Paranormal proof: prize unclaimed 37 years on

[papageorge1]

2 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

Not really, I think I understand your position.

What I was saying is that a firm belief in a benevolent higher power/entity/soul/collective consciousness isn't the logical conclusion based on the evidence available. What you consider evidence of one thing could just as easily be evidence of another - or meaningless human fantasy as I showed before. None of it is provable in any meaningful way.

The standard of evidence I would require, as a bare minimum, to consider psychic powers exist:

1. A concise definition of the psychic power being claimed e.g they can bend spoons with their mind.

2. The scientific methodology used to study the phenomena, described in detail with supporting hypothesis.

3. Video, photographic and documental evidence of the tests being carried out.

4. A verifiable source for the all of the evidence presented.

5. At least two independent sources, preferably from different countries, that can verify the effect is repeatable.

6. A public demonstration of the power.

This seems strict? It is the absolute minimum I expect of any evidence before I accept it into my reality as a 'truth'. 

I can provide this type of evidence to you for anything I claim to believe exists. If you can't do the same you need to ask yourself why not? If the weight of non-subjective, substantiated evidence is so large it should be relatively easy to find one example that meets the above criteria.

 

 

Well, my personal belief is that science is limited to studying the physical plane only at this time. Evidence from the so-called paranormal has shown me beyond a reasonable doubt that there is much more to the universe than can be detected by our physical senses and instruments. What lies beyond the physical is the domain of the clairvoyants, mystics, spiritual masters, or whatever term. I consider what those who I judge to be of quality have to tell us along with science in forming my personal belief system.

Physical science is not the only discipline I use to understand the universe.

[papageorge1]

1 hour ago, stereologist said:

As if you ever answer questions. And you do not do things as other people do let alone well.

Evidence has to have the ability to be checked independently of others.

I can only repeat what I said in the quote: On the rest of your comments, I do those things as well as anybody here. Anyone can question evidence into infinity, so what?

[NightScreams]

5 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

No, 7 billion people believing the earth to be flat means 7 billion people are wrong.

Only if you can prove it.   So if scientists accept something as fact, it remains fact until someone can provide better proof but my contention was on that acceptance of proof. However in things like Archeology, often such contradictions to their evidence get's put on a shelf and dismissed. 

So what if all the best evidence of ghosts turns out to be right? That means everyone that is dismissing that evidence would actually be wrong.

[I'mConvinced]

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, my personal belief is that science is limited to studying the physical plane only at this time. Evidence from the so-called paranormal has shown me beyond a reasonable doubt that there is much more to the universe than can be detected by our physical senses and instruments. What lies beyond the physical is the domain of the clairvoyants, mystics, spiritual masters, or whatever term. I consider what those who I judge to be of quality have to tell us along with science in forming my personal belief system.

Physical science is not the only discipline I use to understand the universe.

If you cannot detect it with your own senses nor with an instrument of science then you must agree all ghost videos and photographs are fakes, correct?

Or are you saying some stuff can be detected but other stuff can't? Yet we can test neither even though a measurable effect must be present to show in a photograph.

You can't, logically at least, have it both ways. 

[stereologist]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I can only repeat what I said in the quote: On the rest of your comments, I do those things as well as anybody here. Anyone can question evidence into infinity, so what?

Evidence has to be able to be checked independently of you. Again, you do not do things as other people do let alone well.

When asked for evidence you give some nonsensical blather about nothingness. When asked to provide a link you do not.

The conclusions I take from posters that do not provide evidence is that they have nothing. A strong consideration on my part is that they are so foolish that they cannot even understand how gullible they have been.

When asked about your reasoning you refer vaguely to unnamed sources that are supposed to be disparate and believable. I see no reason to believe in any of that. I'm just not foolishly gullible. I want to see a basis for the believe. Other provide that, not you. I want to see evidence external to you. Others do that you do not. I want to see a reasoned explanation for how the evidence is connected to the issue. Others do that and you have never done that.

I would have to say that your suggestion that you do these things is a whopper of a falsehood. To further claim that you do well at something you never do exceeds that whopper.

[papageorge1]

25 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

If you cannot detect it with your own senses nor with an instrument of science then you must agree all ghost videos and photographs are fakes, correct?

I believe ghosts can materialize or semi-materialize by drawing matter/energy from the environment causing things like cold spots and batteries to drain. These temporary materializations can be captured on camera. Generally, spiritual entities are invisible, yes. Good question, though.

