Strange Occurrences vs. Rationality

smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Strange Occurrences vs. Rationality

Okay, I've got yet another one. I have a ghost in my apartment. I won't bore you with all the strange things that have happened here. Tonight, though, I was trying to find the remote for my DVD player. I looked over on the bookshelf and there was a remote control. I grabbed it. Unfortunately, it was a remote control from a piece of electronics that I haven't had for years. Why I kept the remote I have no idea, but it was tucked away in a drawer somewhere. There's no reason whatsoever that I'd have taken this thing out of the drawer and placed it on the bookshelf. But there it was. It's also all covered with dust because I haven't used it for years. A number of other things like this have happened here, also.

This is another case where I'd like to know how you all can rationally explain something like this. Please don't resort to telling me my memory sucks or that I'm insane, because it doesn't and I'm not.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Well, if you're human,

 Well, if you're human, your memory does suck.  Studies have proven that over and over and over.  Memory is not a static thing, like a file in a hard drive.  It's a constantly evolving conceptualization of reality that is as much a representation of what we believe about ourselves as what actually happened in objective reality.

To begin with, this piece of electronics that you haven't had for years... you threw it away years ago but didn't throw away the remote.  That's already a strike against you.  You were not methodical in throwing away this gadget, and there's a good guess that you're not OCD about other things, either.  In other words, haphazard stuff happens in your world sometimes.  It's not hard to imagine that remote sitting in an unused part of your bookshelf for a couple of years.  

So what does the evidence say?  There's dust on the remote, and presumably a similar amount of dust on the surrounding books and shelf, right?  So you haven't dusted there in a long time.  You haven't done anything there in a long time.  

But what you're saying is that your memory is so good that you know for certain that you didn't absentmindedly toss that remote onto an unused part of your bookshelf.  Because you remember distinctly all the absentminded stuff you do... even though absentminded means not thinking about it.  You're sure that you have such a keen mental map of your house that you know the location of every item in it at all times, for the past several years.

Because your memory is so good, you're certain that an insubstantial being with intelligence dug your remote out of storage, put it on a shelf and sprinkled dust on it.

Hmm... I'm going with the bad memory theory myself.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


v4ultingbassist
Science Freak
v4ultingbassist's picture
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

 Unfortunately, it was a remote control from a piece of electronics that I haven't had for years.

 

You won't like my answer, but since I typically can't remember where I put the remote the day before, is it really that surprising that you don't remember setting it on the bookshelf years ago?  Or that someone else set it there and forgot about it?  It'd be different if it were all of a sudden on the couch you sit on daily, but it's tucked away on a bookshelf, and since it's collected dust, it's been there a long time and you haven't noticed until now.

 

I don't know what to say other than our rationalization will be that you forgot what you did with it and apparently it's on your bookshelf.  That, or someone could've moved it from the drawer without you knowing. 


drivers1492
Posts: 4
Joined: 2010-03-28
User is offlineOffline
ummmm

dude i got no clue

 

i do have a question tho  since you know you dont have the electronic anymore and no use for said remote i would like to know what you did with it.  is it back in some drawer waiting to rear its evil head some other day or did you throw the damn thing away lol


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hey smarty

 

Is there no chance you came home wankered one night and got that remote out of the drawer while looking for tally-hos or something?

All the odd things that have happened to me have related to the fact I expected one thing and my brain was jarred by the aberration of not seeing what I was visualising I would see.

Again with this you are strongly coming down on the side of woo on the basis of fairly subjective evidence. Why would a ghost be messing around with an old remote, anyway?

Can ghosts even move things? Lumie - can ghosts move things?

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
You've got a ghost in

You've got a ghost in apartment? Some people might consider that romantic, but in my opinion it's better to not be watched in the shower. Sending ghosts away is a favor that a good occultist visiting your apartment might do for you.

Rational explanation, well, that's diffcult. I'm an absent-minded person, sometimes I lose or forget things, because I'm lost in thoughts. If it can be lost, I lose it, even some things that can't be. But what you describe, doesn't happen to me. I find things rather soon after, it only needs to search the same place at least three times before I find what I seek right in front of me. It's not like I would lose anything for long time and then find it somewhere else. So memory is probably not the problem here. Memory doesn't put things on impossible places. I'm pretty sure you would remember finding the long-lost remote control, instead of putting it away somewhere.

It's also true that we permit no bothersome ghosts in our house. Seems like paradox for occult headquarters in this region, but would you trust a man from rodent control who has rodents in his own house? Smiling

Atheistextremist wrote:
Again with this you are strongly coming down on the side of woo on the basis of fairly subjective evidence. Why would a ghost be messing around with an old remote, anyway?

Can ghosts even move things? Lumie - can ghosts move things?

Some ghosts are very interested in physical realm and they want to influence it. They use various methods, they call themselves Jesus and let mediums write down their ramblings. Or they pursue parasitism. Or many other methods, like putting people's things on unusual places. Can you imagine the loneliness of being unseen and ignored? This is how ghost must feel when lost in world of the living.
Some apparently can move physical objects, but in my house it doesn't happen on normal basis. Perhaps a few times but years ago, not really enough to study telekinesis.

The most information I got about telekinetically able ghosts is from the sociologic research of Kyriacos C. Markides. But he recorded on Cyprus testimonies of such a cases of ghostism, that I find hard to believe without another independent work that would support them.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:Hmm... I'm

Hambydammit wrote:

Hmm... I'm going with the bad memory theory myself.

That wasn't allowed.

I'm not sure why I kept the remote, I suppose in case I ever got that item repaired or something and then wouldn't have a remote for it. But it (and perhaps another or two) was in a drawer I seldom ever go into.

The shelf, however, holds records that I play relatively consistently. So not only is the shelf kept clean, but I also use it regularly and would have noticed this remote randomly sitting there month after month: I'd have had to move it out of the way.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
v4ultingbassist

v4ultingbassist wrote:

smartypants wrote:

 Unfortunately, it was a remote control from a piece of electronics that I haven't had for years.

 

You won't like my answer, but since I typically can't remember where I put the remote the day before, is it really that surprising that you don't remember setting it on the bookshelf years ago?  Or that someone else set it there and forgot about it?  It'd be different if it were all of a sudden on the couch you sit on daily, but it's tucked away on a bookshelf, and since it's collected dust, it's been there a long time and you haven't noticed until now.

 

I don't know what to say other than our rationalization will be that you forgot what you did with it and apparently it's on your bookshelf.  That, or someone could've moved it from the drawer without you knowing. 

