Doris Bither case

[XenoFish]

2 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

As someone who has studied mental health, I would love to be able to say that I was as certain as yourself on all these matters.  In general people will hallucinate either sight or sound, but not both simultaneously during the way the brain is wired.  Many cryptid sightings feature both visual and auditory hallucination simultaneously, as described by eyewitnesses.  Now admittedly some are probably hoaxes, but all?  I mean, when someone potentially endangers their lucrative professional standing by going on record as having seen a cryptid, and gains nothing financially other than the ridicule of their peers, what do they gain other than a sense of martyrdom?  I am drawn to remind you of the time the French Academy used to tell the world that there were no rocks in the sky ergo rocks could not fall from the sky, and set about trying to prove that pranksters were firing nickel iron cannonballs randomly across Europe.  Just because you can't put something under a bell-jar doesn't mean it isn't real.

Get back to me when real evidence is provided. Till then 99.9% of all paranormal claims are false. Unless you want me to be a gullible believer and think that all the **** I witnessed was real. Then sure sign me up for sucker of the month, I'm sure I'll buy that bridge. 

[Alchopwn]

7 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Get back to me when real evidence is provided. Till then 99.9% of all paranormal claims are false. Unless you want me to be a gullible believer and think that all the **** I witnessed was real. Then sure sign me up for sucker of the month, I'm sure I'll buy that bridge. 

I am not saying that all paranormal events are necessarily paranormal, I am saying that they need to be examined on their merits.  Take the Hessdalen Lights for example.  Many people in Norwegian government refused to even consider the possibility that there was a genuine phenomenon occurring.  We now know exactly what was causing it of course, but that took some interesting science, and now we know.  Are we not richer for having uncovered this amazing natural phenomenon?  Would we not be poorer if nobody had bothered to investigate it because "UFOs aren't real"?

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Alchopwn said:

I am not saying that all paranormal events are necessarily paranormal, I am saying that they need to be examined on their merits.  Take the Hessdalen Lights for example.  Many people in Norwegian government refused to even consider the possibility that there was a genuine phenomenon occurring.  We now know exactly what was causing it of course, but that took some interesting science, and now we know.  Are we not richer for having uncovered this amazing natural phenomenon?  Would we not be poorer if nobody had bothered to investigate it because "UFOs aren't real"?

How many times? How many will it take to put it all to bed? How long will it take till this "paranormal" nonsense is vanquished? 

Sorry but I've got buyer regret will all this crap. The more I see it the more angry I get. So unless someone ponies up real proof I will continue to dismiss all cases and no amount of anecdotal evidence will many anything. Same goes for psychic abilities, etc. I figure most people are liars anyway. 

[psyche101]

20 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/brilliant-scientists-are-open-minded-about-paranormal-stuff-so-why-not-you/

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/02/there-is-a-paranormal-activity-lab-at-the-university-of-virginia/283584/

https://www.ed.ac.uk/ppls/psychology/prospective/postgraduate/research-programmes/research-interests/parapsychology

So how do a few opinion articles about some beliefs change what I said? It's also Dyson's opinion that global warming is no threat. Do you believe that too?

[Hankenhunter]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

So how do a few opinion articles about some beliefs change what I said? It's also Dyson's opinion that global warming is no threat. Do you believe that too?

Just showing a sample of legit paranormal studies being done. 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Just showing a sample of legit paranormal studies being done. 

I can show you plenty of legit ones. Stargate wasted 20 million on remote viewing, even Edgar Mitchell did PSI experiments in his way to the moon.

What you not revealing is they all resulted in nothing. A tremendous amount of money and far too much time has been expended on these myths to no avail. Billions of dollars wasted on imaginative fantasies.

Well, except project stargate. That produced a hilarious film.

You should try reading actual sciences. If you put as much effort into that as you do woo websites, you would be aware of what I already told you.

[XenoFish]

13 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I can show you plenty of legit ones. Stargate wasted 20 million on remote viewing, even Edgar Mitchell did PSI experiments in his way to the moon.

What you not revealing is they all resulted in nothing. A tremendous amount of money and far too much time has been expended on these myths to no avail. Billions of dollars wasted on imaginative fantasies.

Well, except project stargate. That produced a hilarious film.

You should try reading actual sciences. If you put as much effort into that as you do woo websites, you would be aware of what I already told you.

You'd think will all the psychic development courses, etc. We'd have basically the X-Men by now. But we don't. 

[Alchopwn]

On 7/20/2020 at 8:41 AM, XenoFish said:

How many times? How many will it take to put it all to bed? How long will it take till this "paranormal" nonsense is vanquished? 

Perhaps it won't go away until we investigate the claims and actually get to the bottom of the phenomenon scientifically like they did at Hessendalen?  Isn't that the point of all this?  Not to simply dismiss claims but to investigate them?  

Edited July 22, 2020 by Alchopwn

[XenoFish]

8 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Perhaps it won't go away until we investigate the claims and actually get to the bottom of the phenomenon scientifically like they did at Hessendalen?  Isn't that the point of all this?  Not to simply dismiss claims but to investigate them?  

When governments spend millions on remote viewing and come up with nothing, when phenomena such as poltergeist can't be studied, there has to be a point where a lot of nothing means nothing. 

[KNash]

On 7/17/2020 at 4:45 PM, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Dr. Taff did not believe anything paranormal was going on. He believed poltergeist-type activity had to do with the psychogenic nature of the human subconscious. In other words, it was the (totally dysfunctional) family that was responsible. The psychodynamics of the home were extremely negative and unhealthy, and Doris herself had a number of issues, as did her children. Psychotic episodes, delusions, anger, hostility, alcoholism, a disgustingly filthy home twice condemned... and hey, anything can happen.

I agree. I've watched a lot of paranormal documentaries/ informational videos over the years and I see a lot of sources referring to poltergeists as some sort of energy manifestation of the mind. Whether that's true or not, I don't know. It's interesting nonetheless.

The first time I heard about poltergeists being human generated was in the case of Annemarie Schaberl.

[HollyDolly]

I've heard of this case. She was I believe unhappy where she worked, and  the activity was a   manifestation of her feelings. In many cases that might be what's going on. Look at Madame Alexandrea David-Neel, a french woman who went to Tibet.  She created afteer much training a talpa, or thought form.  At first it traveled with the group and was  pleasant and kind of heavy set.But then she noticed a change in behaviour and appearance.  Though much work she disolved it. I think the medium Dion Fortune once manifested a wolf.You all may have to google this. 

In Ms.Bither's case, because of the ienviroment and family dynamics, this resulted  in the activity noted. Now are  poltergeists who are truly spirits yes. 

 Some have suggested that the Bell Witch  was possibly  created by Bessy Bell the daughter, but others think it was a spirit, since the Bell Witch Cave itself is haunted.

[Kittens Are Jerks]

On 7/28/2020 at 10:14 AM, KNash said:

I agree. I've watched a lot of paranormal documentaries/ informational videos over the years and I see a lot of sources referring to poltergeists as some sort of energy manifestation of the mind. Whether that's true or not, I don't know. It's interesting nonetheless.

The first time I heard about poltergeists being human generated was in the case of Annemarie Schaberl.

Poltergeists as a form of energy manifestation is indeed an interesting concept, but an implausible one in my opinion. 

Poltergeists are human, meaning, that humans are often behind the seemingly poltergeist-like activity. Children can be extremely adept at fooling adults (the 1920s Cottingley Fairies hoax being a prime example), and poltergeists are a lot easier to pull off than faeries. The Enfield poltergeist, for example, would change its modus operandi the more the girls involved learned about poltergeists. When a journalist mentioned to the girls that poltergeists caused fires, the one in their home amazingly became a pyromaniac overnight. 

I'm not suggesting that all poltergeist activity is deliberate on the part of the individuals involved, as a great many individuals also suffer from mental health issues and could be hallucinating, or erroneously attributing activity to a non-existent entity.

What's most interesting in all of this, however, is the fact that poltergeist events have never occured under controlled circumstances. The reason for that is obvious.

[XenoFish]

If poltergeist activity is actually caused by uncontrolled telekinesis and needs a strong emotional cause in order to occur. Then it should be rampant. How many people have strong emotions on a daily bases? And yet how often do these supposed events occur? Apparently not often enough to be noticed. If you wanted to experiment with this, get a spoon every time you're angry and focus on the spoon bending, imagine all that anger going into it and twisting it up. If something happens, it happens. If it doesn't it won't. 

[GlitterRose]

On 7/17/2020 at 1:45 PM, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Dr. Taff did not believe anything paranormal was going on. He believed poltergeist-type activity had to do with the psychogenic nature of the human subconscious. In other words, it was the (totally dysfunctional) family that was responsible. The psychodynamics of the home were extremely negative and unhealthy, and Doris herself had a number of issues, as did her children. Psychotic episodes, delusions, anger, hostility, alcoholism, a disgustingly filthy home twice condemned... and hey, anything can happen.