 

 

[Merc14]

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

I believe ghosts can materialize or semi-materialize by drawing matter/energy from the environment causing things like cold spots and batteries to drain. These temporary materializations can be captured on camera. Generally, spiritual entities are invisible, yes. Good question, though.

You believe in fantastical things and have absolutely nothing to support your belief.  Fine, stop trying to fight with nothing and admit you believe fantasy is real and don't care  what the evidence shows (you have no real evidence of any kind, that argument has been turned to swiss cheese). After that, no one will bother you.    There are forums on this site where people believe they see orbs during the day and nnicolette thinks she flew in an alien space ship, go there and wallow in your fantasies.   You lost a loooooong time ago mate and just aren't aware enough to see it.  It's over papasmurf, you are a laughing stock by this time, the argument has reached the absurd.

Edited September 13, 2017 by Merc14

[stereologist]

I have to giggle about the ghosts draining batteries. It makes me laugh because of the cold claims as well. Why aren't people injured or killed by these effects? Probably because nothing is happening.

 

[Carnoferox]

Papa, if you want to be taken seriously give us something that is empirical, meaning it is observable, testable, and repeatable. These are the objective criteria by which evidence should be judged.

Edited September 13, 2017 by Carnoferox

[I'mConvinced]

7 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I believe ghosts can materialize or semi-materialize by drawing matter/energy from the environment causing things like cold spots and batteries to drain. These temporary materializations can be captured on camera. Generally, spiritual entities are invisible, yes. Good question, though.

So the physical and spiritual worlds are directly linked and can influence each other? That is what your statement suggests.  If this is the case then performing some strict scientific testing should provide definitive, peer reviewed evidence - I am surprised that more work has not been done on this and that more evidence is not available, it would be earth shattering news.

You use the term energy without, I feel, understanding what you are saying.  There is no such thing as 'energy'.  It is not blobs or bits of stuff, it does not exist as a physical entity at all.  Energy is the term used in science to describe 'work done' in a system.  If paranormal entities were 'drawing matter/energy' from the surroundings they would be having profound and measurable effects all of the time.

While our understanding on what 'energy' actually describes is incomplete our laws that describe its transfer (work done) are confirmed, repeatable and used in everyday life.  Without this understanding we wouldn't be able to harness the different types of 'energy' transfer safely - yet we can.  If we now invoke spirits that can mess with this 'work done' then we should see our systems failing and our measurements become inaccurate, yet we don't.

It seems the following must happen in order for 'spirits' to draw 'energy' from our environment:

1. You must 'believe' and never be in the presence of a sceptic.

2. Your equipment must be old and record in low resolution.

3. You must take EMF readings without using proper controls.  

4. You must use digital audio recordings as ghosts can't talk to tapes.

5. A manifestation must never occur near an experiment that would capture readings from it.

6. It must be night - presumably because 'sun energy' isn't the right type

7. You must be a paranormal investigator with a TV show in order to record anything interesting.

 

You are still trying to have it both ways when you can't.  Either they are measurable and testable or they are not.  If they are then present said evidence and if they are not then all we are discussing is a belief based on subjective evidence collection.

[XenoFish]

9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

drawing matter/energy from the environment causing things like cold spots

I guess winter is one big ghost show.

[acute]

11 hours ago, stereologist said:

I have to giggle about the ghosts draining batteries. It makes me laugh because of the cold claims as well. Why aren't people injured or killed by these effects? Probably because nothing is happening.

Why should anyone be "injured or killed by these effects"?  If you are ghost-hunting, you are most likely suitably clothed and in an acceptable environment, not locked in a walk-in freezer!  The temperature drops reported are modest and localized, not life-threatening or dangerous.

[I'mConvinced]

10 minutes ago, acute said:

Why should anyone be "injured or killed by these effects"?  If you are ghost-hunting, you are most likely suitably clothed and in an acceptable environment, not locked in a walk-in freezer!  The temperature drops reported are modest and localized, not life-threatening or dangerous.

How about pacemakers? Those never seem to lose charge near spirits. EMF meters seem to work fine when they are recording activity on demand but cameras go dead because ... err .... camera batteries are different and ghosts attack them to avoid being caught? Tape recorders also work to capture spirit voices but only if they are digital and prone to interference from many sources - even then a healthy dose of auditory pareidolia is required to make out what is said.  The batteries never seem to die in these either, just the cameras again! 

Proving that spirits can drain batteries should be extremely easy in a controlled test yet no-one carries this out and only anecdotal evidence is presented.  Just like psychics with telekinetic powers that only work when no one is looking or filming.

[acute]

11 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

How about pacemakers? Those never seem to lose charge near spirits. EMF meters seem to work fine when they are recording activity on demand but cameras go dead because ... err .... camera batteries are different and ghosts attack them to avoid being caught? Tape recorders also work to capture spirit voices but only if they are digital and prone to interference from many sources - even then a healthy dose of auditory pareidolia is required to make out what is said.  The batteries never seem to die in these either, just the cameras again! 

Proving that spirits can drain batteries should be extremely easy in a controlled test yet no-one carries this out and only anecdotal evidence is presented.  Just like psychics with telekinetic powers that only work when no one is looking or filming.

I wouldn't recommend ghost-hunting if you have a pacemaker!

Knowing a fair bit about electronics, I would expect an analog tape recorder to give better results than a digital voice recorder, with less pareidolia required by the listener.

I agree..... "Proving that spirits can drain batteries should be extremely easy in a controlled test", assuming that you have booked an appointment with the spirits, so they know where to manifest and at what time. 

[Merc14]

12 hours ago, Carnoferox said:

Papa, if you want to be taken seriously give us something that is empirical, meaning it is observable, testable, and repeatable. These are the objective criteria by which evidence should be judged.

When proof consists of "I heard a story and thought the teller credible so I accept this fantastical thing as real." then the world truly is one big unexplained mystery.  That is actually a very sad way for a grown man to go through life and a part of me feels sorry for the guy and I hope that he isn't teaching a younger generation this sad philosophy, still, what is funny is that after accepting said fantasy as real he goes on to "scientifically" explain how it works and we get gems like "ghosts can materialize or semi-materialize by drawing matter/energy from the environment causing things like cold spots and batteries to drain".

[stereologist]

2 minutes ago, acute said:

Why should anyone be "injured or killed by these effects"?  If you are ghost-hunting, you are most likely suitably clothed and in an acceptable environment, not locked in a walk-in freezer!  The temperature drops reported are modest and localized, not life-threatening or dangerous.

How much energy do you have to drain from a human brain to damage it? How is suitable clothing doing to prevent energy loss from a materializing form? How does an acceptable environment prevent energy loss fgrom a

As you can see the energies involved in neural impulse transmission are small. Should the "energy drain" happen from within someone then there would be possibly severe implications if nerves are affected.

http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/212_fall2003.web.dir/Casey_Adamson/Personal Web Page.htm

http://www.merkle.com/brainLimits.html

 

[I'mConvinced]

5 minutes ago, acute said:

I wouldn't recommend ghost-hunting if you have a pacemaker!

Knowing a fair bit about electronics, I would expect an analog tape recorder to give better results than a digital voice recorder, with less pareidolia required by the listener.

I agree..... "Proving that spirits can drain batteries should be extremely easy in a controlled test", assuming that you have booked an appointment with the spirits, so they know where to manifest and at what time. 

Why not? Ghosts only drain camera batteries .

It would but yet rarely are they used.

Given that there are haunted locations that we can return to time and again (see any ghost hunting show) then it should be easy to gather this evidence.  Mostly we just need to turn on a camera and shout 'knock twice if you're a ghost'.  The ghost invariably appears to knock so this would be the point of manifestation and an easy place to start testing.

 

[michaelpast]

monetary prizes are useless for paranormal. think about it, if you have a paranormal ability, the last thing you would want to do is to expose yourself. you have a priceless asset than anything with monetary value

[papageorge1]

6 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

So the physical and spiritual worlds are directly linked and can influence each other? That is what your statement suggests.  If this is the case then performing some strict scientific testing should provide definitive, peer reviewed evidence - I am surprised that more work has not been done on this and that more evidence is not available, it would be earth shattering news.

First issue is that the occurrence of paranormal phenomena like ghosts are not predictable. This is not the kind of thing mainstream science can study. Paranormal investigators (who I would call a type of scientist) have to go to places where multiple events have been reported and then they do often record anomalies with some sophisticated high-tech equipment. 

6 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

 

You use the term energy without, I feel, understanding what you are saying.  There is no such thing as 'energy'.  It is not blobs or bits of stuff, it does not exist as a physical entity at all.  Energy is the term used in science to describe 'work done' in a system.  If paranormal entities were 'drawing matter/energy' from the surroundings they would be having profound and measurable effects all of the time.

Why would it be all the time? Spiritual entities driven to act on the physical is rare thing. Most spiritual entities are concerned with their own plane and nothing detectable is there for physical senses and instruments. As far as how all that energy stuff works on the physical plane, that is over my head to explain. For me and science, sometimes observation precedes a full understanding.

