Do you believe in the supernatural?

rossc007 · 27-07-2011 10:08AM

py2006 wrote: »

My opinions, observations etc do not need to be fixed by you!

I understand your opinion but 'fix' my opinion outside of a quote!

Welcome to an internet forum, where FYP is not a misquote.

py2006 · 27-07-2011 10:20AM

rossc007 wrote: »

Welcome to an internet forum, where FYP is not a misquote.

What you have done is manipulate what I said and made it look like that is what I said by quoting me in your post! So anybody scanning through this thread will think that is what I actually said.

As I said, I have no issue with your opinion on this but don't insert it into a quote from me!

rossc007 · 27-07-2011 10:25AM

py2006 wrote: »

What you have done is manipulate what I said and made it look like that is what I said by quoting me in your post! So anybody scanning through this thread will think that is what I actually said.

As I said, I have no issue with your opinion on this but don't insert it into a quote from me!

omg, I clearly struck through what you said and added a FYP to indicate that I changed your post to reflect my opinion. Thats what FYP is for....

Anyone scanning through this thread please be aware that py2006 does indeed believe in the supernatural and his opinion should not be confused with my fixing of his posts

Gillington · 27-07-2011 10:32AM

I never beleived in anything supernatural until a couple of years ago.My mate was seeing this girl who told him she had a ghost living her room,which he or I didnt believe until he stayed over one night and said it was one of the freakiest things.Maybe I'm being naive but I believe him and her

Ghost Buster · 27-07-2011 10:36AM

Keno 92 wrote: »

Yes but only because I believe in The Ghostbusters.

You called?

27-07-2011 10:41AM

Yep

*runs from lynch mob*

py2006 · 27-07-2011 10:43AM

As a kid/teenager I was always fascinated by ghosts and UFO's. I don't quiet have the same interest these days but on occasion I will read the odd article etc.

One point I often make to people is that it is probably more outlandish to say we are the only life than it is to say there may be other life out there.

Especially when you consider the vastness of what is out there and we can only view the tiniest part of it.

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 10:52AM

Emiko wrote: »

There's any amount of unexplained incidents in the world.

Whether they're supernatural or not remains to be seen.

I'm agnostic on the issue.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Just because something is not easily explained does not mean that it is unexplainable, and the explanation for an unusual occorance that boils down to "it was magic" is not an explanation at all.

For something to have an effect, it must have a mechanism. There is no plausible mechanism through which ghosts or goblins or psychics or astrology etc can work by.

While the OP only mentioned ghosts and psychics and things, the category 'supernatural' should also include so called 'alternative' medicines. Things like Reiki, Homeopathy, reflexology, chiropractic voodoo etc.

All of the above have no credible mechanism through which they can have the physiological effects that are claimed by their advocates.

Homeopathy is just water people. Reiki is just wishful thinking and chiropractic is just dangerous

py2006 · 27-07-2011 10:57AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Just because something is not easily explained does not mean that it is unexplainable, and the explanation for an unusual occorance that boils down to "it was magic" is not an explanation at all.

For something to have an effect, it must have a mechanism. There is no plausible mechanism through which ghosts or goblins or psychics or astrology etc can work by.

Are you taking things purely from a scientific perspective?

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 11:01AM

py2006 wrote: »

Are you taking things purely from a scientific perspective?

As opposed to some other kind of perspective?

py2006 · 27-07-2011 11:03AM

Akrasia wrote: »

As opposed to some other kind of perspective?

Sorry, I wasn't being smart!

It just that science doesn't and can't explain everything! Perhaps, one day it might and then again perhaps it wont!

I just think that because a scientist doesn't know an answer to something it doesn't mean it doesn't/can't/won't happen!

rossc007 · 27-07-2011 11:04AM

py2006 wrote: »

Are you taking things purely from a scientific perspective?

I'd hazard a guess that he is.

Does the possibility of alien life fall into the category of supernatural? Not in my opinion.

py2006 · 27-07-2011 11:07AM

rossc007 wrote: »

I'd hazard a guess that he is.

Does the possibility of alien life fall into the category of supernatural? Not in my opinion.

Not sure how to categorise it! Supernatural or Paranormal!

Although, scientists are trying to find life out there or at least establish the possibility!

Davidius · 27-07-2011 11:17AM

I have never heard a good reason to believe in the supernatural.

I'd be surprised if alien life didn't exist but that doesn't really give credence to claims of visitation by extraterrestrials. Accounts of UFOs and abductions are too unreliable to be considered real evidence. Just because its plausible that aliens exist doesn't mean that they're the likely explanation for seemingly strange events.

rossc007 · 27-07-2011 11:21AM

py2006 wrote: »

Not sure how to categorise it! Supernatural or Paranormal!

