I get this feeling as well.

You darn sceptic-type person, Ethyl...

I believe that there are possibilities for anything but I am skeptical when going into an investigation. You have to be skeptical. Even though I've been in this field a while, I still need to experience it first hand for me to believe that there is something there. The majority of the time we've debunked the occurences but there have been a few times where we just couldn't explain certain things. No matter how hard we tried to disprove, we just couldn't. I've said it several times already but you can't be gullible or easily influences with this subject because then any time you see an orb in a picture or a weird light, you'll think it's a ghost! It's healthy to be skeptical & objective.

No, faith is faith. You have faith in the paranormal. No difference then having faith in a religion. I believe in my family & friends. I don't have a void that needs filling with the paranormal(NOT saying you do). Logic is key. Most believers throw logic out the window. THEY WANT to believe.

I think I am being misunderstood here. I am in no way trying to state this is our board ( for believers only ) I'm just saying there is a common ground, and we all have, or most of us have the same goals if you think about it. I'm a skeptic believer... if there can be a such an equal thing. I am objective, and always keep things real. You earn more respect and credibility by being a skeptical believer. I believe in the paranormal when I can catch it on audio or video and can't explain it. I think the topic was a great topic to bring up. I apologize if it's been discussed to death but it was a great question.

Pluto, for the most part people have been quite respectful through this post. There were only a few posts that made me feel a bit defensive. Not to worry, I can handle it.

Same here Hezzbelle...

Here is another good question then. To those who do not believe and rely on logical explanation, or rational explanation... when you pass away, where do you think you go?

In the ground. I hope there is more but I don't expect it. Its called being consistent.

Let me re-phrase my question... ( For skeptics.. )

Where do you believe you go when you pass away?

( I'm going somewhere with this... but I'd like to see what a few of you answer? )

I dont think I will go anywhere.

We go super nova.

Not as idealistic as becoming a ghost and hanging out with the living, but I'll basically "go" nowhere. My body will hopefully be cremated so as not to take up any space and I hope the only way I will live on is in peoples' memories. (Maybe I shouldn't have answered because I consider my answer to be logical and rational.

Lol, can you elaborate?

It is blanket, statements like that, which cause upheaval and disharmony. But should I remark on such a post, I'M condescending! Puh leez! Since you skeptics seem to have cornered the market on rational logic, why do you insist on discussing these issues with the likes of us dreamers and mentally impaired with psychological disorders. Are you studying us? Seriously Eric...I don't care either way. This is simply a forum where people present their views and compare stories. It is of no consequence to me. The only reason I make such a fuss, is because I don't like my words turned around on me. I do read these posts, but I am new here. You have obviously read more here than I have. Although I still don't see how someones story or account as they perceive it harms you. But regardless, it is just the kind of profiling thing make people so angry these days, lumping everyone into one category. And I don't think they appreciate the insinuation that you hold the monopoly on logic and good common sense. **Tisk Tisk** young man. Your hood is showing.

Cool! I hope I go super nova! I'll probably just go nova though and that would suck!


Or maybe not!!

Cry me a river. I appreciate your repeated attempts at getting my ire, but seriously...you'll have to be waaaay more insulting to me than that. I'm used to dealing with foul mouthed gang bangers that would gut their own sister for a place to hide their rock. I'd like to point out, that I purposely harbor no ill will to anyone in here. I just like to write my stories and post them and engage in fascinating conversations about the paranormal. Well, since you were so disturbed because I referred to one of my characters as being "nuts" and it destroyed your weekend, I haven't posted any more stories for people like yourself to take personally. Because it has never been my intent to offend anyone, and I found most of your comments to me to be hostile, frankly. But I bear no ill will to you OR your minions. *snicker* Just kidding. Live and let live. Now I just completed a great conversation with Buddharat. And he was kind enough to explain his purposes in this forum. Unlike your cohort who thinks believers are just stupid and NEED him for his intellectual prowess. So it is plain that I am on no warpath, and am civil to those that are civil to me. I have a gowing list of fine people to call friends and speak with them often in PM. I throughly enjoy the accounts in here, and talking with like minded people. And I won't be driven from this forum. As I said, I do not wish to alienate anyone. My purpose on this thread was simply to know why a group of individuals, that are skeptical of the accounts told by the people in this forum, continue to come here and spout their disdain and continue to ridicule the believers here, on a topic for which they don't even believe in its' existence. It makes absolutely no sense at all. Now Buddharat explained his stance, and it was understandable. Now this thread, although inciteful, is becoming taxing. I truely don't like arguing. I prefer a challenging debate. So if you are determined to piss me off, please step up your game. Otherwise, I would like nothing better than to get along with you. I apologise if I sound condescending to you. I speak plainly and to the point. I reserve the pampering insincerity for suspects and politicians. ~Jackal

