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 -
Sign in to follow this  
UM-Bot

UFOs and deja vu

67 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

papageorge1
4 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

That's why this conversation is a challenge and partly why your position is interesting and a little extreme, because this is as deep we seem to be able to get because the next obvious questions aren't addressed, because all roads concerning our meta-statements on this subject lead to the evidence and case for the paranormal.  The obvious next question here is, why is there no educational tradition or curriculum?  The answer is because there isn't much to study, or else of course you'd be pointing it out.  Name your curriculum, what classes do you want taught, can you provide a brief outline of the subjects and most importantly what the content actually is?  From a scientific point of view you can pretty much cover all the real science that concerns the paranormal in one term, it's more like a special interest history class more than a science class.

I think we've mentioned this in the past but I entirely disagree with the idea that something like the paranormal needs a ton of special expertise to determine the truth of.  We don't need advanced mathematical training to ascertain most of the arguments; it's not like we need particle colliders for this research, if ESP or psychics were real, all we'd theoretically need was a deck of cards.

The study of the paranormal has been going on for I believe multiple centuries now, I haven't seen any uptick in the growth of scientific interest so I'm not sure what your prediction is based on, although obviously the advent of the internet may have spread interest among laypeople.

Agreed, but you leave out the relevant question, whether that dismissal is justified or not.  That can't be addressed without naming and showing that there's something that shouldn't be dismissed. There is no onus on scientists to look at every single claim made by astrologers in order to be justified in dismissing astrology.  Paranormal scientists don't get to cheat and certainly haven't earned any special relaxed rules, they have to do the work that all other scholars and scientists need to in order to show their conclusions are valid.  The current explanations why they haven't had much traction in the scientific community that are along the lines of psychological projections are unsupported evidence-wise and are counter to basic psychology and motivations, and are just excuses without also specifying what evidence is being overlooked by them.

I think the 'beyond the physical' is understood in a scientific way by things like Vedic Science, Theosophy and other occult traditions. I have many times shaken my head at the level of detail these wisdom traditions address and how they seem to correspond with claimed paranormal/psychic phenomena. In the western world these things were under the domain of less advanced 'religion' and not science. Western science relies on what can be learned through only the physical senses and instruments. And this type of science is certainly a great thing. If there is a 'beyond the physical', physical science by definition can not give us much answers.  Spiritual sciences like Vedic Science and Theosophy also incorporate the direct insight of many masters that claim clairvoyance of things 'beyond the physical' using what we might call psychic senses.

I believe the spiritual sciences (let's not argue about terms) provide a deeper but less provable understanding of the greater reality. Why? A million and one psychic/paranormal experiences that seem to be little explainable in the western science model of reality (without almost desperate attempts at denial that anything 'real' is ever occurring). 

Share this post


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

If there is a 'beyond the physical', physical science by definition can not give us much answers.

We don't know that, because we don't know if 'physical science' is restricted to just the physical, since we have nothing 'non-physical' to study.  If we did, then we could see if the same techniques would work.  If it cannot be studied then we've just completed the circuit yet again and are right back at the fundamental question: if it can't be studied what then is your basis for your certainty regarding its existence?  

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Spiritual sciences like Vedic Science and Theosophy also incorporate the direct insight of many masters that claim clairvoyance of things 'beyond the physical' using what we might call psychic senses.

Nah, it's better explained by superpowered aliens beaming images of the future into humans' minds unknowingly, that covers everything and has no less evidence to support its reality than 'the spiritual sciences'.  Again, constructing models with no evidence for them is not difficult.

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

A million and one psychic/paranormal experiences that seem to be little explainable in the western science model of reality (without almost desperate attempts at denial that anything 'real' is ever occurring).

I think something real is occurring, I think people are misremembering and misperceiving things, and come on, few things are more desperate than the assumption that you are constantly making, that the anecdote stories you are reading are accurate in content and interpretation, an assumption that is not supported at all.  Why don't you think that explains nearly every paranormal event?  A million and one is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the quantity of misinterpretations occurring all the time.  I mean how many people with mental syndromes that may make them susceptible to misperceptions are there in a world of 8 billion people?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
11 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

We don't know that, because we don't know if 'physical science' is restricted to just the physical, since we have nothing 'non-physical' to study.  If we did, then we could see if the same techniques would work.  If it cannot be studied then we've just completed the circuit yet again and are right back at the fundamental question: if it can't be studied what then is your basis for your certainty regarding its existence?  

Nah, it's better explained by superpowered aliens beaming images of the future into humans' minds unknowingly, that covers everything and has no less evidence to support its reality than 'the spiritual sciences'.  Again, constructing models with no evidence for them is not difficult.

