Thread: Science vs. Your Cracked-out "Theory"

Originally Posted by really

What I am saying is, that IF there was a timer, or a fire or a humid room, the person may not consider a ghost. But there is none of these three proposed reasons anyway, so what else but a ghost?

Perhaps a demon, or maybe a rainbow-coloured pair of pants.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Perhaps a demon, or maybe a rainbow-coloured pair of pants.

What made you think that? Because you want to be a smartass? I doubt you'd seriously believe in either of those. As you have mentioned is important: there needs to be reason for the hypothesis.
Yours has no idea or motivation other than to sound like a prick.

Perhaps A GHOST - Implying the ghost of a daughter who has passed away, on the same date in which these events occur.

Originally Posted by really

Perhaps A GHOST - Implying the ghost of a daughter who has passed away, on the same date in which these events occur.

I don't think the spirits of the dead operate on a 365-day work year. Clearly such a hypothesis is wishful thinking, a yearning for mysticism and adventure.

Originally Posted by thegnome54

I don't think the spirits of the dead operate on a 365-day work year. Clearly such a hypothesis is wishful thinking, a yearning for mysticism and adventure.

What makes you say that? This is one day a year.

Originally Posted by really

What made you think that? Because you want to be a smartass? I doubt you'd seriously believe in either of those. As you have mentioned is important: there needs to be reason for the hypothesis.
Yours has no idea or motivation other than to sound like a prick.

Perhaps A GHOST - Implying the ghost of a daughter who has passed away, on the same date in which these events occur.

Not exactly. That was just a bonus. It doesn't matter if I believe in either of them seriously. Let's imagine that someone does. You ask an important question. "What made you think of that?"

What made you think of a ghost?

Originally Posted by really

What makes you say that? This is one day a year.

My point is, there is no reason for a ghost to reappear on the same date as an event occurred, unless the ghost has a calendar in the netherworld and is factoring in leap years and time zones. It's wishful thinking, because it makes no sense but it sounds like it would be cool.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Not exactly. That was just a bonus. It doesn't matter if I believe in either of them seriously. Let's imagine that someone does. You ask an important question. "What made you think of that?"

What made you think of a ghost?

Have you not been paying attention? There is no other alternative at our level of knowledge!

This can go back to the stupid post you made:

Originally Posted by Mark75

The two examples you list, though strange indeed, are not at all indicative

Originally Posted by thegnome54

My point is, there is no reason for a ghost to reappear on the same date as an event occurred, unless the ghost has a calendar in the netherworld and is factoring in leap years and time zones. It's wishful thinking, because it makes no sense but it sounds like it would be cool.

Yeah, we don't know about spirits and time. That's a good point, and this is how theories develop. Perhaps the spirit connects with the knowledge of those he/she cares about. There could be many things we are unaware of.

Take this for example: Why is it that somebody can perform remote viewing, no matter where, or what time with accuracy? Russell Targ suggests that everything in the universe is connected, as one. So what can this say about a ghost? A ghost could be connected to their family and their memories.

Originally Posted by really

Take this for example: Why is it that somebody can perform remote viewing, no matter where, or what time with accuracy?

Never use another unproven conclusion as evidence. It just won't get you anywhere.

Originally Posted by thegnome54

Never use another unproven conclusion as evidence. It just won't get you anywhere.

Did I say it was unproven? It has been proved.

Edit: My mistake, replace 'suggests' with 'states'.

Originally Posted by really

Why is it that somebody can perform remote viewing, no matter where, or what time with accuracy? Russell Targ states that everything in the universe is connected, as one.

Originally Posted by really

Did I say it was unproven? It has been proved.

Remote viewing has never been verified under strict laboratory conditions.

Haha, you guys go around and around with these debates. It doesn't get anybody anywhere. It's incredibly difficult to change someone's beliefs just like that, especially over the internet.

Now that that's been said, continue, I'm enjoying this.

Originally Posted by CoLd BlooDed

Haha, you guys go around and around with these debates. It doesn't get anybody anywhere. It's incredibly difficult to change someone's beliefs just like that, especially over the internet.

Now that that's been said, continue, I'm enjoying this.

Yeah... I'm not

Getting tired going in circles. It's not even an argument of beliefs... it's... forget it, I'll just repeat myself again using slightly different words, and go in another circle.

My main point is constantly being avoided. The title of the topic is "Science vs. Your Cracked-out Theory" not "Science vs. Your Cracked-out Conclusion". (I'll soon probably get a response telling me they mean the same thing, and then the debate will loop again)

Originally Posted by thegnome54

My point is, there is no reason for a ghost to reappear on the same date as an event occurred, unless the ghost has a calendar in the netherworld and is factoring in leap years and time zones. It's wishful thinking, because it makes no sense but it sounds like it would be cool.

Well actually, our concept of time is largely focused in our revolution around the sun. It is entirely possible to be on a slightly different temporal axis around the sun; one which intersects our own around the same point that the subject was sent slightly off course (death).

Originally Posted by really

Have you not been paying attention? There is no other alternative at our level of knowledge!

Haven't you been paying attention? I just gave you two alternatives.

Yes it is getting quite annoying.

Originally Posted by thegnome54

Remote viewing has never been verified under strict laboratory conditions.

It doesn't matter. This guy didn't need a laboratory anyway.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Haven't you been paying attention? I just gave you two alternatives.

Did I not already reply to those alternatives? They were immature, and, well let me try again:

Originally Posted by Mark75

The two examples you list, though strange indeed, are not at all indicative... unless you'd like to provide some reasons to support your conclusion.

There is no reason for a demon or rainbow pants. So get over it. There is more reason for a ghost - simply because it can relate to a spirit from the deceased.