That's what I think.

[papageorge1]

17 hours ago, GlitterRose said:

That's what I think.

Just to clarify I am certain Dr. Taff has no doubts that strong activity occurred that we would call paranormal. He is assigning the cause to 

Here is more from the OP article:

Taff and Gaynor witnessed phenomena in the new home as well.

A vase appeared to be thrown and crashed to the floor.

Deep breathing and footsteps appeared on audio recordings approaching the microphone until the mic shut off on its own.

Tape on the wall was pulled off the wall by invisible hands, and then the board it was holding flew off and hit Bither in the head. This happened twice within minutes.

 

What happened is that Taff in proposing a theory of psychogenetic nature is proposing that the person's psyche is creating real paranormal phenomena (such as effecting objects at a distance). The skeptic group is trying to create a false scenario that says Taff never thought anything we colloquially call paranormal occurred. As you came in at the tail end of the thread I wish to clarify.

[GlitterRose]

8 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Just to clarify I am certain Dr. Taff has no doubts that strong activity occurred that we would call paranormal. He is assigning the cause to 

Here is more from the OP article:

Taff and Gaynor witnessed phenomena in the new home as well.

A vase appeared to be thrown and crashed to the floor.

Deep breathing and footsteps appeared on audio recordings approaching the microphone until the mic shut off on its own.

Tape on the wall was pulled off the wall by invisible hands, and then the board it was holding flew off and hit Bither in the head. This happened twice within minutes.

 

What happened is that Taff in proposing a theory of psychogenetic nature is proposing that the person's psyche is creating real paranormal phenomena (such as effecting objects at a distance). The skeptic group is trying to create a false scenario that says Taff never thought anything we colloquially call paranormal occurred. As you came in at the tail end of the thread I wish to clarify.

Yes, I agree with him.

[stereologist]

Some of my favorite lines from this thread:

Quote

I see no logical response there to my point: Heavy drinking can't produce paranormal phenomena observable to others!  

Since there is no paranormal then heavy drinking, light drinking, abstinence are not going to produce what does not exist. But there is a strong correlation between the drinking and the events.

Quote

24 people in one bedroom in that house?

Why hasn't anyone suggested this is a narrow but very long house? Houses on company lots are long and very narrow. Maybe the rooms too are long and thin.

Quote

With internet sharing I am finding the case for the paranormal has become overwhelming. 

More BS in more places is not a replacement for evidence which is never there. Anecdotes are at best a starting point for research. In a recent podcast I heard about a search for a ghost in which a TV crew finds the headstone in a field and a deep well in the field. A paranormal investigator that had been unable to find these elements of the story dug out their photos of the area and discovered that the head stone had been added tot he field by the film crew and that the well shown was not on the property. I guess that is the new evidence from the modern era of paranormal investigation.

Quote

The ones who've experienced the paranormal really couldn't give two hoots for science fact,  when what they experienced is still far beyond science.

So people that have no clue about an event are somehow VIPs? Oh dear. If people do not understand what happens then they do not understand what happens. That doesn't make it beyond science or even even that interesting. It tells us nothing more than the event was so poorly observed that no decisions can be made about the event.

[Alchopwn]

On 8/3/2020 at 1:03 AM, stereologist said:

Since there is no paranormal then heavy drinking, light drinking, abstinence are not going to produce what does not exist. But there is a strong correlation between the drinking and the events.

On the other hand, pretty much everyone on this forum will have been to parties where everyone drinks heavily but nothing paranormal ever happens.  I think the correlation might be spurious, i.e. an excuse.  A lazy way of explaining away what happened that has its origins not in the present day but from back in prohibition era when alcohol was adulterated and could poison you badly enough to make you hallucinate.  It is illegal to serve alcohol like that anymore, but this spurious excuse remains on the books long after its use-by.

On 8/3/2020 at 1:03 AM, stereologist said:

Why hasn't anyone suggested this is a narrow but very long house? Houses on company lots are long and very narrow. Maybe the rooms too are long and thin.

People who live in poverty often live in very cramped conditions.  If the room is large, this is not unthinkable.  I recall that one branch my ancestors had 28 kids over 2 marriages and they had them living in a single room full of 3 storey bunk beds back in the 1840s in Pittsburg.

