Has any supernatural event been 'proven'?

[Doc Brown]

I know that things like poltergeists, ghosts and the afterlife (whether you believe in them or not) belong in the supernatural realm because they aren't proven, but on Sky TV you come across documentaries where they have so-called specialists who claim to be using special equipment which shows the presence of these 'spirits' ... :uhh:

But is it real?

These programmes tend to put it across as fact. And I saw one programme which documented a family who had a violent poltergeist in their home. Tables and chairs would fly across the room...lights would switch on and off...pans would crash down off shelves, etc etc. The family were terrified and called in some so-called experts who discovered that a man who had lived in the house had died suddenly in some horrific way...I can't remember the exact details but this 'expert' managed to stop this stuff happening in the end, once they had found out the reason this spirit was upset and addressed the problem and "helped him on his way"

Then there are the God Channels which feature supposed miracle workers who say they are doing Gods work, on a stage in America, with audiences of thousands, all screaming with joy as these 'miracle workers' shout and wail and grab hold of folks heads and chests and seem to cure sick/disabled/blind people right there in front of millions of people!



Surely, if any of this stuff could be proven (and that shouldn't be hard if what we are seeing is true), then once and for all the entire world would KNOW that God was real and the afterlife existed.

If it cannot be proven then how can they get away with showing this rubbish...if it's not real then these 'Miracle Workers' are con men and should surely go to jail. Are they willing to be put to the test?? Has any of this paranormal stuff been put to the test in recent years?

 

[honestrosewater]

Atoms are supernatural.

( )

 

[hypnagogue]

Surely, if any of this stuff could be proven (and that shouldn't be hard if what we are seeing is true), then once and for all the entire world would KNOW that God was real and the afterlife existed.

Not necessarily. Let's just assume for the moment that there really was something beyond physical ken going on in that poltergeist story you mentioned, and there was a way we could discover this. So we have an established supernatural effect; from here, our theoretical options for making sense of it are the set of all metaphysical possibilities that are consistent with this effect. The set of possible explanations for poltergeist phenomena is not limited to afterlife/ghost interpretations. For instance, if we assume that the family in the poltergeist house had some kind of latent telekinetic powers, this hypothesis would be consistent with the evidence as well. So we still wouldn't be able to decide, from this incident alone, between undead spirits or telekinesis as the underlying cause.

That's just a note on what we would be able to deduce if such supernatural effects truly did exist. I'll let the devoted skeptics here propound on their thoughts about the actual validity of such things.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think part of the problem is the question of what constitutes proof.

Many years ago I saw footage [film I think but it may have been video] from an investigation of a haunted house in Los Angeles. The investigative team was a respectable team of graduates and a professor from UCLA; I don't remember what department but it involved quite a few people. They set up cameras and equipment all around the house and left it running [in total] for several days and nights. The whole thing was allegedly run as any other science experient; with all of the rigor to withstand peer review. At one point, just a clear as day, with no one in the house and the entire room in view, one could see a toy car running all around the room by itself. The footage wasn't fuzzy or dark. There were no indications of anything odd and the car was in focus. I thought, well, that's it! They got proof.

I never heard another thing. No claims of fraud. No claims of proof. Nothing. I have come to suspect that peer pressure stifles results like this. We can't prove that the film wasn't faked. That's at least part of the problem IMO. I have seen an awful lot of this stuff, from the least to the most credible, and I believe that I have seen things on film and tape that can't be explained. But, less the obvious or debunked hoaxes, there is no way to tell with any degree of certainty what, if anything, is genuine.

 

[Phobos]

I know that things like poltergeists, ghosts and the afterlife (whether you believe in them or not) belong in the supernatural realm because they aren't proven, …

Just a note….”Unproven” does not equate with “supernatural”. Supernatural would mean something that is outside the known natural processes of the universe. For example, if real, Bigfoot and alien life would not be supernatural things (they would be just another species for science to study) but things like ghosts and miracle events would be supernatural. If something thought to be supernatural is found to be real & explainable by natural causes, then we could then adjust our view of what is “natural”.

