Walhalla Ghost

[Renenet]

Examples please?

And, we're not narrow minded (the non-believers) we're just after evidence!

To the first: Yes please. Longqi, I'd love to hear some examples. (I'm not being sarcastic either, just in case that's not coming across.)

To the second: Exactly.

 

[Jeffa]

Please people, post anything so that all the bullies can knock you down and not give you the confidence to post. Sounds like a plan. Oh You must give evidence or blah blah blah. Everyone gets it, move on.

 

[mysnakesau]

I want to believe so I can see what the believers see, but I still see nothing.

 

[Renenet]

Please people, post anything so that all the bullies can knock you down and not give you the confidence to post.

I hope I haven't come across as rude because I certainly didn't mean to be. However, asking questions or being sceptical is not bullying. More people should get into the habit of doing it.

For the record, I'm genuinely interested (for reasons that have nothing to do with this thread) in Longqi's experiences. Longqi, please feel free to PM me if you don't feel comfortable explaining it here.

 

[slim6y]

Please people, post anything so that all the bullies can knock you down and not give you the confidence to post. Sounds like a plan. Oh You must give evidence or blah blah blah. Everyone gets it, move on.

Ad hominem.....

I see no bullies where gaining greater knowledge is sought after.

All you're trying to do is destroy the good character of the names of people here who genuinely would like to see 'evidence' and you've just re-instated the pseudoscientificness (if there is such a word) of these claims...

 

[Jeffa]

Not that I do have any proof, but if I did I would not post it on here due to being shot down, ridiculed or as I see it, bullied.
Thats all, For the record I am on the fence as far as ghosts are concerned (love the paranormal) and am willing to keep an open mind and unbiased opinion on other peoples beliefs.
Proof they do exist vs proof they do not exist.

By the way, what evidence would be needed to silence the most stubborn critic about the possible existence of ghosts?
Pics and video footage are obviously out. I guess that leaves us good old fashioned dna or a specimen captured and placed in a cage. What else would be acceptable?

Cheers

 

[slim6y]

James Randi Educational Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does that help Jeffa? The fact money is offered for those that believe should be motivation enough to provide evidence....

 

[Jeffa]

Is that not for psycic mediums? I mean evidence of ghosts, not channeling or whatever they do.

 

[Kam333]

Guess who's back. . . back again.

Nice to see that the battle still rages on! It does not take a genius to know that most 99.9999999999% of clairvoyants and mediums are full of oral excrement. That does not mean that there are some people out there that may experience something akin to being such. Scientific facts were once speculations, before the telescope a man was burnt to death as he refused to retract his claims that there were other planets. Unfortunately for him a year later the telescope was invented proving his theory. Interestingly if any one had questioned the governments sentencing (burning to death = silencing a man who had ideas outside of Catholicism) would be a. . . . "conspiracy theorist"

 

[junglepython2]

By the way, what evidence would be needed to silence the most stubborn critic about the possible existence of ghosts?
Pics and video footage are obviously out. I guess that leaves us good old fashioned dna or a specimen captured and placed in a cage. What else would be acceptable?

Cheers

Good question Jeffa, I'm not sure what it would take to be honest.

 

[moosenoose]

My best friend is a ghost

 

[Australis]

Guess who's back. . . back again.

Nice to see that the battle still rages on! It does not take a genius to know that most 99.9999999999% of clairvoyants and mediums are full of oral excrement. That does not mean that there are some people out there that may experience something akin to being such. Scientific facts were once speculations, before the telescope a man was burnt to death as he refused to retract his claims that there were other planets. Unfortunately for him a year later the telescope was invented proving his theory. Interestingly if any one had questioned the governments sentencing (burning to death = silencing a man who had ideas outside of Catholicism) would be a. . . . "conspiracy theorist"

Are you able to name the man you are you talking about? Or is this more of a ghost story.

 

[Kam333]

Are you able to name the man you are you talking about? Or is this more of a ghost story.

Giordano Brunno 1548 – February 17, 1600.

 

[slim6y]

Giordano Brunno 1548 – February 17, 1600.

I'm not out there to say you're wrong - but weren't planets (especially Mars, Venus and Jupiter) discovered long before telescopes were invented?

Planets were first thought to be 'wandering' stars... But it was clear that they weren't stars, even to pre-telescope scientists. I'm pretty certain that the Greek's originally named the planets after their gods and the names were modernised to Roman gods which we continue to use in present day. This suggests to me there was plenty of knowledge that these were planets and not stars....

 

[Kam333]

I'm not out there to say you're wrong - but weren't planets (especially Mars, Venus and Jupiter) discovered long before telescopes were invented?

Planets were first thought to be 'wandering' stars... But it was clear that they weren't stars, even to pre-telescope scientists. I'm pretty certain that the Greek's originally named the planets after their gods and the names were modernised to Roman gods which we continue to use in present day. This suggests to me there was plenty of knowledge that these were planets and not stars....

Google - brunno

 

[Jeffa]

I'm not out there to say you're wrong - but weren't planets (especially Mars, Venus and Jupiter) discovered long before telescopes were invented?

Planets were first thought to be 'wandering' stars... But it was clear that they weren't stars, even to pre-telescope scientists. I'm pretty certain that the Greek's originally named the planets after their gods and the names were modernised to Roman gods which we continue to use in present day. This suggests to me there was plenty of knowledge that these were planets and not stars....

Do you have scientific proof?

 

[thomasssss]

Google - brunno

oh god i hate that movie

 

[Ramsayi]

Giordano Brunno 1548 – February 17, 1600.

Seems the guy copped it in the neck for his religious views not his views on astronomy

 

[Australis]

Giordano Brunno 1548 – February 17, 1600.

He certainly pissed people off at the time with his ideas.
To say he discovered the planets is probably a stretch though as well as the telescope being invented one year after his death is pretty dubious.

What i do see is a guy who was persecuted for being a non-believer, by believers. But i don't think that was the point you wanted to make.

 

[slim6y]

Is that not for psycic mediums? I mean evidence of ghosts, not channeling or whatever they do.

I am pretty sure that it's for any supernatural phenomena as well - however, if it is not, here's another:

Independent Investigations Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unfortunately, as it's never been my field of expertise, I can only speculate what the conditions required for actual proof would be. But it appears you don't need to be an expert to see one... Just an expert to believe they don't exist... Quite counterproductive really...

As I've mentioned earlier, ghosts would be awesome to be living amongst... But it appears they are no more than fiction to fill your heads with grief and hope (that there is something in the after life). Unfortunately there are many unexplained phenomena - gravity being just one of them... Even magnetism (as earlier pointed out) - but those things can be scientifically tested... We can even account for constants... It happens everywhere... Apparently, just like ghosts... Yet, there's no constants... There's no testable conditions.... Does seem a little bit to pseudoscientific for us open minded folk....

I am one who strongly believes that the powers of pseudoscience affect the uniformed far more than those who seek the truth.

Do you have scientific proof?

Well - yeah... I guess, the writings of Pythagoras for one.... But as I wasn't around (and I can hear the sarcasm in your tone...) during that time (or was I???) I can't really account for what was and wasn't discovered...

However, I am pretty convinced planets (being a Greek name) were fairly well discovered... I discovered planets when I first looked at the night sky with my naked eye - I discovered Venus first... Mars wasn't far behind... I didn't count the moon... Because at that time, I was fairly sure the moon wasn't a planet!

Google - brunno

I did, but I just got pictures of a weird, gay Austrian man....