Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Scientific explanation for Ghosts?

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭Jan Hus


    Ghosts are a stupid idea.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Jan Hus wrote: »
    Ghosts are a stupid idea.

    Beautifully argued!


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    The real question is why so many of us want want to believe in things without proper evidence.

    Indeed. I imagine it's simply a way to avoid thinking about about our own mortality.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Indeed. I imagine it's simply a way to avoid thinking about about our own mortality.

    I can understand that, but there must be more to it than just that. Those who believe in various religions may well want that sort of succor, but for many its a desire to believe in obvious untruths and nonsense in a mroe immediate sense.

    For example, I have a friend who believes in all sorts of mumbo jumbo and can remember him putting on his serious face and holding a pointy thing on a piece of string ("even a sygnet ring will do" he used to say) over the mother and predicting the sex of the baby, depending whether it swung clockwise or anti clockwise over the mother. He had a 50% chance of being right, and it's astonishing how many times he got it wrong in retrospect.

    Many want to believe that others have psychic powers and thousands or probably millions wanted to believe that Uri Gellar could read minds and was some sort of psychic watch-mender.

    Evidently people still pay self proclaimed psychics like Sylvia Brown large sums of money in the believe she has some sort of psychic ability to know things about them or their loved ones. Then thers's homoeopathy, aliens, ghosts and so and so on.

    Why do some of us want to believe such nonsense?


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    I can understand that, but there must be more to it than just that. Those who believe in various religions may well want that sort of succor, but for many its a desire to believe in obvious untruths and nonsense in a mroe immediate sense.

    Oh yes, of course. I meant that as an explanation for belief in ghosts and afterlife specifically.

    I think a lot of people (most?) are damn uncomfortable with the unpredictability of real life. That someone with a deck of cards can predict your future or use a a pendulum to sex an unborn child is a kind of comfort.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Ziphius wrote: »
    That someone with a deck of cards can predict your future or use a a pendulum to sex an unborn child is a kind of comfort.

    I think its pretty clear that no one can predict my future or use a pendulum to sex an unborn child. Some pretend they can, but no one can do either with any degree of accuracy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    I think its pretty clear that no one can predict my future or use a pendulum to sex an unborn child. Some pretend they can, but no one can do either with any degree of accuracy.

    I imagine not all of them are pretending . Some of these practitioners genuinely believe in their own ability. And probably for the same reasons as other people.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Ziphius wrote: »
    I imagine not all of them are pretending . Some of these practitioners genuinely believe in their own ability. And probably for the same reasons as other people.

    I have a friend who is a doctor in the Maudsley Hospital in London and she tells me that a surprising number of her patients genuinely believe they are Jesus Christ.

    Just because someone might genuinely believe in their own ability doesn't mean they have a genuine ability. While we all have to make up our own minds about the probability of ghosts, or any other pyschic or supernatural claims, it's interesting that no proof has ever been forthcoming for ghosts or that astrology can predict the future any better than chance, and so and so on.

    We certainly have evidence that the world of those who claim to be psychic contains charlatans, and contains people who are either deluded or deceptive in that their predictions can be seen to be false. I am not aware of even one person who claims to be psychic or able to tap into the supernatural who has been able to demonstrate with any degree of accuracy their claims in all the years and decades that these claims have been made.

    I agree that the reason these sorts of people thrive is that there are so many others who wish to suspend their faculties and want to believe the mumbo jumbo these people spout.


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    I am not aware of even one person who claims to be psychic or able to tap into the supernatural who has been able to demonstrate with any degree of accuracy their claims in all the years and decades that these claims have been made.

    Yup. James Randi has a million dollar prize for anyone you can show evidence of psychic ability in controlled conditions. It is yet unclaimed.

    What is your take on the apparent male female divide in belief in the paranormal that was discussed earlier in this thread?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Ziphius wrote: »
    Yup. James Randi has a million dollar prize for anyone you can show evidence of psychic ability in controlled conditions. It is yet unclaimed.

    What is your take on the apparent male female divide in belief in the paranormal that was discussed earlier in this thread?

    I don't know anything about the male female divide so can't help with that.

    My understanding is that women in general express a higher propensity than men to believe in paranormal beliefs, while men are likely to express a higher propensity to believe in UFO's and extra terrestrials than women.

    My approach is to examine every situation on its own merits and, as best as I can, and come to a conclusion, and so my interest is more in the veracity or otherwise of the individual phenomena rather than in the social or gender divides of those who decide they want to believe in them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,650 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    i have always wondered when people talk of ghosts and the paranormal, they end up talking about mediums and psychics. its easy to realise mediums and psychics are usually fake (i would say always, but best to remain skeptical rather than cynical). that does not explain the many other factors related to the paranormal though. granted, it is easier to boil it all down to fake mediums than it is to go out there and try and find out.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    maccored wrote: »
    its easy to realise mediums and psychics are usually fake (i would say always, but best to remain skeptical rather than cynical).
    The official position on psychics is fairly clear , it's for entertainment purposes only.

    http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/tv3-psychics-live-bai-complaint-619256-Oct2012/
    The BAI upheld the complaints, however, noting that the psychic had made no effort to end the first call when it had became clear the caller was seeking advice on a health issue.

    In the second call, the BAI found that the presenter had raised health issues independent of the caller – and, in saying a particular tarot card “means you are alone and you are prone to depression”, had delivered ”an individualised assessment” of the caller’s personality.

    The general broadcasting code permits fortune-telling and psychic broadcasts only when they are clearly advertised as being for entertainment purposes only, with predictions issued only as a matter of opinion.

    TV3 will now be required to air an on-air sequence acknowledging the breach of the code.

    Just an aside , people are good at picking up on stuff, vibes, atmosphere whatever. If you are ever abroad and someone in your group has a bad feeling about going somewhere / doing something take the hint, it's probably nothing but it could be that they are more attuned to the locals than you are.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    maccored wrote: »
    that does not explain the many other factors related to the paranormal though. granted, it is easier to boil it all down to fake mediums than it is to go out there and try and find out.

    Do you believe in other paranormal events. Care to discuss?


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    My understanding is that women in general express a higher propensity than men to believe in paranormal beliefs, while men are likely to express a higher propensity to believe in UFO's and extra terrestrials than women.

    That's what the data I've seen suggests. I wonder if there is a male bias in belief in conspiracey theories. In my own experience it seems more man than women are interested in these.

    My guess is that men and women are equally as likely to believe in crazy ideas -- ghosts, astrology, ancient aliens or whatever. They just have different, culturally determined, preferences.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Ziphius wrote: »
    My guess is that men and women are equally as likely to believe in crazy ideas -- ghosts, astrology, ancient aliens or whatever. They just have different, culturally determined, preferences.


    I think the onus is then on the rest of us to explore and question their ideas to see if they are likely to be bogus or if there is evidence that their crazy ideas might lead somewhere more interesting.

    Personally, I don't mind ideas which might be crazy as it’s often the one crazy idea out of millions which is right and which helps man to progress, discover and learn about ourselves and the world around us.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    I think the onus is then on the rest of us to explore and question their ideas to see if they are likely to be bogus or if there is evidence that their crazy ideas might lead somewhere more interesting.
    No.

    In science the onus is on the person making the extra-ordinary claims to back them up with reproducible evidence.


    Personally, I don't mind ideas which might be crazy as it’s often the one crazy idea out of millions which is right and which helps man to progress, discover and learn about ourselves and the world around us.
    A reminder that this is a science forum.

    Only those crazy ideas that are falsifiable are allowed.
    Until testable theories are proposed it's too early to call it science.


    By definition you must accept that most of crazy ideas are indeed crazy.

    Venture capital is about a whole litany of failure and bankruptcy with a few success having to pay for the cost of all the failures. It's no use having a crazy idea unless it's a game changer.



    You also have to rule out background effects too.

    Has anyone done a survey of the incidence of ghost sightings relative to the arrival of electric lighting ?

    Also speaking of lighting you have to consider the Hawthorne Effect. The researchers thought they had found a link between increased lighting levels and worker productivity. Until they lowered the light levels again and productivity still went up, in the end it was the interaction between the researchers and subjects that may have been responsible.



    Re the "one crazy idea" I like this bit from Terry Prachett , Small Gods. (It's a parody on ancient Greece)
    "What's a philosopher?" said Brutha.