These programmes tend to put it across as fact.

Watch out for such documentaries. They present 1 side of the story and make it flashy (creative editing, dramatizations, twisting the truth, etc.) so it seems very convincing. Be sure to listen to the other side of the debate & then make your decision about it.

Also watch out for anecdotes (people’s stories, which is an unreliable source of info) vs. actual evidence (which can be verifiable).

For stuff like faith healers, you really need to consider how much of that is internal psychology vs. external miracle. Those are mass audiences of true believers (people who already convinced of the miracle before it happens) worked up into a state of excitement.

Surely, if any of this stuff could be proven (and that shouldn't be hard if what we are seeing is true),

It can be tough to prove scientifically because essentially you would have to prove that there is no possible natural explanation for whatever event you’re studying (proving a negative).

then once and for all the entire world would KNOW that God was real and the afterlife existed.

Absolute knowledge of that would be great. But, IMHO, it seems to be left to personal faith/experience and not something provable in an objective sense.

If it cannot be proven then how can they get away with showing this rubbish...

Because many people believe it. If pressed into a legal corner, the claims usually shift from “it’s truth” to “it’s just entertainment”.

if it's not real then these 'Miracle Workers' are con men and should surely go to jail.

It happens. Miss Cleo recently got in legal trouble for her con (IIRC, it was regarding billing abuses for her 1-900 number).

Are they willing to be put to the test??

Sometimes, especially if the test is on their terms. They are less willing to submit to an objective scientific test.

Has any of this paranormal stuff been put to the test in recent years?

Certainly. Check out James Randi’s website. Also check into Michael Shermer’s essays. (available on the internet)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Note that in the "Randi up the ante thread", I just posted an example of someone to whom Randi should owe $1,000,000.

 

[honestrosewater]

We can't prove that the film wasn't faked.

How can you prove that any experiment wasn't faked? How do you know Galileo didn't fake his experiments?

 

[hypnagogue]

How can you prove that any experiment wasn't faked? How do you know Galileo didn't fake his experiments?

Well, you could try Galileo's falling bodies experiment yourself if you're not convinced that he didn't fake it. It's a lot more difficult to repeat an experiment under unusual or poorly understood conditions, like the poltergeist one Ivan referred to, thus it's more difficult to verify, thus people will naturally be more skeptical of the results. It also doesn't help that the results here seem to fly in the face of our understanding of the world. It's always tougher to get people to accept results that they wouldn't normally expect.

 

[honestrosewater]

It's a lot more difficult to repeat an experiment under unusual or poorly understood conditions, like the poltergeist one Ivan referred to, thus it's more difficult to verify, thus people will naturally be more skeptical of the results.

Are there other phenomena that faced similar problems, but have overcome them? Like tornadoes, rare medical conditions, subatomic particles, etc.?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Are there other phenomena that faced similar problems, but have overcome them? Like tornadoes, rare medical conditions, subatomic particles, etc.?

Meteorites in the past, and ball lightning today.

 

[Janitor]

... one could see a toy car running all around the room by itself...

Before the filming began, somebody with access to the inside of the room placed a remote-control toy car under a bed. Maybe the person draped a lightweight cloth item over the car to provide extra camouflage. During filming, the person gets into position a lot or two away with a remote control, which he uses blindly in a more-or-less random way to make the car come out from under the bed and then into view of a camera.

This reminds me for some reason of a party trick. Start bragging about this fellow you know who can see playing cards remotely. The others at the party are doubtful.

"Okay, let's just see if I am blowing smoke. Here's a deck of cards. Somebody--anybody, pick a card out of the deck and tell us what the card is."

After the card is announced as a Three of spades [or whatever it turns out to be], you dial the phone number where the remote viewer fellow can be reached. The folks at the party hear only your end of the conversation, which goes like this: "Hello... [pause] Sir, I have some people here who doubt your ability to see cards remotely. Would you like to prove 'em wrong? Okay, I'll pass the phone around."

Each person who takes the phone hears the answer from the person on the line: "Three of spades."

Have you figured out the trick? The caller at the party only says "Hello" after the person at the other end says, "Ace? Two? Three?" That is, the timing of the "Hello" tells the person that the card is a Three. Similarly, the timing of the "Sir" tells the person that the card is not a heart, not a diamond, not a club, but is a spade.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Before the filming began, somebody with access to the inside of the room placed a remote-control toy car under a bed...

I thought of that myself. Did you actually read or hear about that somewhere or is it just a guessed explination?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It's not hard to imagine how someone might fake something like this. That's exactly why proof like this, assuming for a moment that it was "proof" [genuine], is so useless. When a phenomenon is random and transient, undeniable evidence is often terribly elusive if not nearly impossible. I'm not sure what would constitute proof of ghosts less a personal encounter for every scientist or person of interest. I can't put and ghost on the table [whatever a ghost may be, if they be] and offer it for testing.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Remember that this was supposed to be a controlled experiment - the kind of stuff done and published daily without objections. I suspect [really I know of some] that many people have assumed that their reputation would carry the day, only to find that no reputation is that weighty in the face of "paranormal" claims. Every respectable UFO buff has suffered the same learning experience.

 

[honestrosewater]

Let me see if I can explain this. I have never actually observed firsthand a tornado nor a ghost. I think the existence of tornadoes is easier to believe because I have experienced their components; I've experienced water, thunderstorms, swirling winds, vortex bottles (two soda bottles filled with liquid, taped together at the neck), etc. I haven't ever experienced anything supernatural- I don't even know what ghosts are supposedly composed of? Surely most of you have encountered questions like "But what is [blank] actually made of?"
Can science actually say anything about the nature of the things it observes? Or can it just explain how those things interact? Does that distinction make sense? Perhaps saying "science can only do such and such" is misleading, but I'm not sure how else to explain it.
Maybe a better distinction would be mechanics vs. essence. Even if science could explain the mechanics of how ghosts interact with other familiar things, ghosts may still be difficult to believe if their essence is left unexperienced. That is, the mechanical explanation may make sense, but another piece may still be missing; A piece which science may not be able to produce. That is, perhaps there are two parts to the "proof".
What if someone has one part, but not the other? Perhaps someone who has seen a ghost has all the proof they need, just as someone who understands how atomic structure is inferred has all the proof they need?
Maybe the person who tries to replace personal experience with mechanical explanations isn't standing on as firm of grounds as they think.
Sorry if that was repetitive, I tried to clean it up some... I think it's Les's ideas swirling around in me brain. Qualia may actually be a better term than essence, but whatever...

 

[Chronos]

If a paranormal phenomenon was shown to be repeatable under controlled conditions, scientists would stand in line for the chance to study it like Cub fans trying to get home game bleacher seats for the world series.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Unfortunately nature doesn't seem to accommodate science, at times.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Perhaps the interesting questions require greater effort.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

For obvious reasons I rarely talk about this but I can tell you why supernatural claims won't go away. For a time Tsu and I experienced several minor "haunting" experiences. Now, I can't prove to anyone else what happened and I'm not about to try. But I know for a fact what happened, and Tsu knows for a fact what happened, and no one and no argument can change that. Nothing like this had or has ever happened to either one of us, before or since. I have never seen a flying saucer. I have never talked with the dead. I have never seen God. I have never traveled the universe in my astral body, but independently and together, Tsu and I have experienced a phenomenon that most people would think of as a ghost. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people just like us.

Scientists have no business pretending that these things don't happen. We all agree that science requires proof, however many scientists seem to feel that science begins with proof. I think science begins with questions.

 

[Louis Cypher]

Anecdote

This should illustrate the difficulties science faces in explaining the 'supernatural' a haunted house in Hampshire, the most haunted place in the world. picked up what seemed to be a ghostly figure walking slowly through the grounds; the excitement was obvious bu it ws only when the 'scientists' had calmed down that they real,ised there ghost was in fact a leaf blowing past the lense, a few centimetres away.

