Over the past several months I've been investigating the possibilities that vampires exist in reality. Here is the evidence.
This is an interview with a vampire
Here are some vampire bones
Here are a group of vampires protesting against Twilight
Printable View
Over the past several months I've been investigating the possibilities that vampires exist in reality. Here is the evidence.
This is an interview with a vampire
Here are some vampire bones
Here are a group of vampires protesting against Twilight
Are you serious? Part of me feels like you're creating this thread purely for shits and giggles. Not criticizing, just wondering.
It also depends on how you define the term "vampire". I highly doubt there are supernatural undead beings whose only source of sustenance is blood. There is, however, documented cases of people believing that they need blood to survive and taking it from various sources such as blood bags, animals, willing/unwilling donors, etc. It's also been held that early vampire and werewolf stories were created to explain the brutal and ferocious killings perpetrated by earlier Serial Killers. Rippers to be more exact. These are the type who are known for disemboweling and mutilating their victims beyond recognition. Many times cannabalism is involved and many of them revert to an animalistic nature when performing these kills, creating savagery that a populace wouldn't believe a person to be capable of. So instead they created these fairy tales to explain what was happening. This helped them make some sort of sense of it all, and helped keep their children in the house at night. Read up on a man named Andrei Chikatilo if you're interested, he is a perfect example of one of these.
Nowadays though, vampires have been glorified to such a point that there are copycats. These people are no longer content with dressing up as a vamp on Halloween, so they decide to live as close to a vamp lifestyle as they can.
Do you have any evidence that werewolf and vampire stories were created to explain early serial killers? Sounds like a pretty bold and outlandish theory to me.
Wow. This coming from a guy whose "evidence" of vampire reality are videos of perpetual Halloween celebrators and bones from corpses which superstitious people desecrated because of their own irrational fears. I suppose you believe the Salem witch trials were successful too?
Excuse me? Why are you making this about me? I asked you a simple question, please do not dodge it.
Your simple question isn't so simple and you know it. Let me just hop in my time machine and get the evidence you require. Meanwhile I'm supposed to accept your "evidence" I guess. I've done much research into Serial Murderers and if you did too, you would see the correlation between many fairy tales and evil people throughout history. Saying prove it doesn't make you right. I actually feel like laughing every time I look at the first post in this thread. Is that seriously what your basing your opinions on? Unless you can provide me with actual evidence of vamps before shitting on mine, then I believe my work here is done.
Lol. Just glimpsed the vampire protestor again. I think I'm gonna have nightmares now...
Why are you implying that just because I asked for evidence that makes me right and you wrong? I never said any such thing. I would like to see evidence if you had any because then I could take your remarks more seriously and perhaps consider your claim. As it stands, your claim is empty conjecture. I may as well claim that vampires and werewolves exist in folklore because they represent deeper elements of the human psyche and have been given symbols in some primitive, jungian way for humanity to understand themselves. I could even say that all folklore monsters spawned from mental disorders, vampires being narcissists and wereolves obviously being the manic depressives. Why not claim these things? It makes total sense so it doesn't need evidence!
I mean, I suppose if you knew your history better in the first place you wouldn't be making such ridiculous claims. When a body initially begins rotting the epidermis is the first to go, revealing dermis so bodies getting freshly dug up would often appear to have a layer of fresh, new skin. There were many random superstitions born out of these little misunderstood phenomena. I'm sure that rippers account for a few misplaced cases, but it's very, very bold to say the vampire myth itself came purely from serial killers. For one thing, people did actually know serial killers existed back then. For two, simply because some serial killers were rather grizzly that doesn't automatically mean every single vampire story can be reduced to serial killers. That's sloppy work on the critical thinking, friend.
I still have yet to hear your concrete evidence as to why you believe these beings to be real? Your logic fails to grasp the situation. If I were to use your way of thinking, I could make an argument for basically any supernatural creature that has ever been spoken about.
Vampires exhibit characteristics of Serial Murderers : the need to take life or life force from others repeatedly, their ability to blend in with others unnoticed, their psychopathic charm which has been extended to an actual power vampires are supposed to posses that is shown by them simply looking into someone's eyes and mind controlling them. Over the years their abilities have grown and become more unrealistic.
