Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
frodonet

To Sceptics : What kind of Evidence is Valid?

33 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

frodonet

A lot of ppl presenting a lot of evidence of supernatural, such as photos, cameras, EVPs, stories and such. But in terms of sceptics, these are not viable proof to show that ghost exists?

Wondering, what kind of evidence is really valid and needed that could be the ultimate proof of existance of ghost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barek Halfhand
A lot of ppl presenting a lot of evidence of supernatural, such as photos, cameras, EVPs, stories and such. But in terms of sceptics, these are not viable proof to show that ghost exists?

Wondering, what kind of evidence is really valid and needed that could be the ultimate proof of existance of ghost?

Who cares about proof :sleepy: ...any evidence that shocks ones sensiblities will be denied by default anyway ...que?

here's something to care about ...b

halfhandshuffle:welcome to bucketheadland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-bIO7OPZmQ

Edited by Barek Halfhand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo

There's a difference between being skeptical and being a skeptic.

The former is someone with doubts about a given situation.

The latter is someone who doubts anything and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buddharat
There's a difference between being skeptical and being a skeptic.

The former is someone with doubts about a given situation.

The latter is someone who doubts anything and everything.

I think you're thinking of debunkers, not skeptics. I know a lot of skeptics who fall into the first catagory, myself included. I can't stand the people who could see a ghost in front of them and try to explain it away with something even more outragous (debunker) but at the same time I can't stand the people who hear a bump from the next room and automatically think it's a ghost without even looking to see if their cat happened to jump down off the couch.

But in reply to the original post, if you're going up against a debunker, good luck, if you're going up against a skeptic, the best proof will be anything that can't be explained away...like an orb can be dust or a bump in the next room (to reference above) could have been the cat that is now on the floor.

:-) Hope that helps.

Plus....Buckethead rules!!!

Edited by Buddharat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustNormal
A lot of ppl presenting a lot of evidence of supernatural, such as photos, cameras, EVPs, stories and such. But in terms of sceptics, these are not viable proof to show that ghost exists?

Wondering, what kind of evidence is really valid and needed that could be the ultimate proof of existance of ghost?

I think its all in the eye of the beholder. However, it is nearly impossible to capture a full apparition on camera so with that said, anything posted can be debunked, criticized or not believed. I feel even if someone did capture an apparition they would be accused of photo shopping, faking, double exposure and the list goes on. I find true EVP's very good evidence, and certain photos attract my attention and others do nothing for me. So, it is what it is, even for believers..JN- :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
I think you're thinking of debunkers, not skeptics. I know a lot of skeptics who fall into the first catagory, myself included. I can't stand the people who could see a ghost in front of them and try to explain it away with something even more outragous (debunker) but at the same time I can't stand the people who hear a bump from the next room and automatically think it's a ghost without even looking to see if their cat happened to jump down off the couch.

You know I'm very skeptical about a lot of evidence. Someone can't send me a pic of an orb and say "I got this orb while asking questions in my dining room so my house must be haunted!" and expect me to agree with them. Will never fly with me.

But that doesn't mean I don't think there is something these or that good evidence can be obtained. Just the bar needs to be set very high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She-ra
You know I'm very skeptical about a lot of evidence. Someone can't send me a pic of an orb and say "I got this orb while asking questions in my dining room so my house must be haunted!" and expect me to agree with them. Will never fly with me.

But that doesn't mean I don't think there is something these or that good evidence can be obtained. Just the bar needs to be set very high.

I def like to play around with pic's but what I actually believe as true is based on a very critical eye. I think there are many on here who have a great grasp of real vs fake. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buddharat
You know I'm very skeptical about a lot of evidence. Someone can't send me a pic of an orb and say "I got this orb while asking questions in my dining room so my house must be haunted!" and expect me to agree with them. Will never fly with me.

But that doesn't mean I don't think there is something these or that good evidence can be obtained. Just the bar needs to be set very high.

Same here, and I would say you fall more under the side of a skeptic. Sadly, the word skeptic has become a bad word, conjuring up thoughts of someone who doesn't believe anything. A true skeptic just looks at evidence skeptically but keeps an open mind. There are debunkers who go around saying they are just skeptics giving us a bad name. I'd much rather keep them in a seperate group, cause I know I don't go out of my way to create an explination just to prove it's not paranormal. :0)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
S.P.P.I.
A lot of ppl presenting a lot of evidence of supernatural, such as photos, cameras, EVPs, stories and such. But in terms of sceptics, these are not viable proof to show that ghost exists?