I think something real is occurring, I think people are misremembering and misperceiving things, and come on, few things are more desperate than the assumption that you are constantly making, that the anecdote stories you are reading are accurate in content and interpretation, an assumption that is not supported at all.  Why don't you think that explains nearly every paranormal event?  A million and one is a drop in the bucket when it comes to the quantity of misinterpretations occurring all the time.  I mean how many people with mental syndromes that may make them susceptible to misperceptions are there in a world of 8 billion people?  

OK, Gardens. Thanks for the discussion. It’s best we end here and recognize we are irreconcilable in our differences and can go on forever.

Personal Paradigm shifts only occur zero, once or maybe twice in a lifetime. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
25 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

OK, Gardens. Thanks for the discussion. It’s best we end here and recognize we are irreconcilable in our differences and can go on forever.

Personal Paradigm shifts only occur zero, once or maybe twice in a lifetime. 

You too.  If no evidence can be presented then I think we've discussed all we can about and around the subject. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
On 2/13/2020 at 7:46 AM, ChrLzs said:

, it is LUDICROUS to claim that lots of anecdotes means anything.

This is just you displaying your own limitations. The wise man does not assign worthlessness to anecdotes, in the broader scheme of things. Your evaluation depends on something quite remarkable, that over vast periods of time, in places all over the world, and from millions upon millions of people, that the entire reportage is either mistaken, or false. I'm not impressed by that kind of confidence. You demand evidence, well perhaps consider this, that whatever is behind what you give no chance of existing, has the capability of restricting who gets to observe it. If you say impossible, then I'm afraid all we are really talking about, is the little personal fence you have erected around "reality", and only what goes on inside your fence, is "real". Have fun in there !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
9 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

2+2=5 is a non-convention that I cannot comprehend because of how necessary logic is in order for me to make any sense of anything, I can't tell you anything at all really about it if it were actually true.  One afterlife concept is that after we die our spirits travel to 'the beyond' (you may have heard of this theory, you know, since you've spent years here tolerating nothing but agnosticism concerning it? ;)), our consciousness and memory carries on and we hang out in heaven and occasionally apparently send beyond-crude messages to still living people for who knows what purpose.  What part of that is not comprehensible and unimaginable?

So you don't "comprehend" it. I don't think anyone does. I do comprehend it to be real, though, and your "beyond crude" characterization is of no consequence, once acquainted with this reality, "refined" messages would be surplus to what appears to be the "message", that being that it is a reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
1 hour ago, Habitat said:

So you don't "comprehend" it. 

Actually, I do 'comprehend' it, I just don't think you comprehend that words have multiple definitions and ranges of meaning.

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

I do comprehend it to be real, though, and your "beyond crude" characterization is of no consequence, once acquainted with this reality, "refined" messages would be surplus to what appears to be the "message", that being that it is a reality.

Would you prefer a 'Hallelujah' or 'Amen' there, Reverend?  Not sure there is any other response since you also have no evidence to show supporting 'your reality'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
12 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

 

Would you prefer a 'Hallelujah' or 'Amen' there, Reverend?  Not sure there is any other response since you also have no evidence to show supporting 'your reality'.

Not too sure why you are going off on that tangent, but you are a person who resents the possibility that others may have had first-hand experience of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
3 hours ago, Habitat said:

This is just you displaying your own limitations.

Funny, I'm not the one who runs away when asked for the best evidenced case....

Quote

The wise man does not assign worthlessness to anecdotes, in the broader scheme of things.

I don't either, but just like science and the entire legal system, anecdotal submissions must be a part of larger picture and be properly verified against the facts of the case.  In most of these cases, we can't even verify the incident itself, let alone the stories being told.

A wise man would know this...  How come you don't?

Quote

Your evaluation depends on something quite remarkable, that over vast periods of time, in places all over the world, and from millions upon millions of people, that the entire reportage is either mistaken, or false.

Ya mean, like fairytales?  UFO=alienz movies?  Religion?

Yes, Habitat, unfortunately we have cultural issues.  Cultural memes.  A desire to tell stories.  It's not remarkable at all, it's just the human psyche.  A wise man knows that.

Quote

I'm not impressed by that kind of confidence.

I'm not impressed with the ridiculous stance that for your approach to be valid, somehow, amongst all those case, not one has verifiable evidence.  NOT ONE.  If you claim otherwise, cite the evidence.  Just ONE best case.  Just one GOOD one, even.

 

Quote

You demand evidence, well perhaps consider this, that whatever is behind what you give no chance of existing, has the capability of restricting who gets to observe it.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaahah!  The way to win any argument just invent a ludicrous 'rule' such that your claim HAS NO EFFECT ON REALITY, because that is what you are saying.  It's stupid.  If it can hide form everyone (and does, apparently) then it clearly may as well not exist.

Quote

If you say impossible...

No, I say NO EVIDENCE.  There's nothing to argue about being 'impossible' until you pony up.