So your saying because a corpse is found with some amount of skin that it must be a vamp? What about mummification? Embalming? Are these not ways of preserving the corpse after death? And by association we can presume there are other ways to do so. You are the one making ridiculous claim buddy. My response is based much more on fact and in reality than you're videos or anything you've had to say in this thread so far.
It's obvious though that you need to be bitch slapped by god with research to the contrary of what you believe. You're very hard headed and are in no way accepting logic in this debate. You have already decided they are real and their is no realistic way for me to convince you otherwise. That's fine by me though because the evidence you've shown me lets me walk away from this knowing that you are going to be chasing your tail for years to come.
Wait, Blade isn't real?
Who said I believed they were real? I merely presented the notion they were real, and then you jumped to conclusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by PlanesWalker
Did you read the post I made addressing this? "I'm sure that rippers account for a few misplaced cases, but it's very, very bold to say the vampire myth itself came purely from serial killers. For one thing, people did actually know serial killers existed back then. For two, simply because some serial killers were rather grizzly that doesn't automatically mean every single vampire story can be reduced to serial killers."Quote:
Vampires exhibit characteristics of Serial Murderers : the need to take life or life force from others repeatedly, their ability to blend in with others unnoticed, their psychopathic charm which has been extended to an actual power vampires are supposed to posses that is shown by them simply looking into someone's eyes and mind controlling them. Over the years their abilities have grown and become more unrealistic.
Lol, you are not a very good reader. I was pointing out that there are multiple sources of vampire stories, discrediting your reductionist position that they were all just psychopaths. People also believed in them because they didn't understand the decomposition process.Quote:
So your saying because a corpse is found with some amount of skin that it must be a vamp? What about mummification? Embalming? Are these not ways of preserving the corpse after death? And by association we can presume there are other ways to do so. You are the one making ridiculous claim buddy. My response is based much more on fact and in reality than you're videos or anything you've had to say in this thread so far.
Once again, I never stated they were real. This is so utterly clear that you're either very dim or you're trolling. If you're trolling, I'd ask you to please respect the seriousness of my questions. I'll assume for the benefit of the doubt, that you are not trolling. You've claimed that I am not accepting logic and that you couldn't convince me simply because I saw logical flaws in your claim, can I be any more clear? You made a bad claim, but I'm the illogical one. Nicely done, troll. Nicely done.Quote:
It's obvious though that you need to be bitch slapped by god with research to the contrary of what you believe. You're very hard headed and are in no way accepting logic in this debate. You have already decided they are real and their is no realistic way for me to convince you otherwise. That's fine by me though because the evidence you've shown me lets me walk away from this knowing that you are going to be chasing your tail for years to come.
You should think about the videos you posted before saying that lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
The irony.Quote:
Over the past several months I've been investigating the possibilities that vampires exist in reality. Here is the evidence.
Exactly. See what I did there? Investigating the possibility =/= belief in the reality
Is that irony?Quote:
Originally Posted by zoth00
Funny nonetheless
Vampires are cool, you know, would be a c0o0o0ol evolutionary step for when we overpopulate the world and have to resort to cannibalism.
So you say "here's the evidence" and then claim you were exposing your belief? Makes sense...not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Um... what? I presented evidence for something that I neither believe nor disbelieve in.Quote:
Originally Posted by zoth00
Oh, okay. Then since you haven't realized so far, I'll go ahead and tell you that your presented "evidence" is nothing nowhere close to evidence. 2 of the videos aren't even relevant to the question presented in the title of the topic, and none of them has solid information. Sure we can talk about vampires, but so far your "investigation" gives nothing that truly resembles the possbility they exist :?Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Um, excuse me? That evidence is solid. Perhaps you should reexamine it, before you make claims like that. The first one has interviews with actual vampires, who admit to feeding off blood or psychic energy. The second one shows that ancient civilizations knew all about vampires and were wary of them, even back then. I mean, there's no other possible reason as to why you'd stick stones in some dead dude's mouth if you're not afraid that he's a vampire ready to come back with a vengeance. And the third video reveals that vampires are not only real, but directly engaged in society with protests of their own when their name is defiled by trashy romance novels. There's a trifecta of evidence that I spent months finding, and you're acting like I just pulled the first three videos off youtube under the search query "are vampires real" as if possessed by a random impulse to fuck with people's heads. Not cool, dude.
