Archie_tect
De Skieven Architek... aka Penfold + Horace
- Location
- Northumberland
No gods, no ghosts, no ectoplasm, no afterlife... once you're dead that's it. Zip. I'd be devastated if I'd got to go through all this again...
Whars the message
A book I read some years ago which read like a biography of the Universe, stated in similar words that, all scientists wished for their work to be disproved, for it was only when an idea was disproved that greater leaps into unknown scientific territory could be made. It was thus acknowledged that no scientific theory could ever be proved conclusively - Newton's Physical laws and Einsteins theory of relativity are two examples of science, largely accepted which are not universally proved and contain the minute flaws which allow science to search for further answers given their inconsistencies.
It is from this standpoint that any assertion that ghosts do not exist is a nonsense, precisely because such assertions rely on 'evidence' which tries to prove completely that they don't exist. And there is no evidence that proves conclusively that ghosts do not exist - one example of a ghost therefore, one exception, can and would scupper any such assertion that they do not exist.
It is not up to ghost believers therefore to prove conclusive evidence, but for the doubters to disprove. This is something virtually impossible to achieve and so, in my book, ghosts are very possible and if unexplained scientifically then so be it - just like much of what physics is, and up until very recently was - unexplained, but present.
There will always be examples which seem to prove none other than the fallibility of the human mind - try reading up on the Angel of Mons and the so-called apparitions of the soldiers of the 1st World War and delve deep enough, you know there is little proof as ever there is. But to make the leap from disproving the presence of phantom medieval archers in a WW1 battle to assuming that all supernatural/supernormal occurences are nonsense is equally nonsense.
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.
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.
This is my view on ghosts and other stuff.I have seen one but don't believe in them. I just haven't found the explanation for what I saw.