Skepticism!

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Those are pretty low standards for some life defining attitude of mind, I don't see how being committal or not proves anything one way or another, one might even say it belongs in a distinct realm all on its own. How that affects reality in any way whether true or otherwise rather dictates merely those occasions where one is safely in a straight jacket behind locked wards of an asylum or in a mental straght jacket hiding behind symbols of supernatural symbolism be it religious or just ludicrous.

~

I think it like this, the people who are prepared ( some are even eager) to believe the worst about others, with insufficient evidence, are, to paraphrase Trump, "bad people, these are bad people". There is more than a little of that state of mind, operating with those who declare ghosts "BS", they have effectively dismissed the earnest reports of thousands as lies, which offends the principle of justice. Anyone who is prepared to spout an idle opinion as fact, is not to be trusted in any walk of life.

[Golden Duck]

36 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

If you spread it on bread first then push it onto the wall it sticks no nails needed, just tried it twice in the kitchen.

jmccr8

What we Aussies call "jelly" I think you call "jello".  

http://graeme.woaf.net/otherbits/jelly.html

Perhaps testing this idiom in Tunguska will provide promising results.

[Habitat]

6 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

If someone has had a mysterious and unexplained experience, why is it ridiculous to seek an explanation and solve the mystery here?

I see this site's name as an indicator of the type of content here; while also being a challenge.  It's just as futile too come here with a story and the intention of only accepting responses of "Yeah, I dunno either mate."

Realistically, no great mystery of the ages, is going to be solved here. anyone so able, would likely sell that evidence, not post it here, where you'd have people complaining it upset their phone screen, and you photo-shopped it. About the best than can be hoped for, is that someone might have a light-bulb moment and recognize that being idly dismissive of stuff that has not been ruled in or out by science, but does have a considerable body of anecdotal evidence, is just common, garden variety ignorance !

[SHaYap]

Just now, Habitat said:

I think it like this, the people who are prepared ( some are even eager) to believe the worst about others, with insufficient evidence, are, to paraphrase Trump, "bad people, these are bad people". There is more than a little of that state of mind, operating with those who declare ghosts "BS", they have effectively dismissed the earnest reports of thousands as lies, which offends the principle of justice. Anyone who is prepared to spout an idle opinion as fact, is not to be trusted in any walk of life.

That exhibits some levels of over reaction to me, peaking as someone on the sidelines, all I see is that the tone of the language in the debate got embroiled into a tumble into arguments is all.

Reminds me of those old tales when the seas were being 'conquered, witnessing whales for the first time, sailors returned with fanciful tales of monsters, then the poor leviathan ended up as oil, petticoats and ambergris. A mega pod of dolphins was mistaken as one giant creature of immense proportions. Then people learned to know better until they took to the skies. In an age where science was promising off world colonies or fantastic gravity defying vehicles, it was inevitable that the imagination that got the better of them also got better as times goes by.

All in all, it is reflective of the same predicament of human frailties , their imagination got the better of them. Ghosts or spirits is integral to basic fundamental human beliefs, I agree, its been with humans since long before humans considered themselves human but that is not evidence of anything nor can it be the foundation of any valid scientific basis of a categorised pursuit.    

State of mind or sound minds aside.

~

[eight bits]

@Habitat
 

Quote

 

Not at all, it is an "unexplained mystery".....all those "foo fighters" of WW2, those people knew how to separate an aeroplane from whatever these were.

 

Agreed. But "not an airplane" covers a lot of possibilities.

Quote

I have even had my own "UFO-type" experience, in company with another witness, which I have outlined on this site, and the same Dr No fanatics came on the scene to dismiss it. If they'd have been there, they probably would have **** themselves. But that is another story.

OK, but your estimate of how somebody else would react isn't evidence of anything. You do realize that some "team" members have posted about unexplained experiences they've had? And their underwear remained underwearable.

Quote

I see  many parallels, if I had to guess, I'd say these things are more likely an intrusion from the "beyond", rather that spacecraft, but may be neither, or even both. But the same problem of being more slippery than an eel, in getting a high-res picture taken, or some other convincing residue, still applies.

Well, at least that would be a parallel to the ghost problem. However, the photos that are missing from your poltergeist episode are, if I read you correctly, the aftermath of whatever happening. Patterned debris just lying around on benches, etc.,, odd fractures in human-scale-sized inanimate objects, ... Objects like those can be, and have been, photographed in whatever resolution anybody cares to have.

So far, as predicted, UFO's aren't helping.

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Objects like those can be, and have been, photographed in whatever resolution anybody cares to have.

