Spiritual presences - Request for theist input

TakeCashToChurch
TakeCashToChurch's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2006-12-19
User is offlineOffline
Spiritual presences - Request for theist input

I am an amateur ghost hunter. Only I don't like that term, I prefer spiritual conversation, as hunting them doesn't equate to the attack factor of that word. we seek them out, and converse with them.

Yeah, I know, you think I'm crazy. I do too. The thing is, there are literally spirits all around us, particularly concentrated in areas of mass tragic death, like the battlefields that litter my area. I get them on tape. Digital recorder, actually. I was a skeptic the first time i went until I reviewed the audio. We were walking up a slave built staircase, and the style of the staircase changed halfway up it. we stopped a sec, and said "Oh, look this is where they must have got pissed and killed the slaves and got new one's" right after, and I mean RIGHT after, there is a supernatural voice on the tape that says "we call them blacks". Interested, I looked it up, and sure enough, this particular area was black friendly when it came to slaves. Guys, the voice was there saying that, and that wasn't said that night, and no one else was around. Later on in the tape, another voice caught my interest. We were in "prostitute alley" and I made another joke. The whole thing was a joke to me while I was there. I said "Did the ghosts just fuck here, or did they at least go somewhere else". Again, after that, another supernatural voice says "ghosts don't fuck". I didn't even realize that they only fucked when they were alive. duh.

Since then, I am a believer, as I have actually heard hundreds and hundreds of these voices by now. To describe them, I would have to say they sound fast, like they're moving with effort. Almost like hearing someone talking in a car driving by.

So, I'd like for a theist to explain this. Heaven/hell final judgment? What about these spirits? How do you explain that?

Every step I took in faith betrayed me

-Sarah McLachlan


TakeCashToChurch
TakeCashToChurch's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2006-12-19
User is offlineOffline
Ok, I thought it would be

Ok, I thought it would be best to back up what I said, as my spiritual existance question is not based on an assertion. Here is a link to the audio. Each EVP expeirirnce is triplicated, so it's 3 times you'll hear each one instance. The text is below, so you can follow along. Atheist input would be nice as well.

Audio:

http://www.zshare.net/audio/081806evp-mp3.html

2.56MB 

Text:

Here is what you will here on the audio (this is copied from the text file):

8-18-06 Harpers Ferry Ghost Hunt E.V.P.

01) "Look at me" (male) - We were talking about John Brown & his dog at the Coffee Mill.

02) "Oh Yeah" (male) - Standing by the lightpost behind Whitehall Tavern.

03) "I call them 'Blacks'" (male - English accent) - At stairs.

04) "I want to be free" (female) - During discussion of orb pic in Dana's camera, afer under porch investigation next door to Whitehall Tavern.

05) "Tracy" (female) - Green Door audio as apparition picture was taken. Amy's vidcam would not focus.

06) "Mary" (male) - Audio obtained by porch w/ spiders on Main Street.

07) "Ghosts don't fuck." - Back alley behind old blacksmith area (rumored to be a protitute area...)

08) (Chris) "Rule is when we vacate the premises, you vacate us..." / "Alright" (female) - Walking up Main street toward stone steps.

09) "It's been so long, come sing along... whooo" (group: male & female) - Obtained by Harper House basement / worker's area.

10) "Get out" (whispered) - Walking back down hill next to St. Peter's, during discussion of current safety regarding "seen" vs. "unseen", given the amount and type of people present for festivities.

11) "Oh...(singing) / "Did you really get to see us?" (female) - Harper House

12) "Supposing in ghosts" (female) / "The people are free ha haaaaaa" (female) - Corner of Coffee Mill & Hog Alley.

13) "Guilty" (male) - Original site of John Brown's fort.

14) "Get Out" (male - gruff voice) - original site of John Brown's fort.

 

Remember guys, it was JUST us. It was a creepy kind of alone this particular evening.

 

Every step I took in faith betrayed me

-Sarah McLachlan


Krehlic
Silver Member
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
TakeCashToChurch

TakeCashToChurch wrote:
Yeah, I know, you think I'm crazy.