See above. I also haven't had any houseguests in months because I've been working too much.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
drivers1492 wrote:dude i got

drivers1492 wrote:

dude i got no clue

 

i do have a question tho  since you know you dont have the electronic anymore and no use for said remote i would like to know what you did with it.  is it back in some drawer waiting to rear its evil head some other day or did you throw the damn thing away lol

LOL I know, it's ridiculous. I'm going to confirm I that it doesn't operate anything and throw it away.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: Is

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Is there no chance you came home wankered one night and got that remote out of the drawer while looking for tally-hos or something?

All the odd things that have happened to me have related to the fact I expected one thing and my brain was jarred by the aberration of not seeing what I was visualising I would see.

Again with this you are strongly coming down on the side of woo on the basis of fairly subjective evidence. Why would a ghost be messing around with an old remote, anyway?

Can ghosts even move things? Lumie - can ghosts move things?

 

There'd have been no reason for me to go into this drawer in the first place, wankered or not, much less pull out a remote I don't need and set it on a random shelf.

This ghost has actually moved quite a few things around in my apartment.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:You've got a

Luminon wrote:

You've got a ghost in apartment? Some people might consider that romantic, but in my opinion it's better to not be watched in the shower. Sending ghosts away is a favor that a good occultist visiting your apartment might do for you.

Rational explanation, well, that's diffcult. I'm an absent-minded person, sometimes I lose or forget things, because I'm lost in thoughts. If it can be lost, I lose it, even some things that can't be. But what you describe, doesn't happen to me. I find things rather soon after, it only needs to search the same place at least three times before I find what I seek right in front of me. It's not like I would lose anything for long time and then find it somewhere else. So memory is probably not the problem here. Memory doesn't put things on impossible places. I'm pretty sure you would remember finding the long-lost remote control, instead of putting it away somewhere.

It's also true that we permit no bothersome ghosts in our house. Seems like paradox for occult headquarters in this region, but would you trust a man from rodent control who has rodents in his own house? Smiling

Atheistextremist wrote:
Again with this you are strongly coming down on the side of woo on the basis of fairly subjective evidence. Why would a ghost be messing around with an old remote, anyway?

Can ghosts even move things? Lumie - can ghosts move things?

Some ghosts are very interested in physical realm and they want to influence it. They use various methods, they call themselves Jesus and let mediums write down their ramblings. Or they pursue parasitism. Or many other methods, like putting people's things on unusual places. Can you imagine the loneliness of being unseen and ignored? This is how ghost must feel when lost in world of the living.
Some apparently can move physical objects, but in my house it doesn't happen on normal basis. Perhaps a few times but years ago, not really enough to study telekinesis.

The most information I got about telekinetically able ghosts is from the sociologic research of Kyriacos C. Markides. But he recorded on Cyprus testimonies of such a cases of ghostism, that I find hard to believe without another independent work that would support them.

Well, I don't really mind his occasional mischief, aside from the one thing he did that was somewhat dangerous. It was also kind of annoying because when I first moved here, I was having really bad nightmares, like every other night as compared to the once a year or so I've had them the rest of my life up till then. I now sleep in my bed upside down, that sounds silly, I know, but it did seem to help significantly.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3391
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Well, I

smartypants wrote:

Well, I don't really mind his occasional mischief, aside from the one thing he did that was somewhat dangerous. It was also kind of annoying because when I first moved here, I was having really bad nightmares, like every other night as compared to the once a year or so I've had them the rest of my life up till then. I now sleep in my bed upside down, that sounds silly, I know, but it did seem to help significantly.

 

stories stories stories please!  i love "real" ghost stories!  something a bit juicier than moving an old remote i hope.

btw, as for "sleeping upside down," do you mean sleeping with your head where your feet used to be?  did you get some sort of feng shui advice?

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:That wasn't

 

Quote:
That wasn't allowed.

I'm not sure why I kept the remote, I suppose in case I ever got that item repaired or something and then wouldn't have a remote for it. But it (and perhaps another or two) was in a drawer I seldom ever go into.

The shelf, however, holds records that I play relatively consistently. So not only is the shelf kept clean, but I also use it regularly and would have noticed this remote randomly sitting there month after month: I'd have had to move it out of the way.

So what you're saying is that a remote control magically appeared on a well used shelf, and it was covered with dust.  Hmmm.... I just went into my office and inspected the contents of several of my shelves in well-used areas.  It turns out that when you don't dust regularly, some items build up a substantial coating of dust, even though they're in very close proximity to things that are often used.  

As it turns out, I am an absentminded collector of old remotes.  I have at least a dozen of them.  This happens because I lose remotes almost immediately upon opening new gadgets, and when the gadget eventually breaks, there's at least a 50% chance that the remote for it is in one of its "lost" phases.  Rather than spend twenty minutes looking for a remote to a dead gadget, I just throw the gadget out and let the details sort themselves out later.

The upshot of it all is that I located an old remote after a few minutes of digging.  It was in a bin with other homeless electronic knicknacks, stashed in a closet behind a box of three ring binders.  It's a happy coincidence that it was also thoroughly dusty.  I picked it up as one would normally pick up a remote, walked it over to a bookshelf, and set it down.  Then, examining it in pretty close detail as it sat there, I discovered that dust is pretty sticky stuff.  It didn't even look like I'd ever picked it up.  I guess my hands weren't especially sweaty or greasy, and the dust was well entrenched in all the nooks and crannies.

The point of this little empirical experiment was to decide for myself whether it's feasible that a person could move a remote from an unused location to a used location and still expect to leave a coating of dust indicating months of disuse.  I am certain that it is feasible now.

Which leads me to my next theory, which I bet you haven't even considered:

Sleepwalking.

There.  Put that in your ghost pipe and smoke it Smiling

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

Sleepwalking.

There.  Put that in your ghost pipe and smoke it :

I KNEW someone was going to say this. I have never sleepwalked in my entire life. I'm sorry but I don't buy it that I've started to sleepwalk all of a sudden to do bizarre things around my apartment.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote: have never

 

Quote:
 have never sleepwalked in my entire life.

And you know this how?  You were asleep at the time, after all.  What you mean is that you have no evidence that you have ever walked in your sleep.  Then again, there's a remote sitting on your shelf, so maybe you do have evidence now.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Option 1:  Invisible,

 Option 1:  Invisible, magic, intelligent creature with nothing better to do than pester you by going through your drawers, retrieving dusty remote controls, and placing them on shelves.

