Sometimes I'm a sceptic

A friend of mine (and a member here, although he hasn't been active here for some time) has made a point of being exposed to both sides of the debate so, while he has been a long-time member of the group I used to attend (back in the UK) discussing psi, the spiritual and the paranormal, he also joined a local Humanist discussion group for balance. It seems, however, that whereas at our group we would discuss the paranormal and also the sceptical responses so as to stay grounded and not wander off into wild speculation, the idea of taking seriously any report suggestive of psi phenomena at the Humanist group was met with outright hostility. They have a Facebook group and he happened to post something about Ian Stevenson's reincarnation research, asking for their opinions. This was the reply from a member of the Humanists:

"Your answer just confirms my suspicions that you're hopelessly gullible, and that you credulously soak up this crap like a sponge falling into a cesspit."

Sadly, this kind of response is all too common - I have encountered similar reactions in person-to-person conversations to the point where I am loath to talk about the subject with acquaintances. I have to really get to know them well before I will take the risk of "coming out" as someone who finds the afterlife a credible possibility. On the other hand, I like to think that I am not gullible enough to swallow all I see and hear when it comes to the paranormal. I try to be sceptical too yet that does not seem good enough for those such as the humanist mentioned above. To them, nothing but complete compliance to their worldview will be acceptable. Anything short of that invites insult and scorn. 

Here's an example of the kind of thing that rings all my sceptical alarm bells. This was on my YouTube feed this morning from CBS News and I have to say that, with the best will in the world, I defy anyone to see ghosts in the wisps of smoke pictured.

The Association I help manage is the Association TranCommunication (atransc.org). (The "trans-" prefix is often used for "across the veil.") (It is pretty much discontinued now.) Electronic Voice Phenomena is the most commonly known voice version, but there are many visual forms as well. My avatar was found in optical noise produced using a video loop. See bottom of  https://ethericstudies.org/tom-butler-biography/.

Most any form of chaotic optical noise is useful for feature formation. Most are people's faces, and sometimes animals. The one shown here is usually seen as a small dog facing the camera (lower-left) being held by (maybe) an officer. It is common for the images to be distorted.

Light reflected from moving water produces chaotic noise. See https://atransc.org/downey-water-itc/

Take a look at Christopher Abbott's work at https://www.breath-photography.com/. Use some caution, as he may do a little selective background manipulation. We covered him when he first began and he came with recommendations of trusted researchers. There are a few other's doing the same sort of work.

I have speculated about the nature of these features and how they might be formed in my writing, mostly at ethericstudies.org. My point is that the fact of the features is well established. The who, what and why is hardly discussed ... only discounted as too improbable.

The rest of the video is the usual ghost stuff. We made the Halloween rounds for a while but no one wanted to talk theory so we stopped. There is no metaphysical or empirical foundation for clearing or relationship between place and phenomena.

I don't like such attitudes from either "skeptics" or proponents but sadly, a lot of people have an emotional investment in their position that they think justifies such attacks.  I tend to be skeptical too when it comes to any individual case but I think the overwhelming evidence is that strange things happen to people that are not easily explained with "normal" explanations.  Anybody who denies this simply hasn't looked into it properly.

A friend of mine (and a member here, although he hasn't been active here for some time) has made a point of being exposed to both sides of the debate so, while he has been a long-time member of the group I used to attend (back in the UK) discussing psi, the spiritual and the paranormal, he also joined a local Humanist discussion group for balance. It seems, however, that whereas at our group we would discuss the paranormal and also the sceptical responses so as to stay grounded and not wander off into wild speculation, the idea of taking seriously any report suggestive of psi phenomena at the Humanist group was met with outright hostility. They have a Facebook group and he happened to post something about Ian Stevenson's reincarnation research, asking for their opinions. This was the reply from a member of the Humanists:




Sadly, this kind of response is all too common - I have encountered similar reactions in person-to-person conversations to the point where I am loath to talk about the subject with acquaintances. I have to really get to know them well before I will take the risk of "coming out" as someone who finds the afterlife a credible possibility. On the other hand, I like to think that I am not gullible enough to swallow all I see and hear when it comes to the paranormal. I try to be sceptical too yet that does not seem good enough for those such as the humanist mentioned above. To them, nothing but complete compliance to their worldview will be acceptable. Anything short of that invites insult and scorn. 

Here's an example of the kind of thing that rings all my sceptical alarm bells. This was on my YouTube feed this morning from CBS News and I have to say that, with the best will in the world, I defy anyone to see ghosts in the wisps of smoke pictured.

I was just going to give you a like, Dave and not make a comment but that was so silly. I do feel sorry for her losing her mother to Alzheimers but I didn't get what she meant by unconditional love (from her mother ?) and how that led her to start looking for patterns in smoke ?? which naturally must be interpreted as a "spirit guide" if there is even the smallest whiff that resembles a human face. What else could it be :/   

And don't get me started on humanists, they're as bad as Jehovah's witnesses. "We don't believe in some benevolent being sitting up in the sky judging us just as we don't believe that human beings have immortal souls. The earth was not created 6000 years ago (hearty chuckles from the assembled group meeting up in the local library) and if there was such a thing as a God, he would be the biggest tyrant ever …it's our duty as good human beings to consign superstition to ancient history and make the best of this one and only life by living in harmony with our fellow man..... "

Yeah I think one can apply skepticism in a judicious cost/benefit analysis.

I can believe in psychical-healers as a real category of persons while not shelling out $10,000 for one I deem dubious.

I can also play the odds, relying on my doctor's prescriptions and my aunt's ritualistic prayers for my health. I can also refuse to drink some healing potion made by an occultist that seems dangerous, or might interfere with my medications.

It's why I'm increasingly doubtful there's any intellectual obligation to debate with Skeptics - which isn't to say they have no body of work worth interacting with. After all, before visiting a medium it would behoove me look up the ways a medium can try and trick me and likely Skeptics have compiled such strategies.

Similarly with anecdotal evidence I can judge these things the way I judge all anecdotes about events I haven't personally witnessed.

Yeah I think one can apply skepticism in a judicious cost/benefit analysis.

I can believe in psychical-healers as a real category of persons while not shelling out $10,000 for one I deem dubious.

I make some use of acupuncture (I am not sure if that counts as psychical), but the point is, my therapist charges £40 for a 1-hour session. If he charged $10000 or even £400 per session, I would have far less confidence in him!

Off topic request.

Can anyone explain how to use the 'Quote' button?

Off topic request.

Can anyone explain how to use the 'Quote' button?

Tap the quote button then tap the reply button Or. Just tap the reply button to quote.

Off topic request.

Can anyone explain how to use the 'Quote' button?

Tap the quote button then tap the reply button Or. Just tap the reply button to quote.

Thanks, but what is the value of the quote button? I was trying to select the part of the text I wanted to quote.

Thanks, but what is the value of the quote button?

If you want to reply to multiple people in a single post.