...yes.

 

Most of the voices didn't sound supernatural at all.  The voices that were most clear sounded much too modern in their accent.  They all just sound like poor recordings of people... nothing special. I've seen these ghost hunters on TV using EVP(?) and the most they got was a little bit of noise that sounds kind of like a word.

 ...maybe post more of the recordings and not just the instances by themselves?

 

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Pikachu
Pikachu's picture
Posts: 181
Joined: 2006-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Say S is a supernatural

[error]


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
Hey, wikipedia, what do you

Hey, wikipedia, what do you thinK?

~~~

Electronic voice phenomena (EVP) are anomalous voice or voice-like sounds captured on a variety of recorded media.[1][2] Typically they are brief, the length of a word or short phrase, though longer examples are not unknown.[3] As with other paranormal phenomena, EVP and the principles behind it are disputed.[4] and attempts to replicate it under laboratory conditions have so far been unsuccessful. Results of various EVP experiments have been published, but no literature supporting the phenomena has appeared in mainstream peer review scientific journals.[5]

 


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I personally would request

I personally would request EVP's be added to Irrational Precepts.


TakeCashToChurch
TakeCashToChurch's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2006-12-19
User is offlineOffline
I'm glad I checked back on

I'm glad I checked back on this.

I'd like to clarify that I am an absolute atheist, and have been since I was a child.  That is why my experiences with EVP's have messed me up a little.  I know, it sounds absolutely nuts, but I don't do well with the unexplainable, hence my lack of faithful beliefs.

 But the sounds, brief and in passing, were there.  And they have been for quite some time.  I haven't been out with the ghost chasers in about a year, because I simply cannot deal.  I was cleaning out the Subaru to sell it, and came across a tag from the Ghost Club, and remembered I posed this question a while back here. 

 There's no explanation for the EVP's and other happenings - and no way to verify it or disprove it.  It's so weird to me, and honestly, it's frightening.  I don't like things that cannot be proven or disproven.

So I have to axe this, a question presented to all of you logical and rational people:

 What do you believe happens when you die?

I always thought that was just it.  You die.  But lately, I'm begining to wonder some things, not religious things, like pearly gates, judgement, and heaven/hell, but different things like do all of your senses cease immediately? 

Every step I took in faith betrayed me

-Sarah McLachlan


richard955
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Hi. Unfortunately the file

Hi. Unfortunately the file expired and I couldn't download and listen to it. But I'll comment on your questions.

    I think the brain can be very easily fooled and this is why we need many proper experiments in order to establish something (a.k.a science).

So, as brain science shows that "We are our brains" and we found no substance that survives the death and decomposition of the brain, it's clear that there is just nothingness after death.

 For the 'ghost' to hear you speak it needs to detect the vibration of air molecules. In order to speak it has to make air molecules vibrate, certainly if the voice is recorded. So the 'ghost' is made from a substance which can be acted upon by air and act upon air this should make it easily detectable by experiment and yet it remains undetected by any scientific means. That is why I think there are no such 'ghosts'.

 

Cheers,

Richard 

 

A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics.


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
I'm wondering, what could

I'm wondering, what could make a voice "supernatural"? How did you know it was "supernatural", and what does that mean?

It's only the fairy tales they believe.


vexed
vexed's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-06-03
User is offlineOffline
TakeCashToChurch wrote:I

TakeCashToChurch wrote:
I am an amateur ghost hunter.

Ghost hunting is woo, yes I do find the idea of thinking that spirits are around 'talking to you' is complete insanity.

ETA: edited content

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts


Nero
Rational VIP!
Nero's picture
Posts: 1142
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Ghost hunter and atheist are

Ghost hunter and atheist are not terms that go in the same column when describing someone.  Either accept reality and be an atheist, or see wonder and magic in the world and look for nonexistant ghosts.

"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Guys, back off this guys

Guys, back off this guys case.  He is an atheist - he doesn't believe in God, just like you.  However, he has experienced and seen things he cannot explain without delving into the spiritual world.  If you can sufficiantly explain these things away, go ahead.  But if you cannot, open yourself to the possibility that there is more than there appears to be.