Wondering, what kind of evidence is really valid and needed that could be the ultimate proof of existance of ghost?

" Seeing is Believing"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neognosis
A lot of ppl presenting a lot of evidence of supernatural, such as photos, cameras, EVPs, stories and such. But in terms of sceptics, these are not viable proof to show that ghost exists?

First, "stories" are NOT evidence.

Second, I've NEVER seen anything or heard anything that could not be explained by lense flair, double exposure, etc. I spent 5 years as a photojournalist. I know what a camera is capable of doing, and how a lense works. There has NEVER been any proof of ghosts presented. EVER.

What proof would I require? First, something that doesn't have a rational and scientific explanation that can be repeated in experimentation.

All you'll ever have is smudges on your lense, shots of the camera lanyard reflected in front of the lense, light reflections, and inaudible and faint white noise. Why? Because there are no such thing as ghosts that visit and haunt us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
coldethyl
Sadly, the word skeptic has become a bad word, conjuring up thoughts of someone who doesn't believe anything. A true skeptic just looks at evidence skeptically but keeps an open mind. There are debunkers who go around saying they are just skeptics giving us a bad name. I'd much rather keep them in a seperate group, cause I know I don't go out of my way to create an explination just to prove it's not paranormal. :0)

Brilliant!!

I totally agree. The bolding and enlarging is my own.

I couldn't say it better myself. Excellent post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
Why? Because there are no such thing as ghosts that visit and haunt us.

isn't this a bit too bold for a conclusion??

Ever heard the expression "there's no smoke if there's no fire"...

if something doesn't exist, there wouldn't be any traces of it at all but there are so many encounters which i even had a few of them and i too have to say that sometimes we have to rely on stories. Whether it's spoof or a lousy spoof, we won't know but what we need is to analyze the possibility.

But i don get it, you mean you can explain every ghost pictures and you meant "every" by lens flare? double exposure? what about those pictures which has clear face of a person or human?? camera tricks ? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
You know I'm very skeptical about a lot of evidence. Someone can't send me a pic of an orb and say "I got this orb while asking questions in my dining room so my house must be haunted!" and expect me to agree with them. Will never fly with me.

But that doesn't mean I don't think there is something these or that good evidence can be obtained. Just the bar needs to be set very high.

I totally don't believe in ORBS either. It's totally gibberish to be a good evidence for ghosts, and some 'if i may add' got so much free time and zoom in on the orb and find a face in it. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neognosis
isn't this a bit too bold for a conclusion??

No, it isn't.

There are many stories because it is a fundamental human need and desire to:

a- communicate with those who have died that were dear to us

b- we desperately want to believe that there is something for us after death

These needs and desires are universal among all human beings, regardless of culture. We all also have the same brain chemistry and physiology. It is no surprise, and certainly not evidence, that all cultures through time have ghost stories. We are the same species.

But i don get it, you mean you can explain every ghost pictures and you meant "every" by lens flare? double exposure? what about those pictures which has clear face of a person or human?? camera tricks ?

Yes, very nearly EVERY "ghost image" can be explained, and the few (VERY few, if any at all) that can not be explained merely have an explanation that we have not come across yet. That explanation is NOT ghosts. I'm sorry, those are the facts. I support your right to believe in ghosts, but realize that is is a BELIEF, and you have no proof. This coming from someone who has SEEN the dead. I realize that I have no proof, and there is likely an explanation for what I THINK I saw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
I think you're thinking of debunkers, not skeptics. I know a lot of skeptics who fall into the first catagory, myself included. I can't stand the people who could see a ghost in front of them and try to explain it away with something even more outragous (debunker) but at the same time I can't stand the people who hear a bump from the next room and automatically think it's a ghost without even looking to see if their cat happened to jump down off the couch.

But in reply to the original post, if you're going up against a debunker, good luck, if you're going up against a skeptic, the best proof will be anything that can't be explained away...like an orb can be dust or a bump in the next room (to reference above) could have been the cat that is now on the floor.

:-) Hope that helps.

Plus....Buckethead rules!!!

