[movlabs]

I don't see what's so strange about people believing in ghosts. There's no evidence they don't exist, just like there's no evidence that they do...apart from hearsay.

Personally I'm not sure, although I find the subject interesting. I've got a number of books and DVDs about it.

Does this mean you think both possibilities are equally likely?

[Justlovemy]

I don't see what's so strange about people believing in ghosts. There's no evidence they don't exist, just like there's no evidence that they do...apart from hearsay.

Personally I'm not sure, although I find the subject interesting. I've got a number of books and DVDs about it.

Fair enough maybe they DO i am NOT the person to doubt that,
but a side question do you believe those people who are saying they have seen them ?


O LOL not sure what i am about now [rofl]

[viepedorlella]

Does this mean you think both possibilities are equally likely?

Since I have no evidence either way then I would say the answer is yes.

Fair enough maybe they DO i am NOT the person to doubt that,
but a side question do you believe those people who are saying they have seen them ?

People don't always tell the truth so it's hard to say, but I think some people really believe they've seen a ghost. Whether it was really a ghost, or just in their head, or something else that's easily explainable is open to debate.

[movlabs]

Since I have no evidence either way then I would say the answer is yes.

I'm not trying to attack you specifically; it just bothers me when people use this type of logic. "I haven't seen any evidence directly disproving the existence of ghosts or santa claus so even though they would violate many established laws of physics, I'll be sure to respect those who believe." Would you attribute equal probability to the existence and non-existence of the flying spaghetti monster?

edit: I guess my point is some arguments really just have more inherent validity than others.

[Dkavtbek]

Since I have no evidence either way then I would say the answer is yes.


People don't always tell the truth so it's hard to say, but I think some people really believe they've seen a ghost. Whether it was really a ghost, or just in their head, or something else that's easily explainable is open to debate.

Your logic does not make sense.

You're plainly saying that Santa Clause with the reindeer and all are more likely to exist than not.

[ftpsoft]

I'm not trying to attack you specifically; it just bothers me when people use this type of logic. "I haven't seen any evidence directly disproving the existence of ghosts or santa claus so even though they would violate many established laws of physics, I'll be sure to respect those who believe." Would you attribute equal probability to the existence and non-existence of the flying spaghetti monster?

edit: I guess my point is some arguments really just have more inherent validity than others.

ZOMGZOR! Something disproved a law of physicses! It must not existzors!

Please. That's about the most retarded reason to think something can't exist. Anyone that believes everything about physics is known, hell, everything about any science is known, is a complete idiot. Laws are broken, and will continue to be broken, on a daily basis by matter out of the realm of our capable comprehension.

Hell, there are plenty of examples of **** we try to throw "laws" on that just don't work. Black holes, supernova, pretty much anything outside of our sad little sphere of existence.

[CaseyFronczekHomie]

Anybody that lived in the house I lived in during the '80's, would not dispute the existance of ghosts. Of course, he moved on when his wife died.

[Justlovemy]

Your logic does not make sense.

You're plainly saying that Santa Clause with the reindeer and all are more likely to exist than not.

wha what!? you mean there is doubt about that ? [shocked]

[RicardoHun]

I'm not trying to attack you specifically; it just bothers me when people use this type of logic. "I haven't seen any evidence directly disproving the existence of ghosts or santa claus so even though they would violate many established laws of physics, I'll be sure to respect those who believe." Would you attribute equal probability to the existence and non-existence of the flying spaghetti monster?

edit: I guess my point is some arguments really just have more inherent validity than others.

This is where I have problems. You're basing all the laws of physics on what MAN knows to be true of this place. If you think we have everything 100% figured out, that's sad. I don't think of ghost as the souls of dead people. It's just something I cannot explain. Does that mean there is no way in hell that whatever people are seeing is real because it goes against what we know as man to be possible...not really.

[viepedorlella]

I'm not trying to attack you specifically; it just bothers me when people use this type of logic. "I haven't seen any evidence directly disproving the existence of ghosts or santa claus so even though they would violate many established laws of physics, I'll be sure to respect those who believe." Would you attribute equal probability to the existence and non-existence of the flying spaghetti monster?

edit: I guess my point is some arguments really just have more inherent validity than others.

The difference is nobody's claimed to have seen the flying spaghetti monster, or Father Christmas for that matter, but millions of people claim they've seen ghosts.

[stadiaKab]

I think it´s sad that some people find it necessary to ridicule things that they don´t believe in, let it be ghosts, ufo´s, God, conspiracies or whatever.
If i don´t believe in something i can still have a normal levelheaded conversation about it without stooping down to the level of a 3rd grader.

[RicardoHun]

I think it´s sad that some people find it necessary to ridicule things that they don´t believe in, let it be ghosts, ufo´s, God, conspiracies or whatever.
If i don´t believe in something i can still have a normal levelheaded conversation about it without stooping down to the level of a 3rd grader.

So very true.

[tropicana]

The difference is nobody's claimed to have seen the flying spaghetti monster, or Father Christmas for that matter, but millions of people claim they've seen ghosts.

that's because it'll get a lot of "youtube views" if you know what i mean

[Justlovemy]

I think it´s sad that some people find it necessary to ridicule things that they don´t believe in, let it be ghosts, ufo´s, God, conspiracies or whatever.
If i don´t believe in something i can still have a normal levelheaded conversation about it without stooping down to the level of a 3rd grader.

You just mentioned all of the parts i don't believe in,
what does that make me ?

[movlabs]

ARC and Golem, I think you're being unfair.

ARC: you're putting words in my mouth. Black holes and supernovae have been added to the realm of legitimate science through evidence. If you refuse to separate somewhat-proven phenomena from ghosts, then I don't wish to participate in the discussion.
[serious question] Do black holes contradict Einstein's theories of relativity?

Golem: I hardly think I'm conversing at the level of a 3rd grader. I'm only trying to add another side to the discussion.

[tropicana]

You just mentioned all of the parts i don't believe in,
what does that make me ?

a realist[thumbup]

[movlabs]

You just mentioned all of the parts i don't believe in,
what does that make me ?

Snw, it makes you a skeptic [yes]
edit: and yeah, realist, naturalist.

[Justlovemy]

Aaa i can deal with that

[RicardoHun]

I think some people are confusing "Belief" and "Possibility". They're not the same thing.

[Justlovemy]

I think some people are confusing "Belief" and "Possibility". They're not the same thing.

That might be possible if i would believe you