Do you believe in the supernatural?

[Murdoch]

I agree with Zaldron and will add that paranormal and Supernatural are bullshit terms that do more harm than good to legit phenomena and fields of study. They imply that certain events are wholly "other" and out of scientific comprehension, which is simply not true.

In my own reading alone I've already found scientific evidence that points to possible explanations of poltergeists, the Bermuda Triangle, telekinesis and - assuming it did actually happen - the events surrounding and the after-effects of the Philadelphia Experiment.

[Scuba Steve]

As much as I dreamed of becoming a Ghostbusters, dressing up with a proton pack and jumpsuit... No, there are no supernatural/paranormal anomalies.

Now if you excuse me I have a full torso vaporous apparition to dispose of...

/me plays Ghostbusters Doom for old times' sake.

[Foofoo]

Yes, i do believe in the supernatural, since i've had some supernatural stuff happen to me in the past and i know some people who've had supernatural stuff happen to them also. Honestly, the world is very fucked up. Dont be so quick to close your mind around what limited things you know.

[Grazza]

I don't think those who reject supernatural explanations for phenomena have a closed mind.

Simply viewing certain phenomena as "unexplained" or "currently unexplainable" seems a good deal more open-minded than rushing to ascribe a supernatural explanation to them.

[Green Gates]

<size=4>NO!!!</size>

[Negatronica]

Grazza said:

I don't think those who reject supernatural explanations for phenomena have a closed mind.

Simply viewing certain phenomena as "unexplained" or "currently unexplainable" seems a good deal more open-minded than rushing to ascribe a supernatural explanation to them.

My thoughts exactly.

[Green Gates]

Well, sometimes I've thought that the overall integrity of such a matter going around about something in the world existing as "supernatural" had some room to be questioned. When you look at a lot of the conflict that goes on between diverse religions, beliefs, etc, you'd see a lot of the acts of such believing groups that they claim to be a large contribution through related distribution of their beliefs, but behind it is an imperialistic, monopolistic plan or some other scheme to somehow 'buy' their way into the minds and hearts of people.

Then again, despite the over-the-top post I made in here, I am actually rather agnostic about regarding whether or not any sort of "supernatural" being or phenomenon could possibly exist. After studying EVP and seeing the movie White Noise (damn that movie was scary), I've always come to think about that.

[Lord FlatHead]

I don't believe in anything.

[myk]

I don't believe in believing.

[NiGHTMARE]

Lord FlatHead said:

I don't believe in anything.

That would mean that whenever someone tells you something, or you read about something, or even when you see an event happen right before your eyes, you always consider it to be a lie. To you, nothing is true, and everything is false.

What a bizarre and rather depressing sounding way to live.

[Enjay]

I see dead people. Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're dead. :-)

[Murdoch]

Enjay said:

I see dead people.

Me too. Neat eh?

[Jonathan]

NiGHTMARE said:

That would mean that whenever someone tells you something, or you read about something, or even when you see an event happen right before your eyes, you always consider it to be a lie. To you, nothing is true, and everything is false.

What a bizarre and rather depressing sounding way to live.

Not quite. Holding something to be definitely false is as much a belief as thinking it is definitely true. A complete lack of belief would presumably mean an absence of opinion or certainity one way or the other.

Now that I'm writing this, I'm immediately reminded of the man in the shack in Douglas Adams' Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy books. He takes nothing as certain, and acts completely without prejudice, and seems the closest you could get to somebody who doesn't believe in anything.

[myk]

I've often considered the nature of skepticism; but in the end negating belief is hypocrisy and an impossibility. In a way the only thing we ever do all the time in relation to our considerations is to dwell in belief; thus what I said above, about being skeptical about the nature of belief itself and of taking it for granted as something that we espose or define specifically. We can't hold supposed belief as property.

About "I see dead people"... I was typing that randomly here and there the other day. I Don't even know where it comes from, to be honest...

[Plasmaburst]

Supernatural, do you mean like Super Mario? I saw a koopa once, it looked kinda pixelated but I know what I saw and if you don't believe me, then go to hell!

lael

[ducon]

myk said:

I've often considered the nature of skepticism; but in the end negating belief is hypocrisy and an impossibility.

The skeptic does not negate belief but the object of belief; when of course there is something to negate and when there is enough facts against that belief or enough absence of facts for it, if not he suspends his judgement.

[myk]

I agree to a degree; my "but" was in relation to the phrase I believe in nothing being an inaccurate one for honest skepticism.

Nonetheless when being skeptical one considers the belief or perception, not the objects... well, the objects, yes, but these are constructs of circumstance in any case.

[ducon]

Yes, even a kick in the ass. :-) See "Le mariage forcé" ("The Forced Wedding"?) by the french actor Molière, in french here http://wikisource.org/wiki/Le_Mariage_forc%C3%A9 (end of the 8th act when Sganarelle slaps Marphurius the pyrrhonian philosopher).

[DOOM Anomaly]

I guess I kind of do. :D Though I am not sure. :D

[Sharessa]

It depends on how you define supernatural.