Good point indeed, those are the worse case scenarios man...where i totally agreed where debunker seriously throws all non-reality possibility out of the window and just says the word "bullsh*t".

What about EVPs??? how come no one mentioned this? captured EVPs all around the world, and don tell me this is some radio trick and yes i'm not talking about backward subliminal playing but real captured EVPs.

PS : BUCKETHEAD is the greatest everr!!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neognosis
EVPs all around the world, and don tell me this is some radio trick and yes i'm not talking about backward subliminal playing but real captured EVPs.

What's an EVP? is that when you hear a "voice" on a piece of tape or a digital recording device?

I used to be a television photojournalist. That type of thing happens all the time. I'm sorry you don't want to hear about the nature of radio waves and radio/electromagnetic interference, but that's the deal.

Saying "don't tell me about...." doesn't make it any less the cause. And that's just for the stuff you CAN hear. Most of what people claim is evidence I don't hear at all. You can hear ANYTHING in white noise if you try hard enough. And there are also a lot of hoaxes. This has NEVER been duplicated in a controlled experiment without radio and EM frequency interference being the cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
No, it isn't.

There are many stories because it is a fundamental human need and desire to:

a- communicate with those who have died that were dear to us

b- we desperately want to believe that there is something for us after death

I disagree with your 2 points above.

1. Ghost stories are usually not created because we want to communicate with someone who are dear to us. I've read many stories ranging from Asian to Western Ghost stories, and there are some which i find the storyline is credible. I don't know whether it's true or not, and i can't decide that from just my reading but what i analyze is how does the plot goes...is it really those staged or more like unexpected.

2. Is it a desperation that i want to know what's there after death. I'm not but rather i called super-curiosity. Both are totally different things, the only reason humans have evolved to be more advanced is due to their nature of inquisitive. Eg. Few years ago, global warming wasn't even accepted as a liable logic, but now, ppl started to realise that it is real. What we do affects the earth. I have high interest of life after death matters but i don think it's desperation though :blush: but rather my nature to know something, or to realise something that may make me a better person. The thing is, which i holds dearly to myself ; which is by my own words but i'm not a wise man...

"If something does not exist, there won't be a trace of it all".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
What's an EVP? is that when you hear a "voice" on a piece of tape or a digital recording device?

I used to be a television photojournalist. That type of thing happens all the time. I'm sorry you don't want to hear about the nature of radio waves and radio/electromagnetic interference, but that's the deal.

Saying "don't tell me about...." doesn't make it any less the cause. And that's just for the stuff you CAN hear. Most of what people claim is evidence I don't hear at all. You can hear ANYTHING in white noise if you try hard enough. And there are also a lot of hoaxes. This has NEVER been duplicated in a controlled experiment without radio and EM frequency interference being the cause.

sorry i really didn't mean to be rude...my english is quite bad actually :blush:

anyway...those EVPs which are captured by recording in haunted houses, which are not connected thru any radio transmission. And those EVPs captured are more of dialogue which has connection pertaining to the current situation involving a haunted house.

Of course there would be hoaxes around, doesn't mean every single one is fake though. I understand your opinion cause these are your area of expertise but maybe due to my inquisitive nature, i do not believe that ghost doesn't exist. I've seen one myself. :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neognosis
I've read many stories ranging from Asian to Western Ghost stories, and there are some which i find the storyline is credible.

Think about what you are saying. you find the storyline credible? That someone saw something that does not exist? Credible is a subjective term. I suspect there's a much lower requirement for credibility in your case.

There are also explanations for visions. they are either waking dreams, hallucinations, or other explanable phenemona.

but people NEED to believe in something they can't understand. People NEED to believe that there is something else out there. People LIKe being scared and fascinated. That's why ghost stories always have been, and allways will be.

I saw my grandfather come to me at night and say goodbye the night he died.

Ghost? Paranormal?

Most likely not.

1- I knew he was old, in the hospital, and not doing well

2- I was most likely half asleep

3- I may have dreamed the same thing before, but since he did not die at those times, I forgot it.

simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thekeyboardkid
Think about what you are saying. you find the storyline credible? That someone saw something that does not exist? Credible is a subjective term. I suspect there's a much lower requirement for credibility in your case.

