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 -
Crikey

Any concrete evidence?

72 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

freetoroam
2 minutes ago, TashaMarie said:

True but I guess unless you're there you really do not know how you would react. 

Actually....lol.

I love visiting old buildings, always have done since my youth. I have been in some pretty old buildings and  spooky and underground places, and I love it. 

As I do not believe in ghosts, my fear would not be ghosts, but people or animals who may have been lurking. 

I love history, not believing in ghosts is a big advantage as I visit them without that fear. But as I said if I were visiting as a ghost hunter, I would not be afraid , as to find what you are seeking would be an achievement. 

I did go ghost hunting when I was young, I always went with an open mind and from believing there could be ghosts,  I became aware there are explanations for noises, movements and sightings and they are not ghosts. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
freetoroam
6 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Maybe they got better ratings that way.

I sure watched it, always gave me a laugh. Derek was hilarious, Yvette was so funny.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bed of chaos

Lizard men? Look up (Dean Kootz) Beastchild. I've never seen one. They must have reptilian cloaking devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TashaMarie
11 minutes ago, freetoroam said:

Actually....lol.

I love visiting old buildings, always have done since my youth. I have been in some pretty old buildings and  spooky and underground places, and I love it. 

As I do not believe in ghosts, my fear would not be ghosts, but people or animals who may have been lurking. 

I love history, not believing in ghosts is a big advantage as I visit them without that fear. But as I said if I were visiting as a ghost hunter, I would not be afraid , as to find what you are seeking would be an achievement. 

I did go ghost hunting when I was young, I always went with an open mind and from believing there could be ghosts,  I became aware there are explanations for noises, movements and sightings and they are not ghosts. 

 

I'm with you I love history and old buildings, and have been to my local museum on a ghost hunt twice, got nothing either time.

Yes if anything were to happen always rule out the living first and think logically about what could have caused the noise or whatever.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
drakonwick

I used to enjoy watching Ghost Hunters just for the obvious fakeness of it all, it had it's comical moments! But anymore, the show has just become boring.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
On 1/19/2020 at 2:15 AM, papageorge1 said:

 'Concrete Evidence' is a subjective term 

no it isn't

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

no it isn't

Yes it is

"Concrete evidence" is just a colloquial term meaning very strong real world evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Yes it is

"Concrete evidence" is just a colloquial term meaning very strong real world evidence.

No, it is a coloquialism used to mean irrefutable.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

No, it is a coloquialism used to mean irrefutable.

No such thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
35 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

No such thing

Therein lies the problem of communicating your beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
Just now, Desertrat56 said:

Therein lies the problem of communicating your beliefs.

Not sure what your point is. It’s impossible to provide irrefutable evidence on a ghost show (the OP question). 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
5 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Not sure what your point is. It’s impossible to provide irrefutable evidence on a ghost show (the OP question). 
 

Hence the lack of "concrete evidence", which you claim means something different than at least two of us on this forum were taught.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Essan
1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

No such thing

If no evidence is irrefutable you cannot prove you do not own me £10,000 ;)  

And no-one can prove that you even exist.

But if you do not exist you cannot own me £10,000 ........ :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Essan
42 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Not sure what your point is. It’s impossible to provide irrefutable evidence on a ghost show (the OP question). 
 

Well yes.  Because it was a TV show.  It wasn't real.

Oh and by the way, the dragons on Game of Thrones were not real animals either :P 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
On 3/26/2020 at 9:05 PM, drakonwick said:

I used to enjoy watching Ghost Hunters just for the obvious fakeness of it all, it had it's comical moments! But anymore, the show has just become boring.

Ghost Hunters was pretty fun to watch. Now Ghost Adventures, that's where the campiness is at. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
6 hours ago, Essan said:

Well yes.  Because it was a TV show.  It wasn't real.

The paranormal TV shows might get edited to be entertaining but they can't be called 'not real'. They encounter real phenomena and the quality ones don't fake evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
18 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Not sure what your point is. It’s impossible to provide irrefutable evidence on a ghost show (the OP question). 
 

Well that I agree with. But that doesn't mean "concrete evidence" of ghosts can't be found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
3 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

Well that I agree with. But that doesn't mean "concrete evidence" of ghosts can't be found.

And who would officially judge the evidence to be 'concrete'. It's always still subjective in this business was my point. We each are our own subjective judge of the evidence.

But aside from the wordplay over what 'concrete' means in this context, I think these shows have given very compelling evidence for the paranormal over and over again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
17 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

And who would officially judge the evidence to be 'concrete'. It's always still subjective in this business was my point. We each are our own subjective judge of the evidence.

We've been through this so many times. There is no one "official judge" on this, but the scientific method can build a testable model, and if this can be successfully challenged and be used to make things like predictions etc, then you can say "ghosts exist". But you've always maintained that the paranormal is excused from this process, despite then saying:

Quote

I think these shows have given very compelling evidence for the paranormal over and over again

...so the scientific method cannot build a model for the existence of the paranormal but a TV show - which is easily and often faked - can?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
7 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

We've been through this so many times. There is no one "official judge" on this, but the scientific method can build a testable model, and if this can be successfully challenged and be used to make things like predictions etc, then you can say "ghosts exist". But you've always maintained that the paranormal is excused from this process, despite then saying:

I don't recall the conversation morphing into proving a scientific model. I thought we were talking about television shows documenting anomalous activity that has no current scientific explanation to the extent that is can be called that vague term 'concrete'.  What you are doing is called 'moving the goalposts'. 

7 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

...so the scientific method cannot build a model for the existence of the paranormal but a TV show - which is easily and often faked - can?

Well again, who was talking in this thread about building a model for the existence of the paranormal? In the scientific process 'observation can precede understanding'. The shows are at the observational level of doing science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
Posted (edited)

It is fortuitous that I noticed this topic.  I have actually been to some places where flying saucers allegedly landed with a geiger counter.  While some were a bust, most likely because I wasn't looking in the right place, I have had a couple of sites where the identification of the sites was better and I was able to get some readings that suggested high levels of background radiation decades after the alleged landings.  I count that as evidence, as these sites would just be random bits of woodland otherwise.

Edited by Alchopwn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
35 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

t is fortuitous that I noticed this topic.  I have actually been to some places where flying saucers allegedly landed with a geiger counter. 

I take it that you  mean you had the geiger counter, not the flying saucers.  Have you been to any sites in New Mexico?  I would be interested in your findings at some of those alleged sites.  Specifically Hart Canyon.

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.