On 8/3/2020 at 1:03 AM, stereologist said:

More BS in more places is not a replacement for evidence which is never there. Anecdotes are at best a starting point for research. In a recent podcast I heard about a search for a ghost in which a TV crew finds the headstone in a field and a deep well in the field. A paranormal investigator that had been unable to find these elements of the story dug out their photos of the area and discovered that the head stone had been added tot he field by the film crew and that the well shown was not on the property. I guess that is the new evidence from the modern era of paranormal investigation.

Look, agreed. Anecdotes are not evidence and are at best a starting point for research.  Does that mean we can ignore anecdotes tho?  No, because then there is no point from which the research can start.  Now if he research shows it is bunkum, then problem solved, but if not, what then?

For example, many people are very quick to dismiss the Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblin Spree, but since when have great horned owls been immune to shotguns?  Say what you like about good ol' boys, but they can shoot straight, and owls don't make a metallic rattle after being shot.

It is annoying when you can't put evidence under a bell-jar, but not many aliens are keen about winding up in an autopsy video I'd imagine.  As for ghosts, well, they are an ubiquitously cross-cultural human experience, and while we have some explanations for a good few ghost experiences, there are still a good many that defy explanation but are sadly not reliably reproducible.  I suspect that we will eventually find an answer to the ghost phenomenon, and at the moment my money is on it being an olfactory triggered event brought on by trace coded stress hormones "soaked into" in an environment where something traumatic happened.

On 8/3/2020 at 1:03 AM, stereologist said:

So people that have no clue about an event are somehow VIPs? Oh dear. If people do not understand what happens then they do not understand what happens. That doesn't make it beyond science or even even that interesting. It tells us nothing more than the event was so poorly observed that no decisions can be made about the event.

I am not on the side of "People who know what they saw and know therefore that it was beyond science", but nor am I on the side of people who dismiss other people's experiences out of hand.  Neither is being properly scientific.  Both are being arrogant.  Neither will contribute anything to human understanding of these events. Both are being pig-headed.  The fact is that party A claims to have seen something implausible that science cannot reproduce, while party B thinks that because science cannot reproduce it that it could never have occurred.  Both are wrong.  There are things unknown to science, that's a simple fact, and new discoveries are made daily, but science is one hell of a good toolkit when it gets to work, so let it get to work rather than saying that it can "never understand" or dismissing an event before it has been investigated.

[stereologist]

On 8/17/2020 at 5:56 AM, Alchopwn said:

On the other hand, pretty much everyone on this forum will have been to parties where everyone drinks heavily but nothing paranormal ever happens.  I think the correlation might be spurious, i.e. an excuse.  A lazy way of explaining away what happened that has its origins not in the present day but from back in prohibition era when alcohol was adulterated and could poison you badly enough to make you hallucinate.  It is illegal to serve alcohol like that anymore, but this spurious excuse remains on the books long after its use-by.

People who live in poverty often live in very cramped conditions.  If the room is large, this is not unthinkable.  I recall that one branch my ancestors had 28 kids over 2 marriages and they had them living in a single room full of 3 storey bunk beds back in the 1840s in Pittsburg.

Look, agreed. Anecdotes are not evidence and are at best a starting point for research.  Does that mean we can ignore anecdotes tho?  No, because then there is no point from which the research can start.  Now if he research shows it is bunkum, then problem solved, but if not, what then?

For example, many people are very quick to dismiss the Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblin Spree, but since when have great horned owls been immune to shotguns?  Say what you like about good ol' boys, but they can shoot straight, and owls don't make a metallic rattle after being shot.

It is annoying when you can't put evidence under a bell-jar, but not many aliens are keen about winding up in an autopsy video I'd imagine.  As for ghosts, well, they are an ubiquitously cross-cultural human experience, and while we have some explanations for a good few ghost experiences, there are still a good many that defy explanation but are sadly not reliably reproducible.  I suspect that we will eventually find an answer to the ghost phenomenon, and at the moment my money is on it being an olfactory triggered event brought on by trace coded stress hormones "soaked into" in an environment where something traumatic happened.

I am not on the side of "People who know what they saw and know therefore that it was beyond science", but nor am I on the side of people who dismiss other people's experiences out of hand.  Neither is being properly scientific.  Both are being arrogant.  Neither will contribute anything to human understanding of these events. Both are being pig-headed.  The fact is that party A claims to have seen something implausible that science cannot reproduce, while party B thinks that because science cannot reproduce it that it could never have occurred.  Both are wrong.  There are things unknown to science, that's a simple fact, and new discoveries are made daily, but science is one hell of a good toolkit when it gets to work, so let it get to work rather than saying that it can "never understand" or dismissing an event before it has been investigated.