Science automaticaly discount the supernatural by it's nature, everything can be explained by science, just not the science we know of today, with QM

ghost like particles are possible and as we know QM effects happen in the Macro Universe but are exceedingly rare, like ghosts really, what we're seeing is a quantum photograph in the macro universe? Or did I dream that

 

[Doc Brown]

For obvious reasons I rarely talk about this but I can tell you why supernatural claims won't go away. For a time Tsu and I experienced several minor "haunting" experiences. Now, I can't prove to anyone else what happened and I'm not about to try. But I know for a fact what happened, and Tsu knows for a fact what happened, and no one and no argument can change that. Nothing like this had or has ever happened to either one of us, before or since. I have never seen a flying saucer. I have never talked with the dead. I have never seen God. I have never traveled the universe in my astral body, but independently and together, Tsu and I have experienced a phenomenon that most people would think of as a ghost.

Tell us what happened?

 

[Chronos]

It is certainly true that unexplained events have occurred throughout human history. Many phenomenon once thought to be supernatural have been explained by science. No doubt many other currently unexplained phenomenon will be explained science in the future. I think the term 'supernatural' implies something intrinsically beyond the power of science to explain. Many, and scientists in particular, are resistant to that idea.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Oh gosh, I knew I couldn't get away with that statement without inquiries. Tsu and I did talk about this once before...but it has been quite some time.

The short of it is that we each felt something of significant weight sit on the bed; like a person that wasn't there. I was home alone, had just gone to bed, and was still wide awake when, just as plain as day, I felt a depression form in the mattress near my feet. I layed there for a moment while trying to figure out what I was feeling. I turned, looked, saw the two cats in their normal spot, and then looked directly at the source of the weight still pulling the blankets tightly around my legs. It was unmistakable that someone was there, but there was nothing there. For a moment I even expected to be assaulted by an intruder. Someone had to be in that room, but beyond a doubt I was the only person in the room or even at home. Honestly, it scared the hell out of me. I ran - not walked - out of the room and slept on the couch after I finally managed to settle down.

The key for me - the undeniable proof - is that I had never told Tsu about what happened. Some weeks later when I was out of town and called her - having just arrived at my parents house some 500 miles away - her voice was still shaking as she described an experience that was nearly identical to mine. After that, as long as we lived there we experienced the occasional presence of a strong, flowery odor that would fill the room suddenly and leave just as quickly. It was like opening or even spilling a bottle of perfume in the room. This was in an apartment with virtually no air exchange. We had a sealed heat pump systems and three closed windows.

I know that all sorts of theories [edit: prosaic explanations] to explain these occurences are possible. I can only say that once you've experienced something like this those theories sound pretty ridiculous. I know for a fact that it happened. To you, its just another internet ghost story.

edit: spelling correction.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I should stress that I don't pretent to understand what we experienced. I only know for a fact what did happen.

 

[Kerrie]

For obvious reasons I rarely talk about this but I can tell you why supernatural claims won't go away. For a time Tsu and I experienced several minor "haunting" experiences. Now, I can't prove to anyone else what happened and I'm not about to try. But I know for a fact what happened, and Tsu knows for a fact what happened, and no one and no argument can change that. Nothing like this had or has ever happened to either one of us, before or since. I have never seen a flying saucer. I have never talked with the dead. I have never seen God. I have never traveled the universe in my astral body, but independently and together, Tsu and I have experienced a phenomenon that most people would think of as a ghost. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people just like us.

Scientists have no business pretending that these things don't happen. We all agree that science requires proof, however many scientists seem to feel that science begins with proof. I think science begins with questions.

Ivan, you have a way with words at times. My thoughts exactly on science.

 

[juju]

Hi,

Supernatural events are proven by those that experience them.

To prove them to others, others need to experience them.

juju

 

[rayjohn01]

To Juju
Proof is not in the saying -- or even experiencing -- that's all BS , the 'proof ' is by replication with 'independant witnesses ' , it's the replication where most of these phenomena fail -- if you cannot replicate then they are of no intersest to the rest of mankind -- they are irrelevant!.
Hoaxers are only interested in fooling others , for reasons of gain , Deluders are only interested in convincing others of their delusion, people who are interested in any form of truth ( however limited ) require an experiment that can be independantly done and the give similar results -- it's the adopted scientific principle -- but it's not just science -- it is simply how to 'prove something' -- whatever.
Ray.

