What would it take for you to believe in ghosts?

what about this image, this was taken again with a flir at a graveyard by a different investigation team
that to me looks like a sad women sitting on her grave

dorsetghostthermal.jpg


video link

 
Last edited:
Edrof said:
I thought 'biofields' were proven via Kirlianography. I guess some people would call them auras. I'm not knowledgeable on that subject.
Click to expand...
"Kirlian's experiments did not provide evidence for an energy field other than the electric fields produced by chemical processes, and the streaming process of coronal discharges.".

The whole spiritual crowd has tried to piggyback onto legitimate science many times (recently with quantum physics), talking about living beings which have electromagnetic fields isn't the same as implying a whole host of additional attributes about being able to read personalities & moods from "Auras".

It's not a coincidence that most people who claim to be able to read auras are 40 sometime single women, with a horoscope in one hand & bottle of homoeopathic medicine in the other.

It's called women's magazines & too much free time/day-time TV.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, it was just off the top of my head.


Swearies in that video link, Dicky. I wouldn't want you to get a ban. It's also not proof of much, either. :)
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It would take a meta analysis of peer reviewed scientific papers to get me to accept it.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. You would accept the word of a group of people you don't know, analysing data you haven't seen, nor would completely understand about something you don't know anything about. God, people are riduculous: X says it's true so it must be true.
 
Lysander said:
So let me get this straight. You would accept the word of a group of people you don't know, analysing data you haven't seen, nor would completely understand about something you don't know anything about. God, people are riduculous: X says it's true so it must be true.
Click to expand...
It's not just one group, it's the system of entire scientific method of problem solving & peer reviewed evidence he is trusting.

Seems the most rational thing to do.

I find it depressing in the age of information we still have people reading tea leaves & palms - that's what level ghosts are on.

They see a grey blob on a camera & instantly think it's proof of ghosts - instead of thinking "ahh, my camera seems to be broken", they see a cup fall & it's instantly a poltergeist (instead of the wind or something more mundane).

It's the same as people who see a singular light in the sky & "omg it's aliens for sure!", a blur on a camera & we have the Loch Ness Monster....

It's delusional thinking.
 
Last edited:
Lysander said:
So let me get this straight. You would accept the word of a group of people you don't know, analysing data you haven't seen, nor would completely understand about something you don't know anything about. God, people are riduculous: X says it's true so it must be true.
Click to expand...

I would too. Surely you also do the same - if your doctor gives you some medicine, you don't refuse to take it until you've been to medical school and understood how it works.
 
PinkPig said:
I would too. Surely you also do the same - if your doctor gives you some medicine, you don't refuse to take it until you've been to medical school and understood how it works.
Click to expand...

Sure. I take the medicine in the hope it will get me better because there's no better alternative. I don't know that it will work, or even believe it will. I just hope it will.
 
Dickyb0b said:
you know its not a person because its white , if it was human you would see red for blood..
Click to expand...

Haha. Now that's funny. And made even funnier with the fact that there is an actual display on the screen that makes it obvious that the colour relates to temperature.

I'm assuming that by your logic if someone has crapped themselves they'll show up as brown???

:D
 
Lysander said:
So let me get this straight. You would accept the word of a group of people you don't know, analysing data you haven't seen, nor would completely understand about something you don't know anything about. God, people are riduculous: X says it's true so it must be true.
Click to expand...

No, it's not just 'people', it's people who know better, and are willing to stick their reputation and credibility on the line. Oh yeah, besides their actual published data, cross-references, ect... They back up their claims with FACTS!
 
lol ghosts :rolleyes:
Of course they don't exist don't be silly, just like psychics, lock-ness, tooth-fairy, faith-healing, deity's ..etc ..etc it's all nonsense that does not have a shred of evidence to back-up these unscientific outlandish claims!!

But hey if people want to believe this nonsense more fool them :p
 
Dickyb0b said:
what about this image, this was taken again with a flir at a graveyard by a different investigation team
that to me looks like a sad women sitting on her grave
Click to expand...

Again, you start with the conclusion to arrive at the facts.

"I don't know what it is, so it must be...". It's called 'appeal from ignorance', also a non-sequitur.

And about that 'evidence', why didn't they go and check it out. Oh that's right, scary ghosts.
 
Last edited:
Large, multiple, independent, verifiable, repeatable scientific tests and evidence with unanimous cross-community support and significant publication across multiple peer-reviewed journals. Basically what is required for any other knowledges or theory to be accepted.

If ghosts exists as the nutters claim then it should be trivial to accumulated mountains undeniable scientific evidence by research teams across the world, without a single shred of doubt in the procedures and results. That has not happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom