove that fairies and leprechauns do not exist using verifiable facts?  Is your disbelief in leprechauns 'based on the fact that you can't prove that it either exists or not (WHAT???)'?  What has been proven not to exist, why can't you name one thing?  I think it's because of your misplacement of the burden of proof.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users