Look, you have outed yourself as firmly in the "there must be a mundane explanation" camp, when a wise man might be rather less sanguine. As if a few pictures taken by me, would have had any impact with those of your bent. Or anyone else, for that matter. And I really have no great clarity about what the intended message in these incidents was.

[SHaYap]

Oh dear, it seems we are seeing things again ...

~

[eight bits]

2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Look, you have outed yourself as firmly in the "there must be a mundane explanation" camp, when a wise man might be rather less sanguine. As if a few pictures taken by me, would have had any impact with those of your bent. Or anyone else, for that matter. And I really have no great clarity about what the intended message in these incidents was.

It's not so much there must be as so far, there reliably has been. There's no issue of wisdom in noticing that; it's just the way the cookies have crumbled. Want a different outcome? Go find some better cookies.

As already explained, the pictures would get us past some questions and into the fray. For all I know, some picture of yours might open a door (maybe to an expert, one of those fractures actually is difficult to explain... thus, something to discuss, what this site is for). Also, maybe somebody here could give you some leads about what the "pattern" might mean. But there are no pictures.

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, eight bits said:

must be as so far, there reliably has been.

You are trying to tell me every reported ghost incident that has been analysed, has met with a plausible mundane explanation ? I'm sure plenty have been, but really, that is a pretty silly assertion.

[SHaYap]

As far as things stand where it stood, until ghosts or spirits can be frozen or white bread lathered with jello/jelly can be made to stick on invisible entities and end up floating in the air, the nail the jelly/jello to walls theory has to be put to bed.

~

[eight bits]

8 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You are trying to tell me every reported ghost incident that has been analysed, has met with a plausible mundane explanation ? I'm sure plenty have been, but really, that is a pretty silly assertion.

You've been asked repeatedly to bring forward an exception. The closest you've come is to change the subject to UFO's.

So, make me look silly (or do something really supernatural, make me look pretty).

[Golden Duck]

27 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Realistically, no great mystery of the ages, is going to be solved here. anyone so able, would likely sell that evidence, not post it here, where you'd have people complaining it upset their phone screen, and you photo-shopped it. About the best than can be hoped for, is that someone might have a light-bulb moment and recognize that being idly dismissive of stuff that has not been ruled in or out by science, but does have a considerable body of anecdotal evidence, is just common, garden variety ignorance !

You're right! The great cases don't end up here. But, it has been proven, in the UFO forum, that if you provide enough information someone will provide a very good explanation.

Those that cry "photo thop" get called out too.  I see there's a good opportunity to learn from other users here. 

I can perhaps name one user here that is idly dismissive. Most of the time I see the sceptics as anything but adversarial until the person sharing the story becomes defensive and dismissive.

IMHO, I see believers more often being dismissive.

My personal pet peeve is when self-proclaimed sceptics assert some position is 'just common sense'.  Common sense doesn't rely on evidence - it bypasses.  It's similar to unconscious competence.

However, joining a discussion forum to dismiss any, and all, challenging opinions is a waste of time.

 

[Habitat]

 

 

8 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

However, joining a discussion forum to dismiss any, and all, challenging opinions is a waste of time.

Anyone we know ?

[Habitat]

11 minutes ago, eight bits said:

You've been asked repeatedly to bring forward an exception. The closest you've come is to change the subject to UFO's.

So, make me look silly (or do something really supernatural, make me look pretty).

I don't catalogue ghost sightings, as I've mentioned, I've only ever had one related to me by a witness. It wasn't something that would lend itself to a ready explanation, if it was a mistaken "mundane" occurrence. So convinced was the witness, he even contacted relatives of a woman who had died in the house of his ghost sighting, decades earlier, found them in Canada, and was seeking photos of that woman. They did have some, but she did not particularly look like the  ghost . Unsolved. And I don't profess to do supernatural deeds. Just a clumsy witness.

[Golden Duck]

4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Anyone we know ?

2

I'm wasn't pointing the finger at any Australians if that's what you mean. But, my recent interactions in the UFO forums might be a clue. While there yet others I hold in lower regard to whom, I know, shouldn't reply. 

It is funny how thought can be aligned on some subjects but you can't have conflict without being emotive.  This IS the versus forum, however.  An adversarial approach is somewhat sanctioned.  Being invested in seemingly invested in dismantling someone's (a stranger's) framework for living provides no return.

I read your sighting in Moreton Bay. But I never replied because I've never actually been boating out there.  I'm down at Shorncliffe Pier regularly and I think I can probably look out across where you were.  The doubt I have is I don't recall the water ever being clear enough to see the bottom from the end of the Pier.  However, without knowing the depth, at the piet, my intuition is useless.