Option 2:  You walked in your sleep, fetched a remote you didn't need, and placed it on a shelf.

 

Hmmmm..... survey says... 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:stories stories

iwbiek wrote:

stories stories stories please!  i love "real" ghost stories!  something a bit juicier than moving an old remote i hope.

btw, as for "sleeping upside down," do you mean sleeping with your head where your feet used to be?  did you get some sort of feng shui advice?

 

Yes, exactly. No feng shui, though. I knew it had something to do with where my bed is located, because I fall asleep on the couch in the living room a lot while watching movies. I don't think I've had a single nightmare any of the times I slept on the couch (or, in any case, far, far less), only in my bed in my bedroom.

Okay, here are some others:

One night I fell asleep on the couch and woke up around 4AM or so to discover every burner on my stove going full blast. That was the one that was kind of scary because dangerous. At first I suspected maybe one of the cats had done it, but because of the wide spread placement of the knobs, and the fact that they have to be turned all the way to light the flames, there's just no way they could have done that by accident. And I could have been planning to cook something before I fell asleep, but there were no pots or pans, and I don't think I've ever used all four burners on a stove all at once in my entire life.

I was walking through my kitchen one evening to discover that, out of the blue, a box of stereo cables and speaker wire was sitting right out in the middle of the kitchen floor. I had absolutely no reason to have pulled it out. There was nothing going on with my stereo that I'd have needed another cable. I wouldn't have pulled this big box out of the closet, anyway, I'd just have found the right cable. And even if I did pull out the box, I would have taken it to the living room where the stereo is, not the kitchen.

Out of the blue I discovered the trashcan under my desk filled with water. No spilled glasses or anything with water in it anywhere to be found.

The one that really got me: a beautiful 8X10 color photo I'd taken of an old abandoned one-room schoolhouse (built around the 1890s or whatever according to the plaque above the doors) out in the middle of the wheat fields of Ohio (where my mother grew up) I found sitting conspicuously on top of a box in my bedroom, like "look at me." Because of where it would have been, deep inside a box in a portfolio case, with a lot of other stuff piled on top of it, and therefore the trouble I'd have had to go through to find it, there's no way I could have pulled that photo out without a well-thought out and solid motivation for doing so. In other words, it's extremely unlikely I'd have forgotten doing it. As I've already said, I'm not insane.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Quote:
 have never sleepwalked in my entire life.

And you know this how?  You were asleep at the time, after all.  What you mean is that you have no evidence that you have ever walked in your sleep.  Then again, there's a remote sitting on your shelf, so maybe you do have evidence now.

 

I've lived with other people, parents or roommates, probably about 90% of my life, and never in that entire time has anyone ever seen me sleepwalking. I also have the suspicion that actual chronic sleepwalking is very rare.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Option

Hambydammit wrote:

 Option 1:  Invisible, magic, intelligent creature with nothing better to do than pester you by going through your drawers, retrieving dusty remote controls, and placing them on shelves.

Option 2:  You walked in your sleep, fetched a remote you didn't need, and placed it on a shelf.

 

Hmmmm..... survey says... 

Thanks for the condescending tone, but I'm sorry, but I consider the suggestion that someone who has never been found sleepwalking in 30 years suddenly starts to for no reason whatsoever is every bit as ridiculous as my explanation.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

Hambydammit wrote:

 Option 1:  Invisible, magic, intelligent creature with nothing better to do than pester you by going through your drawers, retrieving dusty remote controls, and placing them on shelves.

Option 2:  You walked in your sleep, fetched a remote you didn't need, and placed it on a shelf.

 

Hmmmm..... survey says... 

Thanks for the condescending tone, but I'm sorry, but I consider the suggestion that someone who has never been found sleepwalking in 30 years suddenly starts to for no reason whatsoever is every bit as ridiculous as my explanation.

 

His overall point is what I brought up in your last thread about supernatural happenings.  You have been assuming the most likely explanation is woo.  Personally, I would think it more likely that you forgot the remote, another human moved it, you sleepwalked, lots of things, before I say, "Ghosts!"

 

This is dead simple.  Put some video cameras up and get a ghost on film.  Even if the ghost is invisible, you'll see the remote moving, or see it appear and disappear, or whatever.  When you are in a situation so easily tested I can't imagine why you leap to 'ghost'.  But we went over this in your thread about prophetic dreams...when confronted with a test to provide a way to falsify your belief in the supernatural you balk and make excuses.  What will it be this time?  Not enough money for cameras?  It happens so infrequently that it cannot be tested?  It would take too much time?

If I thought I was being haunted, I think I would find a way to do some empirical data gathering.  Maybe I'm strange though.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:His overall

mellestad wrote:

His overall point is what I brought up in your last thread about supernatural happenings.  You have been assuming the most likely explanation is woo.  Personally, I would think it more likely that you forgot the remote, another human moved it, you sleepwalked, lots of things, before I say, "Ghosts!"

This is dead simple.  Put some video cameras up and get a ghost on film.  Even if the ghost is invisible, you'll see the remote moving, or see it appear and disappear, or whatever.  When you are in a situation so easily tested I can't imagine why you leap to 'ghost'.  But we went over this in your thread about prophetic dreams...when confronted with a test to provide a way to falsify your belief in the supernatural you balk and make excuses.  What will it be this time?  Not enough money for cameras?  It happens so infrequently that it cannot be tested?  It would take too much time?

If I thought I was being haunted, I think I would find a way to do some empirical data gathering.  Maybe I'm strange though.

So let me get this straight. If I don't want to go out and spend $1000 on a video camera, spend hours of my life night after night recording and reviewing video footage, with no guarantees I'll capture anything, and if I find something strange, post it on YouTube months later just to show something to a few people on a random atheist web forum, that's me "making excuses???"


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3391
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

His overall point is what I brought up in your last thread about supernatural happenings.  You have been assuming the most likely explanation is woo.  Personally, I would think it more likely that you forgot the remote, another human moved it, you sleepwalked, lots of things, before I say, "Ghosts!"

This is dead simple.  Put some video cameras up and get a ghost on film.  Even if the ghost is invisible, you'll see the remote moving, or see it appear and disappear, or whatever.  When you are in a situation so easily tested I can't imagine why you leap to 'ghost'.  But we went over this in your thread about prophetic dreams...when confronted with a test to provide a way to falsify your belief in the supernatural you balk and make excuses.  What will it be this time?  Not enough money for cameras?  It happens so infrequently that it cannot be tested?  It would take too much time?