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
xamination wrote: Guys,

xamination wrote:
Guys, back off this guys case. He is an atheist - he doesn't believe in God, just like you. However, he has experienced and seen things he cannot explain without delving into the spiritual world. If you can sufficiantly explain these things away, go ahead. But if you cannot, open yourself to the possibility that there is more than there appears to be.

Sorry Xam,

The arguments often presented for ghosts are similar to ones presented for god and I just don't buy it. Just because 'unexplained' things happen does not mean they automatically get attributed to the supernatural or spiritual. Lack of explanation does not mean "god did it" or "ghosts did it", it simply means the reasons are not immediately evident.

Throughout history people have tried to attribute the 'unexplained' to something other worldly and consistently science has been able to step in and answer most 'unexplained' claims.


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Hey, could you reupload that

Hey, could you reupload that file?


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I'd much rather have a

I'd much rather have a world full of ghost hunters than a world full of Christians or Muslims.

I think all three are kind of wacky, but so far as I know, there's no dogma of killing heretics in ghost hunting.   The wackiness of ghost hunting is that it avoids the scientific method, not that it is a dangerous belief in dogma.  I suspect that until we get that peer-reviewed journal, we can just write it off as bad science, and nobody will consider making legislation based on what some ghost hunters tell us.

If anything, ghost hunters are just misinformed about the existence of the supernatural.  Are they more likely to be swayed by religious preaching because of it?  I dunno.  Maybe so.  But, I'm sure glad when anyone's an atheist.  Makes my life easier.

 

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

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


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Sorry Xam, The

Quote:

Sorry Xam,

The arguments often presented for ghosts are similar to ones presented for god and I just don't buy it. Just because 'unexplained' things happen does not mean they automatically get attributed to the supernatural or spiritual. Lack of explanation does not mean "god did it" or "ghosts did it", it simply means the reasons are not immediately evident.

Throughout history people have tried to attribute the 'unexplained' to something other worldly and consistently science has been able to step in and answer most 'unexplained' claims.

It seems to me that you are closing yourself to a lot of what could be in the universe.  The simple fact is that we do not truly know what happens to a persons conciousness when a person dies.  Sure, there probably is some explaination for these events. But until you actually get one, do not throw away these events immediatly.

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
xamination wrote: It seems

xamination wrote:

It seems to me that you are closing yourself to a lot of what could be in the universe. The simple fact is that we do not truly know what happens to a persons conciousness when a person dies. Sure, there probably is some explaination for these events. But until you actually get one, do not throw away these events immediatly.

Because we do not know the immediate explanation for something DOES NOT mean we make up one.

An unexplained event DOES NOT automatically become 'spiritual' or 'magic', it remains exactly that, UNEXPLAINED


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Alrite, we don't know the

Alrite, we don't know the answer.  He has an idea.  You ridicule it, yet offer no other explaination, nor disprove his assertion. 

...I vaguely remember having a similar conversation with you awhile back. 

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
xamination wrote: Alrite,

xamination wrote:

Alrite, we don't know the answer. He has an idea. You ridicule it, yet offer no other explaination, nor disprove his assertion.

...I vaguely remember having a similar conversation with you awhile back.

Ummm, I don't believe I ridiculed anything. Show where I have done that in the three posts I have made here.

I do not have to disprove what has not been proven. Simply plugging in an answer where there are still too many unknown factors does not make him right. I would need a lot more facts about the recordings the building and many other things surrounding these events in order to even to begin to investigate this.

I will not just plug 'spirits' in as placebo explanation because in all reality that would be closing my mind off to finding the real answer.

 I am going to continue to live in the natural world, reality as I know it.


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
...Dang, that wasn't you,

...Dang, that wasn't you, was it?Embarassed  My bad.