Just because they claim, it doesn't mean it's true. You can't steal psychic energy according to science. Do you have any actual neutral study proving it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Argument from ignorance, a pretty known fallacy, but there's no evidence the people were actually vampires. Just because people were afraid back in the days, says nothing about the people in the graves. Again, fallacy argument. You're really naive if you think people don't commit weird actions when something scares them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
The video never shows "vampires are real" it merely indicates a group of protesters who say twilight gives vampires the wrong image. They even interview a person who says "they (vampires) are supposed to be..."Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
As you can see, your "evidence" is a bunch of fallacy arguments, and provide no actual and solid information that explains their existence. Besides, the so called "real vampires" are either people who think they steal "psychic" energy (which is a concept that isn't even supported by itself in face of science), or drink blood and think that makes them vampires. There's loads of people with disorders that causes them to drink blood and they aren't considered vampires because of that. Vampires are mythological or folkloric beings, nothing else. So far, your evidence can't prove otherwise.
Of course psychic vampirism is scientifically proven. One obtains energy through dominating others. A troll is an example of a psychic vampire because they feed off others' frustrations by purposely engaging in fallacy as to make it impossible for the other to debate on solid ground. The opponent becomes frustrated and debilitated because all of their efforts to remain clear simply wash against the expertise of fallacy before them. A bully is another type of psychic vampire, a bully's motivation is to be feared and intimidated by weaker people. If people are intimidated by you, they will pay you more attention and be extra careful not to invoke your wrath. Other tactics used by psychic vampires are criticism, aloofness and pity. These are styles of manipulation used to make people cater to your needs and pay you a parasitic amount of attention. People will get sick of being criticized, and so actively attempt to please the criticizer; or they will feed the aloof in their attempts to pry into them, or they will please the self-pitied so they won't get guilt tripped.
Now you're probably thinking that the manipulators don't gain anything substantial from getting others to cater more attention, but you'd be wrong. Energy follows attention, and what you focus on, you feed. The entire fabric of existence works through perception. What perception pursues exists more substantially than what perception ignores. If you want a bunch of neutral studies and shit, there's a bunch of links in that LOA thread revealing how attention follows energy.
Now keep in mind I don't believe in vampires, necessarily, but I do think there's a lot of strong evidence (especially that third video I posted). Because the evidence is so strong, I'm forced to concede that it's possible some individuals are able to take the energy directly through psychic means and are not required to get it through attention like others. Throw the ones that drink blood into the mix and we're looking at a subtle body twist where blood and only blood can somehow revitalize something aspect of a human integral to their well-being.
I would prefer to argue this simply upon the concept that reality exists only through perception, and that which gains a bigger audience will feel more powerful, like as if two people sharing a dream and focusing on the same particular object would increase its vividness. This is an easier argument to make rather than throw in a whole subtle body aspect. But I'm fine with whatever you want to argue about.
I agree with what you say about "psychic vampires", except I'm not sure if the classification is necessary. There are people who suck the energy from others in a very real and scientific, psychological way. One could call them vampires.
However, there are also people who don't think, and one could call them a zombie.
There are people who really love cake. Would you call them a caker?
Humans like to classify things, and I think that can get us into trouble. That's a chair. That's a ball. They are married. They are engaged. They have an "open relationship". Bill believes in manbearpig, Bob thinks there is a manbearpig, Ben knows there is a manbearpig, and Buck has faith that there is not a manbearpig. It's all absurd. We calculate information using pulses of energy in our brains. Outside of that there is no rock, or planet, or manbearpig, or vampire. There is only collections of particles, acting and reacting together, and we observe them in the only way we can.
Yes, I think there are vampires, in the same way that I think there are witches, and zombies, and manbearpig. I don't see evidence of anything supernatural, and if you examine the concept "supernatural" that falls through just as pathetically. If there are "supernatural" beings, such as ghosts, would that still not be confined by the laws of science? Can the laws of science hold elements that we would call "supernatural"?
