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 -

Government files detail investigation of paranormal activity in Utah


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, joc said:

There is no personal proof.  There is only proof...

I think this is just a misunderstanding of the use of the word 'proof'.  There is common use, where people claim to 'sufficient' proof to back their beliefs.  Proof in science (or in a court..) means something a bit more formal than that.. :)  Pretty much by definition, personal proof is just a state of mind, not a proof at all.

  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

I think this is just a misunderstanding of the use of the word 'proof'.  There is common use, where people claim to 'sufficient' proof to back their beliefs.  Proof in science (or in a court..) means something a bit more formal than that.. :)  Pretty much by definition, personal proof is just a state of mind, not a proof at all.

Well lets forget the word proof, people seeing something has got people executed so it's good evidence. Stop playing with words like a stuck up, private school boy to make yourself feel better about your lack of paranormal insight.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about we call anyone having sighted paranormal things as having good evidence instead of proof, just to please the box heads :tu:. Even with that I'm sure they'll whinge 😄.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, openozy said:

*snip*

The question is, Do you have have actual evidence to back up your statement or is it just personal evidence?

 

Edited by Saru
Removed reply to deleted comment
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grey Area said:

The question is, Do you have have actual evidence to back up your statement or is it just personal evidence?

If you call witnesses evidence, because I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, openozy said:

If you call witnesses evidence, because I do.

Awesome, please call your first witness 🫣

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, joc said:

 Wrong!  Wrong! Wrong!  There is no personal proof.  There is only proof...and then that which is proved becomes a  fact and is something we know.  We call that knowledge.  There are things we know.  Things we don't know.  And things we believe.  If you believe something to be true, it is always because there is no proof.  

I think you are wrong here.  I think most of us cling to what we might term personal proofs, somebody does something and you might convince yourself of a motive based on what you know.  You could be totally wrong but in a vacuum that personal proof stands strong.

I think the issue here is twofold.  One, if you have a ‘personal proof’, does anyone have an expectation of anyone external respecting that personal proof if you share it?

Two, when that personal proof is challenged, how that person handles said challenge.

Its a personality thing, and when we introduce human nature, the laws of physics crumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grey Area said:

Awesome, please call your first witness 🫣

I have one person who has witnessed three different paranormal events and a house full that witnessed my worst paranormal experience. It's all the evidence I need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Pretty much by definition, personal proof is just a state of mind, not a proof at all.

So if you saw your mum fall into a bottomless pit, with no chance of finding her it was just your state of mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Yup, I caught Bats debunking an article that he refused to read. When I pointed it out to him, he doubled down and asked me to give him a brief overview so that he could debunk my overview.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/376607-skyline-bar-and-grill-haunting/

 

Cry me a river, and stop making up stuff, post a link to that thread. I own what I said and that is  it was a ghost story with no supporting evidence, was I wrong? Prove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Grey Area said:

While you openly admit to trolling, one good turn deserves another right?

ETA:  So I just reviewed the thread, with a focus on @the13bats responses.  With the exception of the aforementioned ‘dear true believers’ I have to say that their responses have been measured, calm and factual.  I can see no inappropriate attacks or even particularly offensive pokes at individuals.

Personally I think if you are taking offence at ‘dear true believers’. Which I will add was a statement without any individual focus, you need to recalibrate your offence detectors.

Edited 21 hours ago by Grey Area

I work all weekend and come back to see I live rent free in true believers heads, oh dear ,I'm I a horrible monster? A troll?

I have most of those players on ignore I only see them when quoted and only reply like now when I'm involved,

My use of "dear true believer" it's not original I stole it from a kind elderly lady named Elsie Wright, recognize the name? Well when she was a little girl her and her cousin Frances Griffiths plated a ruse, the cottington fairies,

When Elise was very old and in an interview being asked about one of the picture not being very good how did they explain it she's said, "well, we didn't have to one of our dear true believers explained it for us...."  Meaning the believer made up stuff to cover flaws in the photo.

I use the term for any one who believes in something not known not proven but they believe, I read or hear believers say things to the effect just because they believe then it's fact or they know, and to me that's super but if they think I will be credious enough to believe their story then they are off by more than half.

In this thread I've had more than one true believer bash and trash and go ad hominem on me claiming I'm so horrible to believers, hypocrite much? Remember I only see it when people on ignore are quoted,

This is a public discussion forum if a person wants to tell stories with zero questions I suggest locked blogs I assure you I wont read them.

