Are Ghosts Real? Science Says No-o-o-o

[wimfloppp]

why is it that people say they have been in contact with someone who died a hundred years ago but never from someone who died in the stoneage.

[Frank Merton]

I know someone who has had contact with Barbarossa (Frederick I) Holy Roman Emperor. Valuable first hand historical source.

[merline48]

I believe that 'ghosts' ie people or animals that have previously lived do not exist. However, we are not the only created things here on earth. There are other creations too that exist in different yet parallel planes to us. These beings can see us, but we can't see them. They can enter our three dimensional life but as they exist in other higher dimensions, we cannot enter their's...They are able to shape shift, enter or control other humans and animals; they can appear as ghosts, smoke,UFOs or lights etc - these are all forms that our senses can recognise and therefore their existence can be verified . There are known as the jinn.

[_Only]

why is it that people say they have been in contact with someone who died a hundred years ago but never from someone who died in the stoneage.

People have supposedly seen 'ghosts' of people from all time periods. There isn't a shortage of sighted 'ghosts' from early time periods, and no monopoly by 100 year old ghosts.

http://www.paralumun.com/ghostage.htm

[scowl]

The question is then who you are going to believe. Are you going to trust what you saw and interpret it yourself? Or trust others to tell you did or didn't see? You already know the answer to that, though. This was more directed, erm, indirectly, to the post above.

In other words would you rather believe what you want to believe, or would you rather believe in the truth?

Some of us choose the truth.

[stevemagegod]

Ghosts are in the Realm of the Paranormal/Supernatural. It is Science's Job to Explain this Phenomenon and bring them into the realm of "Normal". For example Lightning was supposed to be from Thor/Zeus when he was p***ed. But through the Scientific Method it was brought into the realm of normal.

[Sweetpumper]

With so many basic contradictory theories — and so little science brought to bear on the topic

I thought scientists would have to study something to have a conclusion.

[fran123]

Believing ghosts exist is one thing, actual sightings another. I feel the question should be followed up with: "Do you believe that you have genuinely seen a ghost?" That way we might get an idea of how many people think they have seen something which is paranormal.

[_Only]

In other words would you rather believe what you want to believe, or would you rather believe in the truth?

What truth, in this case? That what she saw didn't

happen? Who are you to tell her that? That's what you believe, which it seems you have made, our truth.

Edited February 6, 2013 by _Only

[Render]

Believing ghosts exist is one thing, actual sightings another. I feel the question should be followed up with: "Do you believe that you have genuinely seen a ghost?" That way we might get an idea of how many people think they have seen something which is paranormal.

No because it's just irrelevant.

I'll quote the article once more because some ppl really have difficulty to understand the invalidity of experiences by the senses:

The science and logic of ghosts

Personal experience is one thing, but scientific evidence is another matter

[scowl]

What truth, in this case? That what she saw didn't

happen? Who are you to tell her that? That's what you believe, which it seems you have made, our truth.

People often misinterpret what they see. We are predisposed to interpreting the unexpected in common ways. In our culture, if anyone sees a white blob they presume it must be the spirit of someone who has died.

Unless they want it to be an angel.

Or unless they want it to be Jesus.

Or unless they want it to be an alien.

Or it turns out to be something else entirely.

See how interpretation plays a critical part in "ghost" sightings?

[Mr Supertypo]

My childhood house was haunted. I remember seeing things and we could listen to weird sounds, even voices in empty rooms. But Whatever is my personal conviction its irrilevant to the matter. There is actually no evidence for anything that can be considered ghosts (in the traditional sense). Right now, its outside our grasp. Maybe in 100y we can have enough understanding in psychics that we can confirm or definitively disprove the existence of non physical beings

[Simbi Laveau]

I am atheist and I value science, but I seen things that I can't explain. Like Indians and Civil War figures, showing up at history landmarks. Even been attacked once...

I hope your mom is feeling Better US .

