Welcome to Gaia! ::

Gaian Atheists United

Back to Guilds

A safe and friendly place for Atheists to be themselves. 

Tags: Atheism, Theology, Philosophy, Science, Logic 

Reply The Main Discussion Place
The Supernatural Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 4 [>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Sanguvixen

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:53 pm
Foetus In Fetu
There are a couple of assumptions made in the twenty minutes or so that I watched of that programme (and that was pretty generous of me, seriously). Firstly that paranormal activity creates an electromagnetic field and from that the fallacious backwards assumption that if there's an electromagnetic field there must be paranormal activity.

Secondly that "Electronic Voice Phenomena" aren't just apophenia. They give due process a nod but they don't even present alternative scientific explanations, let alone debunk them; they just assume that all of these things must be the result of paranormal activity. In fact they go in there under the assumption that paranormal activity will ensue.

I doubt that their 'findings' are peer reviewed, and between that and the fact that it's a "docu-soap", I seriously don't consider it to be a credible source of evidence.


They don't assume that an electromagnetic field means paranormal activity. You might get that diea but after watching a few episodes you'll understand thier view on it a bit better. They say it can suggest it, but they often try to find other means to explain an electromagnetic field. That could be a light fixture, wall outlets...stuff like that.

I remember in one investigation they found out that reason they had such a huge electromagnetic field in one area, was because of a wire box that wasn't properly covered and it was leaking so much electromagnetic energy to the point that it could be consider dangerous. In fact then they decided that was causing the home owner to feel feelings of dread and see things. His sensitivity to electromagnetic energy combined with the fact that all his chemicals he is using to fix up the house is right next to an air vent which is pumping air from that area into all parts of the house, and they also pointed out a huge excess of mold that could also be causing the problem.

That is why I like them. They don't go into investigations with the mind set that they are going to find something. They go into investigations with the mind set that there are prefectly ordinary explanations being it bad wiring, pipes, plumbing, or something else that is normal.

If you go into a place assuming it is haunted, than you go into trying to collect evidence that it is haunted, with that said, almost anything you catch normal or not, could be turned and twisted into something suggesting paranormal or supernatural activity.

I notice that. It seems they accept EVPs as they are. However, how could you go about debunking an EVP? If you are in area where you catch one and it is female, and there are no females on the property...than what?

If you catch music, and there is nothing in the area to create that kind of music....than what?

I don't know. How would you disprove or try to debunk and EVP? That would be interesting to try.

I don't think it peer reviewed...maybe it is...maybe it isn't. They do what they do to help people, not really to prove to the world anything. The TV show is for entertainment. However they don't investigate or didn't start to investigate with thier mind on having fun, or doing a TV show....they want to help people who think they are going crazy over something that they assume is paranormal or supernatural.
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:55 am
If they're not even going into it to try to prove anything, I'm not going to look at it as though it's likely to provide empirical evidence.

And the fact is that they go in there with the assumption that there are paranormal phenomena such as ghosts. It's implicit in the way they talk about the subject and in the language that they use: "There are no non-human spirits". Like I said, when they talk about other possible causes it seems almost cursory; it was nowhere near as thorough as I'd expect from a rigorous survey.

As for "EVP", it's really not that difficult.  

Foetus In Fetu


Dread Dionaea

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:03 am
Wow Foetus in Fetu, you're the most scientifically-inclined person I've seen here. It's very impressive. Have you had any sort of formal education in this subject or are you just naturally good at this type of discussion?  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:40 pm
Foetus In Fetu
If they're not even going into it to try to prove anything, I'm not going to look at it as though it's likely to provide empirical evidence.

And the fact is that they go in there with the assumption that there are paranormal phenomena such as ghosts. It's implicit in the way they talk about the subject and in the language that they use: "There are no non-human spirits". Like I said, when they talk about other possible causes it seems almost cursory; it was nowhere near as thorough as I'd expect from a rigorous survey.

As for "EVP", it's really not that difficult.


Unfortunately for you I buy niether three as an explanation for EVP's. The first doesn't explain it. The second doesn't either.

Right now I am clueless as to how you are attempting to take those three things Pareidolia, Apophenia, and the Clustering Illusion, put them together and use them to try try and show EVP's as being...debunked.

I read all three links and I'm confused when it comes to what you are thinking.

Do me a favor and explain to me how each of those three things work together to disprove/debunk an EVP. I want to see how you are looking at it.
 

Sanguvixen


Sanguvixen

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:46 pm
Aufstandkind
Wow Foetus in Fetu, you're the most scientifically-inclined person I've seen here. It's very impressive. Have you had any sort of formal education in this subject or are you just naturally good at this type of discussion?


Not really. Giving a few links to a few things that are somewhat irrelevent to the conversation do nothing. If you want to make a link relevent you explain it yourself with your own words.

My younger brother often would bring up some off the world stuff, then say...that proves me right! Then he wouldn't be able to analyze it in his own words, and often didn't even fully understand it himself.

I'm not saying Foe is being foolish like my brother tends to be, but if you are going to take three links and try to claim those easily debunk something, you should also provide your explanation as to why the information provided in those links help your case.
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:30 pm
Eh, no offense, but her logical responses seemed a little more scientifically backed. There's a reason I stopped buying into the energy theories. I'm inclined not to take anything seriously that doesn't have solid evidence and that seems to be what she's saying. It's one thing to daydream up possible solutions for fun and it's another to take it seriously. Sorry.  

Dread Dionaea


Sanguvixen

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:41 pm
Aufstandkind
Eh, no offense, but her logical responses seemed a little more scientifically backed. There's a reason I stopped buying into the energy theories. I'm inclined not to take anything seriously that doesn't have solid evidence and that seems to be what she's saying. It's one thing to daydream up possible solutions for fun and it's another to take it seriously. Sorry.


I toy with different theories but I don't buy into any of them...none of them have enough to be solid. I think that is why this thread was made right? To discuss different ideas...

I still fail to see how either three of her links can explain the appearance of a voice on a tape when that voice was no present when it was being recorded. If the voice wasn't edited in...than where did it come from?

Further more two of those don't really have as much to do with science as much as Psychology.

"From the Wiki article: Pareidolia ,first used in 1994 by Steven Goldstein, describes a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being mistakenly perceived as recognizable."

Some of it is vague. Some of it isn't. For the sake of it let us call all sounds that are vague or not "Sounds of an Unknown Origin"

So you've got two people talking, or even just one asking a question. Then something "A sound of an Unknown Origin appears." You don't hear it. When you play back the tape it is there. If if is "Vague" one could discard it.

If itsn't vague...then what? What if it is clear as day? Then you can't use Pareidolia as an explanation because it isn't dealing with a vague or random sound. It is distinct, loud, and very recognizable.

Then you are left with...what caused this "Sound of an unknown Origin?"
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:43 pm
Aufstandkind
Wow Foetus in Fetu, you're the most scientifically-inclined person I've seen here. It's very impressive. Have you had any sort of formal education in this subject or are you just naturally good at this type of discussion?

Not "formal education" as in degree-level.

Sanguvixen
I read all three links and I'm confused when it comes to what you are thinking.

In a lot of cases static (or whatever) on the recording is being mistaken for a voice speaking because of the human brain's inherent predisposition to find patterns, such as human speech, where there are none. I also wouldn't be surprised to find that if someone were specifically looking to record an "EVP" they are more likely to have recorded one, in their opinion.

The Skeptic's Dictionary also has an entry on "electronic voice phenomenon".  

Foetus In Fetu


Sanguvixen

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:59 pm
Foetus In Fetu
Aufstandkind
Wow Foetus in Fetu, you're the most scientifically-inclined person I've seen here. It's very impressive. Have you had any sort of formal education in this subject or are you just naturally good at this type of discussion?

Not "formal education" as in degree-level.

Sanguvixen
I read all three links and I'm confused when it comes to what you are thinking.

In a lot of cases static (or whatever) on the recording is being mistaken for a voice speaking because of the human brain's inherent predisposition to find patterns, such as human speech, where there are none. I also wouldn't be surprised to find that if someone were specifically looking to record an "EVP" they are more likely to have recorded one, in their opinion.

The Skeptic's Dictionary also has an entry on "electronic voice phenomenon".


Ok...I undestand where you are getting now.

I still don't buy it though. Maybe that is just me.
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:51 pm
Sanguvixen

I toy with different theories but I don't buy into any of them...none of them have enough to be solid. I think that is why this thread was made right? To discuss different ideas...


Yeah, prettymuch.
That and I wanted to see how people who deny the existance of god/gods deal with other things that aren't easy to explain.
Its turned into quite a nice debate.  

Lee Retalis


Dread Dionaea

PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:13 pm
Foetus In Fetu

Not "formal education" as in degree-level.


"Formal education" typically does mean you have aquirred a degree and often refers to the specific subject in question.  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:36 pm
Lee Retalis
Sanguvixen

I toy with different theories but I don't buy into any of them...none of them have enough to be solid. I think that is why this thread was made right? To discuss different ideas...


Yeah, prettymuch.
That and I wanted to see how people who deny the existance of god/gods deal with other things that aren't easy to explain.
Its turned into quite a nice debate.


It did didn't it?

Sometimes I don't even understand my own ideas...but yeah, that was interesting.
 

Sanguvixen


Foetus In Fetu

PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:58 pm
Aufstandkind
Foetus In Fetu

Not "formal education" as in degree-level.


"Formal education" typically does mean you have aquirred a degree and often refers to the specific subject in question.

That's what I mean. I don't have a degree.  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:04 pm
Meh, I think ghosts, spirits, and souls are just acessories to believing in gods. If there really was "evidence" then it'd be scientifically accepted. I'm sure they're not just being stubborn. However, I do believe that unexplainable occurrences do happen, especially since I've had a few of my own, but stange as they are, they are still unexplainable. Just like how people couldn't explain the sun so they called it a god, people can't explain these occurrences so they call them ghosts, spirits, whatever.  

Dathu

Newbie Noob


Vedun

PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:17 pm
Well, while having my appendix cut out I saw the whole operation from the side, felt like I was floating in the air. But I myself beleive in the probabilty of existence of a soul. But not a deity. You don't need God to die.  
Reply
The Main Discussion Place

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 4 [>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum