Science Vs Paranormality

Lucas10101

I do follow scientific principles and I try to deduce information based on facts. It's the same as believers in Global Warming and those who think it's nonsense. The facts are there on both sides but they disagree. With the information I have in relation to Paranormal, I have deduced it's highly improbable but not impossible as nothing is impossible, not even the tooth fairy. However I deduce it's highly improbable as I've explained since post one.

What licenses you to even think it could be from another world? Tell me your methods of deduction and how you thought of this deduction process and your conclusion? (Please don't brush this question off; give a good long detailed explanation so everyone can see what goes on in the mind of a Paranormal believer)

Regarding the laugh again you said "clearly has a laugh on it"...three points in reply:

(i) It couldn't be that clear if you didn't even hear it in the location you were at.
(ii) You don't know if it's a laugh, so don't say "clearly has a laugh"...say "clearly has the sound of what could be a laugh". You've no right to claim certainty about this than I do.
(iii) I still can't fathom your method of deduction: It sounds like a laugh, it must be a laugh, therefore must make the paranormal world clear. What do you think the chances are that you could have just made a mistake and it's not what you think?

iamhunted

i asked you for an explaination instead of answering you're asking me questions.

as I said, there was no -one laughing when the recording was made yet its on the recording. we can be almost certain its not from outside (personally I am certain as I have hours of natural recordings from the same room) - so the question Ive asked you which you told me there was a general explaination for, is who laughed.

Can you answer that yet? wheres the 'general explaination' you were so confident about earlier? Is it that the recording device manage to make its own sound that sounds like a laugh? - that itself is laughable.

Please do me a favour and stop trying to wiggle out of giving me an explainable answer.

iamhunted

Lucas10101 wrote: »

However I deduce it's highly improbable as I've explained since post one.

im sorry but you've explained nothing - all you've been doing is TELLING us that this is the case. You on one hand admit anythign is possible and then with the other tell us that though everything is possible, the paranormal isnt. its an illogical viewpoint.

iamhunted

(good old thrid reply)

Lucas10101 wrote: »

Tell me your methods of deduction and how you thought of this deduction process and your conclusion? (Please don't brush this question off; give a good long detailed explanation so everyone can see what goes on in the mind of a Paranormal believer)?

I already outlined how we make detailed recordings of the general area and use this to work out levels of noise pollution. i could go into more detail but frankly why bother? We spent quite a bit of time determining if outside sounds could find their way onto the recorder and we eventually decided (after experimentation with recordings) that they couldnt.

Finally - are you telling me that it *doesnt* sound exactly like a laugh? Is that youre answer to this by denying that the sound which sounds like a laugh, only sounds like one? thats inane.

really, if thats the line of your debate, dont bother me as I havent the time to waste.

Lucas10101

My point is this: I can see how you think it's a laugh. But that's no reason or evidence for the existence of a paranormal world. I don't have an explanation, I don't! But that doesn't mean we hand over the situation to the Paranormal.

Equating this with religion; when we can't answer questions like "Consciousness", religious people hand it over to "God".

I repeat, I'm not telling you that Paranormal does not exist. I'm saying the probability in relation to science is close to zero. You have to admit, the evidence is scanty, the accounts are second hand, and not a shred of pure 100% evidence given there's millions of accounts.

The questions I asked above, I didn't ask them in relation to noise or your video. I'm asking a general Paranormal believer to answer them, but not in any specific case. So please re-answer, as I've answered all yours I think:

What licenses you to even think unexplained noises/movements are from another world? Tell me your methods of deduction and how you thought of this deduction process and your conclusion in relation to a paranormal world in which you believe in?

iamhunted

don't have an explanation, I don't! But that doesn't mean we hand over the situation to the Paranormal.

you cant explain it but wont class it in anyway as something that could be called paranormal. thats a bit closed minded dont you think?

I repeat, I'm not telling you that Paranormal does not exist. I'm saying the probability in relation to science is close to zero. You have to admit, the evidence is scanty, the accounts are second hand, and not a shred of pure 100% evidence given there's millions of accounts.

changing your mind then? youve been telling us all along the paranormal doesnt exist not you say you arent saying that but just saying its probably pretty rare.

I said that pages back. You've switched your argument and Im calling you on that.

The questions I asked above, I didn't ask them in relation to noise or your video. I'm asking a general Paranormal believer to answer them, but not in any specific case. So please re-answer, as I've answered all yours I think:

OK so once more youve avoided the issue.

What licenses you to even think unexplained noises/movements are from another world? Tell me your methods of deduction and how you thought of this deduction process and your conclusion in relation to a paranormal world in which you believe in?

Thats a lot of typing which Im really not bothered to do in this instance. Upi dont want to believe anything that you dont already believe and thats fair enough but theres no way in hell I'm spending 20 minsutes writing out a post that you'll glibly bypass.

Believe me, our methods ensure that we seriously look at every natural explaination we possibly can. we are open minded enough to realise that not everything is paranormal - in fact not very much is paranormal. but when we run out of explainations we do wonder - we dont say things like "thats not a laugh, its just something that sounds just like a laugh" or "i can't explain it but its obviously not paranormal" based on nothing more than things we choose to or refuse to believe in. thats not being open minded, thats being narrow minded.

I am going to take my leave of this thread as this is such waffle. You dont have a point to rest your case on so you should drop it instead of looking for me to give you information that you can then pretend to rip to bits. its a bit of a waste of time.

When will the skeptics forum come into its own and start some threads of value and worth instead of 'omg that psychic is fake' threads? Ye's need to brush up on being skeptical (and learn what cynical means)

Lucas10101

iamhunted wrote: »

you cant explain it but wont class it in anyway as something that could be called paranormal. thats a bit closed minded dont you think?

Why does it have to be paranormal? There's probably an infinite way of explaining it...your just picking the nicest one to believe in.


changing your mind then? youve been telling us all along the paranormal doesnt exist not you say you arent saying that but just saying its probably pretty rare.

I said that pages back. You've switched your argument and Im calling you on that.

I think I've clearly stated at least 5 times that the probability is close to zero but cannot ever be zero.






Thats a lot of typing which Im really not bothered to do in this instance. Upi dont want to believe anything that you dont already believe and thats fair enough but theres no way in hell I'm spending 20 minsutes writing out a post that you'll glibly bypass.

Don't get into a debate if you can't answer the questions or are too lazy to.

Believe me, our methods ensure that we seriously look at every natural explaination we possibly can. we are open minded enough to realise that not everything is paranormal - in fact not very much is paranormal. but when we run out of explainations we do wonder - we dont say things like "thats not a laugh, its just something that sounds just like a laugh" or "i can't explain it but its obviously not paranormal" based on nothing more than things we choose to or refuse to believe in. thats not being open minded, thats being narrow minded.

I'm open-minded. If I experience, I'll believe. If there's sufficient proof, I'll believe. Before that, I think it's nonsense.

I am going to take my leave of this thread as this is such waffle. You dont have a point to rest your case on so you should drop it instead of looking for me to give you information that you can then pretend to rip to bits. its a bit of a waste of time.

You don't have a point...running away from the issue at hand. You've practically admitted you've lost the debate.

When will the skeptics forum come into its own and start some threads of value and worth instead of 'omg that psychic is fake' threads? Ye's need to brush up on being skeptical (and learn what cynical means)
I think this is of significant value and worth discussing. It's gotten over 60 posts so I think it's successful to some degree. I believe your arguments are baseless and worthless and just your interpretation of an event which 1,000 others will have differing opinions. Yours doesn't have to be right.

Goodluck.

pH

iamhunted wrote: »

For examples, heres an EVP we captured - listen for the laughter.

iamhunted

Lucas10101 wrote: »

Goodluck.

sorry lucus - acting the winner when you havent an argument *AFTER* Ive given up on you isnt exactly a great way to debate anything.

Youve contradicted yourself more than a few times and I really cant be bothered going there just to make you feel like you have a point. sorry.

iamhunted

I think this is of significant value and worth discussing. It's gotten over 60 posts so I think it's successful to some degree. I believe your arguments are baseless and worthless and just your interpretation of an event which 1,000 others will have differing opinions. Yours doesn't have to be right.

its got a lot of threads just like this one where people give up as the level of skeptical argument just isnt up to it.

Lucas10101

I'm not "acting" anything.

You simply misunderstood and I think I've made my arguments crystal clear, if I didn't have any, you wouldn't have refuted everything I've said.

Get off this thread now, you said you'd leave, so leave. Best of luck in your Paranormal Investigations.

Rather than the skeptical argument not being "up to it", I think you're arguments amount to near zero, the probability of the existence of Paranormal activity ironically.

iamhunted

yeah yeah. dont be a sore loser. :P

Lucas10101

Now that the rubbish has been taken out - does anyone have an alternative credible argument?

iamhunted

my god but you are something else. you dont have an argument - you couldnt answer me - give it up (unless you just like to listen to yourself talk, i dunno)

Lucas10101

I can't answer that sound question in the same way I can't answer questions about the Higgs Boson or whatever.

That doesn't prove the Paranormal whatsoever and isn't a point in your favor. For me, it doesn't prove a point in my favor either.

iamhunted

it is indeed a point in favour of the paranormal. unless of course you have an explaination for the laughter. if you dont, then you have to be open to the idea of it. if for example, such things where blamed throughout history ont he tooth fairy, and you had no other explaination, you cant avoid the idea it might be the tooth fairy. same goes with the paranormal. if many claim such things are paranormal and you cant explain it yourself, then you have to be open to the fact it is paranormal. thats if youre a skeptic. if youre a cynic you'll still refuse to consider any theory but your own, as in its isnt paranormal regardless of the info presented to you.

Lucas10101

How many times do I have to reiterate these main points:

* I don't say the Paranormal doesn't exist. I simply say it's highly improbable and therefore conclude for my opinion it doesn't. Due to the lack of evidence, I equate it with the tooth fairy and other mythological rubbish.

* It's not a point in favor of the Paranormal because, WHY do you pick Paranormal among the millions of other things it could be? You pick one of the most unbelievable explanations rather than the credible and realist ones.

* I'm open to the idea of the Paranormal in exactly the same way I'm open to the tooth fairy existing. I just think they are equally highly improbable. Paranormal is the adults version of the tooth fairy so to speak.

* As you claim they exist, proof MUST be somewhere...otherwise you wouldn't believe it. Therefore, provide me with such proof and I'll HAPPILY believe it.

iamhunted

as much as i hate going round and round in circles ....

* I don't say the Paranormal doesn't exist. I simply say it's highly improbable and therefore conclude for my opinion it doesn't. Due to the lack of evidence, I equate it with the tooth fairy and other mythological rubbish.

THEN MAKEUP YER FECKEN MIND.

You wont say it doesnt exist but yet you call it mythological rubbish - stop sitting on the fence and tell me which it is - something that could exist or something thats rubbish .. not the usual safe answer of both. you cant have your cake and eat it. Make a stand and stick by it instead of changing your answer to suit whatever has been put to you.

* It's not a point in favor of the Paranormal because, WHY do you pick Paranormal among the millions of other things it could be? You pick one of the most unbelievable explanations rather than the credible and realist ones.

Im not - but i know it wasnt someone there and I know it wasnt someone outside plus i know the recorder didnt mimic the sound of laughter so you tell me - whats the other choices? Oh i forgot - you dont know but yet youre sure it cant be paranormal - by the way, Im not saying evps are paranormal for certain but you definitely dont have any new ideas on the subject for me.

* I'm open to the idea of the Paranormal in exactly the same way I'm open to the tooth fairy existing. I just think they are equally highly improbable. Paranormal is the adults version of the tooth fairy so to speak.

and what do you base that on? mediums and psychics being fake? If you REALLY want to know about the paranormal, get off the internet and go looking otherwise you wont find anything and you certinaly wont be in any position to make any comment on whats paranormal and what isnt until you do.

* As you claim they exist, proof MUST be somewhere...otherwise you wouldn't believe it. Therefore, provide me with such proof and I'll HAPPILY believe it.

you cant explain what that laugh was. Thats as definitive as I can be on the subject in this thread - Im sure you;ll come back with some more twaddle about how the paranormal is bunkum, but sure work away as Im now completely bored with this thread.

Lucas10101

This is too easy:

You say "Make up your mind" - I never changed it.

If I said to you "Can tooth fairies/santa claus exist?"...what answer would you give?

