What about the damn Succubi...even a photograph from a succubi party would do!
Shotgun...........you never fail to make me giggle!
Do you believe in the paranormal?
by BeelzeDub 50 Replies latest jw friends
-
Sunnygal41
-
Sunnygal41
Living things...are moist. When the electricity enters the living object, it produces an area of gas ionization around the photographed object, assuming moisture is present on the object. This moisture is transferred from the subject to the emulsion surface of the photographic film and causes an alternation of the electric charge pattern on the film. If a photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears. If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum (Hines).
Funky, who is (Hines)?
And yet, no matter how much you assert, intone, state, affirm, declare, pronounce or testify, it is still untrue.
Funky, you skeptics need to lighten up a tad, and try to have a bit of fun now and then.........
-
funkyderek
Funky, who is (Hines)?
Hines, Terence. Pseudoscience and the Paranormal(Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1990).
Funky, you skeptics need to lighten up a tad, and try to have a bit of fun now and then.........
This is fun!
-
Jim_TX
Funky,
I am just going to quote a bit of what you said...
"Living things...are moist."
"If a photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears."
How does one take a photograph of a 'living thing' in a vacuum? The last time I checked... us humans couldn't 'live' in a vacuum.
Regards,
Jim TX
-
Abaddon
target
You are arguing that there is cast-iron proof of the paranormal; you claim;
Now remember, the question here was not whether what took place was true or not, but whether such a show took place.
That's not what you said initially, you said;
The film clearly showed several "spirits" moving about and moving merchandise and piling it in the isles and what not. They were not whispy images, they were quite clear and the whole thing was quite documented.
So, quite clearly you are claiming that you have seen well documented proof of 'spirits', even though now you're claiming you were just claiming there was such a program.
As the program actually includes spoof items I think you other claim:
It is about my credibility
... is also true, and unfortunately as regards determining whether a TV show is a fake or not, you have none.
Your thinking seems muddled or simplistic;
I doubt that Dateline keeps a record of shows from that long ago..
No, you don't doubt, you don't know either way, do you?
And whether or not things are real or not depend on what YOU believe.
It does? I believe in purple dragons. Oh, there aren't any. So your allegation "whether or not things are real or not depend on what YOU believe." is false.
And if You don't beleive it, then I must be lying
Ah, so it is all about you. You, just like me and everyone else can be decieved, deluded, muddled, forgetful, mistaken, drunk or dishonest.
You are so into your own opinion you take any disagreement as an accusation of falsehood when there are plenty of other explanations why you're talking rubbish.
As you have already shown you were mistaken about WHAT program it was AND whether the items in it were real or not...
Mary:
a telephone flew off the table in the hallway when no one was anywhere near it , her son saw an old man hovering over him in his bed one night and then disappear into the wall,
How come this has never ever happened under repeatable and controlled situations? Not once. Which is more likely, that ghosties don't like cameras, or that sometimes people exagerate and lie, or have a confused dream based on all the stories like that?
she's heard her husband call her name when he's 200 miles away at work... one day he comes home from work and says "I'm home!" He hears his daughter yell down from upstairs "hi dad!". Within a couple of minutes after that, he gets a telephone call from his daughter: she needs him to come pick her up at work.
Do you realise that we don't have a very thorough 'error correction' system? Ever reached for something and picked up something lying next to what you actually wanted? Was that deminzs or a mistake?!
Never thought you heard your name being called only to realise it couldn;t have been?
Never seen something out ogf the corner of your eye and thought "WHAT!", only to turn and see something innocuous?
Here's a link to show you how easily fooled our 'systems' are;
http://www.west.net/~science/exhib1.htm
Our eyes only have sharp focus in the very centre of our visual field. If you stare at something and try to read something away from the centre of your field of view without looking at it you will find visual accuity is much lower.
Just as some sofware enhances photgraphs (and can make it look like there is some there that is not), so to the brain can 'enhance' to the point that something that isn't really there is percieved by us as being there.
