"Skeptics" Please show me you scientific "Proof"!!!?

Question

I sit here & read the statements by "skeptics" saying there is "NO" proof of paranormal activitey. It seems that most have no proof of non exsistance of "ghosts" & are just stating what they "think" or feel or have been taught through out the years.

I think it is absolutly silly for them to say that, when they can't prove it themselves.

Answer 1

True i see your point, but No offense , People are entitled to their own opinons , like Paranormal enthusiasts versus a skeptic we cannot force upon one to agree with us and its like arguing religion you don't do it and arguing a never ending battle kind of gives one a bad image :)

Ryan~Paranormal Investigator/Researcher~

www.theprosonline.com

Answer 2

After you've been on here awhile, you'll figure out who the skeptics are. This is what you do...just skip their answers. They are here mainly for new people or for people who are "on the fence"...not for the ones with proof already. I read their answers because I've begun to think about them as part of the paranormal "family". Once in awhile they're right about some things. If I went over to the Science&Math section and tried to answer questions to things I know nothing about...they'd laugh me away.Hopefully this section won't become like R&S where most of the Q&As are just constant bickering.

Answer 3

That is not the way that science works.   Science requires evidence and facts to make theories.

Science does not work by seeking to disprove anything.   So science is not going to try and disprove things like  Ghosts, Goblins, Fairies, etc.  However, it will weigh the validity of the evidence available in determining whether the available evidence shows that something or some event may be true.

It uses scientific thinking, reasoning, scientific method, etc. to make determinations.

A lot of theories postulated by ghosthunters, etc. are pretty much not based upon science.  In fact some defy the laws of physics and reason.

All science is saying at this point, is that there is no scientific evidence to support the notion that there is a such thing as ghost.   And some of the so called evidence being put forward can be explained in a more logical manner, or there is no evidence that it is a ghost.

But it is fun talking about them, etc. just like Halloween is fun, etc.  So I really don't think anyone should really be upset if there is no such thing as a ghost.  It is still fun celebrating Halloween, watching Ghosthunters, Ghost and Mr. Chicken, etc.   No big deal.

So if you choose to believe in ghosts fine.  But realize that there is no true scientific body of knowledge or research to support their existence.  If there was,  there would be thousands of real scientists out there studying the phenomena.  Trust me.

Out of curiosity I would be interested in you relaying the personal experiencess that you have had that led to your belief in ghosts, and how you determined that it was a ghost that caused the phenomena.

What is funny to me is how some get very indignant, etc. if you question their belief in such things, whereas the only experience they have had is watching a TV episode of ghost hunters.   This negative attitude towards scientific thinking etc, has always baffled me, as you would think that ghost believers would welcome scientific evidence.  But it seems to me that sometimes that believers sometimes accept evidence that might indicate something paranormal, but choose to ignore more logical explanations.  This just serves to make it a big joke.  Interesting.

And while it might be very difficult to ever scientifically prove the existence of ghosts, it should be easy to scientifically test and prove psychic ability, dowsing, etc.   However it has never been done and proven.  And I do believe that the James Randi Educational foundation is still offering a million bucks to anyone who can prove anything paranormal, psychic ability, etc.    To date it has not been paid out.

Someone mentioned that some things you just know.  OK,  I know that 4 Leprechauns are living under my house.  That makes it true.  Ha.

Answer 4

Its the same argument in R&S. Proof that God exists. Well prove he doesn't! I believe that there is more out there than we know! But I have no "proof" just things I've seen with my eyes. I know there are demons I've seen one. I was with 2 other people when I saw it and they saw it too. He was Anger! He came immediately after the death of our brother who passed in an accident in Iraq. I have no physical proof but then no one has proof he's not there! It doesn't matter if it ghosts, spirits, demons or GOD himself if some one refuses to see them they won't. You could have all the proof in the world to prove them; there will always be a skeptic saying it's all made up.

Answer 5

Having the capability of recognising logical fallacies in arguments reduces the likelihood that skeptics will exploit your emotional or intellectual weaknesses.    

The skeptic insists that he doesn't have to provide evidence and arguments to support his side of the argument because he isn't asserting a claim, he is merely denying or doubting yours.  His mistake consists of assuming that a negative claim (asserting that something doesn't exist) is fundamentally different from a positive claim.  It isn't.

Any definite claim, positive or negative, requires definite support.  Merely refuting or arguing against an opponent's position is not enough to establish one's own position.  In other words, you can't win by default.