I believe that life has developed on other planets in the universe and that several of them have probably reached sentiance and have aquired technology greater or equal to ours, but I really doubt they are constantly monitering out planet and abducting us considering there are billions upon billions of planets in the universe and possibly thousands of planets with civilizations similar to ours (and thats statisticly speaking. Sightings of UFOs are either hallucinations, misidentified aircraft or natural phenomenon (and there are some weird natural phenomena, several of which I've seen). "Abduction" cases are the products of mass hysteria mixed with psychological disorders and laboratory-proven phenomena (subjects had their brains stimulated by certain naturaly-occuring magnetic waves and experienced hallucinations almost exactly similar to the experiences of "abduction" victims. Thinking that UFOs are constantly monitoring us and flying in formation over us is a decidedly human-centric point of view which flies in the face of logic.

I believe that ghosts are another form of mass hysteria possibly mixed with something akin to the afformentioned naturaly-occuring magnetic waves. Perhaps there is some kind of soul drivng us, but I don't think it would linger around in our world or anything.

I believe that cryptozoology deserves more respect than it gets. Sure, there are several cases such as the Loch Ness Monster and the Jersey Devil that are silly and can be thrown right out, but there are other cases that should not be ruled out. The giant panda, mountain gorilla, platypus and celocanth were all believed to be mere fairytales at one time or another, but they were all captured and observed by scientists eventualy and are now easily found in zoology texts. In the case of sasquatch, careful study of sighting locations reveals a logical habitat pattern and some hairs recovered in the wild did not match the DNA of any large mammals known to be living in the area (also know that the sasquatch is an endangered species under WA state law and killing one would incur a hefty fine...bum-bum-bum :P).

I believe that the tactile world that we interact with may not be the entirity of our surroundings. I have experinced strange things (seen doesn't really describe it) that really can't be explained. For instance (to use of of the experiences I've had while not on drugs :P), I frequently dream of things that happen in the future. Vivid little occurances happen while I dream, I shrug them off and forget about them, and they later happen in exactly the same manner as they occured. It's always about some mundane and random happening though and it happens so often that I'm used to it now though. Still, when I think about it, it's a little weird.

Lastly, if you really think about it, existance doesn't make sense at all. If the universe followed a completly logical course, it wouln't even exist. What explaination could be behind this, I couldn't even venture to guess, but really there are some things I don't think we'll ever know.

[ducon]

- Jesus lives! Jesus lives! Yeessss!
- …
- Give me my shotgun.

[NiGHTMARE]

The universal constant (the energy that can be found everywhere in the universe) has to be such an incredibly precise figure for life to exist (at least, in the form that it does), that it's far more likely in scientific terms that there is a god, than the constant is the way it is by pure chance.

The third, far more likely explanation is that our universe is merely one of an infinite number of universes, existing either simultaenously or in succession. Some would have other, bizarre forms of life, others would be entirely barren. Some would have similar laws of physics to our own, some would have a few fundamental laws altered or reversed (e.g. matter repels other matter, so no celestial bodies can ever form; heat causes darkness rather than light; the good old fashioned 'time runs in reverse'; etc), and others would be utterly alien to our way of thinking.

[Fletcher`]

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE

[Rotting Corpse]

Do I belive in the supernatural? Nope, I dont. I feal the same way about god and the supernatural. If I cant feal it, see it its not real. Maby one day some thing will happen aht will change my mind. A better question would be do I care. The answer to that would be no also.

[Fredrik]

NiGHTMARE said:

The universal constant (the energy that can be found everywhere in the universe) has to be such an incredibly precise figure for life to exist (at least, in the form that it does), that it's far more likely in scientific terms that there is a god, than the constant is the way it is by pure chance.

No, that has nothing to do with science.

[NiGHTMARE]

Energy, the universe, constants, and probabilities have nothing to do with science? If that were the case, Einstein would have a lot of explaining to do, if he were still alive...

[Fredrik]

To be specific, it's the statement "that it's far more likely in scientific terms that there is a god" that is incorrect. Whether or not the conclusion is accurate, it is entirely unscientific.

[Amaster]

I believe in the subnatural.

[myk]

Subnatural... heh.

NiGHTMARE said:
The universal constant (the energy that can be found everywhere in the universe) has to be such an incredibly precise figure for life to exist (at least, in the form that it does), that it's far more likely in scientific terms that there is a god, than the constant is the way it is by pure chance.

God is perceptive projection and chance is speculation by perception. Whatever exists is by inherent intersequential circumstance and not by 3rd party planification (sic) nor by the roll of dice on a table beyond the void.

[NiGHTMARE]

Err guys, chance can be entirely scientifically determined. Though generally scientific circles use "probability", which I guess would have been the more appropriate term for me to use ;).

There all kinds of formulaes and equations which can be used to work odd the precise odds of certain things occuing, and such things are exactly what has been applied here. Highly educated scientists worked out (with the aid of computer models as well as a great many blackboards ;)) that the probability of a certain random occurence (one neccessary for our universe to be the way it is) actually happening is considerably lower than the probability of a sentient being being responsible for the creation of the universe.