"...But don’t worry, you’re not alone, there are many men like you left in the world, and some of them even used to be your friends. After all, this is America, and we only kill our friends." - Immortal Technique
Pssshhh, that never happens. Obi-wan was helpful when he became a ghost. Granted, he is the best good aligned character of all time, but it still applies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Cave Johnson »
When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. I don't want your damn lemons! I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!
The proof is on the person making the claim. Not on the person asserting the negative.
I've gone over this before, but let's do it again for old times sake.
For the sake of reasoning, let us assume, for the moment, that ghosts do exist.
so
1. Ghosts Exist
Working off that assumption, how are they generally supposed to work? Apparently they only stay around on earth when they have "unfinished business". Of course ghost-theorists don't base this on anything scientific, like say, a video interview with a ghost, or observation of a ghost in it's natural environment, which appears to be drafty old buildings for some reason- they just pulled it out their ass. But, what the hell, let's assume that is the case, so:
2.Ghosts remain on Earth when they have unfinished business
But this raises the question- what counts as "unfinished business"? Should we expect a Elvis ghost to be roaming around because he died on the crapper? What if somebody is trying to pay their phone bill and dies of a heart attack, does that count as unfinished business? There is absolutely nothing but vague insinuations about "souls" and "rest" in regards to what determines when a ghost remains from a dead person. What the "ghost hunters" engage in is speculation, not science. No matter how many times they call coffee pots a scientific tool to find ghosts- they aren't. They are for making ****ing coffee. Anyway, Clearly not everybody can become a ghost, since there are only so many empty abandoned houses near woods that they can "haunt". Which brings up another question:
If I had unfinished business, what the **** would hanging around some old building do? Nothing. Would the goal be to "let my soul rest", because despite opur conciousness being innately tied to our brain, somehow it can magically separate and we can become what can only be described as clouds. Why would ghosts make sounds and noises that can easily be explained by naturalistic forces? If it is the same persons consciousness, wouldn't they want the living persons help to finish paying their phone bill or whatever the hell their unfinished business was? Is being a ghost a punishment, and if so, by whom?
Making these assumptions just piles on even more questions, to which ghost hunters can only make up phony "scientific" experiments. For example, one such "skeptical ghost hunter" said he "felt a presence" well **** that's proof right there, obviously. I mean, it's not like the buildings that are "haunted" are notoriously ill-maintained and drafty or anything. No, it must be a ghost, right? Simple and easy naturalistic explanations be damned!
It is said that ghosts like to work in the dark because it's harder for people to see them than in broad daylight where their invisibility is more visible. It's also easier to deceive and scare people at night because they can't see what's going on. It's usually cooler and breezier at night, too, and both those elements assist the ghost in producing scary sounds and movements, which for some reason is their goal. Ghosts don't like to work in conditions where people can easily see what they are doing because then people would see them for what they are rather than for what they imagine them to be. By appearing only in the dark they can maintain their mysteriousness better. Besides, ghosts have found that many people are afraid of the dark and that fear makes their work much easier.
There are numerous groups of paranormal investigators that spend their spare time investigating allegedly haunted places. They arrive with coffee pots, flashlights, tape recorders, EMF detectors, video cameras with night vision, metal detectors, and other devices that were not designed to detect ghosts and therefore have no instructions on how to use them for that purpose. (I know. There is no equipment designed for this purpose. How could there be?) The equipment looks scientific, but does that make the investigation scientific? I'd say you're about as likely to detect a ghost with a Sony camcorder as you are to get the truth out of a house plant by hooking it up to a polygraph.
>implying ghosts don't exist
>implying we know a jack **** about the universe
What the **** do ghosts have to do with what we know about the universe?
First off, we know a hell of a lot about how the universe works. Maybe if you'd put down those ghost hunting books that purport to be "scientific investigations of the paranormal" and actually read something that involved cognition (A brief history of time is pretty good, if fairly theoretical; it definitely takes a more scientific approach, nothing about ghosts though, so you may be dissapointed.).
Secondly, "ghosts" are a concoction of people. It's called "perception". If you see a optical illusion that makes a wheel appear to spin on your screen, do you say "OMG it is really spinning" No, you say "ha, cool". And yet, when it comes to confirming what one already "knows" (such as the 'fact' that ghosts exist), people are willing to grasp any perceptual and anecdotal evidence and hold it as proof. It's not proof, and you are a dumbass for thinking otherwise.
it isn't ghosts existence that needs to be disproved (and that exercise is pretty trivial to anybody who has a basic understanding of some of the elementary sciences anyway) it is the existence of ghosts that needs to be proved. Occams Razor.
ThAt's a rEaLlY OdD CoMmAnD, yOu kNoW. yOu'rE AsKiNg hIm tO DiSpRoVe iT, sOmEtHiNg hE WoUlD HaVe tO SeArCh eVeRy sPoT In tHe uNiVeRsE To cHeCk iF ThErE WaS A GhOsT. wE Go bAsEd oN AsSuMpTiOnS On wHaT Is rEaL Or nOt bAsEd oN WhEtHeR It aFfEcTs uS Or nOt. OtHeRwIsE It's a wAsTe oF TiMe.
Trust me, me and Bobo my pink unicorn who's sitting right besides me know a lot about these things.
pah, your' only a boboite? I' good friends with his larger brother, Jeff.
Jeff is Purple. And a lizard. And he eats fire. Also, he's a robot. And a ghost. And he shits giant pieces of Cannelloni filled with rancid mustard.
So, a Purple Robotic Lizard Unicorn Ghost that shits Cannelloni filled with rancid mustard. How can anybody disbelieve something so blatantly credible, right? I mean, after all, we don't know "everything" about the universe, so obviously, a Purple Robotic Lizard Unicorn Ghost MUST exist, unless we can prove it doesn't, amirite?
