Guys, i talk with ghost last night

[strangelove]

It's not rational, it's arrogant. The only thing that makes any argument correct and sound is the existence of evidence. Seeing as neither side have this at their disposal it is simply much more practical to say "I don't know". Your belief is based entirely on assumptions. As you have said, lack of evidence is not proof of non existence. I must say EvGa I rather enjoy arguments with you, you make me think.

No, the burden of proof is on the ones making assertions and claims. You don't make baseless assertions and expect everyone else to disprove them– that's not how science works. This is called an Argument from Ignorance, and it's extremely poor grounds for making claims. You come empty-handed, you leave empty-handed. The onus is on you to prove the assertion correctly, not everyone else. If you believe that to be arrogant, that's very much your prerogative, but it doesn't take away from the fact that empirical evidence will always trump superfluous postulations.

[NuclearSilo]

Unfortunately, life doesn't work that way.

I can either say "EvGa is an innocent, but I don't have proof for it, therefore he isn't" or say "EvGa is a guilty, but I don't have proof for it, therefore he isn't". Either affirmation are stupid because that's not how we judge things in life. Life is not in black and white, it's not something that you can just answer with yes or no. Life =/= science.
The best answer over all is "I don't know", "maybe" or "?".

As for the evidence, maybe there are a lot but people is too blind to notice it, or maybe there isn't but people try to fake it. Who are you to decide which evidence is real or fake?

[CeLL]

^^hes almost got something.

[Shadow]

"EvGa is a guilty, but I don't have proof for it, therefore he isn't". -- stupid because that's not how we judge things in life.

..this is exactly how we judge things in life. The rational ones, anyway.
Take your example. EvGa wouldn't need to prove his innocence unless there's proof against him. Rumours wouldn't count as proof, neither would a photoshopped picture. This is how it works, and it's pretty damn logical.
Likewise, we don't need to prove that ghosts don't exist unless proof that they exist is presented. Don't expect anyone to take your word as proof. Especially not your word, lol.

As for the evidence, maybe there are a lot but people is too blind to notice it, or maybe there isn't but people try to fake it. Who are you to decide which evidence is real or fake?

We don't need to prove the non-existence of evidence unless you can present evidence that evidence exists.

[NuclearSilo]

EvGa wouldn't need to prove his innocence unless there's proof against him.

Yes, he also wouldn't need to prove his guilt unless there's proof against him too.

We don't need to prove the non-existence of evidence unless you can present evidence that evidence exists.

Of course you don't need to and you are not obliged too. But it doesn't mean you are right, that they can't exist.

[EvGa]

Fug_Dup pretty much summed it up.

It's not rational, it's arrogant. The only thing that makes any argument correct and sound is the existence of evidence. Seeing as neither side have this at their disposal it is simply much more practical to say "I don't know". Your belief is based entirely on assumptions. As you have said, lack of evidence is not proof of non existence. I must say EvGa I rather enjoy arguments with you, you make me think.

As far as we can tell, ghosts/souls/spirits do not exist. When brain function stops "you" stop. Physics does not point to there being ghosts, neurology does not point to there being ghosts, etc. So, what is the bases for claiming ghosts do exist? There is none. Saying "ghosts don't exist" is the logical stance to take.

Like Fug said, "the onus is on you to prove the assertion correctly."

NS - Science attempts to explain the world. So far, nothing points to there being ghosts. I'm not sure I understand your comparison to me being innocent or guilty. I'm guilty btw.

[CeLL]

hes taking an example of things that CAN be proven and using it to justify something that CANT be proven. but he was close to concieving a rational thought. im proud.

[.Banshee]

As I have said, this is an argument that will not move forward. Nothing will be proven or dis-proven and I am simply content to say "I don't know". I'm sure it has crossed your minds that we as a civilization are simply not advanced enough to explain certain phenomena we dub as "supernatural" with logic and science. But in the end, I have to contradict myself and say this is not a question of logic. It's a question of how an individual thinks and approaches problems.

[Shadow]

I'm sure it has crossed your minds that we as a civilization are simply not advanced enough to explain certain phenomena we dub as "supernatural" with logic and science.

We are advanced enough to not dub anything as "supernatural". We (well, the rational ones of us anyway) even understand that there is no such thing as "supernatural" since everything that exists is subject to what we call as "laws of nature", the way that this world works.

I can even explain "ghosts". It's imagination, probably fuelled by ignorance throughout ages (like explaining phenomena like ball lightning as supernatural ghosts).

To summarize: We can't prove or disprove ghosts' existence (mainly because they don't exist) and we have no reason to assume such things exist, but we can explain the reason why such a myth exists.

[*BlackFox]

We can't prove ghost exist nor can we prove it doesn't exist.. lulz

but we can explain the reason why such a myth exists.

Are aliens a myth or real?

[CeLL]

myth for now, speculated by steven hawking as real.

[McLovin1t]

Theoretical probability. Not a myth.
They can be theorized almost flawlessly, so we can make a VALID assumption that they exist.
Theoretically, they exist.

[NuclearSilo]

Time will tell. There is no use to force the belief on someone
Science has been wrong and used to be wrong. This is not gonna be an exception

[EvGa]

Science has been wrong and used to be wrong. This is not gonna be an exception

Good thing science is a self correcting process. It doesn't chain itself to centuries old thinking or wade around in wants and wishes. It deals with cold hard facts.

[NuclearSilo]

Yes, and there's still lots of "update" it needs to do, especially about paranormal study.

[McLovin1t]

like what? honestly, if you believe this is true, it's upsetting.
there is a huge impossibility factor, and you have to come to understand that, im not being mean, im just being realistic.

