True Tom, but that one had the added bonus of an author who spent 25 years trying (and failing) to find scientific evidence of paranormal activity and eventually turning their back on the whole subject.
Neither the American Institute of Civil Engineers, nor the Nobel Foundation seem to do a prize for ghostbusting so it's still cobblers regardless of which was intended.
You don't think conclusive proof of ghosts would result in a Nobel prize?
You don't think conclusive proof of ghosts would result in a Nobel prize?
Seems fairly likley. Proving the existance some sort of indestructable 'soul' would be pretty incredible*.
*for the pedants, I believe incredible is used correctly here.
I tell you what explains that. First off, he's a surgeon and therefore a *. Secondly, he suffered massive brain damage and consequently lost the plot - real scientists have been known to lose the plot as well and believe in bollocks. The infamous one being Peter Duesberg.
That's pretty much the type of ad-hominem response I expected 😉
You have not read his book, and yet you describe him as a * for being a Surgeon and then state he suffered serious brain damage - which if you read the book you would know that he did not.
His recovery in itself is a minor medical mystery as all the machines he was hooked up to showed he was clinically brain dead with no neural activity for an extended period. The doctors looking after him really did not rate his chances of survival.
Having read the book I can pick holes in it and surmise what may have happened with logical explanations... but these are all things he tries to explain as to why he thinks them unlikely - the fact he is a neurosurgeon is what makes this part of the book interesting.
Get hold of a copy and read it; it has some horribly American emotional bits, and the guy was already a church goer before his illness but those are not reasons to dismiss his story out of hand. It's probably unlikely to change your view point but at least you'd probably have some respect for the chap...
Its far more littered with areas of study now debunked - mysticism, alchemy, homeopathy, astrology etc and the scientific method was what led to them being replaced. this is sciences strength - you cannot use it as weakness - as it shows that with enough evidence you can persuade science to switch paradigm unlike those of "faith"Even the wackier ones like expanding Earth theory only got properly demolished in the past 50 years once better technology could be used to measure plate tectonics.
You mean the did some empirical measures , found no evidence of it and rejected it ...wow imagine !
You clearly like preaching to the converted, I find myself tempted to strongly argue in agreement with you, but what's the point, you'll just find a stronger argument to agree back at me with...
We are not agreeing as you seem to think that some areas cannot be easily dismissed
His recovery in itself is a minor medical mystery as all the machines he was hooked up to showed he was clinically brain dead with no neural activity for an extended period
It may be unexplained but the view he went to heaven and then came back seems the least likely one. Perhaps we should call it a miracle? Your evidence is from the brain of the person who was "dead" [ he was not ] remembering what happened when he was dead. I assume we can reasonably conclude, whatever happened, that his brain was working or else he would not remember anything for there would be nothing to remember and nothing capable of remembering. Someone's recall, however heartfelt and honest, is not actually proof. How many athletes thank god for winning yet they still train there arses off for example. Just because they say it is not automatically true.
ed correcting my typos is a FT job, enjoy- you seem to anyway :wink:.
As to the only point you made as noted above you are wrong. If you captured and proved the existence of a hitherto unknown phenomena of this magnitude [ghosts]you would be awarded.
It's great that science can now give us a good explanation of near death experiences and out of body awareness. We didn't have those explanations until recently.
I have yet to see equivalent explanations for shared ghost experiences (like the cat meow) and for deja vu (earlier post seeing his dad twice). The only explanations have been nope they must be lying or mistaken.
I think there is probably more to it. The lack of hard evidence and that its based on personal perception make for a difficult study. Yet even on this small sample of a forum we have people who have experienced these things.
Can the next STW poll be - What paranormal experience have you had? 😉
.. I once saw a trail come alive...
I have yet to see equivalent explanations for shared ghost experiences (like the cat meow) and for deja vu (earlier post seeing his dad twice). The only explanations have been nope they must be lying or mistaken.
There are three possibilities:
1. The person making the report is lying;
2. The person making the report is mistaken;
3. Cat ghosts.
I'd say that explanation 3 is the least likely one, wouldn't you?
I have yet to see equivalent explanations for shared ghost experiences
Me neither, but it's certainly curious.
Miketually, you almost completely paraphrased my comment from early on in the thread 🙂
A mate of mine tripping with some others got chased by aliens [ in a ship initially then they beamed down] and they all ended up split up as they ran away and yet they all saw the same thing 😯
Not sure how I would explain that either but it really happened is not amongst my choices
Miketually, you almost completely paraphrased my comment from early on in the thread
You're overlooking the obvious telepathic connection between your minds, after all how do we know mike had seen your post? Spooky!
When I was very young (approx 4 or 5), as most young'uns would do, I occasionally went into my parents room to sleep during the night.
