The Paranormal is it Fake?

[+Liquid Gardens]

Fill your garage with water and observe what happens next?

Ha, cute, but you've lost the point of the analogy. I've tried to define this dragon to be just like the spirit world that I've heard so much about, which I've been told I've been analyzing incorrectly since according to Seeker: "'verification' rooted in physicalist philosophy isn't going to cut it this time. We are moving beyond materialism so we have to have tools that are not built on physicalism." You are definitely using tools built on physicalism to demonstrate that my dragon doesn't exist by pumping water in, and of course assuming the dragon itself has physical mass, so it's not really applicable. Perhaps more directly to what was being discussed, how exactly would one go about producing verifiable facts that the spirit world doesn't exist?

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

Ha, cute, but you've lost the point of the analogy. I've tried to define this dragon to be just like the spirit world that I've heard so much about, which I've been told I've been analyzing incorrectly since according to Seeker: "'verification' rooted in physicalist philosophy isn't going to cut it this time. We are moving beyond materialism so we have to have tools that are not built on physicalism." You are definitely using tools built on physicalism to demonstrate that my dragon doesn't exist by pumping water in, and of course assuming the dragon itself has physical mass, so it's not really applicable. Perhaps more directly to what was being discussed, how exactly would one go about producing verifiable facts that the spirit world doesn't exist?

There you go, can't be proven that it doesn't exist.. But we have people saying they've done just that, and even going a step further and attacking all who believe in the existence of it...

[Beckys_Mom]

Let's keep the thread simple, show me proof the Paranormal doesn't exist. Use verifiable sources, and if you're not an actual doctor don't make diagnostic theories you are not qualified to make.

You speak of the paranormal.. I take it you mean ghosts? Could I prove to you that the ghost of Elvis was in my living room last night?...If I could prove it, how do you suppose I do this?

Edited June 5, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[Mr Walker]

Ha, cute, but you've lost the point of the analogy. I've tried to define this dragon to be just like the spirit world that I've heard so much about, which I've been told I've been analyzing incorrectly since according to Seeker: "'verification' rooted in physicalist philosophy isn't going to cut it this time. We are moving beyond materialism so we have to have tools that are not built on physicalism." You are definitely using tools built on physicalism to demonstrate that my dragon doesn't exist by pumping water in, and of course assuming the dragon itself has physical mass, so it's not really applicable. Perhaps more directly to what was being discussed, how exactly would one go about producing verifiable facts that the spirit world doesn't exist?

Try filling it with water?

My original answer was meant to be humorous, butlso to show that sometimes the presence/absence of physical things can be proven in many ways. However to prove the absence of something'metaphysical or non physical in nature is more difficult. It's mere absence is not, in itself, proof of anything. it is easy to prove the absence of something which once was but is not now, eg the dodo, but almost impossible to prove the non existence of something which has never been proven to exist.

Thus we usually find the answer to what does NOT exist by discovering what does exist. It is not hard to find "verifiable proofs " that "the spirit world" does exist. This makes proving that it does not exist, redundant. Of course a lot depends on ones definitions of the nature of, "the spirit world' and of, "verifiable proofs."

Another way of looking at it is this we prove the non existence of the dragon by showing that it has no reaction to or interaction with the environment around it. It doesnt displace any water for example idfi it is not there To prove the non existence of the spirit world would require showing that such a world has no reaction to, and no interaction with, the normal world, and thus to all extents and purposes does not exist. Of course the opposite is true.

The existence of "the spirit world" is evidenced by just such interactions and reactions in the normal world. Whatever the nature of such a world, its existence is evidenced by human and animal reactions, responses, and interactions with it. Most people who sincerely disbelieve in the existence of "the spirit world" have had no personal reaction, interaction, or connection to/with it, and base their disbelief on this lack. their disbelief is logical but false, due to a lack of knowledge /experience on their part.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Mr Walker

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

You speak of the paranormal.. I take it you mean ghosts? Could I prove to you that the ghost of Elvis was in my living room last night?...If I could prove it, how do you suppose I do this?

I don't impose how you'd prove it, you have to come up with your own methods.. Ones that are verifiable..

[Beckys_Mom]

I don't impose how you'd prove it, you have to come up with your own methods.. Ones that are verifiable..