I admit when I hear someone say if you saw what I saw you would be a believer too. Or I've seen this or that it must be real

Well I didn't see what you saw and you have zero proof even to yourself that what you think you saw wasn't mental illness, brain damage, a hoax, something you are ignorant to or other mundane explanations but for your in the box thinking the only possibility is paranormal and they call me closed minded,

So flame away on me I still haven't attacked you believers,  you are attacking me no, I did something far worse than attack I rocked your boat I wet on your cupcake doing the unspeakable how dare i ask for support for your claims. Flame on.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, openozy said:

So if you saw your mum fall into a bottomless pit, with no chance of finding her it was just your state of mind?

Condolences on the passing of  your Mom.  Did they ever find her?  Did they send search teams into the abyss? 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Grey Area said:

I think you are wrong here.  I think most of us cling to what we might term personal proofs, somebody does something and you might convince yourself of a motive based on what you know.  You could be totally wrong but in a vacuum that personal proof stands strong.

I think the issue here is twofold.  One, if you have a ‘personal proof’, does anyone have an expectation of anyone external respecting that personal proof if you share it?

Two, when that personal proof is challenged, how that person handles said challenge.

Its a personality thing, and when we introduce human nature, the laws of physics crumble.

The Laws of Physics don't 'crumble'.  What crumbles is our devotion to the truth.  The truth just is.  The truth always is.  But what is the truth?  The truth is what it is...but...

We can only KNOW that something is true if it is 'provably true'.  Personal truth is like:  Well, personally, I don't believe water freezes at 32 F/0 C.  I have found in my own personal experiences that water can freeze at much higher temps.  I watched water droplets freeze on the fence and the temp outside was 34...so I have personal proof that water freezes at 34. 

Regardless of what one's personal proof may be...that isn't what the world considers proof.  Proof is something that can be observably measured and tested on demand and yielding the same results.  That then becomes knowledge.  We don't believe water freezes at 32...we KNOW it does.

Therefore, belief is a conclusion we have made about a thing when no proof substantiates it...except in our own mind.  But 'in our own mind' is just mental garbage.  I know a guy who saw a UFO when he was a kid...up close and personal...as big as a football field he says.  So, in his own mind, he 'knows' that Aliens are here.  He might be correct.  He might be incorrect.  There is no proof.  And because it is a logical fallacy to try and prove a negative, one cannot say, we have proven that UFOs are not real.  So we are left with, We just don't know. 

Belief is a two sided coin...one side is  your mind filling in the blanks about why a thing is true without proof.  The other is filling in the blanks about why a thing is not true...without proof.  The Belief Coin is a No Proof Necessary coin.  The winning coin is the Knowledge Coin.  Both sides are the same...Heads, we know.  Tails, we know.   I only carry two coins in my pocket.  The Knowledge Coin and the We Don't Know coin. 

 

Edited by joc
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

I think this is just a misunderstanding of the use of the word 'proof'.  There is common use, where people claim to 'sufficient' proof to back their beliefs.  Proof in science (or in a court..) means something a bit more formal than that.. :)  Pretty much by definition, personal proof is just a state of mind, not a proof at all.

You are absolutely correct.  It's a matter of semantics.  Just so I am being clear:  the word Proof as I use it with regards to belief is Proof in science (or in a court..).

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, openozy said:

How about we call anyone having sighted paranormal things as having good evidence instead of proof, just to please the box heads :tu:. Even with that I'm sure they'll whinge 😄.

Because evidence is not what establishes a thing to be known as the truth.  Proof does that. Irrefutable Proof.    

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:

And there you are, just your 2 cents, and I say this with all due respect, but now users of this thread have to sift through multiple off topic posts, to enable you to have your 2 cents worth, which is your right of course.

Well the topic apparently was already debunked, by people who most likely never even read it. So we gotta talk about something I guess. 

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:

 


 

For what it’s worth I agree with the sentiment.  What I disagree with is that this issue is exclusive to skeptics, or even a majority issue with skeptics.

I think most posts are given credit where credit is due.

The problem is where someone might post an experience or sighting, that they have convinced themselves of its otherworldly authenticity.  This kind of post represents a significant investment psychologically.  When it is challenged the user lashes out.