Stop trying to be difficult, you're being silly.

Originally Posted by really

There is no reason for a demon or rainbow pants. So get over it. There is more reason for a ghost - simply because it can relate to a spirit from the deceased.

But why is there less reason than a spirit of the deceased? The spirit can move things because they have that ability. The pants are magic, they can manipulate physical objects as well.

Yeah, we don't know about magic rainbow-coloured pairs of pants. Perhaps the magic rainbow-coloured pairs of pants connects with the knowledge of those he/she cares about. There could be many things we are unaware of.

Originally Posted by Mark75

But why is there less reason than a spirit of the deceased? The spirit can move things because they have that ability. The pants are magic, they can manipulate physical objects as well.

There is less reason because the 'rainbow colored pants' came from somebody like you, who wasn't even there a the time, who didn't even experience the things we are talking about, who doesn't have a serious respectful attitude; someone who is running out of steam and posting stupid crap again.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Yeah, we don't know about magic rainbow-coloured pairs of pants. Perhaps the magic rainbow-coloured pairs of pants connects with the knowledge of those he/she cares about. There could be many things we are unaware of.

Be careful what you're saying, Mark75. You've basically taken what I have said and put it into a context that doesn't fit. I am well aware there is no reason to predict 'colored' pants or 'demons'. And there is no 'we', either.

Originally Posted by really

There is less reason because the 'rainbow colored pants' came from somebody like you, who wasn't even there a the time, who didn't even experience the things we are talking about, who doesn't have a serious respectful attitude; someone who is running out of steam and posting stupid crap again.

Very well. One time I was at home and heard a noise that I could not explain. I believe it to be the work of a magic rainbow-coloured pair of pants.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Very well. One time I was at home and heard a noise that I could not explain. I believe it to be the work of a magic rainbow-coloured pair of pants.

That is irrelevant to my scenario.



And you know what? I’m not going to say much more than this:

Mark75, check out this post:

Originally Posted by Mark75

Perhaps a demon, or maybe a rainbow-coloured pair of pants.

Then check out your first post.

Then check out the title of this thread.

Wake up for once in a while, idiot.

Originally Posted by really

That is irrelevant to my scenario.

Your scenario is irrelevant to my thread. Now tell me why my conclusion is any more unfounded than that of ghosts.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Your scenario is irrelevant to my thread. Now tell me why my conclusion is any more unfounded than that of ghosts.

Magic pants: Millions of eye-witness accounts past and present. Thousands of different religions. Ongoing paranormal investigation to try and prove their existence. Everything spiritual... wait something doesn't sound right, oh yeah... that's ghosts I was talking about!

Let me try again.

Magic pants: Hm... nope can't find any possible foundation except for one eye-witness account, possibly with his own religion. Sorry!

Don't even make a post about evidence now, you asked for foundation, and to say ghosts do not have a better foundation (not necessarily good, but much better) than magic pants will just be another ignorant response.

There's a reason we have paranormal investigators that try and prove the existence of magic pants, wait, I meant ghosts.

Why cant those damn paranormal investigators ever get shit on video camera, or anyone in that case? they're always like "wtf was that", "there's something in here OMG" but never see shit... its all bullshit to me. ooooo it must be bacause the ghost wont appear if a camera is present.

I think anyone that believes in ghosts, just wants them to exist. Anyone who has seen one, has some sort of mental problem lmao

"Shit" is on camera everywhere. It really doesn't matter what is captured today, because most of it, if not all of it is fake. If anything legit does comes up, it'll just be considered fake anyway.

Same with pictures. Either the film was exposed, or the light come the camera reflection bounced off objects in an awkward way, etc. Again, if any picture was legit, it would be considered fake.

But you're right, 90% of the people who claim ghost stories just want it to be real, want attention, etc. But I can't be as bold as to say that 100% of people who claim belief in ghosts do.

Originally Posted by blade5x

Magic pants: Millions of eye-witness accounts past and present. Thousands of different religions. Ongoing paranormal investigation to try and prove their existence. Everything spiritual... wait something doesn't sound right, oh yeah... that's ghosts I was talking about!

Let me try again.

Magic pants: Hm... nope can't find any possible foundation except for one eye-witness account, possibly with his own religion. Sorry!

Don't even make a post about evidence now, you asked for foundation, and to say ghosts do not have a better foundation (not necessarily good, but much better) than magic pants will just be another ignorant response.

There's a reason we have paranormal investigators that try and prove the existence of magic pants, wait, I meant ghosts.

Actually, that's no basis at all. That whole post was just a tl;dr appeal to popularity. You haven't mentioned at all why a ghost is more logical than the magic rainbow-coloured pants. After all, I could just as easily say that it is widely believed that ghosts do not exist. Heck, if I wanted I could throw in an appeal to authority for good measure and get some quotes from respected scientists claiming that ghosts don't exist. But all that is worth nothing. It's just rhetoric. Imagine that there were a lot of people who claimed to have seen the magic rainbow-coloured pants, captured it on video, felt its presence, etc. Would that make the idea any more logical? What you're saying is that because more people believe in ghosts, that the idea of ghosts is more believable. Thinking like that is what holds back people from exposing logical, yet uncommonly believed ideas, such as the Earth being spherical, for example. It's sad to think that with all this scientific progress we've made that we still have close-minded people who can't think for themselves like you, who instead just pick the most popular idea without even thinking about it.

Now, I know you two have trouble reading, so if you read even one sentence in this post, let it be this next one:

Using logic (instead of rhetoric), demonstrate why it is that the presence of a spirit of a dead person is a more reasonable explanation than that of magic rainbow-coloured pants.

Do not post again without properly responding to that challenge.