The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

I have always doubted about the existence of ghosts and a god. Does anyone think that peoples beliefs in ghosts, is imaginary and all in the mind? Could it just be our instinct that make us think this way?

I found an interesting article that states that human beliefs in supernatural beings could date back from caveman instincts. Could this be just theory? I like to see anyone's view on this issue.

According to:
http://theconversation.com/caveman-instincts-may-explain-our-belief-in-gods-and-ghosts-26945

Does mankind’s religious instinct date back to prehistoric times?
Notions of gods arise in all human societies, from all powerful and all-knowing deities to simple forest spirits. A recent method of examining religious thought and behaviour links their ubiquity and the similarity of our beliefs to the ways in which human mental processes were adapted for survival in prehistoric times.

You may be wondering what these two hard-wired processes have to do with belief in gods. Imagine a pebble falling in the back of a cave. Our agency device tells us that someone caused that to happen. With nothing in evidence, could it be an invisible creature or a spirit? If so, why would it be sneaking around? To find out secrets about us or to discover if we are good or bad people?

These two very simplistic examples should help illustrate how these hard-wired mechanisms could lead to the beginnings of a belief in gods, as well as ghosts and other supernatural creatures. Our ancestors would have drawn conclusions about supernatural occurrences by fitting together these instincts towards agency and the theory of mind.

Are ghosts just part of human survival function?

This even applies to the Abrahamic, all-knowing, all powerful god. He may seem very inhuman at first glance, but it has been shown that we reason about Him in a very human way. For example we depict Him helping one person before moving to the other side of the world to help someone else. Hard-wired reasoning processes helps explain how religious ideas are so durable, spreading across continents and down through generations.

Both these and other ancient instincts appear to be in evidence from observations of children. Very young children seem to show very accurate understanding of physical laws. For example they know that two solid objects cannot merge into one or that horses do not have metal gears inside them. Developmental psychologists have suggested that children are intuitive biologists, physicists and – using theory of mind – psychologists.

Concepts which violate these intuitive understandings seem to bemore memorable than others. A rose that whispers in Latin violates an intuitive understanding that plants do not have minds or mouths and therefore cannot whisper in an ancient language – or any language for that matter.

It may be that violating an intuitive concept draws special attention and interest and therefore helps embed the idea in memory. Many religious stories contain concepts that seem to violate this special kind of intuition, such as a man walking on water or a burning bush that talks. These tales take advantage of this feature of memory to successfully propagate themselves and resist being forgotten.

Putting these ideas together is one way of explaining religious thought and behaviour. You could go further and suggest that, if these ideas are correct, religion is merely a by-product of mental processes operating in error.

But this assumes that religious/supernatural experiences are not true. If the human mind was to truly experience a god, then the theories of agency and mind and our memory for the counterintuitive would help us make sense of it. If that were to happen, the conclusions would not be in error at all.

I like that article. I would go so far to say that such beliefs are a sign of lazy brained people. Rationalization, and logical evaluation take effort, and thought.

To many people now a days simply are to afraid of being dubbed closed minded.. as in not open to fringe superstitions.

This actually eventually leads them to being very closed minded. When every little visual anomaly becomes a ghost.
Every coincidence becomes ESP.

Religion is thousands of years old, and developed from ancient peoples irrational ideas and concepts. This day and age religion is not compatible for modern society, why do you think religion has declined, because we are modern age thinkers that have developed and evolved to think more rational.

Religion allows people to remove themselves from responsibility. It provides a cope-out. Why bother being proactive about societies troubles when the "higher power" will take care off it.

Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.
Richard Dawkins

A large percent of claims of supernatural encounters are obviously misinterpreted perception. Then you have those who simply fabricate an encounter to fit in with others who claim to have had encounters. This was particularly evident back when Art Bell was in his peek days with his "Ghost to Ghost" show. He first had on a guy that promoted "shadow people". and there were very few callers. The next time (months later) he opened the topic again, and all the calls flooded in, and they all had the hallmarks of the first call. Although there was also those who upped the ante claiming to have felt, or been touched by shadow people.

With religion comes along superstition; born out of either fear or a single bad experience. Perhaps it's the instinct to survive, that the article speaks of. I believe there are genuinely people who are attuned to these things, but hey, we're just discussing this topic.

I think that most of what is derived from religion is superstition.

As for ghosts, I'm leaving that to the others.