Likewise, suggestion; I saw a guy doing a medium routine; he was a fake (he'd accept this himself), but he was very good. His 'suggestions' as to what were happening (like him saying it was getting colder; they all agreed it was in the interviews afterwards but the temperature did not fall) were accepted as real by many particpants.
If person A hears a noise and says to person B 'that is so-and-so', and that person accepts that as a fact, then it doesn't matter what person A actually heard; it is accepted as being what they thought it was (and they could be wrong).
I suppose the main difference is that some people who thought they heard the dog would conclude they must have heard something else when they found out the dog was dead, i.e. they would doubt the veracity or accuracy of their senses. Others would assume that their senses must be absolutely unimpeachable and that there must have been a dead dog moving upstairs, despite the fact no one has ever seen a dead dog other than in the way one would normally expect to see a dead dog (i.e. a lifeless immobile body).
Now, people can be part of whichever group they like, but who would you allow to take your cow to market?
sunny
I assert, intone and state once again that auras have been measured and even photographed.
Yes, but you didn't read, chose to ignore, or didn't realise the following had been linked to;
Living things...are moist. When the electricity enters the living object, it produces an area of gas ionization around the photographed object, assuming moisture is present on the object. This moisture is transferred from the subject to the emulsion surface of the photographic film and causes an alternation of the electric charge pattern on the film. If a photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears. If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum.
Also, I refute your suggestion that skeptics can't have fun. The capacity for fun is not related to the ability to believe in the world being as you would like it to be. You are also assuming, as funky points out, that this isn't fun for us.
Jim
How does one take a photograph of a 'living thing' in a vacuum? The last time I checked... us humans couldn't 'live' in a vacuum.
I caught that too, but the article you're quoting from is rather poorly phrased and the confusion is from the way it is writen, not from any error;
http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/K/Kirlian-photography.htm
In addition to living material, inanimate objects such as coins will also produce images on the film in a Kirlian photograph setup.
-
Mary
I said: a telephone flew off the table in the hallway when no one was anywhere near it , her son saw an old man hovering over him in his bed one night and then disappear into the wall,
Abaddon said: How come this has never ever happened under repeatable and controlled situations? Not once. Which is more likely, that ghosties don't like cameras, or that sometimes people exagerate and lie, or have a confused dream based on all the stories like that?
Oh christ, here we go again Abaddon. Your argument is typical of the skeptic that will grasp at anything, in order to try and disprove that events like this one actually happened. Would it make any difference at all to you if it did happen under "repeatable and controlled studies"? I doubt it. You'd just acuse someone with screwing around with the video tapes. Seeing as there is no logical explanation for the telephone flying off the table on its own, you immediately project the idea that those that witnessed the event have either exagerated, lied or have had a "confused dream". They weren't in bed when it happened, they were all sitting in the living room watching TV. It's an old house with a big archway between the living room and the hallway and the table in the hallway was right in their sight. The kids were sitting there too when it happened, and nothing and no one was near the table when it happened.
Seeing as you have all the answers, I guess I'll have to conclude that my girlfriend, her husband and the kids all must've had a mass hallucination, are a bunch of liars, or they all must have had the same "confused dream". Thanks for clearing that up.
-
funkyderek
Mary:
Your argument is typical of the skeptic that will grasp at anything, in order to try and disprove that events like this one actually happened.
You're describing an impossible event which you didn't witness and for which you have no evidence at all. What's to disprove?
Would it make any difference at all to you if it did happen under "repeatable and controlled studies"?
Well, yes. In fact, and I'm really not sure how you missed this, that's the whole point.
I doubt it. You'd just acuse someone with screwing around with the video tapes.
And what would you do? Would you just accept anything you saw, from any source regardless of how implausible or how flimsy the evidence? How can you function in the real world if you're that gullible? How much money have you transferred to Nigerian bank accounts?
Seeing as there is no logical explanation for the telephone flying off the table on its own, you immediately project the idea that those that witnessed the event have either exagerated, lied or have had a "confused dream".