As arch-skeptic Carl Sagan himself said, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  If someone wants to rule out visitations by extra-terrestrial aliens, it would not be enough to point out that all the evidence presented so far is either seriously flawed or not very strong.  It would be necessary to state definite reasons which would make ET visitations either impossible or highly unlikely.  (He might, for example, point out that our best understanding of physics pretty much rules out any kind of effective faster-than-light drive.)

The only person exempt from providing definite support is the

person who takes a strict "I don't know" position or the agnostic position.  If someone takes the position that the evidence in favor of ET visitations is inadequate but goes no farther, he is exempt from further argument (provided, of course, he gives adequate reasons for rejecting the evidence).  However, if he wants to go farther and insist that it is impossible or highly unlikely that ET's are visiting or have ever visited the Earth, it becomes necessary for him to provide definite reasons for his position.  He is no longer entitled merely to argue against his opponent's position.

There is the question of honesty.  Someone who claims to take the agnostic position but really takes the position of definite disbelief is, of course, misrepresenting his views.  For example, a skeptic who insists that he merely believes the psi hypothesis is inadequately supported when in fact he believes that the human mind can only acquire information through the physical senses is simply not being honest.

Of course, for practical reasons it often isn't possible to

gather the necessary information to prove or disprove a

proposition, e.g., it isn't possible to search the entire

universe to prove that no intelligent extraterrestrial life exists.  This by itself doesn't mean that a case can't be made

against the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence, although

it does probably mean that the case can't be as air-tight and

conclusive as we would like.

Answer 6

I think your right! Most people don't know what they talking about in this area! Most people aren't even aware that Einstein and alot of other great scientists believed in parallel universes and other things that would be considered paranormal. I wish before they answered these questions they would at least know alittle something about them! Most of the people sound like idiots!

Answer 7

It's funny you mention silly in your question/statement.Speaking for myself.I would certainly start believing in ghosts.As I said in an earlier question.I don't know what proof would be.I'll just know it when I see it.Personally If you want to believe go right ahead.I just think,for me it's silly.I mean no disrespect by that and I know some good people take it seriously.It's just what I tell anyone who asks.Can I prove I'm right?Not to you,and I wouldn't even try.I doubt very many real scientists would bother anyway.I think most of them think it's silly too.

Answer 8

everybody wants proof , what ever happened to faith ? Any one ( like me ) who has personal experiences can believe the fact that there something more than heaven and earth . and any one who hasn't will be a skeptic . I really don't care that people think I was seeing things , let them be skeptic , it doesn't hurt my faith at all

Answer 9

Okay. But what's the question? You want proof? We can't give proof that ghosts exist. Skeptics can't give proof that they don't. Seems like we're wasting our time fussing about it.

Answer 10

I do not normally visit this area, but as a person who believes in "the unbelieveable," I empathize with your question.  Why do the skeptics have to come down so hard on believers?  Why are they so vehemently against believing?  It would seem to be the easier of the two choices!

They think:  Something happened that I cannot explain, but I refuse to believe that it is paranormal.  

I think their refusal stems from fear.  Fear that, if there is a paranormal, then there could be a God and therefore someone that they have to answer to.  This fear is normal, as Thomas Huxley once said there was no greater weight lifted from his heart as the day he believed there was no God.  If no God, then people can do whatever they like with no repercussions.

The gold example is completely useless as it compares a quantifiable situation with an unquantifiable one - apples to oranges, folks.  If I said I felt sad, but you said you did not believe me, where is the proof on either side?  This is the type of phenomenon that Ghost Seeker is talking about.

Basically, they do not have any proof either but at the least they think they have theory vs theory, and that is something.  

In reality, there are some things which need no proof.  Sometimes, you "just know."

Answer 11

As a skeptic, there is no burden of proof on me to doubt another's claim. However, the burden of proof does fall on me when I say, in absolute terms, that the claim is false. As a skeptic I try not to do that unless I actually have evidence that falsifies the claim and can back it up.

I hope the difference is clear. Making a claim about anything negative or positive requires supporting evidence. Doubting, but not outright denying, a claim puts no burden of proof on the doubter at all.  Being a skeptic and/or scientists usually puts you in the latter category, a doubter who asks for evidence to substantiate a claim.

To date, I have not found evidence of sufficient quality and quantity to substantiate the existence of paranormal activity. That doesn't mean the paranormal activity doesn't exist, only that there is not enough evidence to warrant belief. In addition, the lack of credible evidence (both theoretical and empirical)  is so overwhelming that it suggests to me that these paranormal claims really don't have merit. Can I prove it?  No, and I don't attempt to. But this is why I doubt.