[scowl]

My childhood house was haunted. I remember seeing things and we could listen to weird sounds, even voices in empty rooms. But Whatever is my personal conviction its irrilevant to the matter. There is actually no evidence for anything that can be considered ghosts (in the traditional sense). Right now, its outside our grasp. Maybe in 100y we can have enough understanding in psychics that we can confirm or definitively disprove the existence of non physical beings

One fun exercise I had in a psychology class was to listen to a recording of voices in a room and try to determine their gender and age. What we thought were people saying short words were ordinary noises like bumps, heating vents, and simple movement of the building -- the room had been unoccupied. Since we were expecting voices, our brains helpfully interpreted them that way. This trick is regularly used during investigations on "Fact or Faked".

I think this effect is part of what we experience as "ghosts". All day we are bombarded with sounds that we ignore. If we believe these sounds have some significance, we'll start misinterpreting them.

[Ghostsstory]

just because science says something doesn't exist, doesn't make Science right.Science is arrogant and dismisses anything it can't explain or understand.

Absolutely. Science can only go as far as current technology allows. There was a time when Scientists believed the world was flat; With today's modern technology, we know just how ridiculous that sounds and we know that earth is indeed not flat.

Who knows what kind of technology we'll have 100, 200, 500 or even 5,000 years from now. The whole argument on the existence of ghosts and the afterlife will sound just as ridiculous as the flat earth theory sounds now.

Though I can not prove a single shred of my paranormal experiences, I know for certain that science will not be able to deny the existence of other worldly dimensions at some point in time. Some kind of technology will come along that'll contain the conclusive, indisputable-evidence on the paranormal theories we have now that leave many questions unanswered.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Ghostsstory

[Render]

the conclusive, indisputable-evidence on the paranormal theories we have now that leave many questions unanswered.

Or you just refuse to understand the already given answers.

[Mr Supertypo]

Absolutely. Science can only go as far as current technology allows. There was a time when Scientists believed the world was flat; With today's modern technology, we know just how ridiculous that sounds and we know that earth is indeed not flat.

No scientist ever believed or claimed the earth was flat. Ancient Greeks they even tried to measure earth roundness observing Lunar eclipses. But the flat earth hypothesis was especially beloved by theologists and some philosopher at certain point, then abandoned later, with exception of a small fanatic fringe. The same kind of people who are today in love with creationism.

Who knows what kind of technology we'll have 100, 200, 500 or even 5,000 years from now. The whole argument on the existence of ghosts and the afterlife will sound just as ridiculous as the flat earth theory sounds now.

True true....as science advances opens new possibilities and new technological artifacts are created. There are still alot to be learn in the world. And one day more rare and complex phenomena, may be explained.

Though I can not prove a single shred of my paranormal experiences, I know for certain that science will not be able to deny the existence of other worldly dimensions at some point in time. Some kind of technology will come along that'll contain the conclusive, indisputable-evidence on the paranormal theories we have now that leave many questions unanswered.

Like Dark matter or energy, they know there is something there, but for now they don't have a explanation for it just speculations based on the interaction with normal matter at cosmic scales. Is the paranormal the effect of normal matter reacting with dark energy/matter in micro scales? is it really ghosts and demons? or its all optical illusions, misunderstandings and frauds? for now nobody know. Thats why people BELIEVE in ghosts. If science had evidence of them, we would KNOW not BELIEVE.

[Mr Supertypo]

One fun exercise I had in a psychology class was to listen to a recording of voices in a room and try to determine their gender and age. What we thought were people saying short words were ordinary noises like bumps, heating vents, and simple movement of the building -- the room had been unoccupied. Since we were expecting voices, our brains helpfully interpreted them that way. This trick is regularly used during investigations on "Fact or Faked".

I think this effect is part of what we experience as "ghosts". All day we are bombarded with sounds that we ignore. If we believe these sounds have some significance, we'll start misinterpreting them.

Yes auditory paredoila, a good example of visual P. is the face on Mars. Our brain is wired to create pattern even when there are none. Just like when you place four dots on a white wall, some people will see the basic structure of a face (eyes, nose, mouth). Possibly like you say some of the paranormal experience is a form of pareidolia. The pet theory of my father was the sounds and other stuff (like objects moving by itself ect) was the produce of small microquakes. We lived in Napoli (Italy) and that is a seismic area. So its plausible. But what happens in the house was a bit more complex than few sounds and moving fornitures. Sometimes we saw also apparitions especially my mother she experienced a lot. In the beginning I was afraid that my mom had some degree of schizophrenia. But I discarded it, since we moved away in 1994 nothing has happen and we all witnessed these strange events. Maybe there was something, or maybe we all went crazy in those years.