On something like a dozen occasions, the next day, I would recount to my parents that 'the man drinking tea was waving at me again (last night)'
In fact I have a vivid memory to this day, of seeing a transparent figure of a man pacing up and down the end of the room and occasionally waving at me. I seem to also recall him holding a cup and saucer and sipping from it. And sometimes sitting down in a chair.
It wasnt until I was about 13 that during a family gathering this subject came up in conversation and my folks let on that the only reason we lived in that particular flat/conversion was because the previous occupant commited suicide - in that bedroom (therefore becoming available quickly/at a good price).
Apparently having a 4 year old tell you about the ghost in your bedroom after such an event is fairly disturbing!
Still, an offering of PG Tips would have kept things on an even keel no doubt..
Mum also told me a few years later that one night she also felt dad getting into bed, and freezing as she felt his hairy legs brush against her legs - as my dad doesnt have hairy legs.
Apparently she got straight out of bed, and of course there was no one else in it.
She never told dad as she knew it would be rubbished, but I could tell from her explanation that she had been genuinely spooked.
Yes, there is always a logical explanation, but its interesting to consider the possiblilities never the less.
I'm not a 'believer' as such, but that experience from all those years ago sends a little shiver to think about now.
You have not read his book, and yet you describe him as a **** for being a Surgeon and then state he suffered serious brain damage - which if you read the book you would know that he did not.
"Scans of his brain revealed massive damage".
[img] 
[/img]
the fact he is a neurosurgeon is what makes this part of the book interesting.
Do you find Peter Duesbergs claims about HIV interesting just because he was a prize winning scientist beforehand?
Buhahahaha
Alexander also writes that he slipped into the coma as a result of E. coli bacterial meningitis and had no higher brain activity, while Dr. Potter says the coma was medically induced and the patient was conscious, though hallucinating.
You're overlooking the obvious telepathic connection between your minds, after all how do we know mike had seen your post? Spooky!
There are two possibilities:
1. Molgrips and I have a telepathic connections;
2. We both spend too much time on STW.
Tom,
No one likes a smart arse but sources/links would be nice. I read the book when first published and haven't followed the story since.
Junkyard - I never said his story proves that near death experiences are super natural, just that he addresses all the usual explanations given and why they did not apply to him using his medical knowledge and this is what makes it interesting, at the very least it suggested we still have a lot to learn about the human body and brain.
If he is now contradicted by the doctors who treated him or his own medical records c'est la vie. He has done well out of it for someone who is so easily dismissed as suffering from massive brain damage.
After a bit of googling;
It looks like Esquire published a de-bunking article in July which questions the Doctors character and motives - they found mal-practice lawsuits against him and essentially call him a liar about certain embellishments in his story. Shame you have to pay to read the whole thing.
A better article on Scientific American which looks more at the science at less at trying to discredit the Doctor is here:[url= http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-near-death-experience-isnt-proof-heaven ]Scientific American Link[/url]
I still find the whole thing interesting; it's been on the list of things to read up for a while along with the whole third man phenomenon (mountaineers experiencing help from someone else when they are alone etc.)
Tom - With regards to this other chap you keep chattering on about is it worth my time reading about him? I've never heard of him so I won't waste my time unless it is of interest.
I still find the whole thing interesting
The thing is, so do scientists. They find it unbelievably fascinating. They find it so fascinating that some dedicate their working lives to learning about and illuminating the murkiest corners of human experience.
Having tried their best to do this, they're often told that they're closed minded. This can rile a little.
If you are interested in the complexities of human consciousness then VS Ramachandran and Oliver Sachs' books are probably the best known pop science expositions. Phantoms In The Brain is a fantastic book.
When I was about 8 I must've been having nightmares since I ended up in my parents' bed. I then woke up and the bed had become a large square field with a giant meatball rolling around the edge of it. I had to get to the middle of the field to avoid being squashed. I was wide awake as I can remember seeing both the field and meatball and my parents' bed and their rather shocked faces as they tried to calm me down. I wad also talking to them.
Fairly confident the bed did not actually become a field.
There are four possibilities:
1. The person making the report is lying;......... nope.
2. The person making the report is mistaken...... not possible, you'd have to have been there to understand
3. In its ultimate essence time, space, matter and energy are incomprehensible by us and all sorts of weirdness is possible..... I can go with this one.
4. Ghosts, as in spirits of the dead, exist..... I don't think so but remain open minded on the the whole afterlife thing.
Some bedtime reading [url= http://www.psitek.net/pages/PsiTek-mind-power-Contents.html ]brain power[/url]
I'd be interested to know what the sceptics / scientists would consider to be evidence in the domain of the supernatural?
What would you consider to be evidence for telekinesis,ghosts, poltergeists, esp, faith healing.
What would you research wquestion be and how would you test a hypothesis?