Science has done a good job explaining away the need of supernatural thinking. We understand that the sun is not a god but a big gas ball of fire and that volcanic eruptions aren't the wrath of an angry deity.

Still, people will exhange one crazy idea for another so I think it's always gonna be with us. As long as humans exist that is.

Of course, I mean no disrespect to anyone who believes in the supernatural in any way -- just giving my two cents.

I've always believed in the super natural since I was young. I don't find it laziness or a cop out. Its my belief system, and it has nothing to do with religion. Its who I am. The article was very interesting and informative. I won't base anything I believe on someone else's written words. I am who I am and believe because its natural for me to believe what I believe. < A little messy, I know. But that's me. Messy but good. :)

What perpetuates ghost stories is the desire people have to want to fascinate each other. Even if it means fabricating an encounter, or experience. This in turn encourages those they share with to pass along, or even build on the tale. So the majority of superstition is based on Biased Memes, and Urban Legend. All in a bid to fascinate ones peers.

Remember beliefs are just opinions, and beliefs are not laid down as solid facts. In science the idea is to search for the truth by experimenting and investigating a natural phenomena that occurs in nature. When you find enough evidence that proves the phenomena to be true, then you can fully accept that theory as a scientific fact. If a phenomena that occurs can't be fully explained by science, people tend to jump to strange conclusions that the phenomena is ghostly activity, and this leads people to misinterpret what has happened during their experiences.

The church hated people that doubt or challenge Christian beliefs, because they are a threat to the faith, in case scientific facts proves the Christian faith to be falsehood, I think it's a cover up to protect the faith.

I have nothing against anyone's religious faith, but I think it's good to doubt, using scepticism and scientific investigation, because it helps us gain a better interpretation of how the world works, and it gets us closer to the truth.

Anyone who declares evidence of the Christian Belief is ignoring a tenant of the bible. The bible calls on the followers to be faithful. Faith is belief without evidence. There are various degrees of believers Fundamentalist be the sticklers for literal interpretation of the bible. A good example is the Shroud of Turin, and the glaring obvious fact that it has been discredited by forensic researchers both sympathetic, and opposed to the church. Yet there are still those who denounce those who discredit it, as wrong.

In cases of claimed encounters with apparitions one needs to interview each individual on their experience. There are sometimes legit experiences people have that defies their ability to comprehend what they saw, or experienced. However given an audience with objectionable counsel asking the right questions, and recreating as best able the scene. The experience can be rationally explained. In some cases it may be an anomaly of light, or wind, or natural matters. In some cases it may well be that the person was subject to a hoax (I am guilty of having spooked a number of people in my days). There is even the potential for delusions (which I suffer mildly personally). In some specific cases And the most common is when people are in bed, or at a near resting position, they slip into sleep paralysis which include as symptoms, sensing or seeing the presence of someone near by out of the corner of ones eyes. I have personal had this experience, and it made me a believer for years until i saw a documentary on the subject.

In the cases of people that claim to have seen demonstrations by psychics, or Spiritualist one only need go see a performance of a skilled Mentalist like Derren Brown, who can perform the same demonstrations often with far more entertaining uncanny results.

No, because yo're not born with the need to believe ANYTHING. Beliefs are taught, just like racism, religion and morals.
To say it IS instinctual human nature implies that everyone with a brain is then missing some crucial part of humanity in not believing in that ghost crap.

I started to believe in the possibility of ghosts and the super natural, only after my experiences, but only that, because regarding religion, I have a different opinion. I know people who starting to believe in god after strange encounters. I don't connect both though and I don't believe in everything, that's why I wrote ''I believe in the possibility...'' rather than I just believe.

We have to be honest and admit that we can't full explain and understand every phenomena that occurs in the Universe, we have to keep experimenting and to search for the truth through experience.

So it is that not all things are to be doubted simply because of a lack of what you may deem as empirical findings, otherwise what's the use in searching for any Truth if we debilitate all of our Experiences as the fault of a delusional mind, simply because you did not have the same experience? Not every pebble thrown into a still pond expends the same energy nor creates the same ripple.

Eye Witness Testimony taken separately, each individual to their own, and in cases of spiritual experiences not evoked by "urban legends," these testimonies that share any common thread must be investigated and corroborated. Are you a skeptic, you think Everyone has Talked to One another to get their story straight? Preposterous. I love Science and I love History, however, Science or History is not always correct and the theories that may hold True in one generation are often debunked by a new one in the next. One thing you can count on within the human body, our physical senses, especially our sight, are very limited in the scope of what exists in the place of "I'll Believe It When I See It."

I have to disagree on the conceptual assumption that Faith is the basis of religion or a belief in God. Religion, in and of itself, can create its own delusions and be completely devoid of anything relevant to Faith. Faith is by spiritual definition (not scientific) the elements necessary to create that which is hoped for. Faith is an Essential component of Manifesting things which are not Seen.

As for the evidence available, scientific and spiritually evoked, on ghosts or other spiritual phenomenon, there are a number of events catalogued and otherwise tracked regardless of eye witness reports. Saying that something is not real or credible simply because it didn't happen to you is like stating the atrocities of mass murder did not actually occur because there are not bodies to be found. If eye witness testimony is so horribly unreliable, then why hunt Nazi killers based on the facial recognition and identification by their surviving victims?

God is not real? Spirit is not real? You can believe that all you like, however, there is relevance that cannot be dissuaded by science. In fact, science, is making headway in the area of the paranormal with the use of various techniques and gadgetry that utilizes sound wave and light technology that's been around for decades. Suffice it to say, I do not believe, based on my personal experience or evidences thereof that ghosts are just human instinct.

Oh...don't touch that handle, it's hot because it's been in the fire too long...Oh...don't go in that room, there's a ghost in there. Please, it's insulting to explain away what you cannot explain with your black and white terminology.

The article brings up some good cogent debates, though as we all know. Science is an incomplete study. There have been several theories and hypothesis that have found their way into the file 13 section simply because we went from a 5% understanding to a 10% understanding.

The biggest problem with that is this; we all believe what everyone else says. Yet we ourselves do not further it by doing our own research. Intelligence is learned, though it is not learned by others. True intelligence is what we find to be true ourselves.

As black and white as science is, it even says there are grey areas that science has yet been able to explain. Religion, supernatural, and the like all have instances that are in fact just that. A grey area, a place of unknown and possibilities.

I do not denounce science has not gone far in it's lifetime. Though I do not denounce the 'possibility' of the supernatural. Because at this present point. Not all things can be explained by either of them. They simply just happen within the universe, or wherever they seem to be from.

Personally I left the christian church for those very reasons. Though there are portions I do still think upon. In my time of researching religion, there were several thousand similarities across the world in religious books and testimonials. Some written long before the evangelistic approach of man, and before the understanding of how big the world truly was.

Thus raises another answer. Of all the religions out there, and the times they were 'created'. How did so many hold some of the same supernatural symmetric when at those times. Neither religion even knew the other existed? I am not asking this, but simply giving you a grey area of 'Religion'. To prove that neither are perfect, yet neither can be seen as completely flawed either.

We all have our set beliefs. And with them I respect them. I simply wished to set my two sense, and allow a different view of the argument to be heard. Especially since 90% of those on here did in fact agree undoubtedly on the said article. It is better to get the full picture before ever making an assumption. Something that neither science or religion has been able to agree upon so far due to their vastly different views.

Anecdotal evidence means diddly. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

" If eye witness testimony is so horribly unreliable, then why hunt Nazi killers based on the facial recognition and identification by their surviving victims?"

I am sorry but seriously are you seriously grafting the holocaust into a rant about ghost to try to make a point that if one says ghost don't exist then they by default are denying the holocaust? Really? FACE PALM!

People believe what they want to believe especially with this kind of stuff.. but if they say no evidence is needed or that faith alone makes the belief justified.. Then that is fair, but then they really have no business telling it to others people, or trying to convince them.. Because you need evidence to convince a critically thinking person of something that only exist in your mind at that point. All you have then is an unsubstantiated claim, and if you are to take it seriously despite the lack of evidence, then to remain intellectually honest, you need to consider all claims with equal seriousness. You can not demand evidence for god claims for example, and not ask for it when the claims are about ghosts. All you do then is to demonstrate a bias. That you use skepticism and critical thinking for one claim, but hypocritically says it is not necessary for the other claim even though both are equally unsubstantiated.. If you consider one such extraordinary claim without evidence, you would have to do the same with all... And no one has that kind of time, so in the end they will still pick and choose between unproven claims, dismiss one as silly and the other worthy of serious consideration.. Seems more practical and more easy to stay honest if one asks for valid evidence before taking the claims seriously.. You can of course entertain the idea as much as you want, it is fun and interesting stuff stuff.. but admit that you have no idea and that the claim is no more valid than something you can pull out of thin air, if you also have no evidence to justify it all.. And if all you have is an unexplained experience, but no evidence for it, then you got to understand that people have no good reasons to take it seriously.. Especially when there are so many perfectly good rational and natural explanations already available.. It is then a lot like asking a person to delude himself so that he can take such a claim seriously.

Returning likewise face palm to Dabbler...@_@ Seriously, you miss point entirely. It's called "allegory," extreme as it may be.

Mad Scientist-Prove your view as well. What evidence do you have that Spirit does not exist?

As was previously noted here, the paranormal is a "gray area" of science as many things are. As for scientific theories regarding this gray area, they include parallel universe, string theory, and universal sciences that track the course of energies unseen.

The Point (lest I forget) of my Allegorical "Rant":

One cannot discount corroborated eye witness testimony in "any" case without questioning why so many believe what they experienced through the utilization of their physical senses: eyes, ears, nose, touch, taste. If eye witness testimony is to be discounted whether you speak of the paranormal, spiritual experience, or a crime, then one is allotted to belittling ANY personal experience as a figment of imagination, urban legend, or human instinct. It is a ridiculous notion since eye witness testimony is utilized in science and law. The Hollocaust is a prime example of eye witness testimony being utilized in place of lost empirical evidence and all else is circumstantial.

Generally people do not say " I believe in a ghost".
If they believe in something, it's because there's a reason for it.

It's not just something seen. It's something heard, and felt and it's much like an animal that reacts to something that you think is nothing, but actually be something that your human eyes and senses are too weak to acknowledge. It's natural to be skeptic of things and that's not a bad thing, however, to say that there's a reasonable explanation for everything we encounter is denying truth, and lack of evidence in the spiritual sense is simple......

YOU CAN'T PUT EVERYTHING UNDER A MICROSCOPE SQUINTERS.

It's funny because our ancestors never had a problem understanding these things. Actually they embraced both science and otherwise.

If being modern day people means that i have to believe in everything people tell me because they say their facts are 100% accurate, then not only would that make me a fool but everybody else that's modern too.

People don't become scientists to make people who believe in the spiritual world non-existent. Matter of fact, some things created was BECAUSE of the spiritual world.

The burden of proof is on the claimant. please show references to any established science supporting this "grey area" you mention.

"One of the biggest problems with the world today is that we have large groups of people who accept whatever they hear on the grapevine, just because it suits their world view-not because it is actually true or because they have evidence to support it. The really striking thing is that it would not take much effort to establish validity in most of these cases.. but people prefer reassurance to research" Neil Tyson Degrasse

Dabbler this is the "Grey Area" that's spoken of. Or one of them. Even science isn't perfect.

Ref: http://www.vib.be/en/news/Pages/Research-misconduct---The-grey-area-of-Questionable-Research-Practices.aspx

​We all know that fabrication, falsification and plagiarism fall under the definition of research misconduct. However, the VIB definition of research misconduct is broader than that. It also includes practices “that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting or reporting research.”

As wishful for truth as people say Science is, it too holds a biased opinion. Another form of these grey areas are the uncontrollable systematic. The fact this article brings cogent debates runs under the thing of lets take a deeper look into things.

Though can you truly take the time to observe someones characteristics in a controlled environment from birth to death? Perhaps, though it would deviate from what is accepted in the scientific community wouldn't it?

For instance of the two just stated. A well renowned scientist sees a ghost on his way to work. From that day on he tries to find a way to explain it. He tells his commity that he saw such a strange occurrence. They say his work has drawn him insane and he ends up in a psyche ward.

Simply because he cannot recreate the same instance again of how he saw the ghost. It is written off as a fluke anomaly of Factor X and he spends most his life writing on padded walls out of boredom and effects of the drugs.

This is the second grey area, the unexplained events. There is no ability to recreate, despite holding proof of a very trusting source.

Next we come to the term "Grey Literature" Accounts and findings that were never published for some fluke or another. All of which is accountable, and if you really wish to do your research behind things. This is what you really need to get a hold of.

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_literature (yes I know Wikipedia is not always a credible source, though there are few sources that are in fact correct and useful. Either way if you wish to seek the full story read everything, including the debunked theories.)

Yes society does believe what they hear or see, but not everything is able to be categorized, even to this day and with how far science has come. Though this comes to the one scripture of the bible I do still think most on in every day life. "Believe nothing of what you hear, half of what you see." In detail it means dig deeper into the truth. Don't go on assuming that you or they are right.