For all you know I am yanking your chain.. Think about it.. If I told you the ghost of Elvis was in my home and lets say you were a fan, you would ask me to prove it...wouldn't you? OR would you just believe me without a challenge?

[+Liquid Gardens]

There you go, can't be proven that it doesn't exist.. But we have people saying they've done just that, and even going a step further and attacking all who believe in the existence of it...

You keep saying that, so provide your quotes from all of these people who say they have proven that the paranormal doesn't exist. Regardless, it doesn't have anything to do with me specifically since I've never said that.

[scowl]

: the quality of being actual :actuality<a question of fact hinges on evidence>

You tell me...

I'll be glad to. Those sentences between the pointy braces are only examples of the word in use and have nothing to do with the word's definition.

So you do look at them but you don't understand them.

[scowl]

The existence of "the spirit world" is evidenced by just such interactions and reactions in the normal world. Whatever the nature of such a world, its existence is evidenced by human and animal reactions, responses, and interactions with it.

Meaning nothing but subjective experiences and anecdotes, the kind that promote superstition and kept man from understanding objective reality through scientific methods for hundreds of years.

Most people who sincerely disbelieve in the existence of "the spirit world" have had no personal reaction, interaction, or connection to/with it, and base their disbelief on this lack. their disbelief is logical but false, due to a lack of knowledge /experience on their part.

So if you don't believe fairies exists, that's because you haven't talked to one. But since people have claimed to have seen and even talked to fairies, they simply must exist and everyone who says they don't are wrong.

[libstaK]

I've had a some "events" that could be construed as "ghostly".

Here's the thing (or one thing) - it all boils down to what we can currently fathom with our five senses about the world around us, if we had sonar for instance maybe we something would bounce back at us and it would seem as normal and real as the material world at large, or if we could taste the air like a snake or have the sense of hearing or smell of a bloodhound we might have a rational and common explanation for what seems paranormal now, as we could use those additional sense to experiment and repeat results aka: everyone would have the same results given everyone had those additional sensory perceptions.

Life as we know it is really only life as our five senses tell us it is. What comes across as "paranormal" could just be a life form that is outside of the realm of "life as we know it" commonly and more "life as some are able to sense it" through subtle genetic differences in each of our sensory perceptions.

This is just a thought experiment on my part btw - if there were more life forms than our five senses can tell us about, they might be as exciting to us as the first time we saw a whale or a lion at a zoo and also as common a life form as a whale or lion when we can understand what they are, maybe even a tiny firefly with a huge capacity to radiate colours or shapes as a form of self defense could be the culprit of some folks experiences, who knows - the "normal" world could still be a great undiscovered territory and fun to investigate if we avoid pigeon holing our experiences as "paranoramal" in every instance we don't understand them.

Edited June 5, 2013 by libstaK

[Beckys_Mom]

...and science has ZERO explanation besides "you're a liar or mentally ill".

I have seen many paranormal shows and there have been a number of scientists desperate to find a lick of evidence.. They did are they could with experiments, and used science to help them ( equipment etc ) ...Some weren't sure and others felt is was a fail...But at least they went in with an open mind and did something. I have never heard of a scientist calling anyone who claims a home was haunted - Mentally ill or a lair ..

It is also best to note that science will not give up trying.. There will always someone out with some special equipment to try.. again to do this you NEED an open mind.. I wish believers in the paranormal would at least recognise this.. The thing I like about scientists like this is they are not just going to swallow any old tale told without at least investigating it...

We are not all sponges that will soak up any tale told, ( I know no one suggested we were ) some of us will go beyond this.. I call it - Effort and determination ..!

Edited June 5, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[libstaK]

Good post. There's probably heaps we don't know about or life forms that interact with us and we don't know it. But another lifeform couldn't possibly project the "ghost" of say your dead grandmother.

The very definition of paranormal: "Denoting events or phenomena that are beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding".

Your firefly would be considered paranormal.

You're right there, if it is definitively your grandma or clear as day a person etc, then that belongs in another basket but many cases of orbs or coloured lights etc are associated automatically with being ghostly and we can sieve alot of the more random phenomena like that out of the "ghost and ghouls" basket to "unknown" straight up.

