And I'm hypothesizing ghosts exist. Is it because we are calling them ghosts? I can come up with something more scientific if that helps.

Yeah, I thought I remembered mentioning it sometime before. I think you are being unfair now. The whole point of what I was saying is that there actually ARE observable phenomena (seen by more than one person) and at some point when we have a better understanding of what makes up those phenomena, we CAN test it. I'm not just pulling something out of my ass and saying try to prove it doesn't exist. There is an actual basis for my claims.

Anyway, it all boils down to what Freebase said. I just think the nonbelievers can cut the believers some slack.

YES PLEASE. There's varying levels I think. You have the ones who believe in things like psychics (which I absolutely don't) and almost seem desperate to pin any one thing that's even slightly unusual on a ghost. On the other hand, there's people me. I'm not one to call "orbs" (a.k.a. dust or flies) on pictures the manifestation of spirits. Just as I'm not one to pin a distant creak of a floorboard on a man who once lived in the home that it occurred in. His name was James. He's a very happy spirit.

But you are relying on anecdotal evidence. I have no independent access to any of these events or phenomena, and just because they don't have an explanation doesn't mean that they are ghosts.

I have a fundamental issue with your stating that these phenomena ARE observable, only to, in the very same sentence, state that they actually aren't. Like I said earlier, there are an infinite number of things that might exist and might be observable at some point in the future. Or not. You can believe whatever you want, but you shouldn't expect anyone else to believe in the same things you do if you only provide anecdotes to support your beliefs; and you certainly shouldn't go around attacking the skeptics for being reasonably and logically skeptical.

Why? When have believers ever cut nonbelievers slack?

I think you are misunderstanding me. Anyway, I'm not attacking you. It sounded like you were completely baffled as to how anyone can think these things might exist in your original post and being a logical person, I got defensive. I don't believe anything until I feel like I've seen enough proof for myself. I see what you are saying, though...there is nothing I can point to that would be completely unbiased. This is definitely the kind of thing where you just have to have your own experience.

I hope you can see there is a difference, though, between believing unicorns exist and humans trying to figure out what happens to our consciousness after we die and the effect that has on our surroundings. There is no denying consciousness exists and that it creates a lot of energy. That's definitely fact. That's also something to extrapolate on.

I guess no one cuts anyone slack. There needs to be more slack in the world. This **** is stressful.

I'll be happy to cut believers some slack just soon as they stop telling me I'm evil for not automatically accepting folklore as irrefutable fact.

You just don't have an open mind. Be more open minded.

:laughing:

Janszoon...you are awesome. Just wanted you to know that.

Sometimes I wonder if you were beaten with a bible as a child though. You give off very strong anti-religious vibes. (And if you were beaten with a bible as a child...well, I apologize for the comment. :\ )

I understand where you're coming from (I think), but I tend to agree with duga here, about everyone cutting each other some slack, so sometimes I find your vehement opposition a bit disturbing.

Has every religious/superstitious/traditional person you've met been a closed-minded nit?

Honestly I'm just wondering, as this hasn't been my experience.

I don't get what it is about the polar extremes. As if I really think you're evil? As if my believing has anything to do with folklore? And as if I think any unexplainable event is an irrefutable fact? Not exactly.