To get down tot he truth, you need an unbiased mind and a strong will. Arrogance has no place in seeking the truth for it only holds you back.

I would not go as far as disregard the gost existance but I will admit that some if not most "reactions" or "beleif"' are triger by , not sure if my english will say it right so I appologes in advance if its not english ok.

I would say that often the per pression, or the surounding people will triger the beleif or the reaction, like some says they felt something then other will say they did even tho they never really did, their mind created that beleif or impression of the existence.

Also a rumour of a haunted place or an article or some urban legend will triger it like if its been happening at that moment , even if there is nothing happening.

Not saying they fake it, because their brain beleive it is real, I'm saying they feel it, even tho its not real at that moment or ever was at any moments.
Hope this makes sens.

Ghost stories have been around for centuries. In some cultures they're told just for the sake of spooking the children to keep them from misbehaving. Although in some cases, they still don't listen! Haha. Anyway, when it comes to religion - I don't see the point. I have nothing against anyone who practices religion, but for me it just doesn't make sense. If there's something that you really want, instead of asking someone (who doesn't exist) for it, work for it and go after it yourself. Take responsibility for your own actions when something goes wrong. Those are just some of my thoughts on the subject. :-)

Darkness, that link goes right to a source for making the case against the pseudoscience that is "Ghost Hunting", and "Paranormal research." The other case against them is the evidence that it is all about publishing books for the market, instead of journals for peer review.. then once a new pet ideal comes around they buffer their old "research" with the new "Info". Thanks for digging up a fine article to refute your case.. it shows you are actually engaging indirectly into reaching info that doesn't just tilt in your favor.

i believe it is human nature to believe in ghosts and god
since the dawn of time people have been believing in something bigger then us and that once u die your soul must go somewhere....and since we have started to discovery so much in the way of science many ppl have been using that fact that we know so much as a excuse to say there are no ghosts or god simply because they are scared themselves ....

that there is something that power out there that they have no control over....so in there fear they hide behind what they consider to be rational thoughts and if they cant see if or prove it with science then they just chalk it up to be fake or bullshit...and go as far as to say anyone who believes in god or ghosts must be delusional or stupid or are simply choosing not to use there brains. when in the end they know they have absolutely no proof what so ever that god or ghosts do no exist it merely comes down to its there opinion based on there bias beliefs just like those who do believe in ghosts or god also are bias in there thoughts.

i personally do believe in god and ghosts and the supernatural yes i have no evidence to support my beliefs but i dont really find the need to prove it cause in the end we are all gonna find out when we die anyway... and the ironic part about it which makes me laugh is when we die and we find out weather ghosts and god are real heaven and hell or if we just all end up being nothing....regardless of who is right science or religion we will never get to tell anyone about it XD except for other who already know the truth lol and the eternal argument about god being real or not will forever go on till the world ends and everyone finds out the truth XD


but yes if u look at the history of this earth it is human nature to believe in something bigger and greater then us

I am very skeptical about ghosts and the paranormal and I have seen someone walk through a bus and seen a lady float in mid air in church. I have no explanation for it as to why or how it happened. All I know is my mind could of been playin tricks on me but guess I will never know. I would say there are things we can't explain such as these incidents.

well here is my opinion . I believe in the lord jesus Christ and I believe there is a god and I believe there is a devil . if you believe the devil is real and god is real. you would have to believe there are ghosts.

Logan there (used properly) are scientific findings that were uncovered by people doing research to verify phenomena that was found to be profound. People that took their (not there) experiences as credible and made the rational conclusion that they would research potential causes for the experiences. It was the study that discovered Infrasound and how it effected the human perception mechanism. There (used as there) are also studies on people with schizo type disorders that genuinely experience hallucinations, there (used again properly)are also people who have the misfortune of being subjected to outright hoaxes, or that are misled by conjuring tricks. All this was discovered while studies were being conducted to verify paranormal phenomena.. so what has the so called "Field" produced? So as you claim your slogan "Where's their (not there) evidence that such and such doesn't exist." it is getting old, and surely shows you are grasping straws in a bib to preserve face. I actually see you trying to elude to having been given tangible proof in the form of photos that are "Improbable" to obtain at this time.. and someone called you on it.. see that is the fail of these so called experts they're (not there, or their) the ones with the burden of proof, all it would be is to summarize their (not there) speculation within their (not there) "field" Until then it all comes across as another Pseudo Academia that needs to put up or shut up.,