Still, I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't dismiss his beliefs so quickly.  I'm not saying you should believe in ghosts or spirits or whatever, just that he could be correct.

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Yeah, that was me that said

Yeah, that was me that said it was wacky.

I do think it's wacky, but I'm not just dismissing it out of hand because it sounds wacky.  

1) There's no science behind it that I've ever seen.  Not only that, when science has attempted to replicate any of it, it doesn't happen.  This leads me to believe it's either a hoax or bad science.

2) It involves the same problem as theism in the sense that it presumes to know an answer in spite of the evidence against it.   In this case, there is exactly zero data corroborating human consciousness after death.  Zero.  Furthermore, a ghost would have to be something, and science has never encountered anything, matter or energy, that seems capable of intelligence removed from a brain.

3) Most of the ghost-hunters I've heard or read about make up things.  You ask them how a ghost communicates, and they'll invent a term like "quasi-language resonance capabilities" or some such nonsense that is just big words to say "because they can, that's why!"

*Note: I just made that term up because I couldn't think of any of the made up terms I've heard before.  I wouldn't bother googling it.

Having said that, I'm still thrilled to have anyone and everyone on board if they're an atheist.  I don't insist everyone be completely rational, or agree with me on everything.  And I still would rather have 3 billion people hunting around with ectoplasm detectors than teaching people not to use condoms or to fly planes into buildings.

 

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

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


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
xamination wrote: ...Dang,

xamination wrote:

...Dang, that wasn't you, was it?Embarassed  My bad.

Still, I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't dismiss his beliefs so quickly.  I'm not saying you should believe in ghosts or spirits or whatever, just that he could be correct.

Most of the responses to the OP have been asking for more information, not ridiculing him, and so far, he hasn't done anything to clarify. Saying that he heard a "supernatural" voice is meaningless to me, and I want to know what he means. Until he clarifies, yes, his claims are ridiculous because they are meaningless.

It's only the fairy tales they believe.


xamination
xamination's picture
Posts: 420
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Quote: xamination wrote:

Quote:
xamination wrote:

...Dang, that wasn't you, was it?Embarassed  My bad.

Still, I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't dismiss his beliefs so quickly.  I'm not saying you should believe in ghosts or spirits or whatever, just that he could be correct.

Most of the responses to the OP have been asking for more information, not ridiculing him, and so far, he hasn't done anything to clarify. Saying that he heard a "supernatural" voice is meaningless to me, and I want to know what he means. Until he clarifies, yes, his claims are ridiculous because they are meaningless.

Can you come up with a sufficiant answer?  I'm all ears.  

I hope that when the world comes to an end I can breathe a sigh of relief, because there will be so much to look forward to.


Nero
Rational VIP!
Nero's picture
Posts: 1142
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
First, I stated that one

First, I stated that one cannot be a "ghosthunter" and an atheist.  The two are mutually exclusive.  If you are looking for proof of Platonic dualism, then you are subscribing to a belief in two realms, material and ephemeral.  We're in the material and have no proof of anything else.

Second, humans try to make faces out of watermarks and clouds.  We also try to hear words from something that isn't capable of speaking (ie. that damned dog that "says" I love you.)  This fellow is taking what is likely a natural occurance, misinterpretting what is actually present, and then claiming contact with the ephemeral.

So, if I appear a little snide when I respond to him, it is because I would do the same to a skryer.   Don't claim to be rational and then make heinously irrational claims.

"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer


Cernunnos
Cernunnos's picture
Posts: 146
Joined: 2007-07-04
User is offlineOffline
There's also the fact that

There's also the fact that he called for theists - when you know your claim is asinine side with the self professed advocates for the authenticity of faith.

I didn't hear the sounds but I'm glad he told us how to interpret them...perhaps they don't 'speak' for themselves Eye-wink

 

 

 

I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind.


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
xamination

xamination wrote:
Quote:
xamination wrote:

...Dang, that wasn't you, was it?Embarassed  My bad.