[Beckys_Mom]

I'm a believer because of my experiences. I've seen all I need to see. That doesn't mean I believe every story I read or hear about nor does it mean that if science can explain some paranormal activity later - with undisputed proof - for say other dimensions or something like that, that I'd dismiss it. It's perfectly fine on the other end of the spectrum for skeptics to say based on their experiences, or lackthereof, that they don't believe there's anything there and wont' do until there's evidence as such. What I have a problem with is being told I have to prefix my statements as beliefs whereas they prefix their beliefs as "fact".

I too have seen and mostly heard things that I cannot explain, but there is no way in hell I could prove it to you or anyone else.. So asking people to disprove it sounds weird because if the paranormal ghosts could be proved by science, then there wouldn't be a need for anyone to ask others - "Ok then disprove it?" Too daft for words in my opinion..

People own the right to say I know ghosts are around.. Just in the way people own a right to say I know there are no ghosts.. WHY? because each to their own.. Both cannot present any way of proving or disproving.. But these discussions usually go one sided...

To sum my point up - Both sides can say how they see it..

Edited June 5, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

The whole purpose of this thread was to remind all of those with swollen heads making personal attacks on people, that their beliefs are opinions not facts.

Skeptic perceptive is just that.. perception. If it were to become fact, it would not be called skeptic fact, it would just be fact.

Believer perceptive is just that. perception. if it were to become fact, it would not be called believer fact, it would just be fact.

Most of the "Paranormal" experiences are claimed to be from another dimension, yet scientists have tried proving/disproving these experiences based on what is in this dimension. Furthermore, they use tools and equipment relative to this dimension. This is the same concept as the sea. We cannot say with certainty we know everything in the sea, because we have not explored the sea in it's entirety. To even begin to see what was in the sea, we needed to develop and use tools/equipment relative to the sea, not land. Science will never say with certainty what's in other dimensions until they explore them in their entirety, with proper equipment/tools.

As far as certain facts brought up in this thread... Someone backing out of a situation seems to be a "fact" that they are unable to perform as mentioned.

http://www.nytimes.c...nted=all&src=pm

In that case, Doctors who refuse patients do not know medicine?

http://dailycaller.c...-test-students/

How about teachers refusing to administer tests to students? I guess they don't know how to teach either right?

http://thelede.blogs...atch-home-burn/

Firefighters who refuse to put out a fire don't know how to put one out either?

Again, retreat/refusal is not indicative of a person's ability or disability to perform anything. It is however, indicative of their desire to not perform under the circumstances. Take that how you may, I'm just pointing out the flaws in your argument, especially since you keep trying to imply that my refusal to participate in your experiment is a "fact" that my beliefs are not real.

Since I still see no facts, I will say that everyone needs to take a step back and analyze what is going on here... Your disbelief of the paranormal is perfectly normal, so is the belief in the paranormal.. Why are some people here attacking others over these beliefs? Why do we have people claiming to have "facts" when we all know there are no "facts" to be had as of yet.. Why are people not providing proof of their belief that this or that does not exist? Why do we instead have arguments where people insist that other's beliefs must be proven, but their own require no proof?

As I said earlier:

So you mean to tell me that when I question others' beliefs, I am being completely unreasonable but when they question my beliefs I must oblige to their questioning?

Edited June 5, 2013 by xFelix

[Sakari]

Millions of people don't report experiences with fairies. Hundred of thousands if not millions DO report experiences with ghosts...and science has ZERO explanation besides "you're a liar or mentally ill". The point Felix and others have tried to make is that nobody, not one soul, has DISPROVEN the existence of ghosts and the spirit world.

That is 100% false....

EMF readings.......Science has a ton of answers for that.

Sound....Science has a ton of answers for that.

Mist.....Science has a ton of answers for that.

Temp. change.......etc,etc,etc,etc.

I could go on and explain a bunch.

Many topics on this site alone have been answered by " Science " on peoples experiences, pictures, and videos included. And, the people that made the claims agreed.

Hell, that crap show Ghost Hunters ( poor example ) has even explained away many things that people thought were ghosts.

Just recently, someone on another topic asked me what could cause them to feel strange things around a certain person, and thought that person may be a Demon.

I posted back that it sounds like it could be " social anxiety " but, to certain individuals only. ( now some will say that means I said " you are mentally ill ".

I gave a link for reading the subject.......

They said, " That is very interesting, THANK YOU "

Why can't everyone be like that?