If I thought I was being haunted, I think I would find a way to do some empirical data gathering.  Maybe I'm strange though.

So let me get this straight. If I don't want to go out and spend $1000 on a video camera, spend hours of my life night after night recording and reviewing video footage, with no guarantees I'll capture anything, and if I find something strange, post it on YouTube months later just to show something to a few people on a random atheist web forum, that's me "making excuses???"

 

yeah, not to mention the intellectual lambasting you'd have to endure from the renowned logicians over at youtube, e.g.:

"fake"

"fuckin fake"

"haha ur queer"

"this vid sux"

"hey fuk u i think its rl.  whn iwas a kid i saw sum strnge shit jus sayin."

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

His overall point is what I brought up in your last thread about supernatural happenings.  You have been assuming the most likely explanation is woo.  Personally, I would think it more likely that you forgot the remote, another human moved it, you sleepwalked, lots of things, before I say, "Ghosts!"

This is dead simple.  Put some video cameras up and get a ghost on film.  Even if the ghost is invisible, you'll see the remote moving, or see it appear and disappear, or whatever.  When you are in a situation so easily tested I can't imagine why you leap to 'ghost'.  But we went over this in your thread about prophetic dreams...when confronted with a test to provide a way to falsify your belief in the supernatural you balk and make excuses.  What will it be this time?  Not enough money for cameras?  It happens so infrequently that it cannot be tested?  It would take too much time?

If I thought I was being haunted, I think I would find a way to do some empirical data gathering.  Maybe I'm strange though.

So let me get this straight. If I don't want to go out and spend $1000 on a video camera, spend hours of my life night after night recording and reviewing video footage, with no guarantees I'll capture anything, and if I find something strange, post it on YouTube months later just to show something to a few people on a random atheist web forum, that's me "making excuses???"

 

When your actual behavior is, "I don't remember putting my remote there...Ghosts!"?  Yes...Yes it is.  You are demonstrating that you want to believe more than you want to find out what is objectively true.

*shrug*

This is your third thread on this stuffs, so it seems obvious you are just searching for something to believe in.  Homeopathy, prophetic dreams, ghosts...it doesn't matter if we show a particular belief to be invalid when you are not willing to change your internal methodology for arriving at these conclusions in the first place.  And on top of it you start a thread then get mad at us when we ask for evidence...like we are just supposed to take your word for it?  If any of us were like that we would probably not be at a board called the "Rational Response Squad" that encourages skepticism and the scientific method as a way to discern fact from fiction.

Some people, like James Randi, have actually made a career out of searching for proof of this kind of thing.  They *are* willing to take the time and energy to investigate and they never find anything besides scams, creaky pipes and willful ignorance.  I'm sorry to sound harsh but the next time you bring up a case for woo, bring more to the table than your belief that it must be so.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:yeah, not to

iwbiek wrote:

yeah, not to mention the intellectual lambasting you'd have to endure from the renowned logicians over at youtube, e.g.:

"fake"

"fuckin fake"

"haha ur queer"

"this vid sux"

"hey fuk u i think its rl.  whn iwas a kid i saw sum strnge shit jus sayin."

 

LMAO! Win.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:So let me

smartypants wrote:
So let me get this straight. If I don't want to go out and spend $1000 on a video camera, spend hours of my life night after night recording and reviewing video footage, with no guarantees I'll capture anything, and if I find something strange, post it on YouTube months later just to show something to a few people on a random atheist web forum, that's me "making excuses???"


Well, no actually.  I would point you towards a $25 webcam and some free motion detection software.  Correctly configured, it will only record when there is something moving in the room.  It should take like two minutes out of your morning to determine if you are really sleepwalking.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:When your

mellestad wrote:

When your actual behavior is, "I don't remember putting my remote there...Ghosts!"?  Yes...Yes it is.  You are demonstrating that you want to believe more than you want to find out what is objectively true.

*shrug*

This is your third thread on this stuffs, so it seems obvious you are just searching for something to believe in.  Homeopathy, prophetic dreams, ghosts...it doesn't matter if we show a particular belief to be invalid when you are not willing to change your internal methodology for arriving at these conclusions in the first place.  And on top of it you start a thread then get mad at us when we ask for evidence...like we are just supposed to take your word for it?  If any of us were like that we would probably not be at a board called the "Rational Response Squad" that encourages skepticism and the scientific method as a way to discern fact from fiction.

Some people, like James Randi, have actually made a career out of searching for proof of this kind of thing.  They *are* willing to take the time and energy to investigate and they never find anything besides scams, creaky pipes and willful ignorance.  I'm sorry to sound harsh but the next time you bring up a case for woo, bring more to the table than your belief that it must be so.

Mad? Who's mad?

Can you think of any better place for me to ask these questions?


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:mellestad

smartypants wrote:

mellestad wrote:

When your actual behavior is, "I don't remember putting my remote there...Ghosts!"?  Yes...Yes it is.  You are demonstrating that you want to believe more than you want to find out what is objectively true.

*shrug*

This is your third thread on this stuffs, so it seems obvious you are just searching for something to believe in.  Homeopathy, prophetic dreams, ghosts...it doesn't matter if we show a particular belief to be invalid when you are not willing to change your internal methodology for arriving at these conclusions in the first place.  And on top of it you start a thread then get mad at us when we ask for evidence...like we are just supposed to take your word for it?  If any of us were like that we would probably not be at a board called the "Rational Response Squad" that encourages skepticism and the scientific method as a way to discern fact from fiction.

Some people, like James Randi, have actually made a career out of searching for proof of this kind of thing.  They *are* willing to take the time and energy to investigate and they never find anything besides scams, creaky pipes and willful ignorance.  I'm sorry to sound harsh but the next time you bring up a case for woo, bring more to the table than your belief that it must be so.

Mad? Who's mad?

Can you think of any better place for me to ask these questions?

 

Fair enough.  And no, I can't, but if you are going to ask here why reject what we say out of hand?  None of the things you have brought up so far are hard, expensive or time consuming to test.  So test them!  I'm really not sure what you are looking for when you ask these questions.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:


Well, no actually.  I would point you towards a $25 webcam and some free motion detection software.  Correctly configured, it will only record when there is something moving in the room.  It should take like two minutes out of your morning to determine if you are really sleepwalking.

Well, I do have a built-in cam on here, so I'll see if I can get motion detection.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote: I'm really

mellestad wrote:
I'm really not sure what you are looking for when you ask these questions.

