The thing is, if everyone simply thought "Hey, if science hasn't explained anything about this, then it's impossible", then science itself wouldn't exist. Science thrives off of taking what was thought as previously impossible and studying it. Some people see something strange and form a hypothesis, then test it and test it until they can either prove it to be true, disprove it, or get a little closer to the truth.
So, you are saying that science progresses through people going "A wizard did it, now let's knock off for lunch!"?
So called "ghosts" have nothing to do with science, it's a matter of people being convinced of the existence of something, to the point where they will completely ignore any other explanations in favour of one that cannot be scientifically verified in any way whatsoever.
Science progresses by finding new scientific explanations for phenomenon that all fit together with all other explanations. Just going "Well, clearly there must be a parallel world to ours where the spirits of the deceased exist that sometimes intersect ours so that we can see the ghosts of those who have died, but only those who died in such a way as to leave some kind of work unfinished!" is crazy! It's madness!
That's why people who dismiss ghosts so quickly annoy me, because science has yet to prove or disprove anything about them.
Largely because of a major fly in the ointment; falsifiability.
In essence, for a theory to be considered scientific, it needs to be possible to prove it false, in case it actually is false. Since claims of "ghosts" never meets this criteria, they are unscientific.
They remain something unknown and strange, so taking a skeptical mindset is the best mindset to go into them with.
No, they remain something very well known that can easily be explained with what we know about the world, there is simply no need to make up outlandish stories about them.
However, I hardly ever see that. There are those who believe they exist, those who don't (and both these groups of people are annoying), and then there are skeptics, the ones trying to figure out if what people report is actually there.
You clearly don't know what a skeptic is. A skeptic is someone who believes something only when it has been firmly established, it is not someone who believes something until it is proven false.
Since every single claim of anything supernatural that has ever been put to the test, scientifically, has been invariably proven to be false, I think that's quite enough to be going on with, don't you?
It's a very difficult thing to research, as most of the "evidence" investigators have gathered is either fake or just not convincing enough.
Isn't that a rather good reason not to believe in it?
Yet there are tons of alleged "eyewitnesses" who claim that they saw their dead grandmother walking down the hall. They could be hallucinating, there could be a purely scientific explanation for it, or their dead grandmother was really there. Skeptics are trying to figure out which of those three possibilities it is.
No, skeptics look at the rational and logical explanations, and so far not a single case has ever involved anything "paranormal".
Besides, I do believe tonnes of people have reported seeing Elvis several years after his death, what do you say to that?
Just flat out denying such paranormal claims because scientists haven't laid a finger on them is being extremely closed minded.
Funnily enough, whenever real scientists do lay a finger on them, they seem to vaporize instantly.
Yes, the believers are annoying, but so are the ones who dismiss the idea without giving it any consideration. Where would humanity be today if it figured "Hey, we can't really see DNA and genes, so let's just skip that and move onto something we know is there."?
Oh, I do believe everything should tested.
But seeing as how the last 10.000 claims have been proven false, I'm really not holding out hope for #10.001.