 

[juju]

To Juju
Proof is not in the saying -- or even experiencing -- that's all BS , the 'proof ' is by replication with 'independant witnesses ' , it's the replication where most of these phenomena fail -- if you cannot replicate then they are of no intersest to the rest of mankind -- they are irrelevant!.
Hoaxers are only interested in fooling others , for reasons of gain , Deluders are only interested in convincing others of their delusion, people who are interested in any form of truth ( however limited ) require an experiment that can be independantly done and the give similar results -- it's the adopted scientific principle -- but it's not just science -- it is simply how to 'prove something' -- whatever.
Ray.

Some people have certain experiences. They cannot prove to anyone else that they have had these experiences. Calling them liars does not negate their experiences.

If the rest of humanity is not interested in hearing of experiences that point to other levels of reality, then the rest of humanity can just sit in there caves and gnaw on their bones until they themselves awaken to wider possibilities.

It is only your mind that prods you to the necessity of absolute proof and repeatability. Transcend your mind and experience yourself.

juju

 

[Hurkyl]

Ivan is a liar!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well Hurkyl, it is obvious that anyone is free to assume this as the explanation. I am disappointed that with no evidence on which to base this claim, you have decided to assume as true the lazy, faith based interpretation, when facing something that you don't understand.

Then there is the problem that there were two of us.


Edit: To be fair, I must admit that to anyone reading my account, Hurkyl's accusation should be at the top of the list of potential explanations.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To anyone reading this thread, if this comment were directed at anyone but me I might have deleted it. Personal attacks are not tolerated.

Everyone should feel free to tell of their own genuine experiences without fear of being attacked on a personal level; especially by a PF Mentor. We all agree that any such story might be a lie. I know that my story is true but you don't. We don't need to make this point with each account.

edit: This is not to say that I won't close a thread if the stories get out of hand.

 

[Evo]

I've told this story before, and I will tell it again. It happened and I have no explanation for it. I don't believe in an after life or ghosts, but I know what happened.

I was carrying a load of laundry into my older daughter's bedroom, as I was going through the door my white cat started to run into the room. My daughter didn't like cats in her room, so I stuck out my foot to block it as I tried to pull the door shut. It kept trying to come in and I kept shoving at it with my foot, it finally made it past my foot, hitting my ankle and ran into the room and under my daughter's bed (which was on the other side of the room ahead of me). I shut the door, put the laundry down and went to get the cat out from under the bed. There was no cat. I searched the entire room, no cat. I then searched the house, no cat. I opened the front door and there was the cat, outside. This really freaked me out because I had been battling a cat that wasn't there.

Then I remembered "thing", a white cat that I had taken in that died a few months earlier.

Zooby explained that this was caused by a frontal lobe seizure. I guess frontal lobe seizures cause you to battle non existent cats. Ivan, I guess you and Tsu both had identical seizures.

 

[Tsu]

Ivan is a liar!

ExCUSE me? :grumpy:

That would mean that you are also calling ME a liar and I have just a tad bit of a PROBLEM with that, Hurkyl. Would you like to explain to ME why you think it's acceptable to call us liars? :grumpy:

 

[Ivan Seeking]

ExCUSE me? :grumpy:

That would mean that you are also calling ME a liar and I have just a tad bit of a PROBLEM with that, Hurkyl.

Oh, but it's okay if he calls me a liar...



Hurkyl, you're in biiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggg trouble.

 

[Evo]

You have to remember Hurkyl can't tell jokes.

I think he was trying to be funny in response to juju's post

Some people have certain experiences. They cannot prove to anyone else that they have had these experiences. Calling them liars does not negate their experiences.

So he called you a liar because it would not negate your experience. Hurkyl, give up.