I'm rarely disappointed by the conversations that result from them, whatever my opinion of the answers.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Answers in

smartypants wrote:

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:


Well, no actually.  I would point you towards a $25 webcam and some free motion detection software.  Correctly configured, it will only record when there is something moving in the room.  It should take like two minutes out of your morning to determine if you are really sleepwalking.

Well, I do have a built-in cam on here, so I'll see if I can get motion detection.

 

OK,here is the sourcforge page for motion detection:

 

http://sourceforge.net/search/?type_of_search=soft&words=motion+detection

 

Senriska looks interesting as it will email you if you it gets a hit.  You could save even more time.  Apart from that, take your pick.  Everything on sourceforge is safe to download as you get the developer's files with the program and anyone can see what is going on.  Granted, one needs some programming experience to read them but even so, they are there for public consumption.

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


geirj
geirj's picture
Posts: 719
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

Hambydammit wrote:

Hmm... I'm going with the bad memory theory myself.

That wasn't allowed.

 

You sound like a theist. It's like saying you want to lose a ton of weight without diet or exercise.

Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.

Why Believe?


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
geirj wrote:You sound like a

geirj wrote:

You sound like a theist. It's like saying you want to lose a ton of weight without diet or exercise.

I've had a hard time deciding where I fit in these forums, to be sure.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think detecting this ghostie is going to be

 

impossible using the normal methods. Passive infrared demands multiple zones be broken at right angles to the detector at a set speed of about 2 metres a second with the target being the source of a local variation to typical slow rise environmental background temperature. A warm body will generate a comparatively sudden electrical signal in a hunk of silicon tantalate. Once this tiny signal breaks a threshold, bingo, it's amplified and we get an NO or an NC in a monitored circuit. But ghosts are cold so a PIR won't work. And if Smarty's housemate Casper is behaving in typical fashion then volumetrics won't work either - we need air pressure changes caused by moving objects or breaches of a fixed perimeter. Ghosts don't open doors so that won't help us.

Ultrasonics? Nuh. Nothing to bounce off and the same with microwaves. They'll need a water-filled body for best effect and that'll be no use with Casper. Same goes for dual technology sensors and range gated doppler radar. Fixed IR beams that can be seen through special goggles will be crap unless we want to check out the awesome glutes on that magnificent welsh hottie from Entrapment and I've never, ever seen those beams used in a real security environment. Installing 500 criss-crossing beams, each with a transmitter and a receiver, power and comms? Not even the U.S. government would be bothered to afford that - especially when the stuff is visible wearing snazzy thermonuclear Bolles.

VMD - well for the most part this stuff relies on variations in the white part of an image based on breaching a certain number of detection tiles in a scene. Perhaps it'll be tile numbers broken, perhaps it'll be direction in which they're broken. There are proprietary systems that use intensifiers. They are cool but even Smarty will look like Alfred Hitchcock's Green Ghost when we run the video playback so no to that stuff, too.  

Glassbreaks? Nuh - unless it's a poltergeist but we won't see the monster itself. Pressure mats? Sorry. Reed switches, vibration sensors, McCulloch loops? Guard dogs? Nope to them all. The best and only way as I see it is to look for objects moving about the place like they did in Betwitched - but no jiggling!

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

impossible using the normal methods. Passive infrared demands multiple zones be broken at right angles to the detector at a set speed of about 2 metres a second with the target being the source of a local variation to typical slow rise environmental background temperature. A warm body will generate a comparatively sudden electrical signal in a hunk of silicon tantalate. Once this tiny signal breaks a threshold, bingo, it's amplified and we get an NO or an NC in a monitored circuit. But ghosts are cold so a PIR won't work. And if Smarty's housemate Casper is behaving in typical fashion then volumetrics won't work either - we need air pressure changes caused by moving objects or breaches of a fixed perimeter. Ghosts don't open doors so that won't help us.

Ultrasonics? Nuh. Nothing to bounce off and the same with microwaves. They'll need a water-filled body for best effect and that'll be no use with Casper. Same goes for dual technology sensors and range gated doppler radar. Fixed IR beams that can be seen through special goggles will be crap unless we want to check out the awesome glutes on that magnificent welsh hottie from Entrapment and I've never, ever seen those beams used in a real security environment. Installing 500 criss-crossing beams, each with a transmitter and a receiver, power and comms? Not even the U.S. government would be bothered to afford that - especially when the stuff is visible wearing snazzy thermonuclear Bolles.

VMD - well for the most part this stuff relies on variations in the white part of an image based on breaching a certain number of detection tiles in a scene. Perhaps it'll be tile numbers broken, perhaps it'll be direction in which they're broken. There are proprietary systems that use intensifiers. They are cool but even Smarty will look like Alfred Hitchcock's Green Ghost when we run the video playback so no to that stuff, too.  

Glassbreaks? Nuh - unless it's a poltergeist but we won't see the monster itself. Pressure mats? Sorry. Reed switches, vibration sensors, McCulloch loops? Guard dogs? Nope to them all. The best and only way as I see it is to look for objects moving about the place like they did in Betwitched - but no jiggling!

 

 

 

 

 

K


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:impossible using the

Quote:
impossible using the normal methods.

Presumably Mr. Haunty picks up the remote control and physically moves it, right?  So no real need for motion detectors or all that crap.  Just a few webcams strategically placed.  When something shows up that wasn't there the previous evening, just look at the relevant webcam.  Even if Mr. Haunty is invisible, the remote is not.  Even if he magically teleports it using Haunty Magic, it's got to end up there in material form sometime.  I would think that video of a remote appearing suddenly would be damn interesting even without a fuzzy image of a guy in a top hat with translucent chains carrying it.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
impossible using the normal methods.

Presumably Mr. Haunty picks up the remote control and physically moves it, right?  So no real need for motion detectors or all that crap.  Just a few webcams strategically placed.  When something shows up that wasn't there the previous evening, just look at the relevant webcam.  Even if Mr. Haunty is invisible, the remote is not.  Even if he magically teleports it using Haunty Magic, it's got to end up there in material form sometime.  I would think that video of a remote appearing suddenly would be damn interesting even without a fuzzy image of a guy in a top hat with translucent chains carrying it.

 

He wears a fedora, not a top hat.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Of course, you do have one

 Of course, you do have one serious problem.  If all you're doing is trying to prove to yourself that Mr. Haunty moves remotes for fun, your own webcam would probably do for evidence.  That is, if you examine the video and there's clear evidence -- a magical mystery glow on the shelf, and then a materializing remote, for instance -- then you're good.  You know your controls were good.  The door was locked, you are not sleepwalking in the video, etc, etc.