Edited June 5, 2013 by Sakari

[Sakari]

Bottom line of this thread :

No one has quoted anyone stating " the paranormal does not exist "

No one has quoted anyone saying " you are mentally ill "

No one has quoted anyone " bashing " someones belief.

What this is about.....( my opinion based on " facts " from previous topics and replies from same people )

First, I believe this stems from a certain thread. If so, let me point out that threads play on words " proving it does not exist " is explained there. It was made for the sole purpose of people saying " prove it does not exist " when they are close minded and refuse to see, or even acknowledge real answers. ( this could be a lot of topics, orbs, etc. ) This play on words worked, and does work.

Facts can be shown to support that something does not exist. ( read that carefully ) And, facts are not shown to support said thing does exist. It is over whelming to one side.

Saying " prove it does not exist " is a " cop out ". It is something someone uses when they feel backed into a corner.

Bottom line, some people can not have discussions about the paranormal without getting personal. These are the ones that take " it could be Schizophrinia " as " you are mentally ill ".....Or, " you should talk to a counselor or Psychologist " as " you are insane "........They take black and white, and turn into whatever they want. It is almost like they can not read. It boggles my mind how bad things ( obvious things ) are taken out of context, just to start a argument.They get defensive and aggressive, and really, should not be on a " open " discussion board such as this. If they can not have a discussion without getting upset to that point of aggression, they should be in a " believers " only site, or a " skeptics " only site, not here.

Instead of saying " prove it does not exist ", something on the lines of " well, I do not, and will not ever agree with you ".......At that point ( both really ) the discussion should be over for that person. Now, if that person is willing to continue to discuss things, they will need to be able to back up there claims, if not, the discussion should be over.

I have said it a thousand times, if someone says " this is what I believe it is " no one ( well, most ) do not even say much. It is when people state " I know they are real " ( and similar ).....That is where the door is wide opened, and evidence is asked for.

Bottom line.......Some people can not have discussions about paranormal topics, personality takes over. It is the same with Politics and Religion, everyone knows that. That is what this topic is really about. .......And that is what I believe.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Sakari

[Beckys_Mom]

The whole purpose of this thread was to remind all of those with swollen heads making personal attacks on people, that their beliefs are opinions not facts.

Same goes for those that bang on about seeing things ... 6 to one and half a dozen the other.. No point in being biased

[Beckys_Mom]

Bottom line of this thread :

No one has quoted anyone stating " the paranormal does not exist "

No one has quoted anyone saying " you are mentally ill "

No one has quoted anyone " bashing " someones belief.

Correct, no one has, which is why I do not get this thread.. AND its based on the paranormal.. This board is is not about the paranormal.. UM have a board for that...

[Sakari]

Paranormal is a broad term and covers a million things...you will however find plenty of comments stating certain spectrums from the paranormal does not exist. The easiest example to pluck out is ghosts/demons.

I've seen plenty of posts that suggest somebody should see a doctor, even tells them what disorder they supposedly have, now if that isn't telling someone they're mentally ill I don't know what is...

"There are numerous people here, and hundreds on the internet that claim they can summon these things, or get rid of them. Not one has done anything except take advantage of people, and/or take money from guillible people" - not calling somebody a liar? I think it's pretty strongly inferred in this quote that people "lie" about their experiences or abilities to take advantage of others, no?

"The ones who " say " it is in the head have proof, facts, and backed up facts from the Medical Profession." - here we go again with these "facts" that are never produced.

Felix pulled out these nice quotes here http://www.unexplain...30#entry4795900 only a handful too, I may go on the hunt for some myself later...

Lastly, I don't mean to be disrespectful but the title of this forum is UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES, I think "paranormal" falls into that quite nicely. A few mods have posted in this thread and not one has said that this discussion shouldn't be taking place on this forum nor that it is posted in the wrong section of the board. If you feel differently, hit that report button

These are the ones that take " it could be Schizophrinia " as " you are mentally ill ".....Or, " you should talk to a counselor or Psychologist " as " you are insane "........They take black and white, and turn into whatever they want. It is almost like they can not read. It boggles my mind how bad things ( obvious things ) are taken out of context, just to start a argument.

See?......You say below.

I've seen plenty of posts that suggest somebody should see a doctor, even tells them what disorder they supposedly have, now if that isn't telling someone they're mentally ill I don't know what is...