Logically it cannot be "They 100% do not exist", nor can you claim "They 100% do exist"...why not? Because we have no proof, but what we can say with that piece of information alone is "Therefore, they are highly improbably to exist, but we can't claim they don't"...which is EXACTLY the same logic I use for Paranormal, and another reason why I say that Paranormal is the adults version of the child's tooth fairy and Santa Claus.

Will you ever stop talking about that music file you posted up. Nobody here upon hearing that can come up with the good reason. You don't help it by excusing it as Paranormal.

I've posted a few threads on why I think Mediums and Psychics are frauds and professional legal con-men. I don't equate or paint them all with the same con-artistry brush...

Like I said, just because it sounds like laughter, doesn't make it laughter.

Similar with orbs in photographs, you see/hear what you want to.

Mythological rubbish? I can come up with more than that if you want.

iamhunted

OK. Its plain to me where you are in regards the paranormal. You are a cynic. Enough said.

You want proof, you are open to the paranormal yet nothing is proof and everything is made up as you arent open to anything. As far as the paranormal is concerned, you are a walking contradiction.

iamhunted

Lucas10101 wrote: »

T
Logically it cannot be "They 100% do not exist", nor can you claim "They 100% do exist"...why not? Because we have no proof, but what we can say with that piece of information alone is "Therefore, they are highly improbably to exist, but we can't claim they don't"...which is EXACTLY the same logic I use for Paranormal, and another reason why I say that Paranormal is the adults version of the child's tooth fairy and Santa Claus.

You have no proof as you havent gone looking for any.

Will you ever stop talking about that music file you posted up. Nobody here upon hearing that can come up with the good reason. You don't help it by excusing it as Paranormal.

Look - you asked for some 'proof' and all I did was link you to an AUDIO file that I cant explain. you cant explain it either (outside of us deliberately faking the recording which we didnt). Where does that leave you? wheres youre so called rational explaination? You know what, you havent got one and though that doesnt mean anything is paranormal, you still hvent answered by question in how did a laugh get onto the recording through normal everyday means.[/quote]

...

Like I said, just because it sounds like laughter, doesn't make it laughter.

that explains nothing and basically youve said absolutely nothing. when will you admit you dont actually have a point of view? its either laughter or it isnt. If is isnt, then what made the sound considering there was nothing there to make one like it. or alternatively, what else makes sound like laughter? glib remarks arent enough here, actual answers are needed. If you arent qualified to comment on them then I suggest you just dont.

Lucas10101

iamhunted wrote: »

You have no proof as you havent gone looking for any.

The burden of proof is on the believer. As I don't believe, I would be wasting my time looking for something that doesn't exist. You, the believer give me the proof. It must be somewhere, or else you wouldn't believe it.


Look - you asked for some 'proof' and all I did was link you to an AUDIO file that I cant explain. you cant explain it either (outside of us deliberately faking the recording which we didnt). Where does that leave you? wheres youre so called rational explaination? You know what, you havent got one and though that doesnt mean anything is paranormal, you still hvent answered by question in how did a laugh get onto the recording through normal everyday means.

It's not proof though, because the conclusion is too ambiguous. We will never know the right answer. For example, a Ghost, if somebody had proper video evidence of a ghost with a person around or whatever that wasn't edited, then I constitute that as proof, not a Music File that some person thinks is undeniable proof of something. The laughing matter is that you didn't even hear it when you were there...so the alarm bells should be ringing in your head (that's of course if you have one).

that explains nothing and basically youve said absolutely nothing. when will you admit you dont actually have a point of view? its either laughter or it isnt. If is isnt, then what made the sound considering there was nothing there to make one like it. or alternatively, what else makes sound like laughter? glib remarks arent enough here, actual answers are needed. If you arent qualified to comment on them then I suggest you just dont.[/QUOTE]

My point of view is more logical than your juvenile attempts. It's quite detestable and irritating that you can't understand my points. Quite pathetic really.

You say "it's either laughter or it isn't", you could equally argue "It could be a billion different things or it isn't"...you just happen to pick laughter as you analyzed the sound and your subconscious naturally looks for an understanding pattern, picked laughter. Mine would probably do the same, but that proves feck all. Like I said, you're picking and choosing the best scenario for your own argument. Another's opinion is just as worthy as yours because you have no proof it's laughter and I have no proof it isn't from the background or whatever. So you're opinion of it, like mine, means nothing.