There are also explanations for visions. they are either waking dreams, hallucinations, or other explanable phenemona.

but people NEED to believe in something they can't understand. People NEED to believe that there is something else out there. People LIKe being scared and fascinated. That's why ghost stories always have been, and allways will be.

I saw my grandfather come to me at night and say goodbye the night he died.

Ghost? Paranormal?

Most likely not.

1- I knew he was old, in the hospital, and not doing well

2- I was most likely half asleep

3- I may have dreamed the same thing before, but since he did not die at those times, I forgot it.

simple as that.

Amen.

Though I don't completely agree with you (I think there are such things as ghosts, demons, blah blah blah), you do have some great points. Some people are just too quick to jump into some bogus explanation for a face they see in the clouds, a shadow they saw in the corner of their eye, thuds on walls, and so on. Like I said before, I am a believer, but I feel as if all these stories/pictures/hearsay are 98% false--especially the ones posted here on UM. :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frodonet
Think about what you are saying. you find the storyline credible? That someone saw something that does not exist? Credible is a subjective term. I suspect there's a much lower requirement for credibility in your case.

There are also explanations for visions. they are either waking dreams, hallucinations, or other explanable phenemona.

but people NEED to believe in something they can't understand. People NEED to believe that there is something else out there. People LIKe being scared and fascinated. That's why ghost stories always have been, and allways will be.

I saw my grandfather come to me at night and say goodbye the night he died.

Ghost? Paranormal?

Most likely not.

1- I knew he was old, in the hospital, and not doing well

2- I was most likely half asleep

3- I may have dreamed the same thing before, but since he did not die at those times, I forgot it.

simple as that.

Hey man,

sorry to hear about your grandfather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buddharat
What about EVPs??? how come no one mentioned this? captured EVPs all around the world, and don tell me this is some radio trick and yes i'm not talking about backward subliminal playing but real captured EVPs.

EVPs are tricky as evidence. There are some factors to take into account when using evps for evidence.

1.) If you're using a digital voice recorder, make sure the brand you have isn't on the recall list. A bunch of digital voice recorders were recalled because they were getting bleed through from cell phones/cbs/radio signals.

2.) With EVPs as evidence, it's really your word against everyone else that there wasn't another person in the room. I'm not sure how to get around this, but it's something to keep in mind if you're presenting it as solid proof.

3.) I always try to have a digital and an analogue audio recorder, that why if it shows up on both, it's harder to dispute. With everything, the more sources you have picking up the same thing, the more corroborative proof you'll have.

4.) Keep in mind your surrounds and if you're trying to capture EVPs, and you make a noise (like say you're going through a dark house and you trip and bump the wall), make an audio note that the odd noise you just heard was you, that will cut down on you wondering later.

I'm not saying that if you do all these things that it will make your evps proof, but it will help to get rid of some of the common gripes with them.

:tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spiridion

I'm with the seeing is believing crowd. I mean, it's not that photos and videos can't be valid evidence if I could be 100% sure that the photo or video was not tampered with. But let's face it, on the internet you really can't tell what has been Photoshopped or faked. I think in order for me to change my mind, I would have to experience something undeniably paranormal for myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xxTippyxToesxx
I'm with the seeing is believing crowd. I mean, it's not that photos and videos can't be valid evidence if I could be 100% sure that the photo or video was not tampered with. But let's face it, on the internet you really can't tell what has been Photoshopped or faked. I think in order for me to change my mind, I would have to experience something undeniably paranormal for myself.

I agree with this 100%. If I could see proof for myself of something like this, without there being another logical explanation, I think I would be questioning what I do or don't believe in. I have seen no proof of anything paranormal that couldn't easily be faked. If something popped up infront of me, that might be a little more difficult to find a logical explanation for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roadlion

It's interesting that there are some who are intent on making science their religion. Thus statements like ... even where there is no explanation, one will be found that explains this without relying on paranormal theory.

Making that statement plainly shows that "faith" in science has simply replaced faith in spirit, the supernatural, or what have you.

In fact, it's really pretty amusing to see with what "evangelical" zeal these science-faithul individuals preach their belief system.

The actuality is, we don't know. Science doesn't cover why we're here, and shouldn't preport to cover aspects of our nature which may not be physical in nature...such as soul, spirit, etc. It's as ludicrous as religious zealots who try to disprove scientific studies.

Ah well, fight nicely.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.