Sure, but isn't it better to have ideas rather than beliefs? Ideas and opinions are much easier to change. I make an effort to not believe in too many things, people are shattered when their beliefs turn out to be false. Which is why I "believe" there is so much confrontation in a situation like this. People believe their photographs are paranormal, even when most everyone here is telling them it's a motion blur or a lens strap. Often we never see them post again.


Somewhere very nice. I can't tell you where since I've never been before, but the word on the street says it's to die for.

Well said Jackal...

When I started this topic, I was hoping for a nice clean debate and have a bunch of intelligent, knowledgable, and friendly people get together to discuss the topic without harm. For a while there, it was going well. I have a lot to offer to the paranormal field, and I hope to accomplish and contribute a lot. I'm not in it to make a buck, or to entertain myself. I do this because I have a huge amount of love for what I do. My heart is in this 100%. I have invested so much into what I do that includes my personal reputation, and my research firm's reputation as well. I've put myself into a huge amount of debt because I feel strongly about what I do and know someday my contributions are going to get credit, or recognition. At least I hope it does. If I ever sound defensive on the forums, its because my dignity, and passion for the field is constantly being questioned. My honesty is being questioned. Nothing but the truth is said behind my words, and those who have gotten to know me, on here and in the field know I am extremely genuine. I'm not here just to spew a bunch of political B.S.

I'd still like to here a few more answers from skeptics, where do they believe they go when they pass away? I'm a bit surprised very little of them are answering it?

Just to add some extra thoughts to the topic...

Whether one is a believer or a skeptic, you have to realise that both represent two extremes of an argument. That is, they both firmly have a belief; a believer will use photographic, sound and video evidence to prove what they believe, and a skeptic will use scientific evidence to prove what they believe.

Ufologist Jacques Vallee points out quite brilliantly, that a skeptic is not someone who has not formed an opinion on paranormal phenomenon, they are someone who has taken up a negative standpoint. To put it in a religious context, a skeptic is an atheist and not an agnostic.

Hence, the need for a skeptic to prove their validity as much as believers.

The people who hold the real power are those in the middle, because lets face it, the only way to effectively prove a point is to understand both the positive and the negative aspects of a phenomenon. An argument over what is real will only be won when either a positive or a negative side can effectively counter all of the opposing sides arguments.

I enjoyed the thread Pluto-x. I like to hear opposing opinions as well (as long as they don't slander me). Often, the other side lends us a fresh perspective of our own goals. I'll listen to anyone and have no reason to doubt anyones word. I'm just here for the discourse and to meet new like minded friends. Nice thread, man. ~Jackal

Ah...the voice of reason. Well said Syntax. All things in moderation. Understanding both sides of the issue is key. I like to illustrate by using the old "two sides of the stone" story. Where people fall short with this analogy, is there is really three sides (there is a side against the ground). The side facing the ground is synonymous with the paranormal side (the unseen side). ~Jackal

Dang and I thought we were going to be best friends.

Wow.

What brought that on? I can see why you aren't a cop anymore. Tirades like that over nothing. Tsk tsk indeed.

I don't know why you think you're so special that I'm trying to piss you off, but I can tell you that's not the case. I was pointing something out to you that should become very obvious to everyone reading this. You are very condescending. I think that's the main problem with some believers. They can't admit that they just don't know the answer to something. Some of them have to have an answer for everything and the truth is that no one has an answer for everything.

If you'll remember the little fit you had after your story, you will remember that I was the THIRD person to say something about your ending. And I accepted your apology.

And if you do want to stick around the board, you might consider reading the rules. Insulting and name calling are forbidden here, as is trolling.

I believe I've also explained my purpose for being here but if you're too slow to catch it, then I am sorry. It does get boring repeating oneself. See? Being insulting and using smiley faces doesn't make it less insulting, does it?

Lets not insult each other, or bash poeple eh? Its been a smooth flowing topic thus far without anyone getting into a heavy argument. Put your guns down Coldethyl

Excuse me?

You need to go back and read who started it.

I have been civil. And I can't believe you called his bashing, rude post well said.