Still, I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't dismiss his beliefs so quickly.  I'm not saying you should believe in ghosts or spirits or whatever, just that he could be correct.

Most of the responses to the OP have been asking for more information, not ridiculing him, and so far, he hasn't done anything to clarify. Saying that he heard a "supernatural" voice is meaningless to me, and I want to know what he means. Until he clarifies, yes, his claims are ridiculous because they are meaningless.

Can you come up with a sufficiant answer?  I'm all ears.  

A sufficient answer to what? He hasn't even clarified the point I asked about.

It's only the fairy tales they believe.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: First, I stated that

Quote:
First, I stated that one cannot be a "ghosthunter" and an atheist.

I really don't like adding to the definition of atheism.

'Theism' refers to belief in a deity.  A deity is but one incarnation of things that could be termed supernatural.  There are energies that are claimed to be supernatural.  Self proclaimed psychics often attribute their abilities to supernatural energy.  This belief could exist quite independent of the belief in a deity.  

Naturalism is the term for the ruling out of anything supernatural.  Atheism and naturalism are not dependent on one another.  Someone could believe in a natural deity (like wavefreak, for instance, who insists on being called a theist even though he rejects the supernatural!)

 Your point is well taken that supernaturalism paves the way for god belief, and gives quarter to those who do believe, even if only implicitly.  But -- it is not mutually exclusive with atheism.

 

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

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


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: (like

Hambydammit wrote:

(like wavefreak, for instance, who insists on being called a theist even though he rejects the supernatural!)

 

Heh heh.

 If it exists, how can it not be natural? Supernatural is a term for the intellectually lazy. I suppose at one time it was easy to think of things as outside of the natural realm, but this to me is unnecessary mental gymnastics. "If it exists it is natural" almost seems tautological to me. Unexplained is much better IMOHO. It points to the key issue of a particular phenomon. We can't explain it but it still exists.  The question that remains uanswered is can we explain everything that can be experienced with empiricism and science? I don't believe this to be true.


richard955
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: The

wavefreak wrote:

The question that remains uanswered is can we explain everything that can be experienced with empiricism and science? I don't believe this to be true.

Almost everything humans and all other animals do is based on empiricism. And science has worked a way to incrementally acquire more and better knowledge about the world. Except, hope of an afterlife, I see no reason to doubt the answer to your question.

Science

A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics.


ofgreatherheights
Theist
Posts: 4
Joined: 2007-08-15
User is offlineOffline
I've heard that those souls

I've heard that those souls either have chosen to stay to tie loose ends for their unfinished business. Or they have really tortorous death, that they have infinitely bonded with their death site.

  http://www.jerusalemexport.com offers a variety of religious hand crafted products from nativity sets to holy rosaries.


Cernunnos
Cernunnos's picture
Posts: 146
Joined: 2007-07-04
User is offlineOffline
Quote: The question that

Quote:
The question that remains uanswered is can we explain everything that can be experienced with empiricism and science? I don't believe this to be true.

The theroies describing particles (and forces) are incredibly accurate. New empirical evidence will never replace these but deepen them. We have now delved so deep into explaining the nature of the fundamental structures of the universe that any new understanding will not have the required scope to allow for the properties that are sought in a God.

As an example that most can relate to: think of how you calculate a resultant velocity. Imagine walking up an escalator instead of just standing on it.

 Vr = Va + Vb,      

where Vr is the resultant velocity and Va and Vb are the velocities of the escalator and walking speed.

This is the Newton or Galilean model and what is essentially our everyday model.

Now many say Einstein proved Newton wrong...this is his equation:

Vr = (Va + Vb) / (1 + Va/c^2)

where c^2 is the speed of light squared.

As c^2 is such a huge number note that the equation is effectively the same as the first for any velocities we can relate to directly. The original theory is still true and will remain so. Also note:

Va and/or Vb = c = Vr

ie the speed of light is the same from any frame of reference! 

