# Can ghosts be scientifically proved to exist?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [September 30, 2004, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917 "2004-09-30T20:25:58Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 12
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/221 "2004-10-10T13:16:11Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Is this supposed to be a **serious investigation**?
> We **know** who was doing the voice!
> And psychic ‘researchers’ have to stand with their backs to giggling children, get hit with objects and **the only explanation is ghosts**?!
Typical tactic: make fun of the worst and ignore the best. The article clearly says that members of the press went into the house and saw furniture move by itself, etc. But if you’re thinking that I genuinely believe that this particular case is valid, think again. I myself would like to talk to the people involved and see what physical evidence exists. But this is the kind of case where sober, seemingly trustworthy people said that something unexplained was going on. Yeah, and later in the case they felt that the girls were purposely hoaxing them. But earlier in the case they didn’t feel so.
> [@](#):
>
> Yes, neutrinos were difficult to detect. But scientists had reason to think they existed, did scientific tests and proved it. Now both you and I accept their existence.
> Ghosts have been claimed for centuries. When is the first test going to succeed?
To my mind the evidence adds up to “exists.” YMMV.
> [@](#):
>
> OK, that’s evidence!
> So are scientists going to be invited to examine the evidence?
> Are you going to claim $1,000,000 from the Randi foundation? (I assure you this qualifies for the award!)
Wow, we get to do the Randi argument twice in one thread. I’m too too thrilled.
> [@](#):
>
> But if the evidence holds up, those critics will have to swallow their insults.
> And you will be a millionaire as well!
Please refer to my comments on the sociological side of evidence and proof. You might actually learn something. You seem to need to learn something.
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/222 "2004-10-10T13:25:07Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> “Why?” you ask. I’m asking you to consider the hypothetical of someone in my position who has seen what he thinks is convincing evidence.
I have already specifically addressed the issue of personally convincing experiences in posts #187 and #213.
> [@](#):
>
> -
>
> Of course not. But let’s try this thought experiment: If you saw the device produce extreme anomalies and/or spirit faces with _your own_ Polaroid camera and film, what would you think?
\*I would think the device has some physical effect on the film or my camera that caused it to produce strange photos.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/223 "2004-10-10T13:59:36Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> I would think the device has some physical effect on the film or my camera that caused it to produce strange photos.
To all appearances it’s just a fan blowing air. Any ideas how it could do that?
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/224 "2004-10-10T15:57:08Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> To all appearances it’s just a fan blowing air. Any ideas how it could do that?
Coincidentally, I just had to lay down a chunk of change on a new camera today because my previously dependable one suddenly started spazzing out on me. I don’t know why _that_ happened, and I certainly can’t explain the workings of other people’s cameras in situations that I’m unfamiliar with. All I know about the mysterious device in question is that it _looks_ like a fan blowing air.
I take it I am not to assume that this is an off-the-shelf item from Wal-Mart, but that it is in some way a _special_ fan. I am not interested in playing guessing games here. You don’t want to describe your mysteries friends’ mysterious device or show us the mysterious photos it produces, fine. In that case you’ve received all the answer you’re going to get.
---
### Author:  [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/225 "2004-10-10T17:16:24Z")
A fan is a large and fairly powerful electric motor. In the old days of sysadmining, people would often complain that their monitors were flickering. When people came to look at it? No flicker. The cause was that they put fans on top of their monitors, and took them off when help showed.
This may or may not be related, but it bears investigation as to the point.
---
### Author:  [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/226 "2004-10-10T19:32:02Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> Typical tactic: make fun of the worst and ignore the best. The article clearly says that members of the press went into the house and saw furniture move by itself, etc. But if you’re thinking that I genuinely believe that this particular case is valid, think again. I myself would like to talk to the people involved and see what physical evidence exists. But this is the kind of case where sober, seemingly trustworthy people said that something unexplained was going on. Yeah, and later in the case they felt that the girls were purposely hoaxing them. But earlier in the case they didn’t feel so.
It’s not a ‘tactic’. It scares me that people who think they are investigating an incredible event should be so amateurish. You described them as ‘scientific-minded’ - why do you think that?
You also said about this ‘ghost’:
“There are many big, documented cases out there that had members of the press as well as scientific-minded people convinced that ghosts or related phenomena are real. They saw and heard things themselves that could not be explained.The Enfield Poltergeist is just one among many.”
So now this is not a valid case?
It’s not well documented?
It’s not convincing?
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> To my mind the evidence adds up to “exists.” YMMV.
Well if that is the best case you have, then indeed I don’t consider it evidence.
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> Wow, we get to do the Randi argument twice in one thread. I’m too too thrilled.Please refer to my comments on the sociological side of evidence and proof. You might actually learn something. You seem to need to learn something.
I already understand the scientific method, which provably works. Do you agree with it?
You claim you and your friends have a paranormal power, but refuse to be tested on it.
Even if we offer you a million dollars.
I think that attitude speaks for itself.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/227 "2004-10-10T21:36:25Z")
> [@](#):
>
> I already understand the scientific method, which provably works. Do you agree with it?
> You claim you and your friends have a paranormal power, but refuse to be tested on it.
> Even if we offer you a million dollars.
> I think that attitude speaks for itself.
Uh, I already pointed out that we’ve done the Randi Prize Argument already in this thread.
