Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9200 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Allysum Global
Post Volume: Total: 919,242 Year: 6,499/9,624 Month: 77/270 Week: 73/37 Day: 2/13 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Supernatural and undiscovered means of detection
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 1 of 47 (609305)
03-18-2011 9:47 AM


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

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 11:34 AM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 4 by DominionSeraph, posted 03-18-2011 11:35 AM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 5 by frako, posted 03-18-2011 1:37 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 6 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2011 1:50 PM Theodoric has replied
 Message 11 by Taz, posted 03-19-2011 12:40 AM Theodoric has replied
 Message 18 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-21-2011 12:01 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 32 by GDR, posted 03-22-2011 6:38 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 7 of 47 (609352)
03-18-2011 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by NoNukes
03-18-2011 1:50 PM


I doubt that the real reason for his belief in ghosts is EVP.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2011 1:50 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2011 3:10 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 9 of 47 (609365)
03-18-2011 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by NoNukes
03-18-2011 3:10 PM


Re: Perhaps you cannot help.
Of course it only happens when someone is alone in the house.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2011 3:10 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2011 11:00 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 13 of 47 (609421)
03-19-2011 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Taz
03-19-2011 12:40 AM


you are little better than the loons you're trying to disprove.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Taz, posted 03-19-2011 12:40 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Taz, posted 03-20-2011 2:44 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 19 of 47 (609590)
03-21-2011 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Taz
03-20-2011 2:44 AM


Ok, let me get this straight. Are you saying that anything that has never been previously predicted by mainstream science cannot possibly exist?
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?
Show me any existing scientific knowledge that shows that anything supernatural exists.
(1) If we truly follow this statement of yours, science would never make any progress whatsoever. One of the strongest basis of science is that it allows for things we haven't thought of or haven't discovered yet to exist.
Non sequitor. Can you show me any evidence of the suprnatural or not?
(2) It seems to be a popular thing nowadays to label something as supernatural or label someone as a conspiracy theorist in order to discredit them.
Not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying ghosts would not be supernatural?
(3) Do you have anything to say at all beside "it's supernatural, therefore it must not exist"? Do you see the problem here? First, you assume that anything that is supernatural must not exist. Then you assume that ghosts are supernatural. Do you see a problem with your conclusion here?
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.
You, sir, are the reason why so many people misunderstand science and it's skeptical nature.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Taz, posted 03-20-2011 2:44 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Taz, posted 03-21-2011 9:13 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 24 of 47 (609654)
03-21-2011 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Taz
03-21-2011 9:13 PM


Try reading the OP
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Taz, posted 03-21-2011 9:13 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Taz, posted 03-22-2011 1:28 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 26 of 47 (609679)
03-22-2011 9:21 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Taz
03-22-2011 1:28 AM


Re: Try reading the OP
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?
What I am saying is that by saying such thing to your friend you're only propagating the misconception that skeptics say no to everything.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Taz, posted 03-22-2011 1:28 AM Taz has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 37 of 47 (609800)
03-23-2011 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by GDR
03-22-2011 8:39 PM


Re: Is This Where the Supernatural Is?
GDR writes:
Mirriam-Webster's
Definition of SUPERNATURAL
1: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)
It does fit the bill for the first part of the definition in that it is talking about something beyond the "visible observable universe". To go beyond that we are definitely into the speculative.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GDR, posted 03-22-2011 8:39 PM GDR has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 40 of 47 (609838)
03-23-2011 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by GDR
03-23-2011 1:55 PM


Re: Is This Where the Supernatural Is?
GDR writes:
Taq writes:
If something has a predictable effect on the natural world and is potentially describable through some sort of scientific law then I would include it as natural, not supernatural. As of the moment, dark matter appears to have predictable effects on the natural world (e.g. gravitational lensing, rotation of galaxies) and seems conducive to being described by scientific laws.
Here are some of the other statements in the magazine about the article.
quote:
A shadow cosmos in our midst may be as dynamic as the visible one.
quote:
Through the force of gravity, dark matter sculpts the universe into a web of galaxies. Theorists now suspect that it may exert other forces as well.
quote:
A shadow cosmos, woven silently into our own, may have its own rich inner life.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by GDR, posted 03-23-2011 1:55 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by GDR, posted 03-23-2011 6:02 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 42 of 47 (609848)
03-23-2011 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by GDR
03-23-2011 6:02 PM


Re: Is This Where the Supernatural Is?
they are talking about in that article might be considered supernatural.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by GDR, posted 03-23-2011 6:02 PM GDR has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9488
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 47 of 47 (730284)
06-26-2014 2:24 PM


Latest from my ghosthunter friend
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.pdf
What 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.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024