[Daniel_]

Science currently tells us that on the most known basic level that that reality is based upon consciousness ALONE. In the absence of humans there can be only other consciousness such as aliens... in absence of them also perhaps there is only a superintelligent conscious being that has decided to run an interesting simulation (www.simulation-argument.com) or devote itself entirely to it. It is RIDICULOUS what passes as "science' or 'scientist' today. Our educational system is corrupt beyond all refute and is only concerned with making money rather than imparting knowledge.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Daniel_

[Moogie]

If you talk about personal exerience, you are not believed, so what is the point. As for science, they are beginning to recognize, via quantum physics, that things exist that we cannot explain. There is also some scientific evidence of a zero point field from which all things are possibly manifested via the manipulation of electromagnetic fields, as well as a level of cosmic consciousness or universal knowledge to which all of us have access. (A possible explanation for the existence of a Godhead of some type) If these things can exist, then ghosts can exist as well.

[cultanorak]

What annoys me about ghosts and leads me to believe they don't exist is their elitism the way only sensitive and clairvoyant people can see them which reaks of superiority to the rest of us people who can't see ghosts. What makes these psychics so special that they can see ghosts but the rest of us can't? What gives them the right? The whole ghost thing is just a massive fraud and con by self proclaimed psychics who should be treated with ridicule for suggesting their better than the rest of us because they can see ghosts!

[_Only]

The whole ghost thing is just a massive fraud and con by self proclaimed psychics who should be treated with ridicule for suggesting their better than the rest of us because they can see ghosts!

The problem with that hypothesis is that one preceded the other, and the idea ended solely on subjective opinion.

Edited February 16, 2013 by _Only

[Alienz8mypopcorn]

I've been on a great number of investigations, and used to be part of a legitmately recognized paranormal group. I never saw anything that convinced me that ghosts are real, but I still believe. Members of the group claimed to have seen things/heard things/felt things. I guess the dead just don't really like me too much

But all the same, perhaps no one has produced any reputable shred of evidence yet because we're all going about this in entirely the wrong way. Since a ghost can't be "captured" and studied, there is literally nothing to base any "investigative methods" on at all. Perhaps EMF detectors and cameras and Digital Voice Recorders are all useless in the hunt for evidence. Maybe we're all searching way out in left field?

Or moreover, maybe the technology to capture this evidence just hasn't been invented yet. Like I said, the members of my group would CONSTANTLY be claiming that we got "something" on every single investigation. I was always like: "Look, you guys get more evidence than anyone else I've ever heard of. If everyone got something everytime they went out, there'd be nothing to prove right now." OR "People with thousands of dollars worth of equipment can't find evidence, I don't think a gaggle of military wives with some digital cameras are going too."

Perhaps they're real and we just don't know HOW to support our beliefs, or the technology too. Or, y'know, we're all wrong and they don't exist at all. Either way, it's a fun topic.

[DancingCorpse]

What annoys me about ghosts and leads me to believe they don't exist is their elitism the way only sensitive and clairvoyant people can see them which reaks of superiority to the rest of us people who can't see ghosts. What makes these psychics so special that they can see ghosts but the rest of us can't? What gives them the right? The whole ghost thing is just a massive fraud and con by self proclaimed psychics who should be treated with ridicule for suggesting their better than the rest of us because they can see ghosts!

I think anyone can see them depending on certain conditions we don't understand yet, whether it be mental state or environmental factors or a combination, usually folks don't see them on command but have the living waste scared out of them! I think haunted places can continually have 'activity' but only in manifest stage such as orbs and auditory phenomena, very early stages of what we consider 'ghosts'.

[TheLastLazyGun]

Are Ghosts Real? Science Says No-o-o-o

Rubbish. Science has got no idea if ghosts are real.