Producing the Paranormal

Alright, so I'm a skeptic. That doesn't mean I inherently disbelieve claims of the paranormal, but I need solid evidence and a convincing argument that either trumps the rational argument against it or proves it wrong, before I believe the claim. The vast majority of paranormal claims can be attributed to completely rational causes, and many others simply lack enough evidence to validate or invalidate the claim.

So what I'm asking for is discussion and debate on anything that would fall into this realm. If you believe in certain paranormal ideas, feel free to say so. Also feel free to say whether or not it is for intuitive reasons (personal "feeling", faith, or personal experiences) or because of data or research. If you don't believe in one or all of them, you can talk about that too.

But what I'm mainly interested in finding (and the reason for this thread) is rational arguments for these phenomenon, if they exist. I'll end up playing the role of the debunk-er more often than not, but I'm interested in the other side of the debate as well, and we can hopefully understand these beliefs better as a result. My goal is understanding, not argument, even if I happen to disagree. Hopefully this aim can keep the discussion civil.

Always remember that the burden of proof is on the claim. A lack of a debunking argument doesn't validate the claim unless empirical evidence also supports it.

Paranormal phenomenon can fall into many categories: ESP, physic powers, telekinetics, dowsing, various forms of magic, power of thought on the material universe (I include this because it seems to be popular on the forum...but let's not let it take over the thread), near-death experiences, reincarnation, a diety affecting the material world via supernatural means, voodoo, out-of-body experiences, prediction, crop circles, the existence of a soul, extraterrestrials, etc, etc. There's many I'm forgetting. Feel free to discuss one, many, or all of them.

Hopefully this isn't too broad to work, but I didn't want to deal with all of them individually, because many won't get any discussion.

I'll ask my Dad, he was a documentarian and worked on a doc about crop circles, I'll get back to you later tommorow.

how about one in the deepak chopra book life after death. a kid was born with a scar that looked like a shotgun spread. he said that he got shot in world war 2 when he was 8, when he could speak. i believe he was 8. he remembered names, dates and people that died. he had the same scar pattern as the person he remembered being, without ever hearing about him. he also remembered his previous wife

kronick i have the book if u wanna borrow it

Originally posted by chickenlover98
how about one in the deepak chopra book life after death. a kid was born with a scar that looked like a shotgun spread. he said that he got shot in world war 2 when he was 8, when he could speak. i believe he was 8. he remembered names, dates and people that died. he had the same scar pattern as the person he remembered being, without ever hearing about him. he also remembered his previous wife

I believe Deepak is referring to the findings of Dr. Ian Stephenson on the subject of reincarnation. Stephenson's work is one of the few entities in paranormal study that I actually find credible and plausible.

Deepak himself loves throwing the word "quantum" in front of things, and attempting to explain why quantum physics validates all sorts of belief structures. It doesn't, and many of his arguments are paper-thin (I once saw him try to justify an omnipresent deity by referring to quantum particles that exist in more than one place until observed...a gargantuan leap of logic) but the public's general lack of knowledge on quantum physics, and general interest in the afterlife and the paranormal, makes it easy to sell such ideas.

Originally posted by superkronick92
I'll ask my Dad, he was a documentarian and worked on a doc about crop circles, I'll get back to you later tommorow.

Cool, sounds interesting.

you didnt address my question, do you believe that?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Alright, so I'm a skeptic. That doesn't mean I inherently disbelieve claims of the paranormal, but I need solid evidence and a convincing argument that either trumps the rational argument against it or proves it wrong, before I believe the claim. The vast majority of paranormal claims can be attributed to completely rational causes, and many others simply lack enough evidence to validate or invalidate the claim.

So what I'm asking for is discussion and debate on anything that would fall into this realm. If you believe in certain paranormal ideas, feel free to say so. Also feel free to say whether or not it is for intuitive reasons (personal "feeling", faith, or personal experiences) or because of data or research. If you don't believe in one or all of them, you can talk about that too.

But what I'm mainly interested in finding (and the reason for this thread) is rational arguments for these phenomenon, if they exist. I'll end up playing the role of the debunk-er more often than not, but I'm interested in the other side of the debate as well, and we can hopefully understand these beliefs better as a result. My goal is understanding, not argument, even if I happen to disagree. Hopefully this aim can keep the discussion civil.

Always remember that the burden of proof is on the claim. A lack of a debunking argument doesn't validate the claim unless empirical evidence also supports it.

Paranormal phenomenon can fall into many categories: ESP, physic powers, telekinetics, dowsing, various forms of magic, power of thought on the material universe (I include this because it seems to be popular on the forum...but let's not let it take over the thread), near-death experiences, reincarnation, a diety affecting the material world via supernatural means, voodoo, out-of-body experiences, prediction, crop circles, the existence of a soul, extraterrestrials, etc, etc. There's many I'm forgetting. Feel free to discuss one, many, or all of them.

Hopefully this isn't too broad to work, but I didn't want to deal with all of them individually, because many won't get any discussion.