    "Someone who's bright enough to find a job with no heavy lifting," said a voice in his head.

    "An infidel seeking the just fate he shall surely receive," said Vorbis. "An inventor of fallacies. This cursed city attracts them like a dung heap attracts flies."

    "Actually, it's the climate," said the voice of the tortoise. "Think about it. If you're inclined to leap out of your bath and run down the street every time you think you've got a bright idea, you don't want to do it somewhere cold. If you do do it somewhere cold, you die out. That's natural selection, that is. Ephebe's known for its philosophers. It's better than street theater."

    "What, a lot of old men running around the streets with no clothes on?" said Brutha, under his breath, as they were marched onward.

    "More or less. If you spend your whole time thinking about the universe, you tend to forget the less important bits of it. Like your pants. And ninety-nine out of a hundred ideas they come up with are totally useless."

    "Why doesn't anyone lock them away safely, then? They don't sound much use to me," said Brutha.

    "Because the hundredth idea," said Om, "is generally a humdinger."

    "What?"

    "Look up at the highest tower on the rock."

    Brutha looked up. At the top of the tower, secured by metal bands, was a big disc that glittered in the morning light.

    "What is it?" he whispered.

    "The reason why Omnia hasn't got much of a fleet any more," said Om. "That's why it's always worth having a few philosophers around the place. One minute it's all Is Truth Beauty and Is Beauty Truth, and Does a Falling Tree in the Forest Make a Sound if There's No one There to Hear It, and then just when you think they're going to start dribbling one of 'em says, Incidentally, putting a thirty-foot parabolic reflector on a high place to shoot the rays of the sun at an enemy's ships would be a very interesting demonstration of optical principles,"


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    No.

    In science the onus is on the person making the extra-ordinary claims to back them up with reproducible evidence.

    QUOTE]

    Yes, I agree. And if they don’t it’s my intention to question them and prod them into looking at the available evidence.
    No.

    Only those crazy ideas that are falsifiable are allowed.
    Until testable theories are proposed it's too early to call it science.


    By definition you must accept that most of crazy ideas are indeed crazy.

    Of course, crazy ideas are, by definition, crazy. And that’s true even if someone doesn’t accept it!

    It would once have been thought to be crazy to have argued that the earth was not flat, and even after evidence was produced it was still thought to be anti establishment, so it took some time to persuade most scientists that the earth was not flat.


    You also have to rule out background effects too.

    Has anyone done a survey of the incidence of ghost sightings relative to the arrival of electric lighting ?

    I think it’s pretty clear now that many supernatural or psychic events are bogus. For example, homoeopathy has had about 250 years to come up with some evidence, and it has still failed to do so. How many more years will it need?

    Ghosts, astrology and so and so on are similarly struggling to actually find any evidence beyond a willingness to believe.

    The jury is not out on these things, it’s pretty evident they are bogus, and will remain so until such times as evidence is produced.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    It would once have been thought to be crazy to have argued that the earth was not flat, and even after evidence was produced it was still thought to be anti establishment, so it took some time to persuade most scientists that the earth was not flat.
    Actually people didn't think the earth was flat.


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭Ziphius


    Actually people didn't think the earth was flat.

    Do you know why this meme is so often repeated? People have thought the Earth was round for thousands of years.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 64 ✭✭ButtimersLaw


    Actually people didn't think the earth was flat.

    I have no idea about people, and can only speak for myself. I am aware that some people didn't think the earth was flat, and others did. Actually, I think there is still a flat earth society and some of its people still profess the view that they think the earth is flat.

    In any case, the flat earth reference was meant as a metaphor.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 352 ✭✭Masteroid


    I think it is clear that people have experiences that defy explanation. It would be more accurate to say that psychics and mediums take advantage of the fact that 'supernatural' and 'paranormal' phenomena are so inadequately explained.

    But people do experience 'supernatural' and 'paranormal' phenomena and the feelings they cause are manifest in reality.

    In other words, every sighting of a ghost has an effect on entropy.

    In this sense, 'supernatural' and 'paranormal' phenomena are a result of natural and normal processes and science must concede that there is an area of research available to it in this field.