Some bedtime reading brain power
THERE EXISTS IN NATURE A DYNAMIC MENTAL PRINCIPLE—A MIND-POWER—PERVADING ALL SPACE—IMMANENT IN ALL THINGS MANIFESTING IN AN INFINITE VARIETY OF FORMS, DEGREES, AND PHASES.
[img]
[/img]
See the example of the books flying off the shelves earlier. If that had been my bookshelf, I'd have been back night after night videoing and verifying it. I don't think I'd be unique in this.
So the question is, why has this never happened to someone who can reliably expose and investigate it? In the last 5-10 years the world has been saturated with recording devices and the ability to communicate this kind of thing.
Er... no. You can fill Wembley Arena if you talk about those kinda things. It's a fact the royals eat human body parts anyway, go look it up.TuckerUK - MemberIt's extremely difficult (actually, nigh on impossible for me), to not be patronising (bordering on downright rude and dismissive) to adults that should know better spouting absolute nonsense. It's 2013, and it's not like the truth isn't out there for everyone to discover.
We live in a bizarre society/world, if someone tells me the Queen is a shape-shifting lizard I can mock them openly, indeed, they could even be Sectioned under the Metal Health Act. However they talk about ghosts or gods or spirits, and apparently I should respect their views. Well I absolutely don't. They are ignorant (meaning they don't have knowledge).
molgrips - MemberSee the example of the books flying off the shelves earlier. If that had been my bookshelf, I'd have been back night after night videoing and verifying it. I don't think I'd be unique in this.
So the question is, why has this never happened to someone who can reliably expose and investigate it? In the last 5-10 years the world has been saturated with recording devices and the ability to communicate this kind of thing.
Electronic voice phenomena.
See the example of the books flying off the shelves earlier. If that had been my bookshelf, I'd have been back night after night videoing and verifying it. I don't think I'd be unique in this.So the question is, why has this never happened to someone who can reliably expose and investigate it? In the last 5-10 years the world has been saturated with recording devices and the ability to communicate this kind of thing.
Are you then saying that if you were to see video of this extraordinary event, you would believe it?
No, I would not have just posted it on youtube. I would have posted it on youtube to publicise it and invited scientists to come and research it, purely in the interests of finding out the truth myself.
If there is anything out there I really want to know. I'm just a little sceptical currently.
It's fine being sceptical, but to be scientific, you have to have some idea of what you would consider to be evidence.
So, just to be clear, if you saw some video of it, on youtube, you wouldn't believe in the phenomenon, right?
2. The person making the report is mistaken...... not possible, you'd have to have been there to understand
Entirely possible I'm afraid: friend hears a noise and says they thought it was a cat; they say something and you post-rationalise and fill in the gaps.
Or, you know, it was the spirit of your dead cat that was somehow able to manipulate the physical world.
It's fine being sceptical, but to be scientific, you have to have some idea of what you would consider to be evidence.
Many people believe things without being able to state what evidence they believe. Instead, they trust that the scientific process works.
Could the average punter state the requirements to prove the existence of the Higgs boson? No. Should the average punter believe that it exists? Yes (well, with a confidence of 3,499,999 chances in 3,500,000).
Assuming your line of questioning is going somewhere productive Charlie, and I hope it is, then no I would not believe a youtube video.
It's fine being sceptical, but to be scientific, you have to have some idea of what you would consider to be evidence.
Objective repeatable, measurable and capable of falsification/experimentation - you know the science stuff
Any effect that is demonstrated [ yes I know] under rigorous and controlled scientific experimental conditions. When these are applied the data is that their is nothing other than random noise - there are hundreds worldwide on the raandi site - my favourite was a woman who claimed that jesus gave her the power to make people wee in their pants - she was rather unclear as to why the Lord gave her this power. Needless to say under controlled conditions she failed to deliver
So, just to be clear, if you saw some video of it, on youtube, you wouldn't believe in the phenomenon, right?
I am not sure a you tube video constitutes proof in the scientific sense
OK back to the stories. Much more fun.
A few years back my then partner ran a bookshop in a tiny building next to Shoreditch church. It was build out of the leftovers when the previous church was struck by lightening and was a gem of Georgian architecture. It was known as The Clerk's House, number 118 1/2. It's full of trendy fashion stuff now, but if you can get inside, go upstairs and look at the panelling (it's there, under the emulsion). I was very fond of that space and ran a little gallery in it for a while.
Anyway, it had been empty for a while when G filled it up with books. And I wouldn't describe it so much as haunted, as a bit tetchy. Every so often things would fly, sometimes books but mainly comics. I prefer rational explanations, so this was blamed on the heavy traffic which streamed past when Shoreditch High Street was six lanes wide, all thundering towards the City.
