Do you believe in ghost?

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 7:24 am

Its a debate topic. A debate topic only works when you have two sides presenting arguments. You can't just turn up and state your opinion, then when asked for evidence say you won't give any because it will just be refuted.
In fact thats the exact opposite of the point, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM.

What constitutes it as a debate topic? And why can't someone just show up and state their opinion. I state my opinion all the time with little effort to provide someone with evidence. I mean, vanilla is better than chocolate. I don't need to prove that to anyone, it's my opinion.

I don't and won't believe in ghost until I see one with my own two eyes. We have no irrefutable proof to make a scientific claim either way. And if we did, folks would change their opinions. :shrug:
User avatar
Adrian Morales
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:19 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:29 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM.


Actually, watching that would be more worth your time, especially if you were watching the entire scene. :D
User avatar
Stefanny Cardona
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:08 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:55 pm

I don't and won't believe in ghost until I see one with my own two eyes. We have no irrefutable proof to make a scientific claim either way. And if we did, folks would change their opinions. :shrug:

I don't see why people put so much stock in witnessing something with their own senses. Your senses, and interpretation of them are just as fallible as those of the other people whose reports of ghosts you don't believe.
User avatar
Chris Cross Cabaret Man
 
Posts: 3301
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:33 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:11 am

I don't see why people put so much stock in witnessing something with their own senses. Your senses, and interpretation of them are just as fallible as those of the other people whose reports of ghosts you don't believe.


Exactly. You can't trust your senses. Everyone who has ever seen an optical illusion knows this, and yet they go on believing everything they see. :nope:
User avatar
Trent Theriot
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:37 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:26 am

I don't see why people put so much stock in witnessing something with their own senses. Your senses, and interpretation of them are just as fallible as those of the other people whose reports of ghosts you don't believe.

If I did not experience it and there was scientific evidence that proved there were ghost I would believe. Since there is not, then I would have to see it myself. I sure won't believe someone else's account of seeing them or talking to them. Just as I won't believe the Flat earth society that the earth is flat or any of the other far out claims some folks have. Since there is no proof, I will have to be a witness to it. I don't claim to know anything for sure but so far, I've not seen satisfactory evidence nor witnessed them, so...that is the bottom line for me.
User avatar
Antony Holdsworth
 
Posts: 3387
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 4:50 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:09 pm

You really need to stop trying to brow beat your opinion on to others. All Im saying is if you really want proof, goggle it. Even if I presented you with proof you would call it fake, so no I don't plan on supplying any anytime soon. If I posted a picture you would say it was double exposed or it was tampered with, even if you had no proof to support your claim, so why should I bother, Im not gonna change anyones mind and neither are you. The difference is Im not trying to force my opinion down your throat like you are to others.

Regardless of whether the topic is a debate, that's really not the way to go about it. If you want to walk in, give an opinion, and walk out, fine. Walking in and stating "I have an argument! Now make it yourself" is just going to annoy people.

It's not an automatically faulty action to disregard a picture by itself, especially considering the inherently "blurry" nature of what ghosts supposedly look like. The fact that people CAN talk about exposure and tampering and whatnot means photographs are not the evidence they once were, because we know the technology exists to make an image look like a photograph of almost anything we want.
User avatar
Klaire
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 7:56 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:49 pm

If I did not experience it and there was scientific evidence that proved there were ghost I would believe.

That should be your criteria, whether or not you have witnessed it yourself. If you think you see something, but it makes no logical sense, the more likely explanation is that it wasn't really there, and the fault is in your own brain. Your own eye witness testimony should be just as untrustworthy to you as anyone elses.
User avatar
Queen
 
Posts: 3480
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:00 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:54 am

That should be your criteria, whether or not you have witnessed it yourself. If you think you see something, but it makes no logical sense, the more likely explanation is that it wasn't really there, and the fault is in your own brain. Your own eye witness testimony should be just as untrustworthy to you as anyone elses.

Many thanks for telling me how I should think. ;)

If I am diagnosed with a brain tumor or my brain gets that faulty, I am sure someone will let me know. If I see snow out the window (which I do) I will believe it's snowing despite you believing I should question it.
User avatar
Baby K(:
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:07 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:34 pm

If I see snow out the window (which I do) I will believe it's snowing despite you believing I should question it.

It's not snow, it's the wispy white flakes from ghosts exploding in midair above your house.
User avatar
Far'ed K.G.h.m
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:03 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 6:17 am

It's not snow, it's the wispy white flakes from ghosts exploding in midair above your house.

Well, they sure are cold souls.
User avatar
CYCO JO-NATE
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:41 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:12 pm

Many thanks for telling me how I should think. ;)

If I am diagnosed with a brain tumor or my brain gets that faulty, I am sure someone will let me know. If I see snow out the window (which I do) I will believe it's snowing despite you believing I should question it.

Snow has a more simple explanation, that makes far more sense than it being a hallucination. If it were snowing bright purple snow that tastes like graqes, but no one else has seen it, and there are no traces of purple snow when you try to prove it, then that's a more reasonable comparison.

Brain tumors and "faulty" brains aren't all it takes to see things that don't exist. The brain is inherently faulty in its complexity. The human brain cannot be trusted without a reasonable level of confirmation.
User avatar
neen
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:19 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:27 am

No, I'm waiting for a shred of actual evidence. Ghosts make absolutely no sense given that life is simple, logical, and scientific so I'd need more than a good story or blurry photo to believe in them

I'd love to be paid to hang out in "haunted" places like the people on all those stupid ghost shows. Oftentimes the places they go are pretty good destinations for a history enthusiast and, of course, nowhere in the world is actually haunted by ghosts.

It'd be interesting if ghosts actually existed, just like magic and superpowers...but they don't.
User avatar
Chelsea Head
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:38 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:31 am

What constitutes it as a debate topic? And why can't someone just show up and state their opinion. I state my opinion all the time with little effort to provide someone with evidence. I mean, vanilla is better than chocolate. I don't need to prove that to anyone, it's my opinion.

I don't and won't believe in ghost until I see one with my own two eyes. We have no irrefutable proof to make a scientific claim either way. And if we did, folks would change their opinions. :shrug:

Well when discussing ice cream I probably wouldn't want evidence, though your claim that vanilla is better is obviously completely wrong.
But whenits about more in depth claims, its always good to be able to back up your position.
User avatar
Janeth Valenzuela Castelo
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:03 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:14 am

I would like to make the point that our brains are very susceptible to illusion in lots of forms, so I don't think our senses are a very reliable instrument to go by as the sole proof of the existence of something.
User avatar
Stacyia
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:48 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:03 pm

I'm a ghost, sorta.
I once played a version of the Ouija board with some girls. One of them claimed that all women on her mothers side had always been able to see and communicate with ghosts.
Throughout the whole "game" I made up all the answers and answered all questions using the board. Started out with simple and very silly things like "What where we all in previous lives?" to which I replied things like "oyster" and "Easy Rider" (Easy Rider was to what I was in a previous life, but no one got the reference :P). Later on I made it say one of us would die that night and that the ghost who where giving us the answers where an evil one. The girl who really believed in this started crying like crazy but told us we couldn't leave since leaving without asking the ghost for permission is a sure way to get murdered by the ghosts. So we all asked for permission and I allowed everyone to leave except her and me (since I still had to control the answers). At this point she was just terrified. But so I started feeling bad for her and let her go. She had to have all the girls sleeping in her room that night (this was at a camp thingey).

I thought it was hilarious. :D
I'm an a-hole.
User avatar
Tina Tupou
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:37 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 6:08 am

Many thanks for telling me how I should think. ;)

If I am diagnosed with a brain tumor or my brain gets that faulty, I am sure someone will let me know. If I see snow out the window (which I do) I will believe it's snowing despite you believing I should question it.

You know, there's a difference between calmly sitting in your house looking out the window and seeing snow, and being scared [censored]less and seeing a ghost. Any situation involving strong excitement, anxiety and/or high adrenaline intoxication really isn't a good moment to be undeniably believing your senses. I was at a football game once and my team had to score a goal to avoid relegation. 5 minutes before the end, one of the players got to a 100% chance of scoring a goal. As he shot, I saw the ball go into the goal and the goal being scored. I didn't just think I saw a goal, I did see a goal. Two seconds later, though, I realised no goal had been scored.


So we all asked for permission and I allowed everyone to leave except her and me (win win!!!) (since I still had to control the answers (:facepalm:) ).

Son, I am disappoint.
User avatar
amhain
 
Posts: 3506
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:31 pm

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:57 am

If I did not experience it and there was scientific evidence that proved there were ghost I would believe. Since there is not, then I would have to see it myself. I sure won't believe someone else's account of seeing them or talking to them. Just as I won't believe the Flat earth society that the earth is flat or any of the other far out claims some folks have. Since there is no proof, I will have to be a witness to it. I don't claim to know anything for sure but so far, I've not seen satisfactory evidence nor witnessed them, so...that is the bottom line for me.


So you would, in fact, believe that Siegfried & Roy actually did fly a white tiger around the room, just because you witnessed it?
User avatar
Gwen
 
Posts: 3367
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:34 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:59 am

Tell me, how is it not flamebaiting for you to hop into a thread, state "Ghosts exist, [censored] google it!", then leave?


- I believe ghosts exist
- You have access to the same evidence I do, if you want evidence then look it up.

How is that flame-baiting?

Arn't you flaming me by trying to accuse me of it? And isn't that against forum policy.....

7. Flaming is not allowed.

Insulting individuals or groups of members and name calling are flames. Any remark that is made to insult another member or group of members will be considered a flame and thus you may receive a warning for it.





For those to lazy to use google.... http://theunexplainedmysteries.com/images/The-Brown-Lady-of-Raynham.jpg

This portrait of "The Brown Lady" ghost is arguably the most famous and well-regarded ghost photograph ever taken. The ghost is thought to be that of Lady Dorothy Townshend, wife of Charles Townshend, 2nd Viscount of Raynham, residents of Raynham Hall in Norfolk, England in the early 1700s. It was rumored that Dorothy, before her marriage to Charles, had been the mistress of Lord Wharton. Charles suspected Dorothy of infidelity. Although according to legal records she died and was buried in 1726, it was suspected that the funeral was a sham and that Charles had locked his wife away in a remote corner of the house until her death many years later.
Dorothy's ghost is said to haunt the oak staircase and other areas of Raynham Hall. In the early 1800s, King George IV, while staying at Raynham, saw the figure of a woman in a brown dress standing beside his bed. She was seen again standing in the hall in 1835 by Colonel Loftus, who was visiting for the Christmas holidays. He saw her again a week later and described her as wearing a brown satin dress, her skin glowing with a pale luminescence. It also seemed to him that her eyes had been gouged out. A few years later, Captain Frederick Marryat and two friends saw "the Brown Lady" gliding along an upstairs hallway, carrying a lantern. As she passed, Marryat said, she grinned at the men in a "diabolical manner." Marryat fired a pistol at the apparition, but the bullet simply passed through.

This famous photo was taken in September, 1936 by Captain Provand and Indre Shira, two photographers who were assigned to photograph Raynham Hall for Country Life magazine. This is what happened, according to Shira:

"Captain Provand took one photograph while I flashed the light. He was focusing for another exposure; I was standing by his side just behind the camera with the flashlight pistol in my hand, looking directly up the staircase. All at once I detected an ethereal veiled form coming slowly down the stairs. Rather excitedly, I called out sharply: 'Quick, quick, there's something.' I pressed the trigger of the flashlight pistol. After the flash and on closing the shutter, Captain Provand removed the focusing cloth from his head and turning to me said: 'What's all the excitement about?'"

Upon developing the film, the image of The Brown Lady ghost was seen for the first time. It was published in the December 16, 1936 issue of Country Life. The ghost has been seen occasionally since.



http://paranormal.about.com/od/ghostphotos/ig/Best-Ghost-Photos/Lord-Combermere.-04z.htm
This photograph of the Combermere Abbey library was taken in 1891 by Sybell Corbet. The figure of a man can faintly be seen sitting in the chair to the left. His head, collar and right arm on the armrest are clearly discernable. It is believed to be the ghost of Lord Combermere.
Lord Combermere was a British cavalry commander in the early 1800s, who distinguished himself in several military campaigns. Combermere Abbey, located in Cheshire, England, was founded by Benedictine monks in 1133. In 1540, King Henry VII kicked out the Benedictines, and the Abbey later became the Seat of Sir George Cotton KT, Vice Chamberlain to the household of Prince Edward, son of Henry VIII. In 1814, Sir Stapleton Cotton, a descendent of Sir George, took the title "Lord Combermere" and in 1817 became became the Governor of Barbados. Today the Abbey is a tourist attraction and hotel.

Lord Combermere died in 1891, having been struck and killed by a horse-drawn carriage. At the time Sybell Corbet took the above photo, Combermere's funeral was taking place some four miles away. The photographic exposure, Corbet recorded, took about an hour. It is thought by some that during that time a servant might have come into the room and sat briefly in the chair, creating the transparent image. This idea was refuted by members of the household, however, testifying that all were attending Lord Combermere's funeral.

Interesting side note: Lord Combermere is connected to another well-known paranormal story: the famous "Moving Coffins" of Barbados. The coffins inside the sealed vault of the Chase family are said to have been moved about by unnatural forces. The heavy coffins were repeatedly put in proper order, but often when a new coffin was added to the vault, the coffins were found strewn about. Lord Combermere, while governor of Barbados, had ordered a professional investigation of the mystery.



Now, is this proof positive? No, or corse not, this is merely evidence for consideration. I cannot provide 100% proof positive that ghosts exist, mainly because any form of evidence can be debated as faked, especially in this day and age. I provide these two solely because there were taken before the vast majority of photo altering technology.



As a final note I don't care weather anyone believes or doesn't, I just think its funny that so many people refuse to believe anything outside of their box, it can be anything else except for paranormal. If you can disprove ghosts then great, I would love to see 100% proof that ghosts don't exist that way we can settle this once and for all. I would love to see solid evidence of either side of the debate. Until then I choose to believe.


Feel free to tear apart the photos or any other part of this post, I will leave you guys to continue the debate.
User avatar
Andrea Pratt
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 4:49 am

Post » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:23 pm

Myself, I've seen a ghost. So, naturally, I voted "yes." However, I tend to mean "ghost" in the same way "UFO" was originally meant. In that, if I see a "UFO," it doesn't mean that it's necessarily a flying saucer from outer space with a bunch of little aliens in it - it's just something that can't yet be identified. In the same way - I've seen a "ghost," but all I can definitively say is that it was something I can't explain.
User avatar
SWagg KId
 
Posts: 3488
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:26 am

Previous

Return to Othor Games