Exactly what I just mentioned.....Taking things out of context. Funny thing is, I am pretty sure you have me on ignore, so did not even see my reply right above yours. Yet, did exactly what I am saying.

"The ones who " say " it is in the head have proof, facts, and backed up facts from the Medical Profession." - here we go again with these "facts" that are never produced.

Those facts are plastered all over this forum.

"There are numerous people here, and hundreds on the internet that claim they can summon these things, or get rid of them. Not one has done anything except take advantage of people, and/or take money from guillible people"

Taken from a topic, and ( long ) discussion regarding how People are taken advantage of :

Psychics

Haunted Collector

The Bizarre Moving Statue ( old topic here )

Again......

They take black and white, and turn into whatever they want. It is almost like they can not read. It boggles my mind how bad things ( obvious things ) are taken out of context, just to start a argument

I am only pointing out a few things here, only to make my point. No offense at all, but you are one of those people. You take it to personal, and let your emotions take over. I have said it before, discussions here are not a game or a battle, not a " I win " thing....Just discussions.

Hell, you got mad at me when I finished a PM to you saying " I am off to BBQ now "......I was stating what I was going to go do, being personal, friendly. Telling you why I had to leave.....I had not idea you were a vegan, and even if I did, why would that have been offensive?......You took it as a personal insult......

Not trying to be mean here, I am pointing out, you ( and others ) take this stuff way to far, and way to personal. I have seen numerous people point out how rude you were being in replies.

Now, not to make this between us, I have been, and sometimes still are a bit rude. For me, it takes someone being rude first, and sometimes I can not control my emotions, and reply with things maybe I should not have. And, I probably will again, no one is perfect.

But, when you can not discuss things without taking things out of context, because your emotions take over, as I said, maybe this is not the place for you.

This topic :

The Paranormal is it Fake?

Calling all skeptics for proof that it doesn't exist.

That is not what this topic is about....It should have been titled :

" Why are skeptics questioning things that we feel / know are real "

It is just a topic of " skeptics -vs- believers ".......

No one is going to win, some will show their true colors, and it will end bad.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Sakari

[Beckys_Mom]

Paranormal is a broad term and covers a million things...

Which is why UM have one just for those things..The paranormal board draws more people that are into the paranormal and more skeptics...

I've seen plenty of posts that suggest somebody should see a doctor, even tells them what disorder they supposedly have, now if that isn't telling someone they're mentally ill I don't know what is

Yea in another thread....But has nothing to do with those posting in here.. No relevance at all.. It's like getting angry at skeptics that don't care to talk much about the paranormal.. We come on this board to discuss spirituality and skeptism ..The guidelines are at the top, hard to miss..

Felix pulled out these nice quotes here http://www.unexplain...30#entry4795900 only a handful too, I may go on the hunt for some myself later...

So, make a thread to complain about things said in another thread? Yup that makes sense !!

Lastly, I don't mean to be disrespectful but the title of this forum is UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES, I think "paranormal" falls into that quite nicely

Observant of you, but it covers a lot of topics and issues.. which is why they made specific boards under UM... like this one.. - > http://www.unexplain...hp?showforum=10 ..Saru built different sections of UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES for a reason, it manages it better, instead of throwing al into the one topic... Derailing all over the place if that were the way...

Unexplained mysteries....If the paranormal is so UNEXPLAINED and a MYSTERY, then shot in the dark but - Why ask anyone to explain it or disprove it? Isn't it unexplained and a mystery? lol I thought the forum was built to discuss your experiences and dive into other topics you are keen on... Next we will see a I saw big foot thread posted in the politics boards !!!

If you feel differently, hit that report button

My report button is broken, it got jammed and Saru says he is meaning to get around to fixing it

PS CAPS are only to lay the emphasis..Don't want anyone thinking I am yelling lol

Edited June 5, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

This topic :

The Paranormal is it Fake?

Calling all skeptics for proof that it doesn't exist.

That is not what this topic is about....It should have been titled :

" Why are skeptics questioning things that we feel / know are real "

It is just a topic of " skeptics -vs- believers ".......

No one is going to win, some will show their true colors, and it will end bad.

Yet you have no verifiable proof.. All I have is you derailing my thread demanding that I post in your thread...