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

 

I read your sighting in Moreton Bay. But I never replied because I've never actually been boating out there.  I'm down at Shorncliffe Pier regularly and I think I can probably look out across where you were.  The doubt I have is I don't recall the water ever being clear enough to see the bottom from the end of the Pier.  However, without knowing the depth, at the piet, my intuition is useless.

Well, I'm quite familiar with the pier, and water is pretty shallow even at the end, probably around 5m depending on the tide, and I don't recall ever seeing the bottom at the seaward end. The other side of the bay is quite different, the water clarity is little different to oceanic waters, and you can see the bottom in 7-8 meters depth easily. The bottom there being sandy helps, and on the mainland side of the bay, of course, the bottom is a much darker shade. Whatever was there that day over 40 years ago, I am still unable to offer a confident opinion, but it was not an inert object, nor marine fauna. When I do think about it from time to time, it is to wonder what it was doing for those few minutes, I don't think it too speculative to say we were under some kind of observation, but I really, simply do not know..

[eight bits]

3 hours ago, Habitat said:

I don't catalogue ghost sightings, as I've mentioned, I've only ever had one related to me by a witness. It wasn't something that would lend itself to a ready explanation, if it was a mistaken "mundane" occurrence. So convinced was the witness, he even contacted relatives of a woman who had died in the house of his ghost sighting, decades earlier, found them in Canada, and was seeking photos of that woman. They did have some, but she did not particularly look like the  ghost . Unsolved. And I don't profess to do supernatural deeds. Just a clumsy witness.

OK, that's fair enough. I've investigated a few paranormal things and some unlikely naturalistic things that come up in genealogy (which I putter around with IRL). Families have stories, and some of them are "odd," but no less cherished within the family for that.

My feeling is, given the interest serious media (mainstream or truth-respecting alternates) have in ghost stories, to say nothing of the inherent fun of investigating them even when they don't pan out as supernatural, that if there were a "winner" out there, then it is very likely we'd both have heard about it. And there wouldn't be only one, I don't think.

However, I'll give you a freebie: if there were a really good one, then somebody in frequent and fluent contact with an other-worldly thingy might have an incentive, based on privacy considerations, to keep it to themselves. I'm thinking of a Lasher secnario (Anne Rice's novel, which I think she spun out to a small series of books), which Star Trek TNG shamelessly worked into an episode of their own. The idea is also found in ET's children trying to shield their alien friend, or comedies like Topper or Bewitched.

Also, it's easy to imagine that some folks of introverted disposition just wouldn't promote their involvement in the situation beyond a certain point. There was a small movie in the 70's called Jeremy. One of the plot points was that a high school kid who had an after-school job at the local horse race track had exceptionally good rapport with the horses. On that basis, he would know which horses were winners and which were losers on any given day. He wasn't secretive about it, nor was he boastful about it, and of course, other people at the track were interested in his opinions. When one of the people he spoke with offered to place a bet for him (he was both underage and barred from betting where he worked), he declined. It's a personality trait, and some people are like that.

So there's my tip for you. IF there were a winner out there, then that's where it is, quietly pursued by somebody with a practical or a personality motive not to share it, or not to share it too widely. I don't think there is a winner out there, but if there were, that's where it might be.

Not that I'm holding my breath.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by eight bits

[+Sherapy]

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Well yes. Quite often  how we see others reflects how we see ourselves, and sometimes it creates a mirror image.

Ie a person with low self esteem will see a person with a healthy self esteem as narcissistic

A narcissistic person would not care enough about others to spend a lifetime helping them     

Bragging incessantly, only talking about yourself, telling these tales seeking to manipulate your audience to aspire to be just like you as if and or else...

I can see grounds to conclude narcissism.

[+Hammerclaw]

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Bragging incessantly, only talking about yourself, telling these tales seeking to manipulate your audience to aspire to be just like you as if and or else...

I can see grounds to conclude narcissism.

He seizes the opportunity to strut and fret his hour upon the stage here, as many do, albeit with much more braggadocio than most.

[+Sherapy]

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I have concluded you are just trolling No one could really be as dumb and unpleasant as you pretend to be  eg i still cannot put photos on Um without a lot of time and effort  and many failures, because i stil find it saying the y are too big and i dont know how to change the size.