This is getting to be like dealing with a skeptic chatbot. ☹
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/228 "2004-10-10T22:38:49Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> Uh, I already pointed out that we’ve done the Randi Prize Argument already in this thread.
>
> This is getting to be like dealing with a skeptic chatbot. ☹
The only thing “done” with the Randi Prize Argument in this, and most other threads on this subject, is that it has been dismissed without just cause. Give us a legitimate reason why you don’t want a million dollars.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2004, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/229 "2004-10-10T23:40:46Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> The only thing “done” with the Randi Prize Argument in this, and most other threads on this subject, is that it has been dismissed without just cause. Give us a legitimate reason why you don’t want a million dollars.
I call megacrap on this short quote. Dung kg/per character ratio high.
Arguing about it for pages does not = “without just cause.” Please try to use more care with your words. Guess what? This same canard gets brought up in every paranormal thread, gets argued at length in every thread, and at the end of the day we still disagree.
The skeptics here (and I suspect elsewhere) just keep trying to boink the “believers” over the head with this same point time and again, often several times in the same thread. And you just did it again yourself!
It’s a tactic unworthy of GD. Then again, it perhaps more accurately could be called a tactic that _characterizes_ GD. And Czar, as mod here and prototypical user of this cheezola sophistry unit, are doing more than others to promote this style of debate here.
Is that what you want? Is that what you stand for?
---
### Author:  [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/230 "2004-10-11T00:33:10Z")
Did anyone watch Ghost Hunters on SciFi? It was an interesting show.
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/231 "2004-10-11T00:50:32Z")
**Aeschines** , could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions? The money is there for the taking, you get to help set the conditions, and if you don’t want the money, you can give it away to charity. Even the judging is done by someone agreeable to both you and the JREF Foundation.
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/232 "2004-10-11T02:20:14Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> **Aeschines** , could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions?
Because to get the prize, they’d have to reveal what their secret mystery device is.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/233 "2004-10-11T02:38:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> **Aeschines** , could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions? The money is there for the taking, you get to help set the conditions, and if you don’t want the money, you can give it away to charity. Even the judging is done by someone agreeable to both you and the JREF Foundation.
You did it again.
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/234 "2004-10-11T02:44:20Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> If you think you do that bad a job of representing your side, why are you bothering at all?
You miss the point. This board is biased against paranormal phenomenon. Maybe you haven’t noticed?
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> Sleep paralysis alone could explain a huge number of experiences that people mistake for paranormal.
There’s always alternatitive explanations. Doesn’t mean that _just because_ there is an alternative that the alternative is the right explanation. Where is your proof that these are just sleep paralysis? never mind proof, how about evidence, or even suggestions?
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> Well, actually, in most cases it probably involves no such thing. The majority seem to have nothing that could be claimed as physical evidence in the first place.
Interesting. You are asking for physical evidence for non-physical phenomenon??
Who’s claiming “physical evidence” in the first place?
But, you know, in part, you are right. Lots of people experience things like “sleep paralisys,” lucid dreams, etc., and assume the experience is paranormal. Looks like we need more open discussion and more education. Education without bias.
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> For most of the rest, well, plenty of people are convinced they’ve found “subliminal sex messages” in Disney animated films too.
The “rest?” You been living on Mars??? Oh, ‘most’ of the rest… statistics please?? Or risk dismissal of your generalizations.
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/235 "2004-10-11T02:47:55Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> Maybe people are just _mistaken_ when they think they experience something paranormal.
And maybe there’s still WMD in Iraq.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/236 "2004-10-11T02:48:44Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> Because to get the prize, they’d have to reveal what their secret mystery device is.
Reveal? No, the device is described on the Web on a website.
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/237 "2004-10-11T03:01:06Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#):
>
> A fan is a large and fairly powerful electric motor. In the old days of sysadmining, people would often complain that their monitors were flickering. When people came to look at it? No flicker. The cause was that they put fans on top of their monitors, and took them off when help showed.
>
> This may or may not be related, but it bears investigation as to the point.
In investigation of the paranormal, it is always important, and supremely so, o elimin ate any esidual physical causes of the phenomenon observed.
In this case, it would require some sort of explanation as to how a generated electrical field from a fan would affect the printed image on polaroid camera!
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/238 "2004-10-11T03:06:53Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> The only thing “done” with the Randi Prize Argument in this, and most other threads on this subject, is that it has been dismissed without just cause. Give us a legitimate reason why you don’t want a million dollars.
Because Randi does not really want to give up his ‘million,’ and will alter the terms of the agreement in order to make it impossible or unlikly to attain.
“10 out of 10” ??? Really??? Even basketball players in the physical univese rarely get those odds!
“The Amazing Randi” is not very amazing. He’s a garden-variety trickster.
_Barf_
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/239 "2004-10-11T03:10:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> **Aeschines** , could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions?
Ha ha, hoo hoo! _Snorf_ Excuse me, I’ve seen some of those “reasonable conditions” – pardon me, I’ve got to take a break…
ha!
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 11, 2004, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917/240 "2004-10-11T03:12:30Z")
0
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> **Aeschines** , could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions?
Ha ha, hoo hoo! _Snorf_ Excuse me, I’ve seen some of those “reasonable conditions” – pardon me, I’ve got to take a break…
ha!
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917.md?page=11)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-ghosts-be-scientifically-proved-to-exist/266917.md?page=13)