EDIT: Let me join with Wiccan Rider in confirming Eri's answer as being correct and to the point. It also appears that Ghost Seeker had made up her mind about skeptics, so I question her open-mindedness.

Answer 12

Please don't be too hard on the skeptics. After all they were here in the Science and Mathematics section first and then yahoo decided to put the paranormal section here with the science section and in their view it seems like the mythology and folklore section.

I think we should realize this and ask and answer questions according to our belief and experience but also try and not be too mythical about it. If we come off as Scientific researchers and call ourselves scientists when we have no valid doctorate in such filed then we should expect this to  cause an uproar among those here who really are real scientists.

I think there is room for us all but we true believers need to be more considerate of the skeptics and true scientists.

One reason I am against teaching and believe we are scientists and are out to prove ghosts exist to the world is all my friends who hold such a view get really upset when they are laughed at by real scientists. or hard core skeptics.

I am a ghost hunter/paranormal investigator and I realize I will be looked at in odd ways by some but that just goes with the territory. If anyone gets upset because skeptics  don't take them seriously then I think it is very possible they should reconsider doing this. A good sense of humor is a must.

Just my opinion here.

Steve

Edit: Eri is right it is up to us believer to prove something exists and I guess that is why so many believers are out to take that one photo, that one EVP that will convince the world ghosts exist.

Every day living in most peoples lives suggests ghosts, magic, miracles, faries, nomes, etc do not exist. If you are going to ask the skeptic to prove ghosts do not exist then you will be asked to prove elves, faries, leprecons, dragons etc do not exist.

Don't get me wrong I am on your side I am a true believe but I also think we should try and understand the skeptics view. I once was a hard core skeptic until I saw that ghost.

Answer 13

I can see the skeptics side of things until the argument becomes self defeating and redundant. Yes I agree that this section may have been placed in the wrong area, but with all that said, its here

And believe it or not, there are scientific theories that do go hand in hand with possible paranormal explantions. Quantum Physics, says there are possibilities for multiple universes, parallel dimentions, and string theories, where time can be bent and warped. Where the past, future, and the present can all exist at the same time.

I appreciate some of the skeptics here because they can give thoughtful respectful answers to my questions. They will actually think before posting. While other come off as blowhards with nothing more to add but their own uninformed two cents worth. Science has proven to be very discriminating to its own community time after time when a new theory has arisen. Labeling new ideas as dreaming and bunk until so much proof has been produced, even the nay sayers had to admit there was proof something happened or could have happened. So dont feel bad, science has their own arguments within their own community. I have known religious people who have gone athiest, and I have known athiest's that have found religion. either way, it doesnt matter in the end unless you have a complete disrespect for others, their beliefs, and their way of life.

Answer 14

"Life is too short to go through it irrationally."

-Ugur Akinci

personally, i believe... that I will have another beer.

while I am drinking, take a moment to read about the "Celestial Teapot"

Answer 15

I personally think that scientist have nothing to fear from paranormal investigators anyway. It seem that if you are stomping out "claims" that aren't possible to prove then you are just wasting your time trying to quiet people down.

What is the harm in allowing a few people a way to get in touch with their spirituality?

I can understand if scientist want to protect people from scams - that is very honorable to say the least. Most lay people wouldn't dare mess with a science lab or an atom bomb because we don't understand the implications or the dangers. So if there is nothing to prove and no danger other than looking like Don Quixote riding a Donkey to prove the windmill is a dragon, why would scientist care?

Science has had the paranormal at checkmate for a long time, probably because the unexplained it a territory only for science to prove no matter how long it takes to prove -scientifically of course.

Answer 16

Like others have said, those that make the claims must provide the evidence. Can't test what is not there. Where is it? Why don't the people that REALLY want to witness (i.e. scientists) the paranormal never do?

"It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas.... If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you.... On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful ideas from the worthless ones" - Carl Sagan, 1987.

Answer 17

Well ask them to prove their conscience exist. If they can't prove that then don't waste time proving yourself, as they have no conscience.

eta: Ohhhh I guess somebody didnt like my answer lol.

Answer 18

You can't prove something doesn't exist.  It's a logical impossibility.

You have no proof that I don't have a million bucks worth of gold in my living room.  But without proof, you wouldn't give me a million bucks for it, would you?  The burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, not the person who doubts it.  It's silly for you to claim there are ghosts or psychics or a god if you can't prove it.