But if you try to give that video to anyone else, the first thing they're going to do is think, 'Fraud.'

So, if this is just for you, knock yourself out with a webcam.  But if you want anyone else to take your claim seriously, you're going to need to do rigorous scientific controls, which will certainly get expensive.  Incidentally, this is why most serious scientists don't believe in ghosts.  There's no well-controlled evidence for them.  Only evidence that is either easily manipulated, or evidence that doesn't really point to ghosts, but rather some other known natural phenomenon.

This is one of those things that a lot of conspiracy and paranormal fanboys don't get about science.  If someone were to demonstrate the paranormal in a valid, repeatable scientific experiment, then a peer review journal somewhere would pick it up.  It's just not possible that the entire world is engaged in an attempt to suppress evidence that ghosts exist.  There are scientists in hundreds of countries, each of which has their own political and cultural agenda.  Someone, somewhere would publish the results, and once that happened, the experiment would be repeated all over in an attempt to falsify it or prove it valid.

And in all of recorded scientific history, there's not a single shred of verifiable evidence for the paranormal.  Not a a scrap.

Which is why you probably sleepwalk and don't know it, or simply forgot that you moved the remote, or had a blackout while drinking, or something.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Of

Hambydammit wrote:

 Of course, you do have one serious problem.  If all you're doing is trying to prove to yourself that Mr. Haunty moves remotes for fun, your own webcam would probably do for evidence.  That is, if you examine the video and there's clear evidence -- a magical mystery glow on the shelf, and then a materializing remote, for instance -- then you're good.  You know your controls were good.  The door was locked, you are not sleepwalking in the video, etc, etc.

But if you try to give that video to anyone else, the first thing they're going to do is think, 'Fraud.'

So, if this is just for you, knock yourself out with a webcam.  But if you want anyone else to take your claim seriously, you're going to need to do rigorous scientific controls, which will certainly get expensive.  Incidentally, this is why most serious scientists don't believe in ghosts.  There's no well-controlled evidence for them.  Only evidence that is either easily manipulated, or evidence that doesn't really point to ghosts, but rather some other known natural phenomenon.

This is one of those things that a lot of conspiracy and paranormal fanboys don't get about science.  If someone were to demonstrate the paranormal in a valid, repeatable scientific experiment, then a peer review journal somewhere would pick it up.  It's just not possible that the entire world is engaged in an attempt to suppress evidence that ghosts exist.  There are scientists in hundreds of countries, each of which has their own political and cultural agenda.  Someone, somewhere would publish the results, and once that happened, the experiment would be repeated all over in an attempt to falsify it or prove it valid.

And in all of recorded scientific history, there's not a single shred of verifiable evidence for the paranormal.  Not a a scrap.

Which is why you probably sleepwalk and don't know it, or simply forgot that you moved the remote, or had a blackout while drinking, or something.

All I can think to say is this: evolutionary selection has produced new forms of life a zillion times over the past million years or so. Observing it in actual operation is extremely difficult because it happens randomly and unexpectedly. It's therefore very difficult to test. That doesn't mean we don't accept it. I'll put this in the same category: just because it happens randomly and unexpectedly doesn't mean it isn't happening.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:All I can think to

 

Quote:
All I can think to say is this: evolutionary selection has produced new forms of life a zillion times over the past million years or so. Observing it in actual operation is extremely difficult because it happens randomly and unexpectedly. It's therefore very difficult to test. That doesn't mean we don't accept it. I'll put this in the same category: just because it happens randomly and unexpectedly doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Well, you can put it in any category you want, but if you put the paranormal in the same category as evolution, you're just completely wrong.   You may not know this, but when you say observing evolution in action is extremely difficult, you mean that observing massive speciation events is extremely difficult.  Observing evolution isn't hard at all.  It's kind of hard to avoid if you're in any life science.

On top of this, we have observed speciation.  No, we haven't seen an ape evolve into a man... that's a lot of steps.  But we have seen speciation in fish, insects, bacteria, and other more short-lived species.  

Finally, you should know that while speciation is very interesting to a lot of non-scientists -- I mean hell... it's the explanation for why we're here -- it's far, far from the only aspect of evolutionary theory.  It's one of the things that happens because of evolution.  Literally thousands of other aspects of evolutionary theory are experimentally verified on a daily basis in every industry from cattle farming to pharmaceuticals.

With the paranormal, there isn't even a working theory about what sort of a thing a "paranormal thing" might be.  Please don't mistake internet theories with scientific theories.  There is literally no evidence for the existence of "things" that aren't material and natural, so scientists can't even begin to speculate about what such things might be.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Quote:
All I can think to say is this: evolutionary selection has produced new forms of life a zillion times over the past million years or so. Observing it in actual operation is extremely difficult because it happens randomly and unexpectedly. It's therefore very difficult to test. That doesn't mean we don't accept it. I'll put this in the same category: just because it happens randomly and unexpectedly doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Well, you can put it in any category you want, but if you put the paranormal in the same category as evolution, you're just completely wrong.   You may not know this, but when you say observing evolution in action is extremely difficult, you mean that observing massive speciation events is extremely difficult.  Observing evolution isn't hard at all.  It's kind of hard to avoid if you're in any life science.

You're talking to me as if I'm a creationist, which I am very seriously not. I've read The Origin of Species from cover to cover and will defend evolutionary biology until the day I die. I've studied countless lectures on the topic, but that's not the point at all. You're completely missing the direction of my analogy. My point was that testing these things in the lab depends on unpredictable occurrences in both cases. That is, random chemical reactions resulting in the formation of complex structures of molecules, which I do believe happened at the start of it all. But that's a random occurrence that would be all but impossible to replicate.

Hambydammit wrote:
On top of this, we have observed speciation.  No, we haven't seen an ape evolve into a man... that's a lot of steps.  But we have seen speciation in fish, insects, bacteria, and other more short-lived species.  

Finally, you should know that while speciation is very interesting to a lot of non-scientists -- I mean hell... it's the explanation for why we're here -- it's far, far from the only aspect of evolutionary theory.  It's one of the things that happens because of evolution.  Literally thousands of other aspects of evolutionary theory are experimentally verified on a daily basis in every industry from cattle farming to pharmaceuticals.

Blah blah blah, you're preaching to the choir here.

Hambydammit wrote:
With the paranormal, there isn't even a working theory about what sort of a thing a "paranormal thing" might be.  Please don't mistake internet theories with scientific theories.  There is literally no evidence for the existence of "things" that aren't material and natural, so scientists can't even begin to speculate about what such things might be.

Actually I think scientists CAN speculate on such things, but there's such a stigma on anyone doing so that it will be a very long time before we get any conclusive answers.

 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3716
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
To be honest, I've seen

To be honest, I've seen better evidence for ghosts than for most other paranormal/supernatural claims, so I might be a bit more sympathetic to it (of course, ultimately, I'm open to evidence for anything).

Evolution is not a random and/or unpredictable process though. Evolution is a stochastic process. Natural selection, arguably the most important mechanism, is completely determined. Digging in the past, we can often deduce the probable mutations that allowed certain evolutionary lines to occur as well as the advantages gained by such mutations. Biologists have also been able to accurately predict changes in gene frequencies countless times after introducing new genotypes into populations. 

Observed examples of speciation are, in my opinion, probably some of the best evidence for evolution, but they're not even close to all the strong evidence. You don't have to directly observe it to get evidence for it; you have geographical, fossil, morphological...well, you know the drill. This is something you can't get with ghosts. Due to the nature of the claim, there's no way to tell if a ghost went anywhere and did anything with any reliability unless you record it in a controlled setting.  

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 598
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:To be

butterbattle wrote:

To be honest, I've seen better evidence for ghosts than for most other paranormal/supernatural claims, so I might be a bit more sympathetic to it (of course, ultimately, I'm open to evidence for anything).

Evolution is not a random and/or unpredictable process though. Evolution is a stochastic process. Natural selection, arguably the most important mechanism, is completely determined. Digging in the past, we can often deduce the probable mutations that allowed certain evolutionary lines to occur as well as the advantages gained by such mutations. Biologists have also been able to accurately predict changes in gene frequencies countless times after introducing new genotypes into populations. 

Observed examples of speciation are, in my opinion, probably some of the best evidence for evolution, but they're not even close to all the strong evidence. You don't have to directly observe it to get evidence for it; you have geographical, fossil, morphological...well, you know the drill. This is something you can't get with ghosts. Due to the nature of the claim, there's no way to tell if a ghost went anywhere and did anything with any reliability unless you record it in a controlled setting.  

Yes, of course. But I was speaking more about how the process could have given rise to life at all, at the very beginning.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:You're talking to me

 

Quote:
You're talking to me as if I'm a creationist, which I am very seriously not. I've read The Origin of Species from cover to cover and will defend evolutionary biology until the day I die. I've studied countless lectures on the topic, but that's not the point at all. You're completely missing the direction of my analogy. My point was that testing these things in the lab depends on unpredictable occurrences in both cases. That is, random chemical reactions resulting in the formation of complex structures of molecules, which I do believe happened at the start of it all. But that's a random occurrence that would be all but impossible to replicate.

Ok, this is threatening to get off topic, but I think it's an important thing to explore.  First, and I apologize if I'm being overly pedantic, but evolutionary biology is... you know... a thousand times more advanced and verified today than it was when Origin was published.  

Second, you're making a pretty basic error in describing evolutionary chemistry as "unpredictable."  It's not.  In fact, that's the whole point.  We can make astoundingly accurate predictions of precisely what will happen, down to the atomic level, when various organic chemicals are brought together in certain ways.  That's a lot of the proof of evolution, in fact.  Organic chemicals behave very predictably, and because of this, we can know with virtual certainty that this or that process is what must have happened in this or that situation.

You're correct that with regard to abiogenesis, there's a lot of speculation.  But make no mistake.  EVOLUTION DOESN'T ADDRESS ABIOGENESIS.  Evolution describes a well documented, thoroughly proven process.  The study of abiogenesis is largely speculative at this point, but that's because, as you say, there just isn't a lot of data available, and the number of possible original replicators is staggeringly large.  There are so many possibilities that we may never have enough evidence to determine which one it really was.

But even here, the study of abiogenesis is not comparable to studying the paranormal.  Abiogenesis did happen.  It must have, because here we are talking about it.  It had to have happened with existing elements because... gee.. that's the only choice.  The elements in question combined in predictable ways according to the laws of the universe.  But with the paranormal, what are "things" made of?  How do they function?  How do they interact with the material world?  There's no working theory whatsoever because unlike abiogenesis, there's no reliable evidence whatsoever that such things even exist outside of the fancy of a few brains.

Quote:
Actually I think scientists CAN speculate on such things, but there's such a stigma on anyone doing so that it will be a very long time before we get any conclusive answers.

Scientists can speculate as well as anybody else, but they have absolutely no justification for doing so because there's no evidence on which to speculate.  That's why there's a stigma.  Any scientist who does speculate is doing so in an unscientific manner that would get destroyed in any genuine scientific review process.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
smartypants

smartypants wrote:

Hambydammit wrote:

 Of course, you do have one serious problem.  If all you're doing is trying to prove to yourself that Mr. Haunty moves remotes for fun, your own webcam would probably do for evidence.  That is, if you examine the video and there's clear evidence -- a magical mystery glow on the shelf, and then a materializing remote, for instance -- then you're good.  You know your controls were good.  The door was locked, you are not sleepwalking in the video, etc, etc.

But if you try to give that video to anyone else, the first thing they're going to do is think, 'Fraud.'

So, if this is just for you, knock yourself out with a webcam.  But if you want anyone else to take your claim seriously, you're going to need to do rigorous scientific controls, which will certainly get expensive.  Incidentally, this is why most serious scientists don't believe in ghosts.  There's no well-controlled evidence for them.  Only evidence that is either easily manipulated, or evidence that doesn't really point to ghosts, but rather some other known natural phenomenon.

This is one of those things that a lot of conspiracy and paranormal fanboys don't get about science.  If someone were to demonstrate the paranormal in a valid, repeatable scientific experiment, then a peer review journal somewhere would pick it up.  It's just not possible that the entire world is engaged in an attempt to suppress evidence that ghosts exist.  There are scientists in hundreds of countries, each of which has their own political and cultural agenda.  Someone, somewhere would publish the results, and once that happened, the experiment would be repeated all over in an attempt to falsify it or prove it valid.

And in all of recorded scientific history, there's not a single shred of verifiable evidence for the paranormal.  Not a a scrap.

Which is why you probably sleepwalk and don't know it, or simply forgot that you moved the remote, or had a blackout while drinking, or something.

