Okay, here's a better way to put my question to those who are skeptics of the paranormal: Why "science?"

Question

I hear and read over and over again from skeptics that they are seeking "proof" of the paranormal, and I keep trying to figure out what, in their minds, qualifies as truth. Does it mean that THEY themselves had to personally witness it and eliminate all natural possibilities? If so, why is their observation worth more than hundreds of thousand of other observers? Does it mean that they need to analyze every part of every event according to the scientific method? If so, why do they put faith in science? There isn't a day that goes by that there isn't some "new" finding that contradicts an earlier finding of "fact." One year, eggs have been proven bad for your health; the next year, they're actually proven to be GOOD for you. When I was in school, I was taught, as FACT, that there were eight planets in our solar system. Now, my kids are taught otherwise. So, what good is the scientific method, really, and why should it be considered any more credible than an eyewitness with no motive?

Answer 1

I can see eggs,I know they're real.Whether they're good for you or not is beside the point.I can see most of the planets.What they're called is beside the point.I've never seen anything paranormal.Nor,can you or anyone else point me to where I can.I personally don't need absolute proof.I'm waiting for some decent evidence.The observations of you or anyone else are worthless as evidence.Here's an example.Folks here are constantly telling us.Astral traveling and telekinesis are real.They've done it they insist.Either one of those would be easy to demonstrate.Why not just do it?Don't worry about the scientific method.Let actions do your talking for a change.

Answer 2

There are still eight planets in our solar system: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.

Pluto was downgraded to "minor planet" when the definition of planet was finally agreed on by the astronomers.

As far as science is concerned, it is a respected process that gave us things like computers, aircraft, medical science and cancer fighting drugs, space probes that land on Mars, and so on. What did paranormal gave us besides proved fraudsters like fake-spoon-bender Geller?

Evidently, your lack of faith in science comes from your relative lack of knowledge and understanding in science.

Which is somewhat ironic, since your belief in the paranormal probably comes ALSO from your lack of knowledge and understanding in science. No disrespect, but as it has been told so many times before, the burden of proof in with the paranormal believers. And there is James Randi who has a protocol that would currently give $1 million dollar to anyone who can show and prove a paranormal event of any kind (under controlled conditions, to avoid fraudsters). There has been no takers since it was instituted in 1964. I really wonder why...

Science works. Paranormal mumbo-jumbo does not. Sorry that I have to break the news.

Edit: what do you take for your ADD?

Do you know they have side effects?

Prozac: Anxiety, restlessness, mania/hypomania, seizures, suicide, impaired judgment, agitation, amnesia, confusion, emotional lability, apathy, depersonalization, hallucinations, hostility, paranoid reaction, personality disorder, delusions.

Answer 3

Theres good science and bad science. The scientists making claims about eggs are, well, bad scientists. The whole thing with Pluto is ridiculous, calling or not a piece of frozen rock a planet or not is irrelevant but not a contradiction. A rose by any other name...

My point is most (but not all) of today's scientists do not follow the scientific method. That by itself has no relation to the intrinsic quality of good science. Paranormal phenomena has a place in the scientific community when done according to the scientific method, why not? But when your data is nothing but a collection of stories you heard on the street... thats bad science.

Answer 4

First of all, the randi million dollar challenge is for paranormal abilities, not for ghosts and goblins.

You experienced something that you believe is a ghost. A loved one who came back from the dead to visit you. How do you know this?

You know because you have heard stories, and seen tv shows that tell you that dead people can come back and visit. None of your information is based on anything except guesses based on other peoples guesses.

Why believe one thing when there is a much more obvious answer, such as a dream, or sleep paralysis.

Hundreds of thousands of observers are just making guesses and interpeting what they experience by hundreds of thousands of other people. They are not basing thier observations on an unbiased basis.

Sleep paralysis is a fairly well understood phenomena which happens to lots of people. There is nothing paranormal about it. A large amount of people who experience it will come away believing they have experienced something paranormal, even though this is absolutely not true.

Many people will even interpet natural house noises as paranormal, without question.

I ask you, wouldn't you rather know the truth, then just assuming all the urban legends and modern myths about ghosts are absolutely true?

Answer 5

Why science? Because it works in the most predictable way, which makes it most practical in the long run.

When you say: "One year, eggs have been proven bad for your health; the next year, they're actually proven to be GOOD for you." you are confusing science and marketing. Marketing uses whatever sells, that was God yesterday, today it is Science; same gibberish.

Teachers need to simplify things to present them to youngsters, sometimes the teacher overdoes it. There are only 8 planets, really meant we observed only 8 planets so far.

The point of the scientific method, is not to eliminate all errors  but to allows us to gain real knowledge and understanding even though the way is littered with presuppositions and over simplifications that turn out to be short-sighted in the long run.  

Now let me return the ball on your side: how would you design a psychic science fair experiment? Try it out yourself and if you get good results ask people that you trust to try reproduce your results. Once you are confident your results hold water, pass it on to people you don't know and see how they fare. Insists that all data be available including your own, so that everyone can double check all results.

Good luck.

Answer 6

There are 8 planets in our solar system.  I assume you mean you were taught that there were 9.  Nothing has changed except what we call one of them because we've slightly changed our definition of planet.  That's not science.  That's terminology.  As for the egg thing, that's bad reporting.  Many science experiments, especially in medicine, only apply to certain cases or conditions that the reporters never bother to mention.  So sometimes eggs are good for you and sometimes they aren't.

It's actually very simple.  The paranormal could easily be proven.  You say you have psychic powers?  Great.  We'll make a test up around your claim.  If you claim you send the images of 10 cards to a friend who can write them down, and that's the test we'll do.  If you pass it, say by getting 9/10, great.  We'll do it once more to make sure it's not a fluke.  Then we'll write it up for a journal.  Before they publish it, they'll send someone over to make sure it worked - another skeptical observer.  We'll do it again, and then the paper gets published.  That's how you do impartial science.  The problem with all the anecdotes out there is that they weren't done in front of people who knew how to construct a science experiment where you couldn't have been cheating.  Because there are so many ways they could be cheating.

Answer 7

witnesses to the paranormal have their hands full to prove what they've experienced. A solid, credible reputation is paramount. We know odd things are out there, but how to put it in the lab? To walk away and deny it isn't good science, nor very professional. Keep alert and report!

Answer 8

I don't know if some of the skeptics who claim to be scientific really are following the scientific method.  What they seem to be doing is dismissing as false everything that does not conform to their preconceived notions.   It's like having a orthodoxy, and everything else is heresy.   Hence, what you saw does not count; your explanation of what you saw does not count.   What counts are only pre-approved scenarios or "explanations."   So these people will say that you are a liar or crazy or on drugs or something else that fits their orthodoxy.

True scientists have open minds and if there is something they do not know or do not understand, they don't just say that it is impossible.

Answer 9

The old "science can't make up its mind" yarn is a pretty old excuse.  Eggs weren't proved good or bad for you by science.  They are either recommended or not recommended according to the dietary rule of the day.  Dietary rules aren't always written by science.  Dietary rules are often driven by trends.  Whether or not an egg is healthy matters less scientifically speaking than whether there is cholesterol in eggs, how much cholesterol is in eggs and what effects high cholesterol consumption can have on your body.

As far as evidence goes, neither one anecdote nor one million anecdotes are as important as a observable, measurable, testable and repeatable event.  This is because personal experiences do not equal evidence.  That's not to say personal testimony should be completely discounted, but due to the unreliable nature of the personal experience we can't assume something is real just because multiple people say it is.

For example, what if it's common to experience something that, although natural, has no immediate explanation?  What is likely to happen?  I would contend that some will investigate to discover the natural cause.  I would also contend that many people will not.  They will base their conclusion on their personal belief system.  These belief systems are informed by the culture a person is raised in.  Some will see this thing as being caused by angels, others by spirits and others still by aliens.

Answer 10

There isn't a way to prove or disprove ghosts, spirits, demons, angels, or even god for that matter.

Not everyone in here has ever had a paranormal experience,

even though quiet a few have.

