It would never happen, so the question is pointless. You might as well ask how we would explain it if we saw somebody turn into a duck.
Tell him when he gets old he will be a grandfeather.
If you saw a lamp start floating, how would you explain it? It’s a pretty simple question.
Or, you can just admit that supernatural things can and will never be factually proven because there’s always ways to explain things.
In which case, saying “It doesn’t exist because there’s no scientific proof of it” is pointless too.
There never can be proof if there’s always a way to explain things.
So what would you consider “proof”?
If a lamp floated in midair, would that be proof to you or no?
If no, what would constitute as proof to you?
A lamp would not levitate in midair. That’s the answer to the question. It’s impossible. It makes no sense to ask what I would think if the impossible happened because the impossible can’t happen. I see no point in dealing with impossible hypotheticals. All you’re really doing is asking whether we would believe in the supernatural if we saw something supernatural. I would not see something supernatural. I do not say that because we lack evidence for it but because the supernatural is, by definition, physically impossible.
Having said that, the answer is that if we could prove something occurred which violated the laws of physics, then we would have evidnece of the paranormal. That has never happened and never will happen, though, and it is perfectly reasonable to assume that impossible things are impossible until proven otherwise.
I agree.
So how could it be proven to you? What would you accept as proof?
You would have to prove that the laws of physics had been violated.
Okay, we’re in a room and the lamp starts to float by itself. That would be a clear violation of physics.
It would be proved then, right?
Ooh, ooh, ooh! I’m channeling Dio here and I think I’ve got this one!
It didn’t happen because it can’t happen and we didn’t really see what we saw.
Yes, that would be a good piece of evidence. Now show me this floating lamp.
No, it wouldn’t be proved then. We would have to examine the lamp and the room to see if there were tricks involved.
The thread IS about ghosts but OK, I’ll bite. A lamp floating across the room does not mean that ghosts or any other supernatural thing exists, it means I saw a lamp float across the room. It absolutely doesn’t mean that I have to accept whatever explanation YOU offer for as the final say in what happened, why would it? If I told you I saw a lamp float across the room would you honestly come to the conclusion that a supernatural being went to the trouble of rearranging my furniture? It wouldn’t seem possible to you that I am mistaken in what I say or that you’ve misunderstood or that I forgot some detail of the story or maybe that I’m just looking for attention? Without even getting to the physics there are many explanations for this phenomena that I claim (in your example) to have seen. You should at least ask me to see the lamp before jumping to conclusions.
I see stuff every day that I can’t explain. Planes stay up in the air, images appear on my television (and talk!), baby ducks make me happy and, of course, women. I can either accept that there are some things I can’t be bothered to fully explore or I can just start making stuff up and telling everybody about it. I really don’t understand why people do the latter. Is it demons?
You would have to eliminate natural explanations first.
I gather nobody here has been to Ikea lately and priced their new Höverlampen series.
Powered by ghost technology? Yes, of course, but we were talking about SUPERnatural events.
If ghosts existed and we could harness them for everyday purposes then someone would be in here claiming we are all too closedminded to believe that grimlins made their ghostlamp stop hovering. No, really, I’m telling you. I SAW it stop hovering.
My first thought would be either that I’m hallucinating or, more likely, that it’s some kind of trick.
There are always ways to explain them. That’s the point. If you could produce a floating lamp that was repeatable (i.e. that the lamp would float more and in a controlled environment) then you could study it and try and determine what it was. If it’s a one off event (which all ghost type stories are), then there is no way to study it, and no real conclusion could be drawn. You might think that gives ghosts some wiggle room, but outside of the woo crowd it really just means that the default explanation is simply a mundane one.
A repeatable anomaly that can be studied by a number of different researchers and which actual data can be drawn. If it’s a flying lamp then the lamp has to fly more than one time for one person or group.
As a for instance, I remember reading about one of the groups engaged in listening for alien signals (I think it was SETI). After years, they got such a signal, and it was a whopper. I remember that one of the scientists actually wrote ‘Wow!’ on the printout. The problem was, they only got the one signal. So, what could have been one of the great scientific discoveries of all time is now just an interesting piece of data.
No, it wouldn’t be proof of anything except that I had possibly seen something weird.
-XT
My only point to giving that example and asking was trying to ask “what would be considered proof to skeptics?”
