Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
No Censorship

Are Extraterrestrials Really Demons?

443 posts in this topic

Not at all, not without a thorough investigation.

Some people might think something like this is supernatural. But it's not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBwiSWkjHlA

So basically if I get the gist of what your saying, is that if it can't be measured scientifically it doesn't exist?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't physics count?

It's even less accurate to accept an outcome as accurate when based upon a statistic too.

Has any supernatural example ever managed to leave the realm of the supernatural and make it's way into the real world? As such, how is it valid to state that some claims are indeed valid, when not one has ever come close to being proven as factual?

Christianity comes to mind. Of course, you can't prove it with some experiment in a laboratory. As far as all paranormal claims, you and I will never agree on whether or not some of them are valid because we will never agree on acceptable criteria. That's why this exchange is turning into the thread version of a hamster wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they seem to be more frightened than us.... link

:unsure2:

Maybe they should be. *We* might seem demonic to *them*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make an absurdity sound so sensible. When people are claiming lala, the presumption that they are dishonest or mistaken is valid all the time. Absence of evidence to do so is not needed; evidence not to do so is essential.

No, it's simply unfair to reflexively put all claims in the same category. It's as wrongheaded as automatically believing all fantastic claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically if I get the gist of what your saying, is that if it can't be measured scientifically it doesn't exist?

Almost! But no cigar.

What I am saying is if someone claims to be able to do a thing, then that should be repeatable and demonstrable. If we are to believe that "some" people have supernatural abilities, and for the life of me considering physiology and known physics, I cannot understand how people come to this conclusion, then I really think we should have more than second hand stories. As that is we do have.

James Randi has been offering a million dollars for a long time to anyone who can just show him a supernatural event. Funny how people cry foul when he proves them wrong, and explains how the trick can be done, and I urge you to watch his debunking, he usually does not even say "This is how said person did this trick" he watches the person, then performs the trick, then he tells you how he did it, then he says " I am not saying the supernatural is impossible but is this not a more sensible and better explanation"?

People who fail his test whine and carry on that they were treated unfairly, but cannot say just how the treatment is unfair.

May I ask, what do you feel would be "enough" to believe in the Supernatural? How would you know if you are being taken advantage of or not? One only has to look at Charlatans such as Uri Geller to see that there are more than enough charlatans and tricksters, why are not all of these claims, and lets face it, they are not exactly powerfully numerous, all either lies and tricks?

Seen Randi with the Matchbox trick? Amazingly according to Randi that even fooled scientists. Do you not feel this genuine exposure is more powerful evidence than the tall tales and ghost stories?

Such a view is not without sacrifice, heck, I cannot watch a Ghost or Twilight movie, as it seems as real to me as Casper the Ghost, and it is hard to get scared by Casper. But as it ruined Twilight for me, from what I hear, that may well have been something of a blessing.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christianity comes to mind. Of course, you can't prove it with some experiment in a laboratory. As far as all paranormal claims, you and I will never agree on whether or not some of them are valid because we will never agree on acceptable criteria. That's why this exchange is turning into the thread version of a hamster wheel.

I wonder what minimum and maximum criteria is for many people though. That threshold seems to be far more conducive to where the support for the supernatural lies other than any other kind of evidence?

May I ask, how does Christianity affect this? It is known for stifling studies, and brute forcing ideals into place without any verification other than that which our Earthly representative receives from the almighty. I find that to be detrimental to a belief in the supernatural, form a critical point of course, not a devout followers perspective, which only has a one way flow. But we are trying to ascertain this ideal beyond a state of belief are we not? Considering what you have to work with, that truly seems an uphill battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they should be. *We* might seem demonic to *them*.

Seriously?

That is crazy, there is absolutely nothing demonic about Rhonda Burchmore's legs, they are indeed nothing short of heavenly.

191211024538_rhonda.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask, how does Christianity affect this?

Sorry. I meant that the Christian faith made its way into the real world. Its origins were spiritual and supernatural, from the perspective of believers. I probably misunderstood you.

It's safe to say that you and I won't agree on the necessary burden of proof when it comes to the paranormal. I doubt that we'll change our minds during the course of this thread's life. I'll end my part of the discussion on a point of agreement. While some paranormal events can't be tested in concrete ways, others indeed can be debunked by close analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. I meant that the Christian faith made its way into the real world. Its origins were spiritual and supernatural, from the perspective of believers. I probably misunderstood you.

It's safe to say that you and I won't agree on the necessary burden of proof when it comes to the paranormal. I doubt that we'll change our minds during the course of this thread's life. I'll end my part of the discussion on a point of agreement. While some paranormal events can't be tested in concrete ways, others indeed can be debunked by close analysis.

Ahh, yes I see, indeed from the perspective of the believers/authors/ readers etc. I agree. That though, is where I think some of us remain stuck. These were ways to explain things we did not understand, from what I can tell, none of them were accurate, they were all philosophies that in time many came to accept as an explanation of the world. It would seem some are reluctant to let these explanations subside away altogether.

I can agree with that as well, it would seem in most cases, a persons required level of evidence is proportionated by their tolerance for the nature of supporting information.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's simply unfair to reflexively put all claims in the same category. It's as wrongheaded as automatically believing all fantastic claims.

I'm sorry but that is just stupid. Your first step must be to assess the likelihood of the claim. If it is lala (outre, bizarre, unusual) then you put it in the category that it is probably false in some way. That should be automatic. You can then just leave it alone if you like, but if curious or pressed, you demand far more positive evidence for such claims than for claims of ordinary events. Further, in the absence of really good, proof-like evidence, even though the claim may be unexplained, you settle for "I don't know" rather than any sort of belief. The stranger the claim -- the more extreme the claim -- the stronger the evidence a prudent person will demand. Also, remember that the magician (con artist, fraudster, the true believer involved in pious fraud, whatever) knows the trick, and you are arrogant indeed if you think you can always or even often see through it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost! But no cigar.

What I am saying is if someone claims to be able to do a thing, then that should be repeatable and demonstrable. If we are to believe that "some" people have supernatural abilities, and for the life of me considering physiology and known physics, I cannot understand how people come to this conclusion, then I really think we should have more than second hand stories. As that is we do have.

James Randi has been offering a million dollars for a long time to anyone who can just show him a supernatural event. Funny how people cry foul when he proves them wrong, and explains how the trick can be done, and I urge you to watch his debunking, he usually does not even say "This is how said person did this trick" he watches the person, then performs the trick, then he tells you how he did it, then he says " I am not saying the supernatural is impossible but is this not a more sensible and better explanation"?

People who fail his test whine and carry on that they were treated unfairly, but cannot say just how the treatment is unfair.

May I ask, what do you feel would be "enough" to believe in the Supernatural? How would you know if you are being taken advantage of or not? One only has to look at Charlatans such as Uri Geller to see that there are more than enough charlatans and tricksters, why are not all of these claims, and lets face it, they are not exactly powerfully numerous, all either lies and tricks?

Seen Randi with the Matchbox trick? Amazingly according to Randi that even fooled scientists. Do you not feel this genuine exposure is more powerful evidence than the tall tales and ghost stories?

Such a view is not without sacrifice, heck, I cannot watch a Ghost or Twilight movie, as it seems as real to me as Casper the Ghost, and it is hard to get scared by Casper. But as it ruined Twilight for me, from what I hear, that may well have been something of a blessing.

Okay for the people that claim to have supernatural abilities im with you all the way, they should be able to repeat said abilities under an condition, I mean there claiming they have them. But as far as things like ghosts go, I dont think you could ever really scientifically proof that they exist, I think its a case of you have to be in the right place at the right time, can i ask you what you would consider a supernatural event?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People like Randi and Houdini and Johnny Carson have been debunking and publicly humiliating frauds forever: they keep coming and the ranks of believers do not diminish.

I think there is a personality trait one might call "rationality/gullibility index" ranging from professional magicians and competent logicians on one end through most of us through those who are a bit queer to schizophrenics at the other.

Edited by Frank Merton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember back when I was a kid when Alien, and spiritual beings were completely separate theories... DAMN YOU DAVID IKE! Everything is so complicated now.. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay for the people that claim to have supernatural abilities im with you all the way, they should be able to repeat said abilities under an condition, I mean there claiming they have them. But as far as things like ghosts go, I dont think you could ever really scientifically proof that they exist, I think its a case of you have to be in the right place at the right time, can i ask you what you would consider a supernatural event?

Hrmmzzz, hosts, I'd like to believe in Ghosts, if I could talk to my dear old Dad again, I would be over the moon. So many times I could have used his advice! Why can a Ghost not be captured? Don't some places have manifestations with claimed regular occurrences? Not all that far from where I sit be the famous Boggo Road Jail, which reportedly is rife with the Ghosts of Prisoners, 10 spirits are said to reside at the Monte Cristo Homestead in NSW just for 2 examples of the top of my head.

One question that always puzzled me is why do Ghosts have clothes? Surely clothes do not have spirits? It seems a pretty basic answer, but try asking an "expert" and watch their eyes glaze over as they come up with something on the spot. The Afterlife seems to have a history in religion alone, going back to ancient beliefs, and the many books of the dead from ancient Egypt. From what I can tell, it's an entirely man made concept, and I think all it does is help us deal with the very fact we are all going to die. Learning is not without sacrifice, losing such comforts from innocence along the way are something of an unfortunate consequence, and that is not meant in any derogatory fashion in case it sounds like that, it is as it reads, just a consequence of asking the big questions. As I mentioned, I just cannot get into Ghost stories any more, to me Ghosts are about as scary as Futurama's evil santa. I have not seen one, and I am firm in my convictions that I simply never will, so no point in wasting time being concerned about it. That's just me and my journey mind you, I don't expect others to understand or even want to, but this is where my path has lead.