The theory of the Standard Model is quantitative and has produced accurate predictions and essentially all nature can be described by this model (the maths gets so complex moving to bigger stuff that it is easier to use the existing 'generalized' models). This theory is probably the most quantitatively successful theory ever. In some cases the uncertainty is in the realm of parts per billion (in physics you must always state your error range). This model will not be changed but merely deepened - like how Einstein deepened the Newton model.

If there is a natural God that has a causal effect in the the way humans see the world he must be described in the formulas of the standard model! These do involve very complex mathematics - good luck hunting! If he is not in these formulas then he can not play a role in our macro-world or be such a feeble force that he would be insignificant in our world.

If you want your God to be natural become a pantheist and don't expect it to break the theories of physics.

 

 

 

I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Cernunnos wrote:  We have

Cernunnos wrote:

 We have now delved so deep into explaining the nature of the fundamental structures of the universe that any new understanding will not have the required scope to allow for the properties that are sought in a God.

 

Hubris. No matter how deep we go, we don't have any way of knowing where the bottom is. 

 

Quote:
 

If you want your God to be natural become a pantheist and don't expect it to break the theories of physics. 

My god is not a supernatural entity. 


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
richard955

richard955 wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

The question that remains uanswered is can we explain everything that can be experienced with empiricism and science? I don't believe this to be true.

Almost everything humans and all other animals do is based on empiricism. And science has worked a way to incrementally acquire more and better knowledge about the world. Except, hope of an afterlife, I see no reason to doubt the answer to your question.

Science

 

I don't question the usefullness or success of science and empiricism. Only that it can fully describe all that can be experienced.


Cernunnos
Cernunnos's picture
Posts: 146
Joined: 2007-07-04
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Hubris. No matter

Quote:
Hubris. No matter how deep we go, we don't have any way of knowing where the bottom is.

You miss the point. The bottom can NOT change the top..that was the purpose of my Newton to Einstein example. Just allow it to reach further. Something can not exist in nature that can change the way nature acts, we know how nature acts in a scope that entirely encompasses the macro-world.

I did not rule out God I just say that:

If he is natural he better obey the current laws of nature.

If he is to exist in any kind of realistic scale he will be described by the laws.

 

This also applies to ghosts! (to stay a bit on topic) 

I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Cernunnos

Cernunnos wrote:

Quote:
Hubris. No matter how deep we go, we don't have any way of knowing where the bottom is.

You miss the point. The bottom can NOT change the top..that was the purpose of my Newton to Einstein example. Just allow it to reach further. Something can not exist in nature that can change the way nature acts, we know how nature acts in a scope that entirely encompasses the macro-world.

I did not rule out God I just say that:

If he is natural he better obey the current laws of nature.

If he is to exist in any kind of realistic scale he will be described by the laws.

 

This also applies to ghosts! (to stay a bit on topic)

To say that such a god would be described by the laws of physics seems to grasp at too much. In part the known laws would necessarily be invoked. But in the whole, I don't believe our capacity for description is sufficient to encompass all that such an etity would entail. Were god to appear to violate the laws of physics, I would consider it the invoking of principles that supercede our knowledge, much like Einstein superceded Newton. I don't believe in a capricious, totally arbitrary god. I discard the notion of omnipotent and replace it with the capacity to do what is possible. Similarly, omniscient for me is reduced to knowing what is knowable. Existence has structure - this is axiomatic to me. This requires, for me at least, that god has structure. Structure implies some form of rules and organization. It necessarily follows that even god is constrained by his/her structure. I, or any other human, may never know what those constraints are, but I am OK with that.


richard955
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak, I understand

wavefreak,

I understand your questioning, but see no reason for it. Do you have any evidence or rational reason for it or is it just wishful thinking?

A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
richard955

richard955 wrote:

wavefreak,

I understand your questioning, but see no reason for it. Do you have any evidence or rational reason for it or is it just wishful thinking?

 