Most skeptics aren't out to disprove the paranormal. In actuality, many would like nothing more than for it to be true, but they aren't desperate enough to fool themselves even mistakingly.
Skepticism is the healthiest approach to any "out there" claim. More believers should be skeptical. Skeptic and Believer are not opposites. Skeptics can become believers in things and still remain skeptics. I trust I've made my point clear enough.

As for our energy having to go somewhere, I believe it goes back to the "whole" or "God." I do not believe that our consciousnesses cheat death, however.

Coldethyl... I'm stating a general comment. Let's not insult one another. That goes for anyone... It's been a great topic, look how many responses we got without the public bashing, insults, and hasn't had any fighting. Up until this point... He had some good points, but that doesn't mean I agreed with his insults towards you.

I beleive it is really cool that skeptics do research on the paranormal. Hey at least they are interested aye??

We are all members here, so lets be cool!!

Thanks for acknowledging them.

I am cool. I'm not fighting at all TBH. He's a fellow Republican. He just has a hot temper.

Go figure.

what would really be cool is, if skeptics ( including non believers ) could join forces with us and help the field... we are stronger in numbers, specially against the scientists who steal our credit and recognition. As I said most of us have a common goal, and together think of what kind of discoveries that can be made together.

^ Agreed.

I agree Pluto-x. Sometimes it can be hard to find answers to the uknown. That is why it is called the unknown. I welcome skeptics because, maybe, just maybe, they could experiance the paranormal than just trying to find answers. I have skeptic friends, that does not beleive. LOL...boy the stories I can tell! But I won't get into that. ...LOL
As for republicans....the other member said they are hot tempered. Well I don't know about that. LOL. I am neither. I stay away from politics. Not my felid, man. Not my feild....lol

No, not all Republicans, just some.

Has anyone read the Main Front Page News yet?? Interesting .."Paranormal Community Unveiled"...Explains alot...

I believe that since we're all made from stardust, we don't die, we just go supernova.

I don't think this is true.

As discussed earlier, Skepticism is taking up an argument for the negative aspect of any discussion or situation. By your statement it would seem that a Skeptic would totally disagree with paranormal phenomenon and at the same time totally agree.

A skeptic is not someone who sits on the fence, they have made their mind up and have taken up a negative standpoint.

Again, to put it in a religious context......a skeptic is an atheist and not an agnostic.

In this way you can clearly understand why skeptics are so intent on researching the paranormal. The same way a believer uses evidence to support their own claim, a skeptic will use evidence to support their own argument.

Think about it as a school debate. Two different sides with two completely different viewpoints on a single topic. The way the argument is won is not just by using your evidence, but by researching the opponents evidence and finding holes in it. The audience is asked to take on both the positive and negative arguments and make a decision.

Using this analogy, the people you are referring to in your statement are the audience......normally in real life this is the scientific community......with Skeptics and Believers battling it out using researched evidence to sway their belief.

I'm sorry, but where do you get your definition of "Skeptic"?
Here's an excerpt from Dictionary.com:

It's natural to question things. Believers do it all the time! Every one is a skeptic to varying degrees.

As is plainly laid out by the dictionary, this is not a factual statement. Skepticism is a means, not an end. A person can be a Skeptic about many things and still hold Beliefs.

yes but that definition has so many holes in it.

A skeptic questions validity, because they believe it to not be true.

Your definition also supports my argument as well.

A better word to describe what you are referring to is cynicism.

To be honest, the word Skepticism is used incorrectly in sentences and phrases. For instance I hear all the time that e.g. 'Professor BLAH BLAH approaches the topic with a fair amount of Skepticism". This would imply that the professor has doubts about the topic, yet still believes a varying degree of truth to it.

An analogy would be to say e.g. "Professor BLAH BLAH has an evil streak in him sometimes"....however being evil is the absence of good...you can't be evil and good at the same time.

Skepticism is derived from the Greek word 'Skepsis' meaning 'consideration'....but how you interpret 'consideration' varies. You can consider a topic before it is discussed and already have a strong belief on how you want the discussion to go.

Looking back, now that I think about it you are also correct.....because 'consideration' can take on so many forms.