You mean emotional vampires? Because psychic vampires are not related to science. They origin is related to a religion, and the term was coined in The Satanic Bible. Just the term "psychic" takes it out of the table already. Besides, your arguments continue to be flawed. Like Sloth said, the classification does not hold anything valuable. Just because those people have certain types of behavior and/or disorders, doesn't mean they are "vampires". It's like saying the lion is the "king the jungle". The term is merely that: a term. Vampires, in the true meaning of the word, don't exist, despite all you've been saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Biggest bunch of fallacies this week, and I read loads of them. Your arguments are wrapped in such false premises to the point they even don't make sense. But let's analyse it, so we don't make the mistake of thinking this is a real discussion (all I do is watching you coming with false arguments to support a view you think it's right):Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
The third video? Really? The same video in which you see protesters complaining about twilight giving a bad image to the vampires? People disguised as vampires with eye-lens saying vampires "should look dark and creepy (or sth in those lines)" and a line saying "real vampires are.....". Is that really the bold of your so called evidence? A tv news video? All the videos are showed to nowhere be close to providing evidence for the existence of the vampires. Yet you assume they are, dodge the questions of the relevance of the information, make arguments from ignorance by saying "there's no other possible reason as to why you'd stick stones in some dead dude's mouth if you're not afraid that he's a vampire ready to come back with a vengeance."Quote:
but I do think there's a lot of strong evidence (especially that third video I posted).
This keeps getting more and more funny lol. Foundation bias at it's best. You're assuming something without even having a valid argument. Once again, your "strong evidence" is a video? And what does anything relate (energy vampires or the real vampires) with energy stealing by psychic means? You can't even prove that psychic energy-stealing exist! You're only valid affirmation (with the wrong name) is about emotional vampires, but they don't "suck" energy by psychic means (you don't even know exactly what that means do you? It's okay, people that make claims of the supernatural never do), you can refer to this article (yes, a science article which is something you didn't even provide so far) to learn what exactly energy vampires are. Most of them are merely people with personality disorders.Quote:
"Because the evidence is so strong, I'm forced to concede that it's possible some individuals are able to take the energy directly through psychic means and are not required to get it through attention like others."
You're actually saying people with Renfield's syndrome should be put into the same lot of energy vampires? When the two disorders don't even remotely resemble each other? Wow....Quote:
Throw the ones that drink blood into the mix and we're looking at a subtle body twist where blood and only blood can somehow revitalize something aspect of a human integral to their well-being.
Conclusion: you have no real arguments to support the existence of vampires. You should really review what you've said so far, because there's still not a single reason to take your "evidence" seriously. For this to become a discussion, you have to provide real arguments, not 3 videos mixed with "psychic vampires" that you claim to be such a strong evidence.
My evidence is irrefutable.
No scientific articles, fallacies all over the posts, misinterpretation of information, dismisses arguments that prove you wrong....nope, you really don't want to promote intellectual honesty or a rational discussion, you just want people to agree with you. Guess I'm done here lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
Wait - prove what wrong? I haven't read every post here, but in the initial post OP didn't make any positive claims, just asked a question and said he was investigating. And immediately there's a flurry of posts assuming that he did make a positive claim, and it seems everyone is still arguing from that assumption. It's possible he did make positive claims in a later post though, and if he did then I'll withdraw my statement.
Actually no, I never did make a positive claim.
He's wrong when he says the videos he posts are evidence. They clearly are no evidence of any possbility that vampires exist. From the moment you say "here is the evidence" you are subject to criticism towards the evidence you provide.
So once again, no, there's no valid evidence of the possibility that vampires exist. All you presented are videos that lack any substance. That doesnt account for any kind of evidence.
And your positive claim of psychic vampirism being justifief by science is also false. At least read your own posts before trying to deny things like that lol....incoming "evidence of my research!" which once again backs up that the focus is nowhere in the discussion of the title. Because according to many of your posts, wouldnt be a surprise if trolling was the intent lol
Edit: after reading the first posts again, it's clearly intentional that the "evidence" sentence was meant to provoke people into thinking that he was refering to the actual topic, because no one in extended discussion would waste their time doubting that someone did research on the topic they started. Clearly trolling intentions....good that it's cleared out :P
It's the evidence on which he's basing his investigation - he didn't claim it was good solid evidence. So sure - you can say the evidence is poor and Ill agree in a heartbeat - but all he said was "this is the evidence". And you can't argue that fact - it certainly is his evidence. Your criticism applies only to the validity of the evidence itself - again he hasn't made the positive claim that he believes vampires are real - he merely said "I'm investigating it and here's the evidence".
