Do ghosts exist?

[Trembler49]

Know what you mean. It's annoying when these killjoys try to spoil all the fun.

Sorry, I can't work out whether you are agreeing with me, being patronising, or just showing how much cleverer you are than me!

 

[Arch]

It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.

Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.

Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me. If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.

That's my feeling. I'm agnostic, so to speak. I find rampant atheism, like Dawkins, as crazy as blind faith. You can't prove either way.

We were talking at work the other day and someone mentioned a friend who was a scientist and a Christian, and saying they found it hard to understand. But I can see how someone can want to see how creation works, while believing it was the work of an entity. Like wanting to understand how a clock works, though you know someone made it.

 

[400bhp]

That's my feeling. I'm agnostic, so to speak. I find rampant atheism, like Dawkins, as crazy as blind faith. You can't prove either way.

We were talking at work the other day and someone mentioned a friend who was a scientist and a Christian, and saying they found it hard to understand. But I can see how someone can want to see how creation works, while believing it was the work of an entity. Like wanting to understand how a clock works, though you know someone made it.

That's ridiculous.

 

[Arch]

That's ridiculous.

I have one or two rather dogmatically atheist colleagues...

 

[Fnaar]

[QUOTE 2306008, member: 1314"]The light at the end of the tunnel is the light of an oncoming train.[/quote]
The Ghost train

 

[bicyclos]

A very close friend of mine passed away a few years ago now........and we have not met up yet in any shape or form. Until I see something in the flesh which is not the norm will maybe change my mind, but I can't see it in my lifetime.............No, never seen one

 

[biggs682]

no such thing as ghosts

 

[Lien Sdrawde]

Don't know if it helps but ive seen lots of people die, and when you die you just tend to get on with it. Not much special or spooky happens. We just die.
Lots of butterflies, rats, horses, elephant's etc etc shuffle off when thier time comes - but rumours of thier ghosts seem to be in short supply.
Fear not.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Now I don't believe in god or an afterlife.

However, it would be fantastic if there was an afterlife because this one is way too short.

To me seeing a ghost would be one step towards me believing that there was something after death other than oblivion.

So.....why doesn't one of the spooky buggers rock up at my place in the middle of the night and let me know that it's all going to be ok?

Seriously, get on over here tonight Mr Spook! I'll be a very happy man.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

That's my feeling. I'm agnostic, so to speak. I find rampant atheism, like Dawkins, as crazy as blind faith. You can't prove either way.

We were talking at work the other day and someone mentioned a friend who was a scientist and a Christian, and saying they found it hard to understand. But I can see how someone can want to see how creation works, while believing it was the work of an entity. Like wanting to understand how a clock works, though you know someone made it.

I thought that Christianity positively flies in the face of wanting to know how the universe really works. How does the Christain scientist rationalise eg the real age of the universe vs the 6000 years as per the bible, or evolution vs big man in the sky making a woman from ribs or the impossibility of an unfertilised human egg developing into a baby?

 

[Wobblers]

This is drivel, and a total misunderstanding of the scientific method.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

Otherwise you must accept any old bollocks as plausible, as it's impossible to prove a negative.

There is no reliable evidence that there is any supernatural phenomena, ghosts or otherwise. Until there is such evidence, we can safely file them along with alien abductions and psychokinesis in the "implausible and unproven" category and ignore them.

I think that you're being overly dogmatic. I am reminded about Antoine Lavoisier's dismissal of eye witness accounts of meteorites falling out of the sky, using very similar reasoning.

You most certainly do have to consider the evidence, as you say. In this case, it is much more awkward because the evidence, such that it is, is not physical and is composed of eye witnesses and peoples' impressions of what they experienced. That certainly does not mean that it is nonsense or can be dismissed. Rather, it is better to ask the question: why do so many people report what are quite similar experiences? That is a more interesting question rather than mere dismissal.

What is the common element in all this? Well, it is all experienced by people, and there are no obvious physical changes. That might suggest that there is something psychological going on. Let's take a look at what the OP said. The warehouse is large and drafty. These are ideal conditions for low frequency standing waves to occur: this is something that can't be heard, but can be felt. What is more, they have been shown to produce feelings of a ghostly presence to those who have been exposed to them. This sounds like a good explanation for the warehouse ghost stories. The open window would also be sufficient for substantial pressure differences to build up across the closed door. A door has a large surface area, and that will add up to a large forced being imposed upon it with even a small pressure difference - certainly enough to force the door open even against the weight of the ornament used to wedge it shut. That would leave the ornament moved a couple of feet backwards - exactly as described. So in this case, I'd say no ghost.

As I say, I don't think out and out dismissal is appropriate - I'm sure there is useful information to be gleaned about human psychology at the least. That does not necessarily mean anything supernatural is going on, but rather we don't understand the physics and biology of it - yet.

PS: I'm quite skeptical about ghosts myself...

 

[Wobblers]

It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.

Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.

Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me. If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.

That's not actually true at all. Quantum mechanics actually suggests that reality is entirely different to how we experience it, and so called "common sense" notions break down at the atomic scale. That to my mind, has more interesting implications than merely saying "anything is possible". If anything were possible, that is, if there were no physical laws, life simply could not exist.

 

[benb]

It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.

Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.

Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me.

Scientific types are not bothered at all - we just demand evidence before we accept claims of this sort. What I find inexplicable is that we're supposed to give credibility for utterly absurd positions that have no reliable evidence to support them.

If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.

That's fine, but let's not pretend that there is any reliable evidence suggesting they (or indeed any paranormal phenomena) exist.

 

[grumpyoldgit]

Its a bit like saying that Earth has the only life in the universe.We cant prove it either way,until other life is found,or finds us & makes itself known.

 

[Arch]

I thought that Christianity positively flies in the face of wanting to know how the universe really works. How does the Christain scientist rationalise eg the real age of the universe vs the 6000 years as per the bible, or evolution vs big man in the sky making a woman from ribs or the impossibility of an unfertilised human egg developing into a baby?

Well presumably the person in question doesn't take the Bible literally, which is quite possible.

I'm not religious myself, but faced with a concept of a Big Bang, in which apparently, everything in an infinite universe was created out of nothing, I can see how believing in a creating deity doesn't seem so odd. Listening to discussions of quantum physics and so on, at my layman's level, it all sounds just as made up as any religion. Perhaps, eventually, it's more provable, but I'm not even sure about that - the best we can say is that the theory fits the evidence - we can't set up an alternative universe to check...