2. If there are none, then no murders!
problem solved.
Hm maybe because everyone has a grudge on someone? dont know
So you don't understand fictitious stories? I'm not seeing your point.
Now that being said. Ponies.
Why should they be any easier to understand when they are dead?
FFS, I am obviously wonderful.
Only if they're Casper. Or my dead cat.
But hey, personally, I'm open to anything that comes my way. I'm not looking to get yelled at.
The proof is on the person making the claim. Not on the person asserting the negative.
I've gone over this before, but let's do it again for old times sake.
For the sake of reasoning, let us assume, for the moment, that ghosts do exist.
so
1. Ghosts Exist
Working off that assumption, how are they generally supposed to work? Apparently they only stay around on earth when they have "unfinished business". Of course ghost-theorists don't base this on anything scientific, like say, a video interview with a ghost, or observation of a ghost in it's natural environment, which appears to be drafty old buildings for some reason- they just pulled it out their ass. But, what the hell, let's assume that is the case, so:
2.Ghosts remain on Earth when they have unfinished business
But this raises the question- what counts as "unfinished business"? Should we expect a Elvis ghost to be roaming around because he died on the crapper? What if somebody is trying to pay their phone bill and dies of a heart attack, does that count as unfinished business? There is absolutely nothing but vague insinuations about "souls" and "rest" in regards to what determines when a ghost remains from a dead person. What the "ghost hunters" engage in is speculation, not science. No matter how many times they call coffee pots a scientific tool to find ghosts- they aren't. They are for making ****ing coffee. Anyway, Clearly not everybody can become a ghost, since there are only so many empty abandoned houses near woods that they can "haunt". Which brings up another question:
If I had unfinished business, what the **** would hanging around some old building do? Nothing. Would the goal be to "let my soul rest", because despite opur conciousness being innately tied to our brain, somehow it can magically separate and we can become what can only be described as clouds. Why would ghosts make sounds and noises that can easily be explained by naturalistic forces? If it is the same persons consciousness, wouldn't they want the living persons help to finish paying their phone bill or whatever the hell their unfinished business was? Is being a ghost a punishment, and if so, by whom?
Making these assumptions just piles on even more questions, to which ghost hunters can only make up phony "scientific" experiments. For example, one such "skeptical ghost hunter" said he "felt a presence" well **** that's proof right there, obviously. I mean, it's not like the buildings that are "haunted" are notoriously ill-maintained and drafty or anything. No, it must be a ghost, right? Simple and easy naturalistic explanations be damned!
It is said that ghosts like to work in the dark because it's harder for people to see them than in broad daylight where their invisibility is more visible. It's also easier to deceive and scare people at night because they can't see what's going on. It's usually cooler and breezier at night, too, and both those elements assist the ghost in producing scary sounds and movements, which for some reason is their goal. Ghosts don't like to work in conditions where people can easily see what they are doing because then people would see them for what they are rather than for what they imagine them to be. By appearing only in the dark they can maintain their mysteriousness better. Besides, ghosts have found that many people are afraid of the dark and that fear makes their work much easier.
There are numerous groups of paranormal investigators that spend their spare time investigating allegedly haunted places. They arrive with coffee pots, flashlights, tape recorders, EMF detectors, video cameras with night vision, metal detectors, and other devices that were not designed to detect ghosts and therefore have no instructions on how to use them for that purpose. (I know. There is no equipment designed for this purpose. How could there be?) The equipment looks scientific, but does that make the investigation scientific? I'd say you're about as likely to detect a ghost with a Sony camcorder as you are to get the truth out of a house plant by hooking it up to a polygraph.
What the **** do ghosts have to do with what we know about the universe?
First off, we know a hell of a lot about how the universe works. Maybe if you'd put down those ghost hunting books that purport to be "scientific investigations of the paranormal" and actually read something that involved cognition (A brief history of time is pretty good, if fairly theoretical; it definitely takes a more scientific approach, nothing about ghosts though, so you may be dissapointed.).
Secondly, "ghosts" are a concoction of people. It's called "perception". If you see a optical illusion that makes a wheel appear to spin on your screen, do you say "OMG it is really spinning" No, you say "ha, cool". And yet, when it comes to confirming what one already "knows" (such as the 'fact' that ghosts exist), people are willing to grasp any perceptual and anecdotal evidence and hold it as proof. It's not proof, and you are a dumbass for thinking otherwise.
it isn't ghosts existence that needs to be disproved (and that exercise is pretty trivial to anybody who has a basic understanding of some of the elementary sciences anyway) it is the existence of ghosts that needs to be proved. Occams Razor.
ThAt's a rEaLlY OdD CoMmAnD, yOu kNoW. yOu'rE AsKiNg hIm tO DiSpRoVe iT, sOmEtHiNg hE WoUlD HaVe tO SeArCh eVeRy sPoT In tHe uNiVeRsE To cHeCk iF ThErE WaS A GhOsT. wE Go bAsEd oN AsSuMpTiOnS On wHaT Is rEaL Or nOt bAsEd oN WhEtHeR It aFfEcTs uS Or nOt. OtHeRwIsE It's a wAsTe oF TiMe.
pah, your' only a boboite? I' good friends with his larger brother, Jeff.
Jeff is Purple. And a lizard. And he eats fire. Also, he's a robot. And a ghost. And he shits giant pieces of Cannelloni filled with rancid mustard.
So, a Purple Robotic Lizard Unicorn Ghost that shits Cannelloni filled with rancid mustard. How can anybody disbelieve something so blatantly credible, right? I mean, after all, we don't know "everything" about the universe, so obviously, a Purple Robotic Lizard Unicorn Ghost MUST exist, unless we can prove it doesn't, amirite?