 

And please stop making me laugh with stuff like them entities havin' the capability to completely vanish from existence whenever them nasty ole skeptics are anywhere nearby... 

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
2 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaahah!  The way to win any argument just invent a ludicrous 'rule' such that your claim HAS NO EFFECT ON REALITY, because that is what you are saying.  It's stupid.  If it can hide form everyone (and does, apparently) then it clearly may as well not exist.

 

2 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

And please stop making me laugh with stuff like them entities havin' the capability to completely vanish from existence whenever them nasty ole skeptics are anywhere nearby... 

Keep laughing, but it will be a slightly nervous titter. It might as well not exist, indeed, to those that insist it does not. It really is an astounding thing, that it will not be pinned down for the inspection of scoffers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

When was the last time you posted that, Habitat?  Last year?  The one before? 1970?

But yes, I'm sure you'll be right, 2020 is the one, after all these years of abject failure and this current sad situation that you and your fellow beliebers cannot point to one good case, let alone one best (aka convincing) case.  Out of all those stories, over all those years.  NUTHIN.

 

BTW, can't help noticing that you also ran away from the bet over here where I ponied up with a $20 challenge.  I take it that ignoring me is your way to say no without appearing cowardly?  Go on, don't be afraid, commit.  Then not only can you embarrass me when you present The One, you'll have $20 to spend on a (cheap) celebratory meal or a bottle of wine..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
6 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

the bet over here where I ponied up with a $20 challenge.

You mean you are going to bite your tongue all year, and not say "best evidences", to win a $20 bet ? Can I stop laughing now ? It is not my fault if you cannot get your head around the idea that the manifestations in question are directed, and not for general view. They are no accident. I cannot imagine the workings of that, and seemingly that you also cannot, is sufficient for you to think it must not exist. That is a leap I would never have made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ChrLzs
9 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You mean you are going to bite your tongue all year

Nah, as if..  I must have misread your intentions.  I thought you were intimating that there would be convincing evidence presented in 2020...  But instead, you were making an absolutely hysterically hilarious joke about my frequent simple request for that evidence, and how dare I actually apply logic and common sense to the drivel you vomit...

 

But anyway, are you willing to bet that *you* will finally present good evidence in 2020, after all these failed years?  I'm betting you won't...

 

Funnily enough, I'd love to see evidence of something currently regarded as paranormal, as it means science progresses.  It seems odd that you wouldn't take that challenge on - it seems you actually WANT there to be no decent evidence.

And guess what..?  I know why.

Edited by ChrLzs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 minute ago, ChrLzs said:

Funnily enough, I'd love to see evidence of something currently regarded as paranormal, as it means science progresses.  It seems odd that you wouldn't take that challenge on - it seems you actually WANT there to be no decent evidence.

And guess what..?  I know why.

There was a poster who said better than I could, something along the lines that it is useless to look for the paranormal, within the normal. I think he might have made an apt point. I have probably got less confidence than you, that the real evidence will ever be revealed, because that really would be a major shock to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
12 hours ago, Habitat said:

Not too sure why you are going off on that tangent,

You were the one that were preaching your truth that you have no evidence of. What response were you expecting?

12 hours ago, Habitat said:

 but you are a person who resents the possibility that others may have had first-hand experience of it.

Nah, that's just a story you tell yourself because you don't have anything to provide to support your beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
9 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

You were the one that were preaching your truth that you have no evidence of. What response were you expecting?

Nah, that's just a story you tell yourself because you don't have anything to provide to support your beliefs.

I wouldn't expect much other than peevishness from you, that's for sure. Your complaint appears to be I don't have proof for you to inspect, which is a little silly, considering I never claimed I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
14 hours ago, Habitat said:

I wouldn't expect much other than peevishness from you, that's for sure. 

I'm sorry that you find it peevish, I just find it logical given the situation and your statement.  Change a couple words to 'Jesus' in what you said, "I do comprehend it to be real, though, and your "beyond crude" characterization is of no consequence, once acquainted with this reality, "refined" messages would be surplus to what appears to be the "message", that being that it is a reality.", and you might as well be standing behind a pulpit.  What other response is there really other than 'amen' given that we already know you don't have any evidence for this 'reality' you claim, what response is one to give to your declaration?  It's apparently not to just stay silent and don't criticize it if I don't agree, because you never do that yourself.

15 hours ago, Habitat said:

Your complaint appears to be I don't have proof for you to inspect, which is a little silly, considering I never claimed I did.

Lots of religious preachers of the 'truth/reality' don't claim to have proof either.  It's not really a complaint that you don't have proof to inspect, it's the consequence of no one having any evidence to inspect.  Since you have no evidence to inspect, then there isn't anything to differentiate your statement from any other sermon. Ergo, 'hallelujah' seems like the correct response.

  • Thanks 1

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.