The "science" investigators use are EMF meters, digital temp guages, voice and video recording devices, cameras, thermal imaging cameras, and even dowsing rods.

But one also needs to have the common sense to dig around for the facts and investigate, possible re-creating the scene, to dismiss a normal experience from one that's not explainable.

It's really no different than the guys from Myth Busters: finding facts over exaggerated story telling.

And there are a few knuckleheads in here that will tell someone they have a demon in their house and the home needs a priest and exorcism.

And if the poster is already convinced that's what the problem is, then that's the direction they will turn until the paranoia scare runs dry.

Answer 11

Why science? Because as a tool science has been our best way of figuring out how things work in the universe. The process of studying,experimenting, and DUPLICATING results has allowed us to build a society where people can talk practically instantly with someone around the world, to go from one place to another in a fraction of the time  our ancestors could. It has allowed us to figure out how to stay healthier and recover from disease and injury faster.  And science learns by practice, and by its mistakes. Someone comes up with an idea (hypothesis). Perhaps a few early experiments show the idea seems good. But its not settling for the first, or second, or even fifth explanation that does it. Continued expermimenting and studying will either add to the confidence we have an idea is right, or to the realization that we went in the wrong direction. Science doesn't promise us easy answers. It only offers us the best idea as to what is right in a certain idea. And that best might argue about what constitutes a planet, thus changing our official numbering system(at one time there were only 6 known planets, including earth), but it does pretty well on figuring out how to put 200 people into an aluminum tube, throwing them into the air, and having them land thousands of miles away safely. One simply has to understand that as a tool, science has to used properly, just like any other tool.

   A note. Eyewitness testimony is known to be the most unreliable form of evidence in court, even though its the form of evidence most convincing to jurors. Why? Because our brains don't function like camera film. The brain edits, adds, even deletes things. Thus 20 people seeing 2 white men, both cleanshaven and driving a red pickup truck, will give 20 different descriptions, with the number of men, their race, facial hair, and escape vehicles being totally wrong. With science, we may START with something witnessed by a person, but we don't stop with that, or their interpretation. We look for evidence to support or falsify the story, or that can give us an idea of what happened. If some evidence is found, we can study the issue more. People didnt used to believe rocks fell out of the sky. Eventually someone got around to looking for them. Thus meteors and meteorites. It was taking the step from "believing" something to testing that belief that makes science what it is. And with the paranormal, it's the repeated failure of paranormal phenomena to work under reasonable control conditions that makes their existence dubious. And there is also the issue of what we know of the laws of physics that makes claimed phenomena like telepathy unlikely. But notice that there is a perfectly good reason for a scientist to prove something like telepathy. It would force a reexamination of everything we know about physics, and at the least make the scientist's repuation. BUT, it has to be done in a way that rules out any other reasonable explanation(thus the controls), or else we have no compelling reason to abandon ideas that have let us predict and understand the world perfectly well under the old paradign.

Answer 12

Science is concerned with explaining things in terms of biology, chemistry, physics, etc.

Paranormal events, by definition, cannot be explained in those terms, which is why science cannot and will not acknowledge the paranormal.  But remember, science doesn't know everything.

The reason people need to personally witness a paranormal event in order to believe it is because they need to evaluate the experience themselves. I can't take somebody else's word for it, because that person could be mistaken or lying.

Answer 13

alright well everyone pretty much said what i had to say already, but I think one thing should be mentioned - when you hear about "science" in the media, most of the time the information has been modified and mutated every which way to be media friendly... every time a scientific discovery is made, it has to be scrutinized and analyzed over and over in different ways by different individuals and teams... You can be almost certain that anything you hear in the news about scientific discoveries is only a half truth. If you want cold hard facts and things you can really on, read a scientific journal or even a book, who knows, maybe you'll learn something ;)

Answer 14

Good point polar bears were once considered marine mammals because they spent so  much time in the water and derived their food from the sea. That was about 10 years ago I heard that spew from a certified marine biologist. The situation has since been rectified.

SCIENCE is  a safety net that people use to DENY EVERY FACET OF SPIRITUALITY.