Many birds are able to endure shotgun blasts. Your wrote " but since when have great horned owls been immune to shotguns?". That is a guess on  your part that is wrong. That's okay. You guessed and were wrong. And all of your stories are just guesses which have no bearing on the case. But,thanks for the input.

This is just wrong: "Neither is being properly scientific."  A story teller being told that they are a story teller has no effect on the person pointing that out. Both wrong? No. If someone tells an idiotic story then that is an idiotic story. Those pointing that out are not affected by that observation. You can pretend they are, but that is a laughable joke.

And your suggestion that all stupid stories need to be investigated is in itself stupid. No one needs to investigate a story. It is up to the teller of the story to show it is not a stupid story. A story remains a story until shown to be anything more than just another stupid story.

[Alchopwn]

On 8/21/2020 at 11:37 AM, stereologist said:

Many birds are able to endure shotgun blasts. Your wrote " but since when have great horned owls been immune to shotguns?". That is a guess on  your part that is wrong. That's okay. You guessed and were wrong. And all of your stories are just guesses which have no bearing on the case. But,thanks for the input.

At long ranges a shotgun can potentially injure but not kill a bird.  The Suttons shot their goblin at close range.  They also heard it rattle metallically as it left.  This is not the behavior of a Great Horned Owl.  The classic behavior of a Great Horned Owl under such circumstance is to vanish in a cloud of feathers and small chunks of meat, dispersing themselves over a cone-like area, depending on the wind direction.  The fact is, what we don't read about is any mention of owl feathers on the scene.  A wounded bird will typically drop feathers or blood, and it is exceedingly suspicious that nothing of the sort was mentioned.  It is also very interesting that the Suttons utterly reject the notion of what they saw being Great Horned Owls, and were sufficiently scared that they left the area entirely, and have made no effort to make money from their story besides one book written by the youngest present, who was determined to set the record straight a great many years later after a lot of debunking and a lot of hype. These are the behaviors of decent honest people who were scared off their land, not hoaxers and profiteers.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Alchopwn

[preacherman76]

On 7/17/2020 at 9:41 PM, Hankenhunter said:

How can you call it cheap effects if you weren't there? Seems is not proof either. Neither is your feeling. Sometimes I think the denialism is because people are terrified it might be true. Same with the possibility of aliens. It would explain a lot of the hostility that happens in these threads.

To me there is no question this is fear driven. For some, I’d imagine especially, well specifically, people who spend a lot of time on this who aren’t content with their disbelief, but get upset at those who do as well. 
 

I suppose the same could be said of some believers. Though to me the fact that they are here isn’t as strong an indication. Once you have a reason to believe, it’s just fascinating. At least for the first few years. Like I said in an other post, I’m here out of habit at this point lol. 

[ChrLzs]

On 7/20/2020 at 8:20 AM, Alchopwn said:

As someone who has studied mental health..

In general people will hallucinate either sight or sound, but not both simultaneously during the way the brain is wired.

Hmm.  Interesting - can you give a cite for that?

[the13bats]

15 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Hmm.  Interesting - can you give a cite for that?

My wife a PhD in applied psychology and teacher at the college, didnt agree with his wording,

And says audio or visual hallucinations very much can and do take place together.

As far as Kelly-Hopkinsville Goblins

Here is the best non biased run down,

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4331

This is a great case of embellishment, contagen, hysteria, bandwagon etc,

Look at the police report, the real orginal one,

Cops didnt find a war zone they found one bullet hole,

So where there was questions of owls feathers and blood and there was none doesnt mean it wasnt owls it means no one hit an owl.

This story proves zero.

 

 

[Alchopwn]

On 9/8/2020 at 3:13 AM, the13bats said:

My wife a PhD in applied psychology and teacher at the college, didnt agree with his wording,

Back when I was being taught, the thinking was that audio and visual hallucinations seldom happened together.  Having looked up the info, more recent studies cast that into serious doubt.

[TashaMarie]

On 7/17/2020 at 11:32 PM, papageorge1 said:

So then what about the two dozen witnesses in the OP if neither are possible?

That depends very much on the validity of their claims.  It has been proven many times not just when it comes to the paranormal that witnesses can not always be trusted.