I like xtisme’s answer. “Proof to him” would mean it having to happen multiple times in a controlled environment. That answers my question.
Anyway, I was just playing devils advocate because I don’t really believe the proven existence of anything supernatural is or will ever be possible due to so many peoples’ different opinion of what proof is to them…
…which is just fine since I don’t believe ghosts wholly exist either. : p
Here’s how I would explain it - I would look for an explanation. I would not just select a conclusion and hurl myself towards it, as ghostophiles do.
So. A lamp floated. First I try to take a closer look at the lamp. If I can’t find it, then maybe I was hallucinating. If I find that it is in the hands of a man dressed completely in black so as to fade into the background, then I might start to suspect a trick of some kind. And if Casper suddenly fades into visibility and says “Hi! Will you be my friend?”, then I will jump out of my shoes, hover in the air for a moment with my hair and limbs literally separating from my body, and then all the component parts of me will flee separately for the horizon.
So you see, what I conclude will depend on what else I notice about the situation. Just saying “you see a lamp lifting up and (apparently) floating around the room on its own accord” is so incomplete that it sounds like the start of a “guess the sequence of events with just yes or no questions” game.
Hey Idle Thoughts: You see a lamp sitting in the middle of a highway. Explain how it got there.
I probably guess it fell off the back of a truck or something.
I understand your point.
My point, though, wasn’t “try to explain this”…it was more “If this isn’t proof to you, by itself, as is,…then what would be?” That’s all. You seem to answer it yourself with your Casper example. 
The important question now is…would you, while your hair and limbs were standing up, go “A guh-guh-guh-GHOOOOOST!” 
Well, obviously. I thought that was universally understood.
And while interacting with a seemingly sentient persistent visible translucent corporeal manifestation would be an excellent way to make me into a believer, it’s not the only way. However, other ways involving less immediately persuasive evidence would require things like repeatability and absence of plausible alternate explanations (that is, they’d work in a controled environment). Of course this hasn’t come to pass yet.
ETA: and seriously, the slow sciency approach would be the better approach, with regard to true certainty. I do concede that I could be fooled by a sufficiently persuasive trick (a hologram, maybe?) - I am a skeptic but not infallible.
I have no particular opinion regarding “ghosts” other than to say that “something” exists.
Since there seems to be an ongoing, uninformed" expression of opinion, I have developed the following “hypothetical” proposal in order to get some serious discussion underway.
Since I wrote this up over my lunch hour, over pastrami and cheese, I don’t pretend that it is comprehensive or without error or omission, but it is a start.
Preamble:
In than over a considerable period of time a phenomenon, or collection of phenomena, collectively and commonly known as “ghosts” have been observed, it is proposed that these phenomena be examined and characterized with the view to determining and classifying their defining characteristics physical properties.
In that this is an apparently unexplored area of science, it is proposed that the study proceed in an iterative manner as data come to light, but broadly proceed along two fronts: the characterization of the phenomena; the examination, measurement, reproduction and exploitation of any or all their physical properties.
-
Characterisation of the “Ghost” Phenomena
Observational and anecdotal evidence suggest that the phenomenon commonly known as “ghosts” are the non corporeal continuation of the sentient qualities of a previously living entity.
Therefore, it is proposed that one branch of this study be aimed specifically at examining this contention with the following objectives:
a. Design and implementation of study methods and protocols leading to the confirmation or refutation that “ghosts” are the conscious residue of a previously living entity.
b. Establish methods and protocols for the ongoing and reproducible means of both establishing and maintaining contact with one or more “ghosts”.
c. In that anecdotal evidence suggests that there may be more than one type of “ghost” or related phenomenon, each of these shall be identified and characterized as a separate entity, in accordance with the overall study protocols.
d. Application of the methods and protocols developed to establish and maintain contact and communication with “ghosts”. -
Examination of the Non Deceased Alternative
In that it is also possible that “ghosts” may be something other than that stated in (1), above, the possibility that “ghosts” are the manifestation of some unknown or unimagined phenomena also needs to be examined.
Therefore it is proposed that a parallel branch of study be established with the objective of examining alternative manifestations of the “ghost” phenomenon. This shall proceed broadly as follows:
a. Identify those phenomena which appear to differ from the previously defined “conscious residue of a previously living entity”.
b. Design and implement study methods and protocols leading to the characterization of said phenomena.
c. Design and implement any such studies along such branches which appear to be productive in light of the results of a. and b. above. -
Psychological Aspects of “Ghosts”
It is recognized that the manifestation of the “Ghost” phenomena may be the result of either a physiological or psychological process.