ok so grammer nazi award goes to my dabbler proving that
even on the intranet u muust spellss rights or mads ppl willls picks on u :(:( lol


but once again im hiding behind nothing and i have no reason to put up or shut up here XD im not defending my beliefs i could go and find a whole bunch of evidence
and that jim the vampire slayed 20 vampires and here is the ashes for proof or that bill the esteemed scientist found out that those ashes couldnt have belong to those vampires couse of x y z....but im not here for that what i believe in is from what i choose to believe in

and once again mr dabbler im grasping at nothing it comes back to my comment which you should already know couse your getting tired of being proven wrong.....i cant prove anything....but guess what you cant either :) thus making this back and forward a complete waste of time!! because we could do this forever and in the end we both have nothing but out opinion with no evidence the back anything up...... so are ghosts real
to me yes to you no.... and the world goes round

but good comment i thank you for the sturdy debate :) always fun fun fun

and next time i see tim the ghost ill ask him for a picture

Dabbler I will admit, when in a debate it is best to drop the negatives and the positives at the same time. Some debates have been lost simply because you provided only the truth on side A, but the other provided truths on both side A and side B.

As for the aspect of proof on ghosts existing, a god existing, and numerous other things existing. There is defneatly proof that they do not exist due to hoaxes, pranks, profit margin, and the like. Though there is still credible proof they 'might' exist. That was what I was getting at with my previous post.

I cannot debate without full on proof they do exist, but what I am capable of doing is proving they may in fact exist. There is a difference yes, but it is a cogent system to provide a open mind. I would love to find credible, legit proof they do exist, at least in one instance. Though we both do know that that in today's society is improbable. I won't say impossible due to we don't know much of this universe and how it works. What we do know is we are still learning.

I will admit I personally believe they do, but I also believe many people who try to 'uncover' it. Do it for the profit margin and not for the actual want to prove them true or not. Which sadly also discredits those actually looking to uncover the truth for scientific reasons. When it comes to ghosts and the like. We have to go through everything with a fine toothed comb. Work from the ground up and then from that point work on separating the credible organisations/people/groups from the discreditable. I would love to find a 'ghost hunter' group or organisation that are seeking to find the truth. Even if they have found little to no proof they do exist. The reason? To know whom is really creditable in such endeavors.

well said evolved i to agree

the problem is with anything in this age we live in
people see a opportunity to make money off people who are willing to believe in anything and presto you have the market flooded with a whole lot of fake crap and cutting away the bullshit from the truth has just become 100000x harder to do.....but like there are lots of ppl who take it way to far with religion and ghost hunting lots of people in science take it way to far aswell the problem with the world today is that there are always a small percentage of people who take something that is supposed to be good and pure and just drag it through the shit and corrupt it to the point of it becoming vile solely to promote there own a genders and ruin its name for the rest of the world

as long as humans being are able to get there grubby paws on it....then its gonna be corrupted and drawn away from the truth.....and the chances of us finding out the truth will take alot longer because of it unfortunately

my belief is that ghosts are the earth's memories.

the earth is a living, intending being, so why wouldnt it have memories of what happens on/to it? particularly things that had alot of energy associated with them (ie battles, celebrations, loved ones, emotional situations).

Because of a human instinctual fear of death, I think we are desperate to seek for life beyond ourselves. You know what I mean? I can elaborate if need be..

no need to u nailed it :)

we live and we die and if there wasnt anything on the other side then life would be a pointless en devour what would be the point in meeting so many people and feeling love if when u die poof u just dont exist ur whole life would have been for nothing...and people will say ohh but u made a impact on peoples lifes and u will be remembered ....but that really dosnt make the fact that if there is nothing after you die your life was pointless considering in a few hundred years anything one who knew u enough to care or even remember u to will be dead to thus making your whole short cruel resistance pointless....how people can not believe in something after death is beyond me

i dont think we live to impact others, thats simply a physical cause/effect law of nature. i think we exist in physical forms to complete tasks for our own greater purpose.

there isnt just "the other side" because the would make us two dimensional.
and i believe we are 4th dimensional. we're not just 3 dimensional forms, we have that extra plane - consisting of infinite planes.

saying people don't subscribe to ghost, or are skeptical of ghost because they are afraid is a dead horse fallacy of logic. Think it thru, and read logans last post.. who is really afraid of dying without a safety net? So the sole reason to believe is to overcome a fear?

from day one and handprints onna wall, man has had to belief in... something.

right but irrational and unreasoning primative man is were we get superstitious conclusions. I mean we don't still sacrifice virgins to volcanos right?