Although, scientists are trying to find life out there or at least establish the possibility!

I don't think its supernatural or paranormal, both of those fields operate outside of conventional science.

I think its more of a scientific probability, given what we know of the universe and the conditions required for life.

dlofnep · 27-07-2011 11:22AM

No.

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 11:30AM

py2006 wrote: »

Sorry, I wasn't being smart!

It just that science doesn't and can't explain everything! Perhaps, one day it might and then again perhaps it wont!

I just think that because a scientist doesn't know an answer to something it doesn't mean it doesn't/can't/won't happen!

Science can't explain everything, but we should still approach things from a scientific/skeptical perspective.

There are a number of steps that we should take to evaluate extraordinary claims

Michael Shermer of Skeptic magazine outlines the basics of the 'baloney detection kit' here http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/baloney.html

1. How reliable is the source of the claim?
2. Does this source often make similar claims?
3. Have the claims been verified by another source?
4. How does the claim fit with what we know about how the world works?
5. Has anyone gone out of the way to disprove the claim, or has only supportive evidence been sought?
6. Does the preponderance of evidence point to the claimant's conclusion or to a different one?
7. Is the claimant employing the accepted rules of reason and tools of research, or have these been abandoned in favor of others that lead to the desired conclusion?
8. Is the claimant providing an explanation for the observed phenomena or merely denying the existing explanation?
9. If the claimant proffers a new explanation, does it account for as many phenomena as the old explanation did?
10. Do the claimant's personal beliefs and biases drive the conclusions, or vice versa?

rossc007 · 27-07-2011 11:30AM

dlofnep wrote: »

No.

Hmmm, if only there was some sort of poll

py2006 · 27-07-2011 11:36AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Science can't explain everything, but we should still approach things from a scientific/skeptical perspective.

There are a number of steps that we should take to evaluate extraordinary claims

Michael Shermer of Skeptic magazine outlines the basics of the 'baloney detection kit' here http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/baloney.html

Interesting, although that list suggests a bias in itself. If we read between lines their aim seems it is trying to discredit the claimant.

We have to remember that at one stage people believed there wasn't any other life on earth. Until one day a boat was built and explorers went and discovered new land and people. When they returned with their stories there were believers and none believers.

I believe we will eventually get to that stage again but replace countries and people with planets and other life.

Not in our lifetime though!

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 11:40AM

py2006 wrote: »

Not sure how to categorise it! Supernatural or Paranormal!

Although, scientists are trying to find life out there or at least establish the possibility!

The existance of extraterrestrial life in other parts of the universe is not a paranormal question, it is a scientific one.

However, the approach to this question can be either scientific (SETI/NASA etc) or pseudo scientific (area 51 conspiracies, Abduction theories,spiritualist mumbo jumbo etc)

I believe that given the scale of the universe and the fact that we know intelligent life is possible given the right conditions (cause it developed here on earth) that on the statistical probability alone, there are probably other intelligent civilisations out there somewhere, possibly even a very great number of other civilisations. Whether we will ever contact them or not is a different question. Whether they are currently in contact with us? there is no convincing evidence of this.

py2006 · 27-07-2011 11:46AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Whether we will ever contact them or not is a different question. Whether they are currently in contact with us? there is no convincing evidence of this.

A lot of people dismiss evidence because they don't believe in something. For example, people will dismiss photographs, video footage of UFO's as being evidence because they don't/won't believe.

Evidence, real or fake, is evidence and must be looked at. The majority of these can be dismissed by experts as fake or something natural but there are a few that defy what can humanly be created in terms of flight speed, size and ability to change direction dramatically.

What fascinated me as a child was there there were ancient stone carvings/paintings that appeared to show a UFO in them.

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 11:53AM

py2006 wrote: »

Interesting, although that list suggests a bias in itself. If we read between lines their aim seems it is trying to discredit the claimant.

It's a good idea to evaluate the source. If the headline "evidence of life found on titan" appeared in "the weekly world news" I wouldn't take it seriously, however, if it appeared on the front cover of "the new scientist" I would give it an awful lot more attention. Of course, I still wouldn't assume that it was true just on the fact that it was reported in a reputable publication, i would look into the supporting evidence and wait for the claims to be verified by other scientists.

Once the claim has been evaluated by the experts in a field and it appears to stand up to scrutiny, then you can justifiably accept that claim.

The best we can do is base our beliefs on the best available evidence.

We have to remember that at one stage people believed there wasn't any other life on earth. Until one day a boat was built and explorers went and discovered new land and people. When they returned with their stories there were believers and none believers.

I don't know where you got the idea that people at some stage didn't believe that there was any other life on earth. it's a very strange claim.

But even if that was a claim that people once believed. If that was consistent with the best available evidence at the time, then it would have been rational to believe it. We take Germ theory for granted these days (well most of us do) but before it was discovered, people could justifiably claim that disease was caused by impurities in the blood or whatever. It only becomes irrational to believe in something after it has been comprehensively debunked or overtaken by a far superior hypothesis. (by the way, Homeopathy as a discipline does not accept germ theory, but homeopathists still presumably wash their hands after going to the toilet for some reason)

Seachmall · 27-07-2011 11:57AM

If supernatural things existed they wouldn't be supernatural and the study of them would become another field in the natural sciences.

Mickeroo · 27-07-2011 11:57AM

py2006 wrote: »

As a kid/teenager I was always fascinated by ghosts and UFO's. I don't quiet have the same interest these days but on occasion I will read the odd article etc.

One point I often make to people is that it is probably more outlandish to say we are the only life than it is to say there may be other life out there.

Especially when you consider the vastness of what is out there and we can only view the tiniest part of it.

Your logic is sound when considering that there could, and most likely is life on other planets. They haven't visited earth though. There's never been a case of alien abduction/ufo that has stood up to scrutiny. It's also no coincidence that UFO sightings and alien abductions didn't start "happening" until they started appearing in popular fiction, strangely enough as alien abductions increased visitations from demons decreased.

Akrasia · 27-07-2011 11:59AM

py2006 wrote: »

A lot of people dismiss evidence because they don't believe in something. For example, people will dismiss photographs, video footage of UFO's as being evidence because they don't/won't believe.

Find me a single photograph or video of a UFO that you believe is convincing and we'll look at it and see if 'Alien space ship' is the only explanation.

Evidence, real or fake, is evidence and must be looked at. The majority of these can be dismissed by experts as fake or something natural but there are a few that defy what can humanly be created in terms of flight speed, size and ability to change direction dramatically.

The quantity of 'evidence' for something is not as important as the quality of evidence.
A million blurry photographs of things that might possibly be an alien space ship (but is probably a frisbee) does not equal 1 good piece of evidence.
Evidence doesn't stack in that manner.

What fascinated me as a child was there there were ancient stone carvings/paintings that appeared to show a UFO in them.

Where? Do you have pictures of these?

py2006 · 27-07-2011 12:01PM

Akrasia wrote: »

I don't know where you got the idea that people at some stage didn't believe that there was any other life on earth. it's a very strange claim.

One of those school things I think! But when you think about it, it makes sense! At one stage people believed if you sailed too far you would fall off the side of the Earth. Its flat you know!

So if you go back far enough, when all people could see was sea and didn't have the means to travel on water a great distance, they wouldn't have had any notion of other countries, people and culture.

There was an interesting video recently of a tribe in the Amazon. This tribe were basically stone age. They had never seen white people, technology or any other lifeform or culture apart from there own. One of the videos shows there reaction to meeting a white man for the first time and it was absolutely fascinating to see them staring at the clothes and technology.

Its actually how we would react should we meet and superior (alien) lifeform.

Frank Black · 27-07-2011 12:04PM

py2006 wrote: »

That has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!

There are people from all walks of life, all cultures and religions, all levels of education, poor or rich who believe they have experienced something that could be classed as supernatural.

The only thing they have in common is that they're all idiots.

py2006 · 27-07-2011 12:06PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Find me a single photograph or video of a UFO that you believe is convincing and we'll look at it and see if 'Alien space ship' is the only explanation.

The quantity of 'evidence' for something is not as important as the quality of evidence.
A million blurry photographs of things that might possibly be an alien space ship (but is probably a frisbee) does not equal 1 good piece of evidence.
Evidence doesn't stack in that manner.

Where? Do you have pictures of these?

In fairness, you can look for photos yourself but I would imagine you would dismiss all.

Amateur photographers with limited cameras trying to capture a small moving object a great distance away often leads to poor quality footage! While not necessarily evidence of alien life it is also not necessarily not evidence. If that makes sense! :P

py2006 · 27-07-2011 12:07PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Where? Do you have pictures of these?

A quick google found this!

Not making any statement here, I merely said it fascinated it me as a kid! As some people think movies created the UFO phenomena

Seachmall · 27-07-2011 12:08PM

py2006 wrote: »

In fairness, you can look for photos yourself but I would imagine you would dismiss all.

Amateur photographers with limited cameras trying to capture a small moving object a great distance away often leads to poor quality footage! While not necessarily evidence of alien life it is also not necessarily not evidence.

Amateur photographers of today have photography equipment better than what NASA had in the 50s and yet UFOs still seem to be taken with amateur cameras from the 30s.

Do you believe in the supernatural?

Comments