 

I’ve seen that as well. More often I see said story teller say they aren’t here to prove anything, which should be an exit sign for people here who are “looking for the truth”. Instead they then laugh at and ridicule the person. 

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:

think some initial challenges can be quite direct but it’s rare to see offensive or overtly insulting challenges as you assert.

If what you mean by rare is it happens in damn near every thread, I’d agree 

 

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:

I would suggest it is beholden on us all to self regulate our emotions, but it certainly isn’t on the skeptic to anticipate hostility to perfectly valid skepticism.

And that’s fine, herein lies the need for self regulation.  If I posted an experience, and couldn’t back it up I just wouldn’t engage with the requests.

But this isn’t an AA meeting, and you are a fool if you think posting an experience publicly is not going to attract dissent as well as assent.  Further I would suggest many who post in this fashion, do so for attention and/or validation.


 

right. Which is why the good folks who founded this site made rules of conduct. Of which are broken all the time. 

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:

 

 

Add into this the thing that I think many people miss in their choice whether to share or not to share:  This stuff matters.  Maybe not so much the sighting of a light in the sky, or the reptilian blob caught on CCTV, but the overarching question of whether we are alone in the universe has meaning for us all.

 

what matter to cynics is they take out their frustrations of life on to people who don’t think the way they do  

 

23 hours ago, Grey Area said:


 

Skeptics or Believers?

🤨

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thread cleaned

Just a reminder for everyone to keep their contributions civil and constructive.

Thank you.

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me drift back to this thread OT for a moment it would seem that this investigation was about the skinwalker ranch kind of a new modern version of the old UFO giant rock conventions,

Personally I never thought much past SWR just being a cash grab, afterall they were asking tall money to visit and zero supporting evidence much less proof of claims, that's not saying people didn't believe the stories just like with giant rock people believed those tales of trips about saucers to Jupiter etc I wonder as time passes are people less credious?

Remember in the 80s the explosion of psychics? TV ads saying first five minutes free type hype.

It's a bit disappointing,  if 1% of claims from SWR were backed up and proven there would be no questioning paranormal but there isn't any proof, just insults for asking for it.

Here....solid gold.

On 5/18/2024 at 7:51 PM, ChrLzs said:

For further reading, try my post about giraffes here....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, the13bats said:

My use of "dear true believer" it's not original I stole it from a kind elderly lady named Elsie Wright,

Well give it back, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, joc said:
18 hours ago, openozy said:

I'm sure they'll whinge 😄.

Because evidence is not what establishes a thing to be known as the truth.  Proof does that. Irrefutable Proof. 

See, lol.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, joc said:
13 hours ago, openozy said:

So if you saw your mum fall into a bottomless pit, with no chance of finding her it was just your state of mind?

Condolences on the passing of  your Mom.  Did they ever find her?  Did they send search teams into the abyss?

No decent answer to the questions then joc, you are slipping 😁. And yeah, don't talk trash about my family 🔫.

Edited by openozy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, openozy said:

No decent answer to the questions then joc, you are slipping 😁. And yeah, don't talk trash about my family 🔫.

Oh, mi Capitano...you brought up your Mom perishing in the abyss...and you said it wasn't your state of mind...so, because I thought we were at that point discussing reality, I thought she fell into a big hole somewhere, how was I to know...all my apologies mi Capitano.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, openozy said:

See, lol.

 What I see is you projecting your own whingeing onto others.  I'm not complaining about your state of mind...I am attempting to educate you as to the breakdown, the synthesizing of the meaning of belief.  You are whingeing... like, Oh he's trying to educate me because he thinks I'm stupid...w h i n gggggeeeee...and then projecting your dislike of the truth onto others.

The reality is that you are not stupid but you are ignorant somewhat about how and where the breakdown of belief lies. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2024 at 10:18 AM, joc said:

The reality is that you are not stupid but you are ignorant somewhat about how and where the breakdown of belief lies.

I probably am stupid but I thought I put forward a pretty good point and I didn't really take offence at the mum thing, I really miss ya momma jokes, lol.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2024 at 10:24 PM, preacherman76 said:

If what you mean by rare is it happens in damn near every thread, I’d agree 

Please either point at a couple of examples (after all, you are saying that it happens on most threads...)  If you can't/won't do that, then over the next few weeks, how about pointing it out when it happens?

 

If you do neither of those things, I think you have just proved something ..  by it's absence...how positively unscientific..

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.