Ok so sometimes people make claims that they saw something that some would file into the "paranormal" or "supernatural" category. Two examples come to mind. 1) a girl wakes up at 2:30 am, sees a transparent image of a girl she hadn't talked to in 10 yrs. Then she sees the devil's face, prays to God, the images go away. 2 days later she sees in the newspaper that this exact girl died at 2:30 that night from an accident. Another one actually happened to my cousin's. They were at a Church event, and they claim that suddenly things turned demonic. One blonde haired lady suddenly had black hair, people were choking, and finally the priest shouted at "demonic spirits" to leave and then everything turned back to normal. Both of these events are anecdotal and I know many would reject these as hearsay. Although you are being rational by doing so, let's just say for argument's sake that these events somehow took place, just give them the benefit of the doubt for a second. Would that confirm the supernatural or paranormal? Or would it still be more appropriate to say that we don't know what caused these events therefore we could never say they are supernatural or paranormal? I personally believe that even if these 2 events are totally real that they don't necessarily confirm the existence of spirits, gods, supernatural etc. I want your opinions on my opinion. I know many will say these events are bull but I want to know hypothetically if they were real, does that mean supernatural or is it just something currently unknown? People used to think thunderstorms were gods fighting. Others thought lunar eclipse was something to do with gods. Now we know this isn't true, so could these cases (granted that they actually occured) be placed into that category?
For me, there is no supernatural. Just because tiny minded humans can not explain something, does not make it beyond nature's ability.
Quote from: No one on April 16, 2017, 07:42:02 PM
For me, there is no supernatural. Just because tiny minded humans can not explain something, does not make it beyond nature's ability.
Yep.
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 16, 2017, 07:49:31 PM
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Absolutely.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 16, 2017, 07:49:31 PM
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Ok but if these did occur, would you trust supernatural or still say it doesn't prove it?
One time me and my cousin Craig was at church and he doo-doo'd in the hallway. They had to evacuate the whole church and the only one who could stay there was the pastor, through the presence of God.
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 08:04:01 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 16, 2017, 07:49:31 PM
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Ok but if these did occur, would you trust supernatural or still say it doesn't prove it?
Nothing based on purely subjective or anecdotal evidence can be considered
proof of a phenomena.
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 08:04:01 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 16, 2017, 07:49:31 PM
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Ok but if these did occur, would you trust supernatural or still say it doesn't prove it?
It would depend on how they were shown to be real. Then that would lead to a theory that could be tested. If that theory were demonstrated to accommodate existing evidence and to be predictive of future evidence and to be falsifiable it would mean that a new natural phenomena had been identified and qualified. It would no longer be supernatural but a verifiable natural phenomena. That his how science works, hypothesis, evidence, theory, prediction, more evidence, verification and/or refinement of theory. If you can't measure it in some verifiable way it can't be quantified, qualified and verified. Until this can be done it remains speculation.
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 07:36:43 PM[. . .] I personally believe that even if these 2 events are totally real that they don't necessarily confirm the existence of spirits, gods, supernatural etc. I want your opinions on my opinion.
I think your opinion is eminently sensible.
I also think your cousins are feeding you tall tales.
Quote from: No one on April 16, 2017, 07:42:02 PM
For me, there is no supernatural. Just because tiny minded humans can not explain something, does not make it beyond nature's ability.
Exactly. All that is being counted is the hits. How many times did someone have a "vision" of the death of someone they know and it did NOT happen? Enough events happen everyday that there are bound to be coincidences.
Human memory is very suggestible. Ask five witnesses to something as ordinary as a fender bender and you'll get six different stories. Put people in an emotionally charged situation such as supposed demonic activity and most suddenly everyone will "remember" all sorts of things that never actually happened because certain things are supposed to happen during such situation. All it takes is one person suggesting they saw something "supernatural" for everyone else to say they saw it also and start adding in all the things they "saw."
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 08:04:01 PM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 16, 2017, 07:49:31 PM
If these things had any validity, scientists would be all over it. I'll take an interest when that happens.
Ok but if these did occur, would you trust supernatural or still say it doesn't prove it?
If masses of reputable scientists were studying it, writing papers on it, doing peer reviews, etc, and claiming that given the evidence they'd collected so far, it might be possible, I'd accept that it might be possible tho I'd still think the supernatural an extremely silly thing.
Without scientists of all types -- the people with the greatest reason to be involved if it might be real -- taking an interest, all I've got is my opinion that the concept of a supernatural world is very silly, and that it serves no discernible purpose other than bolstering human egos and comforting human fears.
I'm always very suspicious of things whose reason for being appear to begin and end with human ego and/or fear.
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 07:36:43 PM
Although you are being rational by doing so, let's just say for argument's sake that these events somehow took place, just give them the benefit of the doubt for a second. Would that confirm the supernatural or paranormal?
No. All that comes out as fact is that it happened, if you could somehow prove it did.
QuoteOr would it still be more appropriate to say that we don't know what caused these events therefore we could never say they are supernatural or paranormal?
You never know until you try. However, you still wouldn't know. And nobody knows this really happened because it's merely a claim. A claim is something with no evidence or reason to believe the statement.
