i wentto the sprit church

[bunnyhuggger]

Ok, here's the photo....

 

[Jeremy]

Well I'll start of by saying thank you Adele as you are one of the few people to argue your case logically and convincingly (creep creep :lol: )

Perhaps we just have not developed the right scientific test yet for these things...

It is not difficult to test some of the claims these people make. Psychics are a perfect example. Just make them do a double blind reading and state FACTS rather than "I'm getting a B". Strangley none of them will - I wonder why?

Hiya, yes this is true but conversely there is other evidence that has been collected that cannot be explained , so believers and non believers can all come up with specific cases to illustrate their point..but this still gets us no further forward :!: :roll: :lol: (Adele)

I think "evidence" is rather a strong word here. Yes, there are occasions where things happen that are difficult to rationalise, but this does not make them "evidence" for the paranormal any more than succesfully rationalising the situation is "evidence" that the paranormal doesn't exist. It is just an anecdote that points one way or the other.


**********************************************************

Well I have never had a psychic reading done, and if i did I would have to base my overall view of it on many readings and meeting many psychics, before I felt I could formulate a perspective of whether it was real or not.
I agree lots of people do delude themselves, but for everyone that does, there are others who have genuine experiences that cannot be quantified.

I would suggest that any psychic reading can easily be quantified no matter how "amazing" it may seem. People do not quantify because they do not wish to.

This then comes down to trust, if the scientific evidence is not there as yet, then we have to take what others have experienced as some truths.
Or do you only believe in things you directly experience yourself, other people are not able to be rational or look at things objectively?

A good point, and I will probably surprise you to say that no, I do not hold "experiences" as truth. Even my own.
Yes, people can be rational and look at things objectively, but as I have stated they can also delude themselves. There is no way of telling so, again, we cannot use anecdote as evidence, even if it is our own experience. It is obscenely easy to delude ourselves.
Therefore we must rely on proper scientific testing where "opinion", "experience" and "perception" are irrelevant. The results must be self obvious.
You state that there is no scientific evidence. Well I would say that there is a great deal of scientific evidence AGAINST the paranormal, but as I have also stated this does not PROVE that the paranormal does not exist.
However, I would currently go with the odds.

Perhaps all these people with paranormal abilities should subject themselves to scientific test to prove us sceptics wrong. But for some reason they do not. Perhaps it is because they have everything to lose and nothing to gain? Another factor that reinforces my belief.

Also if you have experienced things first hand,then you dont arguably need the proof as you know It (whatever it is) exists!

Yes, if you saw a ghost pop up in front of you in the living room and all methods of trickery, hallucination (or drug taking :lol: ) had been ruled out, then I would admit this would seem like personal proof. I would tentatively suggest that most people do not have such well defined experiences.

..oooh this is hard to explain, am I making any sense?? sorry doing my best!.
It is like Religion I guess, some believe and know that a God exists(as they experience something unquantifiable) , and others who dont.

Yes, I see what you are saying, but personally (ooer! I'm on dangerous ground here! :lol: ) I would say that religion is just another self delusion. As you know I used to be very religious and I "knew" that God existed. But did I really? No, I had just convinced myself. :?

People are often scared by things they cannot quantify, so they refuse to accept that we still do not know everything about life and death.

It seems to me that it is the "believers" who are scared to face the real world, and so make up extraordinary explanations for things THEY cannot quantify. On a personal level I found myself FAR less "afraid" of life since realising that there is zero solid evidence for the paranormal and these things have a rational explanation. Whether coincidence or not I don't know, but I have also found a lot of other irrational fears I had (such as spiders) have also evapourated a great deal.)

Firstly who are the believers? do you mean people who want to believe something exists and go to extraordinary lengths to try and gather info/ evidence to back up their view point? or those that have experienced something directly, and surely they would not need to prove anything to anyone, as they just know something unexplainable has happened?
There are different ways of looking at it arent there?

Hmm, I think we are moving slightly out of context. I do not mean to lump together everyone who has a possible belief in the paranormal, but SOME people would rather embrace fantastic believes rather than face a harsh reality.
I think we have a basic difference of opinion on what counts as proof. I would say the vast majority of people who base their belief on some personal experience are basing on a false premise as I have already outlined. They get a reasonably convincing reading from a psychic so they believe.

There are too many people having experiences of paranormal to just conclude it is the imagination, or in the mind in my view.

Earlier in my life I would have agreed with you Adele, I really would, but I have found time and time again that people are either just deluding themselves, or are using deliberate trickery to make a fast buck.

yes I have no doubt that this is the case in a lot of cases Jeremy, just like anything else in life, there are those that abuse any belief system to their own ends.
But dont people also do that when they are trying to prove their own perspective though, just pick up on the things that support their case, not work with everything in front of them.

Yes, of course. It is a natural thing to do, and as a sceptic I have to try very hard to practice what I preach and remain open minded to other possibilities.

I dont profess to have the answers of life, I am not a believer or non believer, but I do know that there are unexplainable things. and cannot personally put those down to delusions.

That is you opinion. My opinion would be that there is probably a logical explaination. I think we have a difference of opinion! :lol: :lol:

I would be happier myself to think nothing else existed as it would fit in with my scientific upbringing, but due to my life experiences I cannot say that..it is like working with the bunnies, you read things in books about rabbit care, but if you have observed and experienced things first hand (0r through those close to you) that conflict with the book, then what do you do? Ignore them as they cannot be right as they conflict with a book, or follow your own gut instinct as to the truths?

You should always go with what you believe is right, whether you base that on "gut instinct" and experience, or like me, on quantifiable data.


Arrgh! I've got [/quote] before my eyes! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Jeremy]

Ok, here's the photo....

Erm. You're having a larf right? :wink:

 

[Lizzie]

Exam Question 1: Lizzie is sitting here at her computer, accompanied by Modge and Potty. Do you know this for a fact? Do you know that I am typing this message? Do you know that my name is Lizzie? Have I just been to see my hero, Jason, for Modge to have a post-operative check-up? Is it raining in Gloucester? Have my bunnies got wet? I can give you the answers but will you believe what I tell you, how will you know that I am telling the truth? Please discuss.

Exam Question 2: A matter close to my heart, especially considering the very, very trying afternoon I have had up to seeing my hero!!! "All car traders are absolute villains and sharks. True or false?" Please discuss.

Answers on a postage stamp please!

 

[cazza269]

:lol: :lol: ahh yes Lizzie my point is though..are you charging for these answers....and are the people you are charging extremely vunrible...

my feelings, if you have this amazing "gift" (gifts are free to the reciever right?) then why charge people in need to recieve your help, especially if they may go home dissapointed and not any the wiser or happier

very very clever way to look at it though lizzie

 

[Lizzie]

Believe me, Cazza, I do appreciate what you are saying - there are some very vulnerable folks out there who can so easily be duped by unscrupulous charlatans out to make a quick buck.

The answer to the questions will be whatever your "perception" of them is! :wink: One of the best poems I ever read (well, sort of read half-heartedly when I was doing A levels at school) was Bishop Blougram's Apology by Robert Browning - I have tried to read it in recent years but get bogged down but it basically shows you that for faith to exist, there has to be doubt - without doubt there is no faith. I was really interested in this idea all those years ago but I wouldn't claim to be able to paraphrase it for you, far be it from me!!! :lol:

By the way it is absolutely p***ing it down here!!! :roll:

 

[cazza269]

please dont get me started on faith and beliefs...I could get me into a lot of trouble so I am keeping it zipped!!

its kinda soggy up up here too, and I am actually quite likeing it, I hate muggy weather, heat I love but its been muggy and orrible here today, not nice!!!!

 

[Jeremy]

Exam Question 1: Lizzie is sitting here at her computer, accompanied by Modge and Potty. Do you know this for a fact? Do you know that I am typing this message? Do you know that my name is Lizzie? Have I just been to see my hero, Jason, for Modge to have a post-operative check-up? Is it raining in Gloucester? Have my bunnies got wet? I can give you the answers but will you believe what I tell you, how will you know that I am telling the truth? Please discuss.

Given my previous experience of your postings, and having met you, and using knowledge of all previous interactions with you, I believe all those statements.

However, these are not extraordinary claims.

If a post appeared with your signature but contained extreme profanity and a death wish to all rabbits, I would conclude that someone else had access to your account, despite all the "evidence" that it was you who were posting.

Exam Question 2: A matter close to my heart, especially considering the very, very trying afternoon I have had up to seeing my hero!!! "All car traders are absolute villains and sharks. True or false?" Please discuss.

True! LOL :lol: :lol:

But seriously, maybe I can rephrase the question:

"Given the hypothetical statement that nobody has EVER had a good deal from a car trader, are all car traders absolute villains and sharks?"

Answer: Very probably, although impossible to prove.

Answers on a postage stamp please!

I tried making the font really small but I couldn't read it

 

[bunnyhuggger]

Ok, here's the photo....

Erm. You're having a larf right? :wink:

Erm.... no Can't you see the little girl?

 

[Adele]

Can't you see the little girl?

I can Lynda , where and when was the photo taken??
Xx

 

[Lizzie]

Aaaaaaaw, HB!!!!!

 

[Jeremy]

Ok, here's the photo....

Erm. You're having a larf right? :wink:

Erm.... no Can't you see the little girl?

I can see a vague smudge down the right hand side that could possibly look sort of like a little girl if you squint hard enough.
If she was wearing 4 foot heels that is.

 

[bunnyhuggger]

The photograph was taken at the Arthur Findlay College in Stanstead where I have attended for training courses on several occasions. I think it was taken about 10 years ago. It wasn't me who took the photo however I was present at the time. The medium (if I remember rightly) is Ivy Northage. The photo isn't good quality because it was taken in poor light so as not to cause a disturbance in the room.

And no Jeremy, the little girl isn't on the right of the photo :wink:

 

[Jeremy]

And no Jeremy, the little girl isn't on the right of the photo :wink:

She isn't!! :shock:
I must be blind then 'cus I don't see anything remotely like a little girl anywhere else? :shock:

And as for the programme! That sealed its fate in the first two minutes when they inferred that the Fox sisters were genuine. It went downhill from there :roll:

 

[loopylop]

And no Jeremy, the little girl isn't on the right of the photo :wink:

She isn't!! :shock:
I must be blind then 'cus I don't see anything remotely like a little girl anywhere else? :shock:

I'm with Jeremy on this one!!!! :?

 

[loopylop]

OK.....

Is it to the left? :? Halfway down the bottom of the bookshelf?? :?:

 

[bunnyhuggger]

No......... try again.......

 

[Jeremy]

Ah! I see it now! A clear figure in the middle!

Although it looks more like an old lady with glasses sat in a chair to me..... :? :wink:

 

[loopylop]

The orange line down the middle?

 

[HS]

I can't see anything either. mind you, I'm here on my own at the moment, so i'm not trying too hard