Etymology: Skeptic \Skep"tic\, noun. [from Greek expression skeptiko`s thoughtful, reflective, from ske`ptesqai to look carefully or about, to view, consider: compare to Latin scepticus, French sceptique. See Scope.]

alas, i haven't seen anyone who labels themselves 'skeptic' , to be thoughtful , reflective, considerate..

and i wish we would stop looking up dictionaries to know how to think.

so i suppose those who call themselves skeptic, those who turn what they can't understand into something they can. we will have to call 'pseudo-skeptics'.



there's no such thing as a 'skeptic' or a 'believer'. i am neither so i wonder what i am , i suppose i will have to look up the dictionary.
maybe i'm a knower.

no cheeky answers please, even though it is a full moon.

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust?

(Not a very Republican pov.)

The point is - they don't ! They don't see the need .. Why investigate something that
does not exist ? This is exactly why they always sound dumb or stupid . No time has been
taken on their end to even bother with investigating .

I take it you are stating someone else's point of view here, but in case you are not, I see skepticism as a healthy doubt - more of an agnostic using your comparison. An atheist does not believe in any sort of god or religion, whereas a nonbeliever does not believe in any paranormal activity whatsoever. The definition for skepticism was already posted here, but it is described as doubting something, not a complete denial of existence.

I just truly think that people are confusing the words Skeptic and Skepticism. A Skeptic as a singular is different to a person with Skepticism. I will now humbly agree that my above statement about the example of the Professor is wrong....because you can have varying degrees of Skepticism.

But don't forget what Skepticism is......it is someone who takes on the Characteristics of a Skeptic. A pre-defined stance to an argument. In that regard someone who has a degree of Skepticism begins to act like a Skeptic when it comes to certain discussions.

A Skeptic as defined as a person who simply has doubt about a subject is too pedantic, in that case someone can be 99.9% sure that something is true....but that .1% of doubt would class them as a skeptic? It's not possible for a Skeptic to have Skepticism.....because a Skeptic doesn't need to take on the characteristics of a Skeptic...they already are one.

It's also not possible for a believer to have Skepticism as well.....because by having doubt they are no longer a believer.

However it is possible for someone who has not formed an opinion to approach a subject with a degree of Skepticism.

haha there is no malice in my arguments, i'm just pointing out logic that supports an argument for one side as opposed to another.

All this picking apart definitions is getting so pedantic, it's given me a major headache.

Coldethyl, you are probably right. I do spend most of my time in political forums arguing with people that have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. You, being a Republican, should be able to understand that. I have them trying to comprehend foreign policy when they can't even name the Secretary of State. So, maybe I do tend to view negative posts as being hostile (as they mostly are in the political forums). I will try and be less defensive in the future. I apologise for misunderstanding your intentions. As I said, I'm in a war in the other forums I visit. ~Jackal

No problem. My husband is in the military and I have to read so much anti-war mess in threads that have nothing to do with politics that it gets to me sometimes as well. I purposely stay out of certain areas of this board for that reason. It's easy for them to criticize when they don't have a loved one fighting.

Anyway no harm done!

call it a hunch but I think He'll make it home safe and sound hun ...it's guys like your hubby that make free speech forums like this a global reality (imho) ..who thinks there could have been Iraqi members here prior to Saddams' topple?...plus know-it-all college kids think war protesting is a real retro hippy (phish fan) thing to do, when they (in reality) have a minimal grasp of world politics I have noticed ....b

sorry for the OT

halfhandshuffle:Ramones-Do You Wanna Dance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89TPe13QsRM

I think you are trying to analyze this too much - this is mostly semantics. Regarding this forum and the paranormal, I think that skeptics are people who are not sure that ghosts/paranormal exist, but are curious about it. There are a few who pop on every now and then who are rude and just laugh at posts, but luckily these "hecklers" don't come around so often. The huge majority of skeptics here are quite interested in the "evidence" posted and take it seriously, although we may be doubtful of some of it, we are respectful.

If you ask me, a big part of why investigators are being laughed at is a combination of things... because of hoaxers, and no thanks to Hollywood with over embellishing dramatized t.v. series that have groups just looking to make the almighty dollar bill. I have a huge amount of love for what I do, and a genuine as well as honest investigator who takes this field much more seriously. I agree that its over analized. As I said before, not sure if you guys read it or not but I think that Skeptics & Believers who are investigators should join forces rather than debate against each other. Think of the discoveries that can be made by sharing each others knowledge and know how. We ALL have a common goal and that is why we should be joining forces. Think of the contributions and accomplishments!?

I think someone mentioned that many investigators are in fact skeptics. I think investigators need to be skeptical to some degree, so as to truly analyze what they see and not immediately call every orb, flash of light, etc. a ghost.