The belief in something like ghosts is usually based on experiences, therefore ruling out "instinct" as an explanation for belief.

haha dabbler funny to what you said there are many tribes that still do stuff like that so yes...people still sacrifice people to volcano's to appease there gods and for a good harvest .....kinda funny they still do that but hay watever they wanna do none of my buisness

i dont believe in ghosts but i do believe in angels, good and bad, the bad being demons and poltergiest, the good being here to lead us

Logan.. how does that comment support your position? All it does is make the case of the comment you are replying to.

The whole point of my statement Logan was exactly what you restated. How does the fact that there are still tribes that do such superstious things make them anymore rational, or reasoning than primative man? Sort of like you knowing there are three forms of spelling for there, their, and they're and because you use there in all cases will never make it right unless you mean there as in a location. Not to grammar Nazi but to make a parralel anology.
Superstitions are antique man made memes.

just because they believe that sacrificing someone to a volcano as bad as that is dosnt give anyone the right to say that there beliefs are wrong....if thats what they choose to believe in then go for it and 90% of the time even the bloody people being sacrificed are doing it because they believe so strongly in what there doing....what im trying to say is no matter how wrong you may think it is or how stupid u may think it is or even how delusional u think these people are end of the day no one has the right to turn to another person and go.....yo dude your whole belief system....yea its a load of shit your wrong and u should feel like a delusional irrational mentally unstable dickhead for believe in that thing....couse u know its not what i believe in....

people need to start accepting the fact that there a billions of people on this planet and there are gonna be a billion different things that people are gonna believe in and the day everyone stops arguing about who is wrong and who is right and just accept the fact that people have free will and will believe in watever they choose....the world will be a much smoother place with less shit and that goes for religious nuts and devout scientists

all im saying :)

Should I weigh in or not...hmmm...

I'm sure Adolf Hitler had his own beliefs. In fact, he shared his (and those who followed him) beliefs with the whole world.

As did Jim Jones.


I wouldn't be so quick to say, "Well, that's their beliefs and they're entitled to them."

Going to start removing post if they are not on the topic.

So back on track. As many responses so well demonstrate more people are abandoning the superstious, and supernatural for sound rational reasoning regarding ghost existing. A bump in the dark to a primative mind is one thing but we are advanced, and educated. Science has even gone one step further to detect anomaly once interpreted as evidence of ghost.

Great thinkers have dedicated themselves to the topic centries ago, Nandor Fodor being one such paraphycologist and even he concluded that of all the cases he attended a suitable nonsupertiuos nonphenomenal explaination was evident.

Here we go again with the, "So and so said ~blank~ so it must be true, because they are/they were a great thinker."

By whose standards are we talking? What, some dude who has a paper hanging on a wall?

I am sure Fodor had plenty of experience. But, just because he is considered an expert by many, does not make him (or anyone else for that matter) an expert to me and many others.

No offense intended, as I don't believe in ghosts either. That is, the departed souls/spirits of once living human beings, haunting/roaming the Earth.

However, I do believe in "familiar spirits." That is to say, an entity that has the appearance of someone who was once living.

I know, people say all the time, "It was my ~insert deceased relative here~ because they knew things only I and that person knew." A familiar spirit would know those things too, being that they have been around since before human beings.

He was just a popular parapsycolgist that reviewed many cases, and often found rational explainations for the experience, or apparent phenomena. His area was Anomalistic Psycology. Two of his outstanding cases were Gef the talking mongouse, and the Tina Resch case. By expert I mean top researchers in the field. Did you know Mark Twain was in the first official Phychic Investigative team?
My point was that there was once a presence of field investigators that sincerely maintained expectations of verifying a paranormal claim.

For a good read I suggest the exaustive historical accurate site The Haunted Musuem, it has all the crazes that caught on, and faded relating to beliefs in ghost, and spirits.

With all this anti ghost post I am making I'll put something supportive for once.

The true ghost are memories fading us, and we can embrace these, which are completely neuro and mental fragments, it is the sense that your deceased grandma is near when you smell her perfume, or sit in the rocking chair she used to rock you in. These are ghost in our synapsii.