All I can think to say is this: evolutionary selection has produced new forms of life a zillion times over the past million years or so. Observing it in actual operation is extremely difficult because it happens randomly and unexpectedly. It's therefore very difficult to test. That doesn't mean we don't accept it. I'll put this in the same category: just because it happens randomly and unexpectedly doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Evolution is neither random nor unexpected, but that has already been addressed by previous posts so I won't go into more detail as to why.

For the purposes of scientific study, the actions of the ghost you have described also do not happen randomly and unexpectedly. We can predict that all the actions happen within your house and that they happen with a high enough frequency for you to have observed several during your time living there. This would make it fairly easy to detect in a controlled setting. You could move out and let a group of scientists observe everything that happens in your house for a few years to find evidence of the ghost's actions. It is not neccesary to predict the exact moment or nature of the event the ghost causes, it is only necesary to be observing the area when it occurs.

Perhaps you personally are not willing to give up your house in order to search for ghosts; however, with the large number of people who have claimed to have a haunted house, it seems ridiculous to assume that not one of them has ever been willing to dedicate their building to the detection of ghosts. Many abandoned buildings also could be observed in a controlled setting with little objection.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:Perhaps you

 

Quote:
Perhaps you personally are not willing to give up your house in order to search for ghosts; however, with the large number of people who have claimed to have a haunted house, it seems ridiculous to assume that not one of them has ever been willing to dedicate their building to the detection of ghosts. Many abandoned buildings also could be observed in a controlled setting with little objection.

That's what I've been saying.  Trust me, if scientists ever find a real ghost, two things would happen:

1) The scientist would win the Nobel Prize hands down.  He would most likely be the most famous scientist of the century, too, since he'd have discovered an entire new branch of science.  

2) Whatever house had the real, verifiable ghost in it would instantly be a million dollar cash cow for its owner.

 

And you're telling me it's a conspiracy?  Nope.  Not selling that one to me.  Way too many benefits to finding a real ghost for the entire worldwide scientific community to cover shit up.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce wrote:Perhaps

Whatthedeuce wrote:
Perhaps you personally are not willing to give up your house in order to search for ghosts; however, with the large number of people who have claimed to have a haunted house, it seems ridiculous to assume that not one of them has ever been willing to dedicate their building to the detection of ghosts. Many abandoned buildings also could be observed in a controlled setting with little objection.

 

Well, I am not sure that we even need that much. After all, much of science begins with guesses and anecdotal evidence. Seriously, the search for ideas has to begin somewhere. For example, the pharmaceutical industry has hundreds of people who go into primitive areas to contact tribal shamen to find out what they think may be valid. Only later on do the actual chemists proceed with directed investigations to see what substances merit further investigation.

 

Consider the amateur ghost hunters. I happen to know one guy who has that particular nonsense going on. He spends nights in abandoned buildings with thousands of dollars worth of electronics. Digital cameras (both still and video), infrared sensors, 96 khz digital audio recorders and so on. When he gets back home, he has much other expensive equipment such as computers, 16 band parametric equalizers and whatnot to process his raw data.

 

To date, none of them have come up with even a speculative hit that merits further investigation. Perhaps the right sensor is too expensive or something. Even so, that whole community has several online forums, dozens, if not hundreds of blogs and who knows how many web sites. If anything like a repeatable hit is ever found, the whole community will go nuts over the matter.

 

Then, when whatever it is starts getting time in outside media (which it surely will), at the very least, some scientists will put in as much time over the matter as has been warranted for the “we never went to the moon” idoits.

 

If the supposed hit is not instantly called out for some error, it is only a matter of time before someone with a shred of respectability will show up at the scene with like a hundred thousand bucks worth of equipment, if for no better reason that to take the direct measurements needed to dismiss the matter. If they still can't debunk whatever is going on then, well...

 

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:And you're

Hambydammit wrote:

 

And you're telling me it's a conspiracy?  Nope.  Not selling that one to me.  Way too many benefits to finding a real ghost for the entire worldwide scientific community to cover shit up.

 

I don't think anyone suggested a  conspiracy. To me, it seemed like smartypants was claiming that ghosts haven't been detected  because their actions occur in such a manner that makes them unable to detect in a credible way. The point of my post was to assert that this is not true for at least some events which are allegedly caused by ghosts. Many ghost actions would in fact be very easy to detect and prove if they did actually occur.

 

 

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

Consider the amateur ghost hunters. I happen to know one guy who has that particular nonsense going on. He spends nights in abandoned buildings with thousands of dollars worth of electronics. Digital cameras (both still and video), infrared sensors, 96 khz digital audio recorders and so on. When he gets back home, he has much other expensive equipment such as computers, 16 band parametric equalizers and whatnot to process his raw data.

My information is, that ghosts should not be recorded in infrared spectrum. Instead, the camera or photographic material should have the sensitivity of several octaves (in comparison of visible spectrum) into the ultraviolet spectrum. (at least 4 octaves) Recording ghosts in infrared is based on assumption that all living things radiate heat, which may be a bit premature assumption for a ghost.

I don't know if my information is true, but it would be interesting to know if that's technically possible. It seems to be like photographing microscopic amount of gamma rays in open Earth's environment. At the very least, someone should tell that guy with infrared sensors to probe into ultraviolet spectrum instead.

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Ghosts and goblins are all

Ghosts and goblins are all bs, it is as real as you want it to be. They have had years and years to prove the existence of ghosts along with any supernatural carp, and they have not. I would sooner believe you have a smart rat in your house or alien visitations...or perhaps a terrible memory like me. Maybe you just forgot how bad your memory is.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3391
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:Ghosts and

robj101 wrote:

Ghosts and goblins are all bs, it is as real as you want it to be. They have had years and years to prove the existence of ghosts along with any supernatural carp, and they have not. I would sooner believe you have a smart rat in your house or alien visitations...or perhaps a terrible memory like me. Maybe you just forgot how bad your memory is.

hey man, fuck you!  the supernatural carp is real!  i saw him in my uncle's pond when i was 12!

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:Ghosts and

robj101 wrote:

Ghosts and goblins are all bs, it is as real as you want it to be. They have had years and years to prove the existence of ghosts along with any supernatural carp, and they have not. I would sooner believe you have a smart rat in your house or alien visitations...or perhaps a terrible memory like me. Maybe you just forgot how bad your memory is.

....we had many years? And when the hell the time limit ran out??? Smiling
I suggest you read some books on devic and elemental evolutions in nature. It's one of the most fascinating areas of esotericism!

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.