QuoteI personally believe that even if these 2 events are totally real that they don't necessarily confirm the existence of spirits, gods, supernatural etc. I want your opinions on my opinion.
I would say that's sensible but why base your opinion on what if's? The story has no reason to be believed so who knows if it happened or not. Nobody. And since nobody knows you can't possibly pose a sound argument for it. It's a waste of time. For me, I'd rather focus on things that are fact. Meaning, they are validated observations. People have tales like this all over the world but are different according to their culture. People in the west see Christian themed events, people in Asia see Buddhist themed events. And they all believe they are the only true ones.
Quote from: manga on April 16, 2017, 07:36:43 PM
People used to think thunderstorms were gods fighting. Others thought lunar eclipse was something to do with gods. Now we know this isn't true, so could these cases (granted that they actually occured) be placed into that category?
These are the manifestations of natural phenomena, which happen in the material reality and can be scientifically observed and described. The supernatural, by definition, are events which cannot be explained by natural laws, so, if they exist, they would not be within the realm of science, which essentially is all about the material universe.
This does
not mean, however, that the supernatural is automatically valid.
If a ghost for instance were to manifest in the material universe, the one we live in and can observe, then there should be ways to measure that interaction. Paranormal investigations are flawed, and that's why the scientific community at large does not accept claims of the supernatural.
You know what I also find telling about claims for the supernatural? The Catholic Church used to require evidence of miracles linked to a proposed saint, performed after his or her death, in order to canonize them. While they'll still accept claims of miracles to investigate, they've stopped relying on them to confer sainthood because so many past miracles have been shown to be not supernatural as scientific discoveries increase. Now they rely mostly on how good a person (by their standards) the proposed saint was to determine whether or not to canonize them.
If scientists aren't flocking to study supernatural claims, and the Catholic Church is backing away as well, then the whole business acquires a "nothing to see here" feel about it.
Ah, the paranormal. :tellmemore:
Well, Manga, I will tell you that I have lived through a 1 hour period of my life that I will never be able to explain. Everyone in the room experienced it together, and we all saw the effects. I know what I saw, and I can not explain it. Not as dramatic as someone's hair changing color or seeing demons, but creepy and unexplainable nevertheless. And yet... I still don't believe in God. I know that a lot of these tales are embellished for re-tale value, but there may be some truth to some stories. We weren't there, we don't know. But i am comfortable not knowing and not having it explained, and just saying "I have no idea what that was". Because there's no way to re-create these events, we can't "figure them out". So I figure, it doesn't matter to what I believe, or don't believe, and I just move on.
What you have are subjective anecdotes. If you approach it from an unbiased stance and take away any of the religious connotations, do those stories sound rational? They sound extraordinary and in defiance of what we know of biology, physics and so forth. If someone told you they were at an event and some girls hair turned colors suddenly would you be completely accepting of that story or be a bit skeptical?
Based upon your previous posts manga, what you seem to be stuck on is subjective stories which I had previously commented on in another thread. Refer back to the mention of the false memories and the Satan cult scare of the 80s/90s.
Here are some things to keep in mind:
1) People lie. For whatever the motivation, people lie and sometimes do it without even realizing it. It may be for attention or to elicit a particular response from others or to get some kind of reward or something similar but it happens, a lot.
2) People embellish. I separate this from lying because lying often entails fabrication whereas embellishment is on a smaller scale but often root to something that actually happened or was true but much more mundane. People embellish for the same reasons they lie.
3) Perception is unreliable. Our senses can easily be fooled - mirages, optical illusions, hallucinations, delusions, false memories, confabulation, cognitive biases, et cetera all show how unreliable our own perceptions are. This is why science relies so heavily upon objectively verifiable evidence - it is independent of our faculties.
4) People love mystery. We love mysteries and attempting to find out about the "unknown" and the "unexplained", however, much like what motivates parapsychologists (man I hate that term) its the pursuit that motivates them - no matter how much lack of evidence they collect they still continue and latch on to any small thing and call it evidence like a "cold feeling" or supposed fluctuations in EMF readings.
5) Explanations for supposed "supernatural" phenomena aren't "sexy". Most explanations are "boring" for lack of a better word. It's not exciting, shocking, scary, or awe-inspiring enough for most people. So many people prefer the more outlandish ideas because they are often steeped in mystery (see #4).
So, no matter how many stories like this you post you won't find any resolution but just skepticism to those extraordinary claims because those require extraordinary evidence and anecdotes from third parties is not extraordinary evidence.
Solidsquid, quite often, I really love your thorough, well-thought-out answers!
Quote from: Dragonia on April 19, 2017, 02:52:45 AM
Solidsquid, quite often, I really love your thorough, well-thought-out answers!
Absolutely. He should get so much more than bacon.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on April 19, 2017, 04:24:54 AM
Quote from: Dragonia on April 19, 2017, 02:52:45 AM
Solidsquid, quite often, I really love your thorough, well-thought-out answers!
Absolutely. He should get so much more than bacon.
:secrets1: He should also get a better whisky, maybe,
The John Walker & Sons Odyssey.
Ha ha thanks ;D