Find some definitive footage of a ghost or something, not something I can't see, and relies on our subconscious to determine it. Even more so, since you didn't hear NOTHING at time of event. Laughable.

pH

iamhunted wrote: »

Look - you asked for some 'proof' and all I did was link you to an AUDIO file that I cant explain.

And here's the problem, rather than try to explain it, you'll continue to bring a recorder with you on your trip, record hours and hours and wonder about every unexplained noise.

Recorders are quite simple things, a microphone moves physically caused by the air pressure of sound, a device converts that movement into an electrical signal, and that signal is amplified and recorded.

If you claim that recorders (regularly) have voices on them that no one else could hear, then by managing the equipment you could find out exactly how this is happening.

Examples:

The spirit is manipulating the microphone directly - to test this isolate the microphone in as sound proof a container as possible, any voices recorded on this device must have been paranormally transferred to the recorder.

If this device is still recording voices, then the next step is to disconnect/disable the mic completely to test if the voice is being directly impressed on the recorder itself.

Repeat the above, write down all results, keep logs, come up with hypotheses and test them. You won't of course, because the type of "investigation" that people like yourself indulge in are more about role playing and a night out than actually finding anything out.

Lucas10101

Lucas10101 wrote: »

that explains nothing and basically youve said absolutely nothing. when will you admit you dont actually have a point of view? its either laughter or it isnt. If is isnt, then what made the sound considering there was nothing there to make one like it. or alternatively, what else makes sound like laughter? glib remarks arent enough here, actual answers are needed. If you arent qualified to comment on them then I suggest you just dont.

My point of view is more logical than your juvenile attempts. It's quite detestable and irritating that you can't understand my points. Quite pathetic really.

You say "it's either laughter or it isn't", you could equally argue "It could be a billion different things or it isn't"...you just happen to pick laughter as you analyzed the sound and your subconscious naturally looks for an understanding pattern, picked laughter. Mine would probably do the same, but that proves feck all. Like I said, you're picking and choosing the best scenario for your own argument. Another's opinion is just as worthy as yours because you have no proof it's laughter and I have no proof it isn't from the background or whatever. So you're opinion of it, like mine, means nothing.

Find some definitive footage of a ghost or something, not something I can't see, and relies on our subconscious to determine it. Even more so, since you didn't hear NOTHING at time of event. Laughable.

Restarting this thread, I think I can eventually convince Iamhunted.

I want a reply to that last post that I've just quoted. ^^ Ok, I'm going to rephrase it for you in a slightly different way. You have a music file with the following attachments;

1. You went on a paranormal trip looking for something.
2. You didn't hear anything at the time of the event.
3. You heard something upon replay of the music file and conclude it comes from a Supernatural dimension which we can never access.

This begs a few questions;

1. Why is your logic so flawed? For instance,
- Heard nothing at time of event.
- Heard something during replay of a file.
- Don't know what it was, I can't explain it.
- As a result, I can explain it was Paranormal.

Please try your best to explain this for me? ^^ lol

2. Why the Paranormal can be sensed by homosapiens?

As a result of a supernatural dimension, the Paranormal claim "Science can't explain it, it's outside the material world"...Well, my response would be;

- Our eyes are material as is the spectrum we see through.
- Supernatural is outside science and outside the material.
- Therefore we shouldn't be able to sense it with our material eyes.
- But we can sense it!

That doesn't make sense ^^, so the only conclusion to be drawn is that the Paranormal doesn't exist (or it's very highly highly improbable), but what does exist, is natural explanations. When Science faces a problem or a gap in the knowledge of something, they don't ever say "That's because of a Supernatural cause", instead they say "I don't know", and they work on the problem.

However gullible Paranormal believers CAN'T seem to bring themselves to do this. Instead they insist on a supernatural dimension that has never shown itself to be true. If it's available to one, it's available to all. I don't believe in this selective thing that only chance arises and only certain people get to experience it. I'll happily believe in the Paranormal if evidence presented itself. More than happy actually. But as I have no reason to believe such a thing, then I can only conclude it's a highly improbable assertion to make. I can't make an assertion of certainty that it doesn't exist.

Zombrex

Lucas10101 wrote: »

Restarting this thread, I think I can eventually convince Iamhunted.

Good luck with that :P