People who believe in the paranormal are delusional.
I mean really .
shareMay I, with respect, remind you that science has not yet disproved the existence of hauntings.
On that basis, the correct position to accept, that is if you've not personally experienced any supernatural phenomena, is that to date, science has neither proved nor disproved same, so we cannot yet dismiss it as entirely delusional.
It is important to remember this truth: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In other words, because modern scientific analysis has failed to capture watertight evidence of certain supernatural phenomena, such as hauntings, it is not then correct to assume that such cannot exist; or, at least that is so without appearing to be arrogantly confident of our primitive abilities to measure same.
Therefore, for those who've *not* personally experienced any supernatural phenomena, the only intelligent position to take as regards the most debated aspects of the supernatural realm, is one of agnosticism. That is, "I choose not to believe in a certain supernatural phenomena, because I've not experienced same myself, and I know that science has yet to prove same either. Nonetheless, *if* definitive proof should ever arise some day, then I will change my beliefs accordingly. Meanwhile who am I to call someone delusional who appears not to be lying about their own experiences!?" is perfectly rational and intelligent. However to state that "the supernatural is all BS and people who believe in hauntings, are delusional" is irrationally closed minded, & definitely not *yet* justified scientifically.
Remember too, there are those who don't believe in UFO's using almost the same reasoning (despite the great probability that we cannot be alone in such a vast universe) only because (somewhat arrogantly and closed mindedly) "we humans cannot travel to the stars ergo no other aliens could possibly do so either." Again, it is more rational to state that because we humans do not *YET* realise the technology required to travel beyond our own moon, that does not by rational extension mean that an alien civilisation cannot have also have amassed the technological expertise required to travel beyond their own galaxy. It is perfectly possible (and indeed perfectly rational to believe) that another civilisation could have acquired the technology for space travel which we have yet to uncover. To assume that aliens could not travel faster than the speed of light when there have been thousands upon thousands of credible UFO sightings over the years, is also a most questionable stance - one which is arguably founded upon contemporary human ignorance more than anything else. Again, we do not yet have the technology to prove hauntings are real either, but I very much believe that the day will come, when science will acquire the technology which is needed to prove certain paranormal phenomena (UFO's etc.) are indeed real; and let's not forget that there are far more than a handful of very credible people who've reportedly experienced the paranormal - even if you don't believe Danny & all the others who somehow very much appear not to be acting.
Modern science has proven that people can be delusional, and the original poster is not breaking any laws of logic to think that believers in the paranormal are among the delusional population.
shareWell some of the people involved in the documentary are clearly delusional, Such as the old lady who produced the "Piece of Christ's cross" utterly ridiculous, but she was completely sold on it. And so was Danny who became quite aggresive when a member of the crew stated he was an agnostic.
I believe its safe to say when all the nuts came out of the woodwork after the story broke, parapsychologists, supernatural investigators and some of the more fanatically religious helped to reinforce these beliefs on Daniel Lutz.
I think Danny had a very traumatic childhood and some of his memories were also further shaped by the Amityville movie and other movies of the time, note his talk of being subject to exorcism.
"Yeah,well..well Dracula called and he's comin' tonight" - Master Shake
The old lady with the cross is Lorraine Warren... part of her schtick is to make people believe she is sold on their delusions, so she can turn a profit. She is more of a charlatan, than actually being delusional. Her and her late husband had their names and game put on the paranormal map, thanks to the original Amityville horror hoax... it made them a lot of money. It is not surprising that she shows up in this documentary... the Amityville horror hoax and Lorraine Warren go hand-in-hand, just as much as the Lutz family does.
Though I see no evidence of it here in this thread, I find that many 'skeptics' are aggressive in their beliefs and tend to treat those with more open minds with barely-concealed contempt (and in some cases, completely blatant contempt). It IS possible to believe in the supernatural without being especially religious, or prone to swallowing every stupid story that comes down the pike.