Tricky question! What would I consider a Supernatural event? That is a tough one for one how feels the word supernatural should mean "something to investigate" Well, mcrom has put up some interesting links on ESP, I would consider a "bluetooth brain" as chemical if it were possible and perhaps not so much supernatural, although hugely impressive all the same, but the remote viewing links he has offered, if proven in some way shape or form. I would consider supernatural I guess.

with.jpg

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I saw was da Leg`s ! :wacko:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but that is just stupid. Your first step must be to assess the likelihood of the claim. If it is lala (outre, bizarre, unusual) then you put it in the category that it is probably false in some way. That should be automatic. You can then just leave it alone if you like, but if curious or pressed, you demand far more positive evidence for such claims than for claims of ordinary events. Further, in the absence of really good, proof-like evidence, even though the claim may be unexplained, you settle for "I don't know" rather than any sort of belief. The stranger the claim -- the more extreme the claim -- the stronger the evidence a prudent person will demand. Also, remember that the magician (con artist, fraudster, the true believer involved in pious fraud, whatever) knows the trick, and you are arrogant indeed if you think you can always or even often see through it.

You're unable or unwilling to view this in a fair way. Your blather doesn't even address my valid point. We shouldn't reflexively dismiss *all* (key word) claims as if we know it all. To do so is the height of arrogance, and it contributes to collective ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're unable or unwilling to view this in a fair way. Your blather doesn't even address my valid point. We shouldn't reflexively dismiss *all* (key word) claims as if we know it all. To do so is the height of arrogance, and it contributes to collective ignorance.

That is an interesting perspective, if all you have is a smattering of a small percentage that you are of the opinion are genuine descriptions of what people have seen, is it really fair to claim that is a valid premise for the existence of anything supernatural?

As I mentioned in the last post I made, I cannot believe in things like Ghosts anymore, I have turned a corner that changes the world for me. But there was indeed a time. If these people mentioned above - the small percentage - were to retract and revise claims upon taking such a turn in life, would their original account still be considered as factual in it's original form? Or would new information discount it?

As opposed to arrogance, I would consider Frank's position more along the lines of "vigilant".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly belive they are demons, not ETs...

I just pray you won't be decieved my friends... :(

God Bless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do et's exist? No proof yet. Do Demons exist? Only allegorical at best, no real proof beyond anecdotes. So my bet is they are both products of fanciful dreaming. JMO.

lol.because you say that et do not exist. if et do not exist then where does those ufo come from. you can not deny ufo. because there has been a lot of sighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.because you say that et do not exist. if et do not exist then where does those ufo come from. you can not deny ufo. because there has been a lot of sighting.

Plasma, earth-lights, Black Ops, Astronomical events, atmospherical events, volcanic activity, electrical charges, parallax error and misidentification are certainly an explanation for some if not all sightings. UFO's do exist, but are in no way shape or form ET, or proof of ET. That is a connection made by personal opinion and science fiction.

You know how some people claim RADAR tracks UFO's? Not one has ever tracked a UFO going into, or coming from space. Shouldn't a spaceship head into space at some point?

Anyways welcome to UM. I hope you enjoy your time here.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're unable or unwilling to view this in a fair way. Your blather doesn't even address my valid point. We shouldn't reflexively dismiss *all* (key word) claims as if we know it all. To do so is the height of arrogance, and it contributes to collective ignorance.

I do with you would stop this "fairness" mentality and get real. Your attitude strikes me as a rationalization for gullibility. Truth is not about balance and fairness, but about what the world really is. The realistic thing is to start from non-belief and skepticism on any claim that doesn't fit with objective reality. For the most part that is the end of it -- we only have so much time and resources to pursue outre claims further.If persuasive evidence is presented and one is curious or has some personal interest, then there is no harm and usually no danger in further query. It is not a case of taking the view that everything of this sort is necessarily false, but one of taking the view that generally one is not going to be able to get satisfactory answers so just leave it alone and don't be afraid of cemeteries at night.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly belive they are demons, not ETs...

I just pray you won't be decieved my friends... :(

God Bless.

Maybe they are neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think ghosts are real enough maybe one sighting in a hundred, and is the disembodied life of someone dead, but not begun the rebirth process. This is what I was brought up to think, anyway, so the possibility haunts me. The rest -- demons and aliens -- don't belong in my world-view.

Therefore, the people around me report encounters with ghosts, but not with these other things. Interesting how culture seems to determine what you see (or feel or hear or sense).

Now how does one dismiss a nonsense except to dismiss it? One cannot "prove" something that doesn't exist doesn't exist. If ghosts flitted about as they do around Harry Potter, I would think they are real, but that doesn't happen, so while they are possible, lots of things are possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider myself a Christian(Born, baptized, and raised Roman Catholic), but I feel that matters of faith and religion should be kept separate of science...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.