Shall I use your logic and say that this is a "fact" that more than 4 skeptics have come to argue but none have provided said proof therefore the paranormal absolutely must exist? I think I will take the Sakari approach, if he can claim something to be fact without verifiable proof why can't I?

Don't even try to say the proof is plastered across the forums, cause my proof is plastered all across this thread... Just a bunch of derailment but nobody provides the verifiable proof necessary to claim their belief that the paranormal does not exist is fact.

Keep derailing, and using wordplay it is un-equivocal to me because you still can't prove your "facts".

Edited June 5, 2013 by xFelix

[Mr Walker]

[/size]

Meaning nothing but subjective experiences and anecdotes, the kind that promote superstition and kept man from understanding objective reality through scientific methods for hundreds of years.

So if you don't believe fairies exists, that's because you haven't talked to one. But since people have claimed to have seen and even talked to fairies, they simply must exist and everyone who says they don't are wrong.

ALL human experience is subjective. (If i see a zebra, that is no different to seeing a ghost.) That doesnt make it less real or objectively existent. When something real happens to a person they talk about it and that becomes an anecdote. But many paranormal events, including those which might be considered a product of some "spirit world " are measurable. The most scientifically accepted is the existence of poltergeists which science tends to put down to some form of living, young, female, human presence.

And you miscontrue my other point. IF even one person has seen/encountered and engaged with a rea/physical, independently existent fairie, then they exist. What i believe about them is redundant.

As it happens I place fairies fairly low on my spectrum of possible reality, because I know how an why such stories evolved I dont know that alien entities exist other than the big one, but i place them highly along my probabilty line for real existence because of evidences for their existence. I do not believe or disbelieve in anything I am not sure of, even the constancy of gravity. If i ever encouter a little grey man one night, then yes, I will know that all who say they do not exist are factually wrong.

Reality trumps belief, no matter how strong or logical that belief may be.

[+Liquid Gardens]

Try filling it with water?

I thought we would need to use something like ectoplasm instead?

My original answer was meant to be humorous, butlso to show that sometimes the presence/absence of physical things can be proven in many ways. However to prove the absence of something'metaphysical or non physical in nature is more difficult.

It's mere absence is not, in itself, proof of anything.

Agreed for the most part, but it depends on the claim. Some claims predict that we should find evidence of it; if it turns out that the evidence is not produced or is absent, then that is evidence against the claim, although it's not proof (personally I don't think these discussions really lend themselves well to the word 'proof'; I like 'greater likelihood' or 'more reasonable to believe to be true' or something like that where we drop the absolutes and try to avoid semantic discussions). I've seen a rather humorous video from India I believe where a skeptic took up some guy who claimed he could kill someone without touching them at all. He tries and tries, but in the end the skeptic is alive and smiling. The absence of evidence for his superpowers that we should expect to exist if his claims were actually true is evidence against that claim. But I understand your point.

it is easy to prove the absence of something which once was but is not now, eg the dodo, but almost impossible to prove the non existence of something which has never been proven to exist.

Agreed; in addition it is almost impossible to prove the non-existence of things that do not actually exist.

Thus we usually find the answer to what does NOT exist by discovering what does exist. It is not hard to find "verifiable proofs " that "the spirit world" does exist. This makes proving that it does not exist, redundant. Of course a lot depends on ones definitions of the nature of, "the spirit world' and of, "verifiable proofs."

I'm pretty sure that you and I do not have the same definitions for 'verifiable'. To my knowledge there are no verifiable proofs that the spirit world does exist, at least using the typical definition of 'spirit world'.

Another way of looking at it is this we prove the non existence of the dragon by showing that it has no reaction to or interaction with the environment around it. It doesnt displace any water for example idfi it is not there

To prove the non existence of the spirit world would require showing that such a world has no reaction to, and no interaction with, the normal world, and thus to all extents and purposes does not exist. Of course the opposite is true.

It is not possible to show definitively that the spirit world never has any interaction with someone's thoughts and perceptions. Even in your future where we can download our 'consciousness' to computers and kinda live forever, you could have every part of a person's brain scanned at the atomic level by these future technologies while the subject is perceiving and interacting with the spirit world and not be able to detect it in any way; duh, you're looking for physical reactions and measurements to something that is not physical. It's bulletproof, it's unfalsifiable, and I don't find unfalsifiable claims to be very compelling.