As for the idea that those of us with the aforementioned 'open minds' are somehow delusional:
Mankind has been experiencing strange phenomena since the dawn of recorded history. That amounts to BILLIONS of individual accounts from all kinds of people, in all walks of life, whether they believe the event was paranormal or simply unexplained. These accounts may be anecdotal in nature, but the law of averages tells us that SOMETHING is going on. The events in question may be 'paranormal' for no other reason than science simply hasn't been able to record them in ways that would satisfy anyone on either side of the debate. And since 'science' is resistant to even TRYING to investigate this phenomena in any meaningful way (primarily due to the sneering of skeptics), it's doubtful they'll ever develop reliable methods to tackle the subject anytime soon.
If skeptics are genuinely claiming - in all sincerity! - that EVERY SINGLE ONE of those countless BILLIONS of individual experiences are all due to deception or delusion (the two main categories into which these accounts are usually placed), then I'm afraid it's the skeptics who are seriously misguided.
I mean, really...
http://www.the3drevolution.com/3dlist.html (3-D Filmography: 1893 - Present Day)
Very well said!
shareScience doesn't have to disprove the paranormal, or unicorns for that matter. The burden of proof is on those who claim the paranormal exists.
That said, I found this documentary to be very sad. Danny's psyche is clearly fractured as a result of his parents' grandstanding, leaving him a stunted husk of an adult man. The scene in which he's reunited with Lorraine Warren -- another adult who permanently damaged Danny's ability to function in reality -- was especially cringeworthy.
i would say most paranormal activity is people having nightmares and not being able to differentiate. also people tend to be quick to call things a ghost. i mean with the billions of people who have died wouldn't there be a hell of a lot more ghosts? shouldn't every house be haunted? is becoming a ghost like winning the lottery or something?
share"with the billions of people who have died wouldn't there be a hell of a lot more ghosts? shouldn't every house be haunted? is becoming a ghost like winning the lottery or something?"
Actually, one of the most widely accepted theories of hauntings is that a vast majority of them are what's known as "unintelligent" hauntings. This is a ghost or spirit that repeats actions in an ongoing loop. Usually these are due more to electromagnetic anomolies. What a lot of ghost hunting shows have shown (if their evidence can be accepted) is that hauntings usually incur a manipulation of electromagnetic fields. Most "ghosts" that we hear about aren't really the spirit of the deceased but rather an electromagnetic imprint upon a certain area. Usually, when a person has an extreme emotion - be it positive or negative, whether it was that they really loved the place where they lived or had a traumatica experience there - they leave an electromagnetic imprint and thus we get the "unintelligent" hauntings. So for that there is at least a somewhat scientific explanation or possibility.
Other times, there is what's called an "intelligent" haunting where you get EVPs, EM meters that seem to respond to "yes" or "no" questions, people reporting that they have been pushed or touched by a spirit, or the movement of physical objects such as doors and chairs. For these I don't know that there is a scientific possibility or explanation, but I do know that I have seen enough ghost hunting shows that the possibility of their occurences should not be discounted by any means. Skeptic will say that a cable show will have the evidence manipulated but if it can be inferred that the investigators on such shows are using scientific means and methods, and that the video evidence has not been tampered with in any way, there is plenty of evidence out there that hauntings and paranormal phenomenon are in fact possible. I myself remain a skeptic until I see actual proof for myself, but if the Ghost Hunters can be trusted, then they have captured some pretty convincing and compelling evidence.
I don't know if you're aware of this but I've already changed things. I killed Ben Linus.
--Sayid
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
That is exactly what it is. It's called a process. you present a thesis, then you test it. If here is no data for it, the thesis is wrong.
This is why you wont find many scientist believing that unicorns, giants and hogwarts are real.
Signature:
Sorry for the horrible english. I'm Swedish.
I did not have to read your post The original story has been debunked.
And you cannot prove a negative. I like I cannot disapprove that are not unicorns, or their are being living in the middle of the Earth, but nothing shows that to be true. Nor can I prove what is in the middle middle of the Earth.