Supernatural and undiscovered means of detection

I recently had a conversation with a friend that claims to be an atheist, but has strong beliefs in the supernatural. He claims there is proof ghosts exist and such.His argument is that we just have not invented the means to detect them.His favorite argument is that at one time we could not detect quarks, but now we can. I have tried to explain that a basic difference here is that quarks are something that science predicted and then were later explained in a more concrete manner. For ghosts there are no scientific predictions.
The concept of ghosts are contrary to the scientific method, because "ghost hunters" are looking for evidence that fits their idea of ghosts. He claims the EVP(electronic voice phenomena" is hard evidence of ghosts.Does anyone have any ideas of how to continue to counter this argument of his, or does anyone support his argument?P.S.
Dr. Adequate
What happened to Skepticwiki?

---

Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Exactly.
I asked him for evidence for ghosts and he said EVP is evidence. He and his wife think a ghost lives in their house, because of odd sounds. Also, they say things are moved when no one around. I offered to investigate scientifically and surprisingly they refuse.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Of course it only happens when someone is alone in the house.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

You miss a huge point. There was a scientific concept of medicine and the development of new medications. The discovery of anti-biotics was based on previous scientific knowledge.Show me any existing scientific knowledge that shows that anything supernatural exists.You seem to be buying into the psuedoskeptic argument.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Not at all. Your argument seems to be that we should find things that are outside of the scientific method. I am saying that using the scientific method we have found no evidence of the supernatural. EVP, ghostly photos, and all other means of "ghost" detection ahve not stood up to scientific inquiry. When something does I then will consider the possibility, until then I have no reason to have a belief in ghosts. Why would it have to be ghosts?The belief in ghosts is like the belief in creation science. People that believe in both take the existence of both as a fact then try to shoehorn the evidence to fit. Why is it ghosts? How about aliens, sprites, gnomes. leprechauns or any other supernatural entity? Non sequitor. Can you show me any evidence of the suprnatural or not? Not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying ghosts would not be supernatural? I did not say that. I said that until there is evidence there is no reason to even consider. Show me some evidence for ghosts and I will consider the concept. Science should rely on evidence. I am skeptical until there is evidence. If there is no evidence I am not willing to consider a belief in the supernatural.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

It seems you haven't even read the OP.Try reading it then try producing a post that actually deals with it.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Ghosts are a concept with no scientific predictions or evidence. Correct?The concept exists without any evidence. The concept of quarks exists with evidence.Are you agreeing with my friend that we just may have not found a means of detection that will prove ghosts exist? In no way am I saying that. I am saying that unless there is evidence there is no need to believe or consider.Someone once said that one should not be so open minded that their brain falls out.I think you are making lots of assumptions of me and the OP. Just because you infer something does not mean that it was implied.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I guess you can stretch visible and observable to mean anything if you think dark matter falls under supernatural

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

And what pray tell do any of these statements you quote have to do with anything. Maybe you should try explaining the point you are trying to make.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

How you get to supernatural from that article is a heck of a stretch. If that qualifies as supernatural, so do radio waves, xrays and anything else not visible to the human eye.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

He posted this link on my Facebook page.
A Physicist’s Explanation of Why the Soul May Exist

quote:

---

Henry P. Stapp is a theoretical physicist at the University of California—Berkeley who worked with some of the founding fathers of quantum mechanics. He does not seek to prove that the soul exists, but he does say that the existence of the soul fits within the laws of physics.

​

It is not true to say belief in the soul is unscientific, according to Stapp. Here the word soul refers to a personality independent of the brain or the rest of the human body that can survive beyond death. In his paper, Compatibility of Contemporary Physical Theory With Personality Survival, he wrote: Strong doubts about personality survival based solely on the belief that postmortem survival is incompatible with the laws of physics are unfounded.

---

I haven't read the original paper. Probably over my head anyway. I see no evidence it was ever published in any journal. Here is a link to it.
http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/Compatibility.pdfWhat little I have read so far and criticism of him, it seems he uses a lot of assertions and little or no evidence. I haven't been able to find any other scientists that support his idea.Seems to be just more woo.