The existence of "the spirit world" is evidenced by just such interactions and reactions in the normal world. Whatever the nature of such a world, its existence is evidenced by human and animal reactions, responses, and interactions with it.

This comes dangerously close to actually stating that these interactions caused by the spirit world can be measured, and somehow determined to actually be a response to interaction with a spirit world. I'm unclear why this potentially convincing evidence has not been presented and more widely accepted.

Most people who sincerely disbelieve in the existence of "the spirit world" have had no personal reaction, interaction, or connection to/with it, and base their disbelief on this lack. their disbelief is logical but false, due to a lack of knowledge /experience on their part.

It's very logical, which I would think would temper the certainty you seem to have about what you believe, especially since your statement above plainly beg the question; to argue "you can't know it's true because you haven't interacted with it" is presuming 'it' exists in the first place. It's existence is what is at issue. Worse, this statement can then be used to defend nearly anything, I can substitute an almost endless number of things in for 'the spirit world', including invisible ghost dragons, and it works just as well, which is not really much at all.

The paranormal has not been proven to exist and has not been proven to not exist, it's existence is unknown. What is not unknown is that it is a fact that misperceptions and misinterpretations of experiences by everyone on earth is not uncommon, at all. Jimmy Carter saw a UFO once, which he found later turned out to be located in the sky close to where Venus was nearly at his greatest brightness. And that's with something physical, it's widely known how unreliable eyewitness testimony can be, should we really think that its reliability improves the more internal and non-physical the experience? People, millions I'd wager, have very different beliefs from unexaminable religious experiences concerning the nature of Jesus; they cannot be all correct unless you want to throw the Law of Non-Contradiction out the window. It is entirely possible that the spirit world exists. It is also entirely possible that you are simply mistaken about your experiences, not a liar, not mentally ill, just simply incorrect like we all are on many things.

Perhaps it comes down to an issue of the application of parsimony also. Thinking back, the closest I've come to a paranormal experience is sleep paralysis. I entirely understand how that can be perceived, as it has been, as being the result of demons or aliens sitting on your chest and feeling an 'evil presence' and being frightened. I don't remember what I thought at the time, probably that there was something physically wrong with me, but then I found out that lots of people have experienced it and it's harmless and it seems to have a logical scientific explanation involving the disconnection of your brain from your motor controls while you sleep so you don't thrash about when you have dreams and how it's possible to suddenly become conscious before that connection is reestablished. But it doesn't mean that it wasn't really demons sitting on my chest, I think some people have even seen them in this odd 'conscious/unconscious' state. You can't ever show that it was never demons. So if someone has this experience, does their claim become more believable if they say they 'know' the reality of it, if they say that you can't know because you didn't personally experience it, does that make their explanation more convincing in the face of this founded scientific explanation? It doesn't to me, it's not really, as you said, a logical argument, so I don't understand why I, or more pertinently you, should not take that into account when evaluating the claim/experience.

[+Liquid Gardens]

If i ever encouter a little grey man one night, then yes, I will know that all who say they do not exist are factually wrong. Reality trumps belief, no matter how strong or logical that belief may be.

The issue is telling the difference between 'encountering a little grey man' and 'interpreting an experience you had as an encounter with a little grey man', which is very difficult for the experiencer to do. You just said how subjective everyone's experience is, how the reality they perceive is not necessarily a true representation of objective reality. Thus, people's claims about what is reality, which is usually 'the strongest' piece of evidence for it with these topics, should logically be weighed as somewhat questionable due to the subjectivity you recognize is inherent. The one thing I've never seen you really hint at, and I may well have missed it, is where you ever have any doubt about your conclusions from your experiences, if you do not I don't find that to be particularly logical either. I know you say there's evidence, it really doesn't faze your certainty that so many people do not find it to be very good evidence?

[rustygh]

Yes it is fake.

Skeptics must rise up and end this nonsense before belief in life after death becomes the new 21st century mythology. It is preposterous and borderline schizophrenic to believe such notions, not to mention it's damaging to our society.

Let's keep the thread simple, show me proof the Paranormal doesn't exist. Use verifiable sources, and if you're not an actual doctor don't make diagnostic theories you are not qualified to make.