What's wrong with that? You provide an anecdote that you claim defies explanation, and when those who are more level-headed than you provide several possible explanations (even though none is really necessary) you ridicule them.
They weren't in bed when it happened, they were all sitting in the living room watching TV. It's an old house with a big archway between the living room and the hallway and the table in the hallway was right in their sight. The kids were sitting there too when it happened, and nothing and no one was near the table when it happened.
I doubt there's any real point discussing this. Any possible explanations we offer can be dismissed as you add more detail to your story. All we knew from your first mention of this alleged incident was that the telephone had supposedly flown off the table when nobody was near it. Now we hear that the entire family were sitting on the sofa looking at it as it happened. If we suggest that the phone may have been at the edge of the table and just fell off as things are wont to do, then I'm sure you'd describe what a large table they had and how the phone was always in the middle of it. And so on.
I don't have enough evidence to draw a conclusion and so feel quite justified in ignoring it as just another anecdote.
-
drwtsn32
Excellent points, Terry and FunkyDerek.
All we skeptics ask for is repeatable, controlled tests to confirm that ANY paranormal activity is real. Why is that so difficult?
It also cracks me up when someone says they're "not interested in the million dollar prize". Who would NOT want a million dollars? If you really couldn't use it, I'm sure you know of a charity you could give it to.
-
Mary
I doubt there's any real point discussing this. Any possible explanations we offer can be dismissed as you add more detail to your story. All we knew from your first mention of this alleged incident was that the telephone had supposedly flown off the table when nobody was near it. Now we hear that the entire family were sitting on the sofa looking at it as it happened.
Sorry but I didn't realize you needed ALL the details before you tore it apart. Maybe you'd like to know what program they were watching and what they were all wearing. Maybe they were watching the Exorist and they all had the same hallucination.
If we suggest that the phone may have been at the edge of the table and just fell off as things are wont to do, then I'm sure you'd describe what a large table they had and how the phone was always in the middle of it. And so on. I don't have enough evidence to draw a conclusion and so feel quite justified in ignoring it as just another anecdote
You're absolutely right: you don't have enough evidence to draw a conclusion, yet you do it anyway. You've concluded that either I'm lying, or my friend and all her family are lying or exaggerating. This isn't an isolated incident at their house, other weird things have happened too. I remember someone else posting on this subject several months ago, she witnessed some pretty bizarre things herself and Rem basically told her that she was a liar or was exaggerating what happened, which I thought was extremely rude, given the fact that he wasn't even there when it happened.
Would you just accept anything you saw, from any source regardless of how implausible or how flimsy the evidence?
No, I think there's probably a logical explanation for alot of "paranormal" happenings, but not for all of them. I don't believe John Edwards Crossing Over is anything more than a scam that he's set up and which I think should be banned. Ditto for Sylvia Brown and a couple other so-called "psychics" that I've seen....I think they're all scam artists. But when someone I've known all my life tells me about incidents that have happened in her home, I don't assume that she's lying or exaggerating: I believe her. I have no reason not to.
You provide an anecdote that you claim defies explanation, and when those who are more level-headed than you provide several possible explanations (even though none is really necessary) you ridicule them.
You haven't provided several possible explanations at all. What you have done is insinuate that either I'm lying, or my friend and all her family are either liars or exaggerating what happened. When she first told me about it, I suggested that maybe it just fell off the table. She said "Mary, the damn thing landed near the bottom of the steps." Judging the distance between the table and steps, I didn't think that was a reasonable argument.
How can you function in the real world if you're that gullible? How much money have you transferred to Nigerian bank accounts?
You're right, I've sent all my paychecks to the Nigerian scammers who have promised me millions of dollars all from their late uncle's estate .....We agree on one thing: we obviously have very different viewpoints on this subject and we're obviously not going to agree or convince each other of anything, so there's not much point in discussing it any further.
-
drwtsn32
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Skeptics aren't calling people "liars" that claim to experience paranormal events; we just ask for extraordinary evidence. Anecdotal evidence is worthless as far as science is concerned.