[.Banshee]

I'm sure it has crossed your minds that we as a civilization are simply not advanced enough to explain certain phenomena we dub as "supernatural" with logic and science.

I can even explain "ghosts". It's imagination, probably fuelled by ignorance throughout ages (like explaining phenomena like ball lightning as supernatural ghosts).

Impossible. You cannot explain the nature of something that hasn't even been confirmed or you yourself, I'm assuming, haven't personally experienced. The best you can do is speculation and that is just what your belief is, pure speculation. "Ghosts do not exist" is a hypothesis not a scientific fact. If I told someone 50 years ago that Pluto is not a planet and presented no evidence, I would have been shot down by every credible scientist. The point of this being that they were not advanced enough to figure this out. It's the same issue with us. Do not claim to know something when you truly do not.

[McLovin1t]

It's not a matter of knowing or not knowing. Theoretic possibility is important, and there are too many flaws in ghosts theoretically to count.
The argument from ignorance sums it up quite well.

[John_Doe]

Wow a topic by NS actually got to 7 pages long.

Yes, and there's still lots of "update" it needs to do, especially about paranormal study.

Look at Mr. Scientist here, your definite working hard then all those scientist out there huh? If you feel you have the knowledge why not update it yourself? Don't know bout you but wasting hundreds of hours on ghost or any paranormal activity is just a waste of time, idk a new energy source or curing cancer/STD seems like a better use of time but that's just me.

[.Banshee]

That's what I've been saying. It's a theoretical possibility that cannot be proven at this present time. I've just been saying that instead of saying they exist or don't exist just say I don't know. Because the honest truth is you really don't know.

[EvGa]

That's what I've been saying. It's a theoretical possibility that cannot be proven at this present time. I've just been saying that instead of saying they exist or don't exist just say I don't know. Because the honest truth is you really don't know.

No it's not.

Yes, and there's still lots of "update" it needs to do, especially about paranormal study.

You don't think that science would have encountered or seen some sort of evidence that pointed towards there being some "other" realm by now if one truly existed?

As far as we can tell, there is no soul, there is no god, there is no spirit realm or metaphysical realm or flying unicorn realm.. etc

[Azilius]

The point of this being that they were not advanced enough to figure this out. It's the same issue with us. Do not claim to know something when you truly do not.

And with this logic, any argument can be countered with, 'No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet'.

A: Pluto is a planet
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet

A: Ghosts don't exist
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet.

A: Spongebob Squarepants isn't real.
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet.

[NuclearSilo]

It's not a matter of knowing or not knowing. Theoretic possibility is important, and there are too many flaws in ghosts theoretically to count.
The argument from ignorance sums it up quite well.

The impossibility or theoretic possibility have been overcome many times. Before people said it's impossible to go faster than light. Now all over the web people talk about it. What's the point, if you already know the answer?
Ok, now explain us why ghosts theory is flaw. Do you actually a proof or you simply assume that?

You don't think that science would have encountered or seen some sort of evidence that pointed towards there being some "other" realm by now if one truly existed?

As far as I can tell, there is no soul, there is no god, there is no spirit realm or metaphysical realm or flying unicorn realm.. etc

No one found any "material" evidence because of the same reason why 2000 years ago, no one knows about the existence of a black hole.

You think that our current technology is advanced enough to get whatever evidence we want, to understand everything in the universe, to be able to detect any invisible elements? I don't think so. Remember we can see an object with the help of photons. If there is an element that doesn't interact with photon, what are you gonna do?

The point of this being that they were not advanced enough to figure this out. It's the same issue with us. Do not claim to know something when you truly do not.

And with this logic, any argument can be countered with, 'No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet'.

A: Pluto is a planet
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet

A: Ghosts don't exist
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet.

A: Spongebob Squarepants isn't real.
B: No, we are not advanced enough to figure it out yet.

Good, now you know your problem. I prefer to hear you answer with that over confirming something you think you are sure about.

[EvGa]

No one found any "material" evidence because of the same reason why 2000 years ago, no one knows about the existence of a black hole.

You think that our current technology is advanced enough to get whatever evidence we want, to understand everything in the universe, to be able to detect any invisible elements? I don't think so. Remember we can see an object with the help of photons. If there is an element that doesn't interact with photon, what are you gonna do?

There are many other ways to detect "things" then by vision. Sure, 200000 million years from now we may discover that we are made binary strings in an alien super computer, but at the moment nothing points to that being the case so positing that is useless. Same as saying ghosts exist... nothing points to this being true so why is it even a consideration to you?

Using your logic, anything is possible, fine. However, believing in everything is ridiculous.

You obviously don't see the illogical failings of your argument so we should probably just stop..

BTW - There is a teapot orbiting Jupiter right now prove me wrong.

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.[1]

Your reasoning is flawed.

[Azilius]

Good, now you know your problem. I prefer to hear you answer with that over confirming something you think you are sure about.

1) no
2)
3) see above post

[NuclearSilo]

Actually, don't expect to find the answer if you think sitting in a lab is enough. Go out and experience haunted house, experience what people experience, inspect reports

Eating glass, eating brick, pushing car with a neck, etc... lots of thing people claimed to be impossible to happen

[TheDrop]

a 7 page thread on if ghosts are real or not. only on SRF

[Azilius]

a 7 page thread on if ghosts are real or not. only on SRF

....
You don't visit other forums do you? Imageboards? /b/? This is kiddy shit compared to other forums..

[EvGa]

R/P Section at bb.com and physicsforums.com.. shit gets real.

[TheDrop]

a 7 page thread on if ghosts are real or not. only on SRF

....
You don't visit other forums do you? Imageboards? /b/? This is kiddy shit compared to other forums..

actually I dont...maybe i should check em out