"ESP, physic powers, telekinetics, power of thought on the material universe (I include this because it seems to be popular on the forum...but let's not let it take over the thread),prediction ,"

definately. although mostly all of my evidence is anecdotal. and emperical also becomes anecdotal when not in experiments and witnessed by one person.

"the existence of a soul, various forms of magic, a diety affecting the material world via supernatural means, "

some rather unique people told me so/hinted at it, and in one way or another, there were reason to believe in them at its basis.

"dowsing, near-death experiences, reincarnation, , voodoo, out-of-body experiences, crop circles,extraterrestrials, etc, etc."

reincarnation cud be of many types. dunno. vodoo, wud be jsut another form of magic/using mystical powers. prolly all mystical power is similar and the dolls/artifacts/beleifs are only as important as the strength of faith in them of the "influential" person, cause strong fealings like faith can be a tool to bring out such phenomenon. crop circles, MAYBE, but mostly just pranks. extraterrestrial : maybe, looks unlikely nd illogical but then again a lot of other things in this world seem that way"

Originally posted by chickenlover98
you didnt address my question, do you believe that?

I didn't? What was the question?

Originally posted by leonheartmm
...

Your response (cut for brevity) is fairly typical, but it's something I can't quite understand. You can find anecdotal (i.e. no evidence) stories about any of these. Then mix that with a general belief in "something out there" or a desire to find reasons to believe these things, and it adds up to people setting aside their reason in favor of that "something else" that seems comforting or interesting.

I can understand it, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I can't personally espouse it for myself because it seems such a suspension of disbelief for the sake of blind belief.

um lemme rephraise. what do you think about the stories about the kids who remember stuff from "other lives"

Originally posted by chickenlover98
um lemme rephraise. what do you think about the stories about the kids who remember stuff from "other lives"

You probably want a yes/no answer, which isn't applicable in my case. Based on the meticulous and exhaustive research of Dr. Stephenson (not Deepak) I see reincarnation as a possible true phenomenon, since I haven't encountered or been able to formulate a rational rebuttal to the material other than resorting to the possibility that reincarnation exists. His findings span decades of research, numerous countries and cultures, and literally thousands of cases like the one you mentioned (though they are investigated far more in-depth).

The default atheist response of "nothing" to the afterlife question also seems likely and/or possible to me, though I don't consider either one a concrete "belief", merely reasoned hypotheses that are supported by evidence (or lack of evidence for alternative explanations).

Honestly, reincarnation is probably the only one on my list that I "believe" in...though I feel it's entirely likely that life exists elsewhere (extraterrestrials) just not ones that visit Earth.

then you share similar beliefs. i believe reincarnation is possible though unlikely. although bleak the atheist view seems the most likely. i mean if i got slapped in the face by an angel and saw heaven id be like holy **** im converting, but until then im an atheist/agnostic. im open to the idea of god but if he's real he just seems like an absolute dick

and no i didnt want a yes or no answer. i wanted to know what you thought

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I didn't? What was the question?

Your response (cut for brevity) is fairly typical, but it's something I can't quite understand. You can find anecdotal (i.e. no evidence) stories about any of these. Then mix that with a general belief in "something out there" or a desire to find reasons to believe these things, and it adds up to people setting aside their reason in favor of that "something else" that seems comforting or interesting.

I can understand it, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I can't personally espouse it for myself because it seems such a suspension of disbelief for the sake of blind belief.

actually no. i was{n still am to an extent} a sceptic. to the point of almost being an extremist in the view. i didnt really have any desire to believe in "sumthing out there" at all. n it was not exactly nice to have such expiriences in my life. but the thing about being logical is that you shud give evidence the respect it deserves and not be biased either way or dogmatic. yes the reason for me thinking its highly probable is because of personal expiriences and anecdotal evidence. thats why i dont go out n tell or preach to people to "beleive it", n rightly so, one man's anecdotal evidence can at best be reason for inquiring, never beleief. i accept that. besides, its not like LACK OF BELEIF in such unlikely things is gonna make sumthing bad happen to any1 who doesnt beleive. n there r more important things in life, like trying to find your own peace n love n lessening the suffering of mankind.

and i DO admit of me being deceived but i also understand that then it must have been a plot by various veyr close people to me, over many many years and maticulous planning and perseverance with only one objective, to deceive ME. whihc is also unlikely as i reason the world around me and expiriences.

leon, if i may stray from the topic what exactly are your beliefs. i dont see much of your arguments in the religion forum and i dont know whether ur an atheist or astrong believer

back to topic, i believe in extra terrestrial life. it isnt just a possibility its a truth. considering we cant even make it past fricken pluto and the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of galaxies its almosta garuntee there are other lifeforms. perhaps even ones that look like us. all that would be needed would be similar conditions.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I need solid evidence

Isn't that a contradiction, though?
If something is paranormal, it means it is unexplainable by science (in definition terms anyway).
It also means, if it is paranormal, that it is outside of the realms of what is deemed as 'normal'. Science is natural.
you cannot use scientific evidence which are used to function in natural (normal) environment to prove something which is 'paranormal', no?