For a 67 year old bloke why is that surprising?   And no, so far i have been unable to cut and paste from FB but i will give it another go 

sept 14

Just to let people know. I am presently taking a holiday in a luxury resort also known as the new RAH. They have limited internet access but face book is available. luckilly a previous guest paid it up until sunday and I could remember my pass word. No way to show photos which is a pity. Cant access wifi for phone or tablet.
All sorts of tests . Eventually the experts decided on full open heart surgery to replace a t least one heart valve.
Bit more risk than last time due to the scarring from an 2004 triple by pass, plus age.

Operation is scheduled for next Thursday.
Care is excellent and, despite publicity to contrary, food is brilliant Orders all put in over the computer network.

nov 2

Finally, after 7 weeks in hospital, I am home again. It is a very slow recuperation process. Wed i managed to walk 330 metres up the road which is about my best effort yet but the walking and exercise are reducing the fluid build up my legs. . 
On th other hand i am total off any painkillers and am getting plenty of sleep Hospital meals were excellent but portion controlled and i continued to lose weight slowly.

My max weight in the royal Adelaide ( in part due to fluid build up was 126 kilos ) lost 23 kilos at the RAH, and another 3 in the two weeks at Cummins That was a fifth my body weight in 5 weeks after the operation .
Hopefully i will continue t lose weight slowly but I also need to build up lost muscle through walking and exercise. This Wed i can drive again which will make life so much easier 
Thank you to the many family and friends, both online and in person, who expressed best wishes and concern over my hospitalisation I hadn't realised just how many people were aware of the drama 
A special thanks to the neighbours friends, and family, who kept an eye on Judy, and went out of their way to help her in many things. 
On the 16th I am supposed to be taking an angel flight to Adelaide for a check up. Not sure about flying that far in a very light aircraft, but I cant knock it back, as it includes a ride into the hospital from the airport and back 
Busy also organising support services like physio dietician, meals on weals, cleaning and gardening etc through " My aged care'

 

Well there you go That bit copied but the next bit stuffed up the whole post  (luckily, THIS time, i had saved it all off line) Wll try one more . 

 

oct 13

Just an update.If the cost of admission wasn't so high,one would book into this place just for the educational and entertainment value.
Ive been here about a month now and learned a lot about its people procedures and its rhythm of life.
The care compassion and work put in by every person involved in the hospital is clear and wonderful.And yet our 1 billion dollar hospital is flawed, perhaps mortally wounded.
There are not enough staff which puts incredible pressure on those working here. Procedures designed to protect often do not and sometimes endanger.
Already there is a shortage of basic equipment from simple things like thermometers to more expensive devices. Despite everything being labelled it gets moved or lost Many times basic dressings are not stocked close by or have been used, resulting in a nurse searching over several wards or even floors while the patient waits for a dressing. 
Recovery continues slowly. I was going to write more but will do so later. It was wonderful to have so many relatives bearing gifts 

 

Mmn, interesting. It seems as though it works if you do NOT include any  thing like your name or a date (so i cut the dates and then retyped them here )

It includes you wife's name you might want to take that out.

 

[Guyver]

5 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Bragging incessantly, only talking about yourself, telling these tales seeking to manipulate your audience to aspire to be just like you as if and or else...

I can see grounds to conclude narcissism.

Walker's not the only person around here who incessantly discusses himself.  Another guy around here does it too - ad nauseam.  It's like there's nothing this guy hasn't done or doesn't know.  It just gets on my nerves.  It's so annoying I may have to say something about it sometime.  lol

[+Sherapy]

1 minute ago, Guyver said:

Walker's not the only person around here who incessantly discusses himself.  Another guy around here does it too - ad nauseam.  It's like there's nothing this guy hasn't done or doesn't know.  It just gets on my nerves.  It's so annoying I may have to say something about it sometime.  lol

Who? 

[+Sherapy]

8 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

He seizes the opportunity to strut and fret his hour upon the stage here, as many do, albeit with much more braggadocio than most.

If only it was interesting, instead of so run of the mill. And nothing ever adds up. Sheesh. 

There are other sections on the forum for mindless prattle.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Sherapy

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

If only it was interesting, instead of so run of the mill. And nothing ever adds up. Sheesh. 

There are other sections on the forum for mindless prattle.

Now Sheri, don't be disingenuous. It's sufficient to pique the interest of a baker's dozen of regular posters here for several years, including your lovely self. Think of the sheer volume of text it has generated from you, alone. A rather intense and curious response by so many to mere "mindless prattle". I've altogether given up trying to understand why.

[+Liquid Gardens]

19 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

 A rather intense and curious response by so many to mere "mindless prattle". I've altogether given up trying to understand why.

For me it has a straightforward answer that completely addresses all befuddling armchair psychology about why people post what they do: entertainment.