Rationally it is plausible to me that there are other intelligent, sentient beings in this universe. A multi-universe cosmology allows for an infinite number of other universes. Then there is the cosmic foam out of which universes arise. All of this has structure and hence holds infomation. I doubt very much that out of an infinitude of universes that we are the most intelligent life form to have ever existed and it is plausible to me that this intrinsic structure is comprehended by entities far superior to us. It is within the realm of theory to actually create universes by inducing fluctuations in the quantum vacuum. I consider it likely that some entity within the infinitude of universes has this capability. Call it what you will, but I believe there is something(s) out there far, far bigger than us and that we are denying an important facet of reality by not exploring the ideas that follow from accepting this.

Experientially, I have had things happen that to a less rational person would be labled as supernatural. I make no claims about these things other than that I have experienced them and they defy any explanation that I have yet to encounter. I will not share them as they are not subject to any empirical verification and interpretation of them is nothing more than personal opinion. If I ever find a reliable way of replicating these experiences then perhaps James Randi will be in danger of losing his million.


Cernunnos
Cernunnos's picture
Posts: 146
Joined: 2007-07-04
User is offlineOffline
Quote: To say that such a

Quote:
To say that such a god would be described by the laws of physics seems to grasp at too much.

I was careful with my words.

"If he is natural he better obey the current laws of nature."

I do not suggest we know all the laws of nature. 

"If he is to exist in any kind of realistic scale he will be described by the laws."

This applies to the bits of a natural God that are to exist within the bounds of our current knowledge.

Quote:
Were god to appear to violate the laws of physics, I would consider it the invoking of principles that supercede our knowledge, much like Einstein superceded Newton.

Einsteins theories may well have superseded Newtons but they also encompass them. Check the mathematics.  A good way of checking a new theory (like Einsteins) is to see if it fits with what we already know.

The only way I can fathom a natural God that can function in a grand way is if there has been utterly no trace of him so far in all of experimentation. This would require a God that is now completely absent and unaware of the deeds of men. If this is the case I also can not contemplate how he would get here. 

Quote:
I don't believe in a capricious, totally arbitrary god. I discard the notion of omnipotent and replace it with the capacity to do what is possible. Similarly, omniscient for me is reduced to knowing what is knowable.

When I muse over the possibility of a God I like you feel it is necessary to set constraints. I however work from the bottom - that is start with impotent and work it up...in the end I have a flaccid God. Eye-wink

Just a thought on "what is possible" - todays technology is reliant the humble handmade screw coming before it.

 

I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Cernunnos wrote: When I

Cernunnos wrote:

When I muse over the possibility of a God I like you feel it is necessary to set constraints. I however work from the bottom - that is start with impotent and work it up...in the end I have a flaccid God. Eye-wink

Impotent instead of omnipotent, eh? Flaccid seems harsh. Religious ideology has conditioned people to assume god has magical properties that allow anything. So we automatically react to a constrained god concept as not really god but some poor imitation. But an entity exponentially more capable and knowledgable than humans is pretty freaking impressive. Could we stand before such an entity and not be overwhelmed?

Quote:

Just a thought on "what is possible" - todays technology is reliant the humble handmade screw coming before it.

So we really are getting screwed by technology.Tongue out


richard955
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
I agree with you wavefreak,

I agree with you wavefreak, except for the "denying an important facet of reality" part. I think we can base our explorations only on evidence and if something is a "facet of reality" surely we will find evidence for it. So, until that evidence comes to light I won't be concerned with "something(s) out there far, far bigger than us".

This was a nice discussion, thanks.

Cheers,

Richard 

A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
I can see your point. I do

I can see your point. I do have trouble with those that suggest that we should not even ask these questions.


TakeCashToChurch
TakeCashToChurch's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2006-12-19
User is offlineOffline
First off, the file - I

First off, the file - I uploaded it again.

http://www.zshare.net/audio/326882564e5142/

This was prepared by a friend, who happens to be in this club, that's how I even got introduced to this nonsense anyway.  This friend simply edited out the crap (It was 3 hours) and sampled what she believed to be the EVP's 3 times in a row for each one.  This friend of mine is a very good friend, and would not lie to me, or tamper/add something.  And she wouldn't go this far to make me out to be a retard, either. 