And I definitely agree with your last statement - OP is trolling hard here, but I think he's trying to demonstrate that a lot of skeptics are really hardliner disbelievers who claim to be skeptical but don't take a true skeptical approach. At least that's my take on another of OPs mysterious and aggravating threads. :lol:
** Edit:
See, if I'm right, this thread is totally meta. It's not at all about whether vampires are real - it's about how people respond to statements that aren't quite what they seem. He never made a positive claim and yet everyone is responding only to the claim they think he made.
Isnt' trolling against the rules? Even more on this sub forum. But yes, it wouldn't be the first coming from op lol, no matter his intentions. But it's not hard to see that the op made positive claims in his late replies, guess not everything went according to the plan. Weird topic, but I'd certainly think there are easier ways to teach that lesson. Despite everything, is a good one ^^
Edit: no darkmatters, if you keep reading, he did make claims - about psychic vampirism for example. But that's not the point: if you're trying to intentionally deceive people, how come you expect to have a neutral discussion? If I trick people into thinking something, am I having a neutral position? I forgot the name in english but that isnt promoting a discussion, but a sophism.
I don't think the kind of trolling he's doing here is against the rules - the rules are more against trolling that violates the wishes of the OP (ironic, aint it?) or impedes progress of the thread deliberately. And he's definitely not doing that! So it's really not trolling. Or rather he's trolling an idea, not a person.
And yeah, I stopped reading before getting to the later posts - I ought to check them out.
To think I'd find a thread twice as interesting after being trolled by the op xD
[/quote]Quote:
Originally Posted by zoth00
That made me think. Thank you.
I hope you guys don't mind if I step in. I've been watching.
I agree with a lot of what Darkmatters is saying.
This is a sticky one. I'm really not sure what op's intentions are, here. I'm not sure that it truly matters.
The initial post does seem almost humorous (sorry op), but you must admit that the conversation went south right away. In fact, the very first three words in the first response were "Are you serious?" That is a blunt and reasonable question, however, PlanesWalker pounced on his beliefs, with a disproportionate display of attention, for the circumstances. Then you jumped in too, zoth.
My point is that if he is trolling, I think he got you guys.
I don't know if there was a point. I don't know him, but:
caught my attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Poster
zoth, you have made the accusation that OP's evidence is not evidence at all. I don't know if I would agree with that yet. Do we need to break down the definition of the word into concept? If one says "I have evidence." is the truth of that statement correlated with the strength of that evidence? If it isn't evidence, what shall we call it for the duration of the conversation?
On the other hand, OP stated "That evidence is solid." which is silly. I'm sorry again, op, but it's hilarious. And I have to pick on you some more.
The captions for the videos were:
"This is an interview with a vampire"
"Here are some vampire bones"
"Here are a group of vampires protesting against Twilight"
All of those are stated as facts. This is catastrophic, because now it must be PROVEN that that interview was really with a true vampire.
I won't list them all off, but each one is a "fact" that is going to be very hard to prove.
An intense challenge is warranted, but not to what op believes or doesn't believe. It doesn't matter. Let us focus on the point of the thread.
I agree that the presented evidence is .. bad. I don't feel that the ultimate question can ever be answered, if that answer is no. The god question, alien question, and chupicabras of course, may some day be proven to be true. However, they can never be proven to be false. We can continue to search for aliens for all eternity and never find the answer. This is a major disadvantage to the skeptic, of course. lol
I must feel that we have to consider anything to be a possibility.
Perhaps that is why doubt works the way it does. You must prove that something is "real", and not that it isn't.
Though op's evidence was hilariously awesome, I personally don't see adequate evidence to conclude the existence of supernatural vampires, people with special powers contributed to whatever causes vampirism, or mage vampires with increased stats and spells.
Yeah Darkmatters had it right, I was doing something meta. Then it kind of dissolved into seeing how long it would take for zoth to realize I was kidding. I mean seriously, did you watch the 3rd video? It was stated at the end of the video that the book burning was a promotion for a haunted house. FFS, guys