We were, however, quite perplexed as to how the shop managed to lock us out one night. It was early on in the tenancy and we spent ages trying to work out a sequence of events that would allow the keys in the mortice locks to be turned from the inside. The only way to get back was to unscrew them.
The most entertaining incident was when we installed a cd player and speakers in the upstairs room. A bit of Strauss for working late one night would simply not turn off. Well, we turned it off. It came back on. Off. On. Off. On. There's a point (and this is where I'm with the people who don't put their dodgy pelting bookcases under intense scrutiny) where you simply don't want to have your rational, explicable world over-challenged. We were tired, it was chilly and late and we wanted to go home rather than poke at something which might be a hornet's nest. So I looked at G and said, "Does it really matter? As long as it's off by morning." Which, of course, it was.
Musing on it, G noted that the house predated Strauss. Maybe it just wanted to hear the whole thing.
I believe that we're human, we like to see patterns and tell stories and tell the ones that make the most sense - we're also greater than the sum of our parts. I wouldn't go as far as to say there's definitely anything as prosaic as an afterlife. It just was a bit of an odd place.
Assuming your line of questioning is going somewhere productive Charlie, and I hope it is, then no I would not believe a youtube video.
Well, i'm trying to find out what you would call evidence.
You say, I don't believe all this, how come no one ever videos it Then if someone were to video it, you'd still say, Pah, don't believe it.
What do you actually want?
I am not sure a you tube video constitutes proof in the scientific sense
Fine, so tell me what does
Many people believe things without being able to state what evidence they believe. Instead, they trust that the scientific process works.
Sure, but you wouldn't call those people 'scientific'. They just have a belief in a certain wrold view
You say, I don't believe all this, how come no one ever videos it Then if someone were to video it, you'd still say, Pah, don't believe it.
Video would be enough preliminary evidence to get real experts in. I'm sure molgrips said this earlier, though that could be my psychic link with him again.
What do you actually want?
As Junkyard says, evidence that is "objective repeatable, measurable and capable of falsification/experimentation".
Sure, but you wouldn't call those people 'scientific'. They just have a belief in a certain wrold view
I believe that DNA sequencing exists and works, but I've not done it myself. I trust that the publication and peer review process works.
That's hardly a 'belief' on a par with ghost cats.
I think it's pretty obvious that video doesn't equal proof.
If you think someone saying "a youtube video isn't proper scientific proof" is them being awkward then there's not much hope....
If you think someone saying "a youtube video isn't proper scientific proof" is them being awkward then there's not much hope....
I agree, although i don't quite see your point
I believe that DNA sequencing exists and works, but I've not done it myself. I trust that the publication and peer review process works.That's hardly a 'belief' on a par with ghost cats.
Well, it's nearer that, than understanding how it works or why it works,
What do you even mean you believe it exists? Yes, i've done it myself, with a toothpick and a magnifying glass, so, yes, your belief is right!
As Junkyard says, evidence that is "objective repeatable, measurable and capable of falsification/experimentation".
Like what?
Yes, i've done it myself, with a toothpick and a magnifying glass, so, yes, your belief is right!
You extracted and viewed some protein. That's not quite sequencing the genome, which requires a little more effort than a toothpick and a magnifying glass. But presumably, you'd be satisfied that there's enough evidence of DNA and its role without necessarily being able to formulate an experimental procedure yourself.
You raise an interesting point though. If the ghost of a recently deceased cat can communicate with the living, all that I need are enough cats, a hammer and a video camera and I can try it out for myself.
Although, living in a house where a suicide took place and where animals have more recently died, you'd think I, my wife or my kids would have noticed something ghostly by now.
Like what?
There are many people better qualified than I to create and run an experiment into ghosts, or many other things.
The book one would be relatively easy though.
Rebuild the shelves, fill them with books. Chuck various sensors in there. Wait.
If the books move without any motion or seismograph generators being triggered, ghosts*.
*maybe
You extracted and viewed some protein.
No, not at all, i actually sequenced it properly and i got some results.
The problem here is that you ask for evidence, but you don't know what evidence looks like.
Waiting to see what others think is not a scientifc approach,any more than believing in ghost cats because someone said they saw some.
What do you actually want?
I didn't mean to say 'no-one ever videos it' because there are loads of 'ghost' videos. What I meant was that no-one ever takes it further.
I'd be opening up my living room as a tourist attraction and making millions. I'd be challenging the world's investigators to debunk it and selling the TV rights to Sky Living.
Or less cynically, if I had a solid reproducable unexplainable but real phenomenon, I'd spent a lot of time trying to figure out what was going on. Not just shrug and change the bookcase. But that's all anyone ever seems to do...
I'd be opening up my living room as a tourist attraction and making millions. I'd be challenging the world's investigators to debunk it and selling the TV rights to Sky Living.
Erm... Like exactly all the people who do precisely that?