That being said... 

Um, uh, I certainly didn't mean to drag you all into an argument about this.  I've only gotten halfway thru these before I decided to respond, so I'm responding to the initialed one, and the Xam.  I'll get to the rest later.  It's gonna be alot to try to reply to, and I hope I'm not expected/required to answer it all...

I would like to start by outlining that I am a sane, rational person who has never even visited a palm reader.  I do not have a Ford Tempo with a dream catcher hanging from the rearview.  I don't want to be treated like that person, either.

 As far as sh***ing or getting off the pot, I flushed that crap once I saw that woman "speak in tongues" for the first time in church.  What a ridiculous sight that was...  When my mind was rocked so hard like that - that was when I started paying much closer attention to the people at the church.  It took 3 more Sundays to realize that it was not true, and that it was more of a business than anything else.  Such a shame, because I kinda liked some of the kids in my sunday school class, and you know what?  They weren't my friends anymore when I left the church.  That alone sealed the deal for me as far as religion itself goes.  I had already come to the conclusion that it was all make-believe, but hadn't fully dismissed actual religious practices or behaviors until they dismissed me for dismissing their sky castle fantasies.  See, a lot of my family is religious, so I thought I could strike a common ground and participate without participating... 

Enough about that.  I don't know what to think about any of it.  I went with her that first night, because Harpers Ferry after hours sounded like it would be kind fun to run around thru.  I would say that I was skeptical, but in order to be a skeptic, one would have to at least entertain the idea that something exists in the first place in order to dismiss it.  I would say that "non-believer" fits best.

 Then I heard the evp's, and I know that those sounds didn't exist that night.  But they were recorded somehow, and nobody else was around to have made them.  EVERYTHING was closed, and we were the only one's in Harpers Ferry proper.  I'm a very observant person, and I notice everything.  I would have noticed if anyone else was around.

I am just asking for an explanation, and if it is possible for anything spiritual (for lack of a better word) to exist.  I don't think it's a gateway into theism or anything like that, I'm just wondering if anyone who is atheist, like me, has ever come across something that made them question what actually happes to us when we die.  And no, I'm not talking about pearly gates, or any of that nonsense, I'm talking about what physically happens.  I don't think that everyone becomes floating spirits neccesarily, but you have to consider that there are sound frequencies that we can't hear, but several other living creatures can.  That doesn't neccesarily have to mean ghost-like presences or anything, I simply don't know what it means.

Then my mind wandered further than this ghost stuff, and the question I have the most is:  Could it be possible that when you die, some of your senses remain for any amount of time afterward?  I don't think anyone has come back from the dead to fully prove what physically happens.  I always thought that was it, you die.  Plain and simple.  I never wanted to entertain other options until these experiences.  And these EVP's are kinda the tip of the iceberg, as far as my experiences in that place go..

Oh, and by the way, when people tell me that I'm crazy, or that It should just be filed under "irrational thoughts", I find that just as frustrating as when you're trying to have an adult conversation with someone about their beliefs, and *all* they can do is reference the bible.

Every step I took in faith betrayed me

-Sarah McLachlan


theotherguy
theotherguy's picture
Posts: 294
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Forgive me for being

Forgive me for being skeptical, but that "evp" you posted sounds like a 911 call to me, recorded and spliced onto a noise loop, with random samples thrown in over it.

 Look, as a sound engineer I can tell you it sounds very fake.

 


TakeCashToChurch
TakeCashToChurch's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2006-12-19
User is offlineOffline
Fake as in fake, or fake as

Fake as in fake, or fake as in unexplainably rough?

Those sounds were captured by a very basic digital recorder. So that rules out any background noise that could exist on a magnetic tape.

I would have a hard time believing that this was fake as in created

It's all unexplainable to me.  The only way i could confirm this is to have more than one recorder, of different brand, and see if they both pick up the same things.  But, what if one picks something up, and not the other?

Ugh.  That would mean that I have to go out with them again.  So I'll just be forgetting about this!

Every step I took in faith betrayed me

-Sarah McLachlan