    I would like to say something about 'onus' and 'burden of proof' now. While it may be the case that all psychics and mediums are cranks and thieves, this is not sufficient to show that supernatural phenomena and experiences can be dismissed by science. The fact that so many people make supernatural claims is in itself evidence of something and science has a responsibility to investigate these claims despite the fact that noone can prove that they have seen a ghost.

    Let us consider a supernatural phenomena that is widely accepted as 'in existence' - Love.

    How does one prove that they love someone? Does the purcase and presentation of flowers and chocolates qualify as incontrovertible proof of love? Some might consider that more to be proof of guilt. Does throwing himself off a high building constitute proof of a jilted jumper's love or does it demonstrate the instability of his/her mind? Who can know love except those in love?

    And what approach should science take to love? Should anecdotal evidence have more scientific validity when it is related by a scientist?

    Of course science must investigate the phenomenon of love in order to understand the human condition in a more complete way.

    And it is the same for supernatural phenomena. There is an onus on psychics and mediums to prove that they are not thieves but there is also a burden on science to prove that they are in order to better understand human nature.

    I'd like to say something about the male/female divide in relation to conspiracy theories, UFO sightings, etc., as I think this can be explained in the same terms as those I suggested as reasons for the male/female divide in relation to paranormal activity.

    As I said earlier, it's a man's world and the problems of men trump the problems of women. That's why we have war - men don't mind sending their sons off to die as much as women do so the fact that we have wars at all is evidence that it is a man's world. In the case of women, empathy and guile are more useful tools than muscles and big sticks whereas the opposite is true in the case of men.

    In the case of women, the mechanisms that are concerned with empathy and guile are the same mechanisms that give rise to paranormal perceptions and are a consequence of evolution that serve as a survival tool, a weapon even, for women. I'm not trying to state facts here, these are simply suggestions.

    Women have to navigate a world of men and women and they have to do so without the aid of the 'might' and 'aggression' tools at the disposal of men whereas men need only be concerned about other men in a parallel world where empathy might be construed as weakness and strength and a big stick are much more useful as tools with which to overcome obstacles.

    Women have evolved a mechanism, a kind of radar if you will, that is tuned to a particular frequency scanning for certain types of event that will, upon detection, elicit a certain response. In men, the equivalent mechanism has evolved to be tuned to a different frequency, scanning for a different kind of event which, upon detection, elicits a different response.

    An intruder alert system would make a good analogy. Men and women have developed two different kinds of alarm system. One is based on a trip-wire which causes an alarm to be sounded and the other is a pressure sensitive mat which causes a two-ton weight to be dropped.

    The thing is, there are things other than an intruder that can trip these alarms but the alarms themselves provide no data concerning such events. When the alarm is tripped, there is a subconscious assumption made that a certain type of event has occured.

    In women, a false trigger is perceived as an 'other-worldly' unseen force whereas in men, a false trigger is percieved as a possible unseen enemy in the real world. In men, this gives rise to feelings of fear, suspicion and paranoia just the same as it does in women but it causes men to sharpen their swords in readiness to protect himself whereas women try to hide in order to protect themselves.

    It is useful for man to perceive that conspiracies are in operation, it keeps him sharp. It is especially useful to men who are imperialistic by nature, i.e., do unto others what you suspect they want to do to you before they have the opportunity to do it. That's how empires are built and empires are built by superstitious men.

    It's not supernatural or paranormal, it's evolution.


  • Registered Users Posts: 324 ✭✭Wereghost


    partyndbs wrote: »
    i dont really believe in ghosts much but i want 2 no what the **** called me and my sister from our mum and dads room when we were younger...i wouldnt mind if it was just me who remembers it but so does my sister...like omg that fear i experienced when i heard that voice will stick with me for ever.....calling out our names :eek: omg
    That reminds me of a time when we were at my grandparents' house in the country and my younger siblings, who had gone to bed, had been making noise in the room. My grandmother complained - so I snuck outside the window and intoned "I am the boogeyman - and I'm going to get " (names kids). There was a short pause, followed by terrified screams. My dad went into the room and , when he told them that there was no boogeyman, was informed that there was because they had heard him. The truth did out pretty quickly, though. :)


Advertisement