This process may be expressed in either individuals, or in broader and more far reaching manifestations, such as mass psychosis.
Accordingly it is proposed that this aspect be studied as a branch in parallel with the other studies.
This branch of study shall proceed as follows:
a. Methods and protocols for the psychological examination and diagnosis of individuals experiencing the “ghost” phenomenon shall be developed.
b. Individuals who report having experienced the “ghost” phenomenon shall be subjected to the methods and protocols developed.
c. A determination of the psychological aspects of the phenomena will be developed in response to the data collected. -
Characterisation of the Physical Phenomena
Observational and anecdotal evidence suggest that “ghosts” have a variety of physical properties. Some of these observed properties are at variance with what is known within the parameters of conventional science; and some of these properties appear to be in conflict with each other.
Therefore, it is proposed that a parallel branch of this study be established for the specific purpose of examining the physical aspects of “ghosts” with the objective of either explaining these within the context of conventional knowledge, or identifying and exploring new branches of knowledge which are consistent with the empirical observations.
The ultimate objective shall be to develop sufficient characterization of these physical properties that they may be reproduced under laboratory conditions on demand, and the exploitation of such properties in a manner which may become apparent with their discovery and development.
This study shall proceed in the following manner:
a. In that there may be different types of “ghosts”, they shall be identified and classified according to whatever organizational parameters become evident.
b. In that “ghosts” are observed under a variety of conditions and circumstances, these shall be identified and classified in accordance with the circumstances and conditions under which they are observed to manifest.
c. In that “ghosts” are observed to exhibit particular physical properties, such as the ability to pass through solid objects, each and every such physical property shall be identified and studied with the objectives of:
i. Characterizing each such property
ii. Producing a coherent, consistent and reproducible physical explanation for each such property
iii. Establishing methods and protocols leading to the reproduction of each such property under laboratory conditions
iv. Propose applications and benefits for all or any such new physical characteristic as is identified and developed. -
Development of a “Ghost” data base
Currently, the prevalence, distribution and characterization of the “ghost” phenomena is largely unknown; what is known is largely dependent on anecdotal hearsay.
This deficiency is largely due to both social convention and scientific dogmatism which both act to discourage individuals from reporting their observations.
In addition, the absence of any centralized reporting base, and the corresponding lack of any standardized method of collecting, collating or analyzing “ghost” data all contribute to the paucity of data.
Accordingly, it is proposed that there be established a central facility with the purpose of collecting all reports of ghostly manifestations, and document their specific character in a standardized format which will be conductive for further study.
With the establishment of this facility, a worldwide ongoing publicity campaign will be launched and maintained in order to encourage individuals to report their observations.
This facility and its operations shall proceed as follows:
a. The physical facility, including buildings and data processing facilities shall be established
b. A standard data collection and reporting protocol shall be developed
c. Corresponding data base and analytical software be developed and implemented
d. Reporting and data collection stations be established in appropriate locations around the world
e. Collected data shall be continuously monitored and analyzed in order to identify both reporting trends, and “ghost” characteristics
f. All such analysis shall be reported to the researchers active in the investigation of the phenomena -
Method and Funding
In that this is an entirely new area of study, it is expected that a considerable amount of time and resources will be required in order to make headway in this study.
It is expected that considerable funding will be required both on an annual, and ongoing basis. Furthermore, it is expected that as the base of knowledge expands, each successive year will require additional increments of funding over and above that of the previous year.
Accordingly, it is proposed that the initial funding for this study be a minimum of $10,000,000. These funds will be allocated broadly to the following areas:
a. Recruitment and salaries for both research and support staff
b. Procurement of office, laboratory and computer facilities; payment of ongoing capital and operating costs
c. Establishment of the data collection and processing facilities, along with the associated ongoing running costs
d. Furnishing and stocking of all office, laboratory and computer facilities
e. Ongoing operating overheads and expenses
f. Preliminary development of study methods and protocols
g. Preliminary identification and survey of worldwide sites identified as prime candidates for “ghost” manifestations
h. Direct costs of each individual study
i. Miscellaneous expenses