Doesn't something become 'paranormal' in eyes of people, when there are no evidence for its occurance?

Originally posted by chickenlover98
leon, if i may stray from the topic what exactly are your beliefs. i dont see much of your arguments in the religion forum and i dont know whether ur an atheist or astrong believer

back to topic, i believe in extra terrestrial life. it isnt just a possibility its a truth. considering we cant even make it past fricken pluto and the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of galaxies its almosta garuntee there are other lifeforms. perhaps even ones that look like us. all that would be needed would be similar conditions.

now thats a hard question. im an agnostic. i beleive that there are mystical things/energies/phenomenon which are more like traditional dreams and fantasies then they are following established scientific guidelines. but i also think that in one way or another part of these phenomenon is physicall like genetics/higher dimension/fate etc, albeit not fully if at all. i do beleive that the phenomenon of BELEIF itself is strong enough to make such things happen for already gifted people but that the CONTENT of beleif is not responsible for it{i.e. if a hindu is suddenly getting vision of the future, and beleives and FEALS like kali is sending them doesnt mean kali is. it just mean th person in question is special and the emotional strength of the beleif brought the thing out. ofcourse its hard to tell that to a psychic whose prolly comprehended more than a normal human ever shud or cud}. i do not know if superhuman entities exist with supernatural powers, but i have heard in one way or another that they do, albeit they might not be stereotypical in nature. same with crystal balls and palm reading and zodiak and stuff. i think its more the PERSON who uses such methods who is gifted and not the method itself.

as far as relegion goes, i beleieve it is empty dogma used to control and manipulate people and causes much suffering in the worls. i think it is based in lack of hope in the real world and fear and dogmatism, a sort of justified vent for humanity's worst characteristics. but i also beleive that FAITH, unadulterated by dogma at times can be a very good thing, n some of it is inevitably present in relegions. i dont beleive an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolant god exists. theres lil probability of a tyrranical egotistical being with great powers existing, who interferes with the world and SEEMS like a god, but its a possibility. i can also imagine a trancendental diety/s, who created the world but are so superior to us in being that they can not understand humanity's suffering and priorities and make the world better. what else, i believe in love, or rather beleived, right now i only KNOW it to be a truth. i also KNOW fate to be an almost inescapeable truth, even though i can not understand it anymore.

as far as the alien thing goes. let me rephrase my reply. logically, there is an almost CERTAINTY, probability wise, that there is alien life sumwhere in the univrse and probably more than one places. however, i really dont know if they VISIT us or anything like that even though theres reason to look into that sort of stuff.

hmm, i think we probably have a soul, whether its sceintific but not understood yet, or comlpetely beyond the bounds of science iand into mysticism, i dont know.

oh yea, n i think this univers,e although generally stable in its laws,{or reality whatever u wanna call it} has a certain tendency to break them at times. thats is why many of my current beleifs wud seem to clash or contradict one another. generally though, im scientific minded and look at evidence and probability. {and the last part about the universe is just a suspicion on my part, not necessarily backed up by any corellative first hand evidence. just extrapolations}

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Isn't that a contradiction, though?
If something is paranormal, it means it is unexplainable by science (in definition terms anyway).
It also means, if it is paranormal, that it is outside of the realms of what is deemed as 'normal'. Science is natural.
you cannot use scientific evidence which are used to function in natural (normal) environment to prove something which is 'paranormal', no?

Doesn't something become 'paranormal' in eyes of people, when there are no evidence for its occurance?

lil's got a good point.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Isn't that a contradiction, though?
If something is paranormal, it means it is unexplainable by science (in definition terms anyway).
It also means, if it is paranormal, that it is outside of the realms of what is deemed as 'normal'. Science is natural.
you cannot use scientific evidence which are used to function in natural (normal) environment to prove something which is 'paranormal', no?

Doesn't something become 'paranormal' in eyes of people, when there are no evidence for its occurance?

Yes but I think your missing the point. If you go by the actual defintion, yes you could say that. Telekinesis for example is an example of paranormal but he would like good evidence to say that it could or does exist.

Telekinesis maybe outside the realm of whats "normal" but if it does exist there should be some evidence for it.

I watched a program where the auidience had to go through some telepathic tests. All the people including myself that believed in telepathy (but didnt think they were telepathic)did better than the people who didnt. Interestingly enough all the people who said they were actually telepathic did the worst (they were full of ****). 😂 The person who conducted the tests said that if telepathy wasnt possible the scores should not have ended up that way. Bare in mind im not using this as inconclusive evidence, im just talkign about a program I watcehed.

I do not believe in the Paranormal.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I do not believe in the Paranormal.

Right...ok..have'nt you said you believe in a "god"?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Right...ok..have'nt you said you believe in a "god"?

Yes, but that is only because no one would understand what I really believe. I believe in the Mystic Law. Therefore, God is natural and not paranormal.