6 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

While our understanding on what 'energy' actually describes is incomplete our laws that describe its transfer (work done) are confirmed, repeatable and used in everyday life.  Without this understanding we wouldn't be able to harness the different types of 'energy' transfer safely - yet we can.  If we now invoke spirits that can mess with this 'work done' then we should see our systems failing and our measurements become inaccurate, yet we don't.

This is often what we see at sights were active spirits are claimed. Anomalous strange effects on electronic equipment are a hallmark of investigations with high-tech equipment at active sights.

I'll briefly comment on each of your seven points:

1. You must 'believe' and never be in the presence of a sceptic.

Fallacy, it is almost a cliché in my armchair investigations to hear .....I was a hard-core skeptic until..<insert story> 

2. Your equipment must be old and record in low resolution.

Fallacy, modern investigators use high-tech expensive equipment

3. You must take EMF readings without using proper controls. 

I am not a techie myself, but I know there are investigators that are highly knowledgeable technical experts who got interested in this field.

4. You must use digital audio recordings as ghosts can't talk to tapes.

I think you are talking about EVPs. There is something going on with Class 1 EVPs ( clearly recognizable to all listeners) that have no satisfactory explanation in mainstream science as they state names and things appropriate to the situation. Occasionally people claim to hear ghosts with their ears too. 

5. A manifestation must never occur near an experiment that would capture readings from it.

Huh, you must not be hearing the many, many reports of investigators to say that.

6. It must be night - presumably because 'sun energy' isn't the right type

Ghost occurrences have been claimed at all times of the day. It does seem that there is a higher chance of activity at night from my experience. I think it does have something to do with the energy of the atmosphere but I would have to research this more.

7. You must be a paranormal investigator with a TV show in order to record anything interesting.

No, amateur investigators and just common folks claim stuff too. Just see YouTube. 

6 hours ago, I'mConvinced said:

You are still trying to have it both ways when you can't.  Either they are measurable and testable or they are not.  

They are measurable but not predictably in a laboratory setting like the type of phenomena science is accustomed to.

 

Edited September 13, 2017 by papageorge1

[Merc14]

41 minutes ago, michaelpast said:

monetary prizes are useless for paranormal. think about it, if you have a paranormal ability, the last thing you would want to do is to expose yourself. you have a priceless asset than anything with monetary value

Oh please!  Anyone with a special skill generally takes advantage of said skill to make their life better and/or enrich themselves, what evidence do you have that someone with a "paranormal ability" would choose to hide it away from the world and purposely not use it to better their life?

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

 

1. You must 'believe' and never be in the presence of a sceptic.

Fallacy, it is almost a cliché in my armchair investigations to hear .....I was a hard-core skeptic until..<insert story> 

This is code for "I saw it on YouTube."

Edited September 13, 2017 by Merc14

[XenoFish]

If I was telekinetic I'd never leave Vegas.

[I'mConvinced]

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

First issue is that the occurrence of paranormal phenomena like ghosts are not predictable. This is not the kind of thing mainstream science can study. Paranormal investigators (who I would call a type of scientist) have to go to places where multiple events have been reported and then they do often record anomalies with some sophisticated high-tech equipment. 

So they are not predictable but they are predictable by Paranormal Investigators?  If they go to places and often record anomalies with sophisticated high-tech equipment then why can't 'mainstream' science do exactly the same? It sure isn't because of a lack of interest.

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

They are measurable but not predictably in a laboratory setting like the type of phenomena science is accustomed to.

Science isn't limited to the lab, this is what field studies are for.  

11 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Anomalous strange effects on electronic equipment are a hallmark of investigations with high-tech equipment at active sights.

Anomalous effect =/= A spirit or ghost.  Anomalous effects occur on high-tech equipment all the time, regardless of location, because they are high-tech.  In fact it is my job to fix anomalous effects on high-tech equipment...

15 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I'll briefly comment on each of your seven points:

I was only having fun.  These cliches exist for a reason though.

7 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

For me and science, sometimes observation precedes a full understanding.

Indeed, however by your own statement observation is a precedent to understanding, it is not understanding itself and it is certainly not enough for any scientific evidence.  If your best evidence is only in observation then you are not basing your belief on scientific evidence.

[I'mConvinced]

13 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

If I was telekinetic I'd never leave Vegas.

I'd never leave the bedroom 

[I'mConvinced]

A report from a genuine person with no reason to lie:

Anomalous effect

[XenoFish]

If I had any psychic ability I would show it off. Who wouldn't? It would be a big middle finger to the doubters.