Serebii Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 While I need evidence to believe something, that doesn't stop me theorising, which is what I've done here. I've been providing possible scientific explanations for paranormal phenomena which differ from the "Hallucination" or "Bullshit" explanations and you took my theorising as me stating its fact and brought up court cases? Scientists theorise and then prove. That's what I do. I'm much more a theoretical person than one who proves things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I don't think people should stick to the way they were raised. I need evidence, and if something has no evidence, then I don't bother with it, I don't see a point. There is an unlimited amount of things that could exist, that we have no evidence for, and so I see no point in seeing it as a plausible possibility. That is not to say that if evidence is revealed I will refuse to believe it. To me evidence is paramount. That is the complete opposite of what I was raised, but it is how I think. ...What I find fantastic is any notion that there are answers beyond the realm of science. The answers are there. You just have to know where to look. I agree on your point about people not sticking to how they were raised, but mostly with regards to religion. Indoctrination should be a crime. People who grow up and have different views to what their parents taught them are just thinking for themselves and this is a good thing. Evidence for stuff like aliens and the paranormal is all great, but I think this sorta stuff is more fun to kinda... speculate on realistically. Meaning to not fully embrace it, but to kind of realistically accept that it could exist. Isn't being unable to prove it doesn't exist the same as proving it does? Just a thought. I'm not lumping myself in the Mulder or Scully camp here, I'm just kinda comfortably inbetween. My skepticism is countered by a kind of schoolboy excitement and optimism for the unexplained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I agree on your point about people not sticking to how they were raised, but mostly with regards to religion. Indoctrination should be a crime. People who grow up and have different views to what their parents taught them are just thinking for themselves and this is a good thing. Evidence for stuff like aliens and the paranormal is all great, but I think this sorta stuff is more fun to kinda... speculate on realistically. Meaning to not fully embrace it, but to kind of realistically accept that it could exist. Isn't being unable to prove it doesn't exist the same as proving it does? Just a thought. I'm not lumping myself in the Mulder or Scully camp here, I'm just kinda comfortably inbetween. My skepticism is countered by a kind of schoolboy excitement and optimism for the unexplained. I'm exactly the same. Just with more scientific explanations for the possibilities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I find it more fun to think of reasons why those things don't exist. And no fun the other way around. Theorising relies on some evidence, or at least a clue or reason, anything. Not just, it could be, so let's theorise. And it's never a theory without evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I'm exactly the same. Just with more scientific explanations for the possibilities Everyone is different. I have a new theory on ghosts, does anyone want to hear it? Oh, great. Experimental government aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Actually, scientifically speaking it is hypothesising. And how would goverment aircraft look like ghosts, and why would it be inside buildings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Actually, scientifically speaking it is hypothesising. And how would goverment aircraft look like ghosts, and why would it be inside buildings? Dude, I have absolutely no idea how it would work realistically. But we're talking about GHOSTS here. They don't work within any rules of realism either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Because they are not real. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I agree on your point about people not sticking to how they were raised, but mostly with regards to religion. Indoctrination should be a crime. People who grow up and have different views to what their parents taught them are just thinking for themselves and this is a good thing. Aren't most things indoctrinated on us? Good and bad? I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a crime. When abused for worse it's obviously not a good result but technically as a kid I was 'indoctrinated' to always look both sides while crossing the road, always say please etc. I won't continue as I feel I'm nit-picking and just being whiny... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Because they are not real. :p Prove it :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Aren't most things indoctrinated on us? Good and bad? I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a crime. When abused for worse it's obviously not a good result but technically as a kid I was 'indoctrinated' to always look both sides while crossing the road, always say please etc. I won't continue as I feel I'm nit-picking and just being whiny... I should have been more specific. I was referring to religious indoctrination there. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Prove it :p It's not anyone's job to prove something doesn't exist. That's not how it works. You prove to me anything doesn't exist, you can't. Therefore anything can't be proven to not exist, everything has that as a reason. If everything has it, then it can't be a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 It's not anyone's job to prove something doesn't exist. That's not how it works. You prove to me anything doesn't exist, you can't. Therefore anything can't be proven to not exist, everything has that as a reason. If everything has it, then it can't be a reason. If you are to make an absolute statement, you need to have evidence to back up your claim, regardless of the contents of the claim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 What do you call a ghost of a paraglider then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 If you are to make an absolute statement, you need to have evidence to back up your claim, regardless of the contents of the claim I think the claim is not "ghosts don't exist", but more "none of the proposed or claimed ghosts exist based on the current evidence". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Thanks Fish. So like everything else there's no evidence for, it's safe to assume they don't exist until proven otherwise, and that my friend, is your job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts