Checks were are still in GD.
CITE!
Come on, you can’t go around making extraordinary statements liek that without at least some proof.
Ok, you want proof? I said that I had seen ghosts. That isn’t enough proof? Someone I know has taken pictures of ghosts in our local YMCA. I have seen the pictures myself and they have not been altered or faked in anyway.
When I was about 8-10, we lived in a house that had been in a fire before (I didn’t know about the fire until much later). Anyway, two kids died in the fire. I could see them but the rest of my family couldn’t.
As for why some people can’t see them, I honestly don’t know. Some people are clairvoyant and some others aren’t. Well, I have a theory, but it will take me awhile to explain it.
Has anyone ever heard of the personality trait of high sensitivity? This trait has been researched by Dr. Elaine Aron. Her website is www.hsperson.com (if it is okay to post other sites). You can read a little bit about being a Highly Sensitive Person. I know alot about this trait because I am one. You can go to the library and read any of the books she mentions on the site.
Some of the traits of HSPs are being aware of subtleties in the environment, being affected by other people’s moods, the ability to notice and enjoy delicate or fine scents, tastes, and sounds.
I believe that many people who are psychic or have paranormal abilities are HSPs. I just believe that HSPs are more in-tune with their surroundings and are able to “see” things that some others cannot.
This is just my opinion, but if you read about people like Edgar Cayce, even though the trait of high sensitivity wasn’t really named then, I do believe that he was a HSP.
uh huh. :rolleyes:
You “know” this how?
**
Cite?
I don’t blame you.
Suer they do. Like cows for instance.
Why would “skepticism” affect one’s ability to see? I can see the guy in the Hampton Court video. I’m also a skeptic. If I can see him then doesn’t that prove he’s not a ghost? (since skeptics can’t see ghosts)
Me too.
I don’t know what “kind of thing” you mean but gthere were plenty of tourists when I was there. It’s the palace where 'enery the Eighth offed a couple of wives. People have a morbid fascination with that stuff.
Boy, that’s a logically solid argument. They don’t have enough tourism, therefore they wouldn’t be trying to attract any tourism. I doubt it’s a ply for tourism but from what I’ve seen, London’ historical tourist sites do not shy away from selling the “haunted” angle to gullible tourists.
Cite that any are actually “haunted” other than just playing up an image to the fish?
Sure they would. People are stupid, especially people who believe in ghosts. I bet this bloke in the Hamlet costume has already attracted a spike in credulous curiosity seekers.
That’s neither here nor there, though. We are not limited to choosing between a stunt to attract tourism or a real ghost. There are a number of other perfectly natural possibilities, such as a double exposure on the camera, a practical joker, etc. The possibility of a real ghost does not even merit serious discussion unless you can eliminate all natural explanations. even an unlikely natural explanation is still more likely than a real ghost.
How about the Jack the F***** Ripper Tour? How about Tower of London? Madame Tussauds? Enough places for you?
Since you deliberatelty took my post out of context (I bet you do this all the time), I will direct you to my post after the one you tore apart for no reason.
I saw ghosts. You don’t believe me? How am I supposed to prove that to you?
People who are into ghosts might not, IMO, visit Hampton Court Palace, just because there is the off chance they may see this guy. If he doesn’t show up when they are there, what’s left for them to do? If they are not interested in Hank’s history, there ain’t much left, unless they make out in the labyrinth.
It is more likely that the ghost hunters would stick closer to London, that way if their day pans out, there are other places to go.
Yeah, there are plenty of tourists that visit the place, but if you’re not a history buff, what’s left to do? With the lousy train system in London and surroundings, you waste a day just going to Hampton Court Palace and back (from London).
If I might just interpose for a moment…
the video is online here;
http://mysite.freeserve.com/gamesmastervze/bxb/ghost.gif
er…
looks strangely wobbly for a surveillance camera…
if pushed I would suggest it was actually taken on a digital handheld camera of some sort.
Oh…well…somebody on a message board thinks she saw a ghost. Well that cinches it for me. :rolleyes:
Are you an expert in photography? How do you know that the images were ghosts? Are you always this credulous about everything?
You know, if you can see stuff that other people can’t see, that’s called a hallucination. Have you ever been in a hospital? Have you ever been on meds? are you off of them now? I’m asking this in all seriousness. I work with schizophrenics. They see all kinds of things that aren’t there.
[waving hand] I know! I know! Because they aren’t fucking there!
Cite?
Well, I have a theory, but it will take me awhile to explain it.
Has anyone ever heard of the personality trait of high sensitivity? This trait has been researched by Dr. Elaine Aron. Her website is www.hsperson.com (if it is okay to post other sites). You can read a little bit about being a Highly Sensitive Person. I know alot about this trait because I am one. You can go to the library and read any of the books she mentions on the site.
Some of the traits of HSPs are being aware of subtleties in the environment, being affected by other people’s moods, the ability to notice and enjoy delicate or fine scents, tastes, and sounds.
I believe that many people who are psychic or have paranormal abilities are HSPs. I just believe that HSPs are more in-tune with their surroundings and are able to “see” things that some others cannot.**
[/quote]
Man, what a a goofy website. I didn’t really find anything about formal studies or peer reviews or empirical evidence for that lady’s claims. I also found that her “credentials” consist of a “PHD” (it doesn’t say in what) from something called Pacifica Graduate Instute
Some of the requirements for the “graduate” programs in this place are very weird and I can’t find anything on the cite about accreditation.
In any case, this woman’s seemingly unsupported theory still doesn’t say anything about the “paranormal.” It doesn’t even explain what causes all this “highly sensitive” jazz, it just tells these “HSP’s” how special they are. The “self-test” is constructed in such a way that pretty much anybody who takes it will come out as an “HSP.” It’s a sucker test. I suspect there’s a hook in it somewhere which will hit up the newfound “HSP” for $$$$ but I don’t have the inclination to explore it any further.
Here’s the Straight Dope on Edgar Cayce. He’s not very impressive.
It’s a hoax
No such thing as ghosts, Bigfoot, UFOs, Loch Ness Monster, Rods, Etc…
IMO.
(fixed coding)
Man, what a a goofy website. I didn’t really find anything about formal studies or peer reviews or empirical evidence for that lady’s claims. I also found that her “credentials” consist of a “PHD” (it doesn’t say in what) from something called Pacifica Graduate Instute
Some of the requirements for the “graduate” programs in this place are very weird and I can’t find anything on the cite about accreditation.
In any case, this woman’s seemingly unsupported theory still doesn’t say anything about the “paranormal.” It doesn’t even explain what causes all this “highly sensitive” jazz, it just tells these “HSP’s” how special they are. The “self-test” is constructed in such a way that pretty much anybody who takes it will come out as an “HSP.” It’s a sucker test. I suspect there’s a hook in it somewhere which will hit up the newfound “HSP” for $$$$ but I don’t have the inclination to explore it any further.
Well, Diogenes, did you miss the link to the APA? Did you miss the reference to a work published by Oxford University Press? Yeah, those wacky new agers at Oxford!
You can dismiss this as you wish, but this trait is not actually new. Dr. Carl Jung (maybe you’ve heard of him) actually pioneered this field. Yeah, the website does not have much info, but apparently you are too lazy to borrow a book from the library or download a sample newsletter.
The test is NOT loaded. Did I say she said anything about the paranormal? NO I DID NOT. I said it was MY theory.
Where the hell do you get off asking if I am on psychotic medication? You can disagree with my theory, but you have no f*cking right to call me schizophrenic.
What kind of proof would you accept? Do you get to decide what is real or not? Who the hell gave you that right? I said I have seen ghosts. That does not mean I was hallucinating them.
As for the photos, I’m not an expert, but I know the person who took the pictures very well. Other people have also photographed ghosts. Just because YOU don’t believe it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
So I guess everyone here is supposed to bow down to your will and believe everything you say. Is that how it works? Who the hell made you God?
Uh, chicksdigscars, Diogenes the Cynic did not call you a schizophrenic; and no, he is not god, but neither you are.
Therefore, since we are stuck in this dimension/timeline, we have to check other evidence than your word. So far, your proof is lacking in research and review. It remains weak on facts.
You obviously don’t understand this forum. You’re supposed to prove your extraordinary assertions. “I saw ghosts” is not proof of anything.
Yes, your site has a link to the APA. So what? It’s just a link to the APA homepage. It doesn’t actually cite anything from the APA about this so-called “HSP” diagnosis. A search of the APA site does not turn up any such diagnosis and a google search only turns up this lady’s website and Amazon links to her books.
Jung is not exactly the cutting edge of psychology these days and many of his ideas have been discarded, especially stuff like his theory of archetypes and dream interpretations.
I didn’t accuse you of being schizophrenic, I asked if you were schizophrenic. It’s a legitimate question to ask of people who frequently see things that aren’t there. It’s also nothing to be ashamed of if you are. I’ve known some great and intelligent people who suffered with it. I don’t consider it a stigma. It’s just an explanation for “ghost” sightings which must be definitively ruled out before “paranormal” phenomena can be considered.
You need to chill out. If you’re going to come around here asserting that ghosts are real and you’ve seen them you’re going to get challenged pretty hard. This is a more rigorous message board than you may be used to, especially the Great Debates forum. This is a board devoted to fighting ignorance so we try to be pretty systematic when it comes to extraordinary assertions. If you want your claims to simply be taken at face value you’re going to be disappointed.
Excuse me, but Diogenes asked me if I had ever taken medication, if I had ever been hospitalized and then later stated that he had worked with schizophrenics. If that isn’t calling me schizophrenic, then what the hell is?
As for proof, if no one believes what I saw, then what do you accept as proof? I guess the multitude of “ghost sightings” out there just aren’t convincing for you. Do TWO or more people need to see a ghost at the same time for you to believe it? I gave you the link to the one site and pointed out legit credentials that Diogenes apparently ignored.
Read Jung’s work. Sorry I can’t point you to a specific book. I guess you guys require footnotes. What part of my proof is lacking in review? Your criticism is weak on facts. The link I gave to support my theory (and it is MY theory, not Dr. Aron’s) has links to other articles and agencies, such as the American Psychological Association. She has been cited in a book published by Oxford University Press, the penultimate academic publisher (and I know that because I work in the library field).
Penultimate means “next to last.”
Actually, UFO’s exist. A UFO is an Unidentified Flying Object, which can be pretty much anything. The existance or nonexistance of Alien Spacecraft is another matter altogether.
And I’ve seen Rods before. Homer used one(an inanimate carbon rod) to save the Shuttle from burning up on re-entry. Flanders also has a son named Rod. 
Yeah, well you didn’t PROVE that this so-called tape wasn’t real, either. And as for “chilling out,” I’ll do that as soon as you stop insinuating that I hallucinated. As for “asking” if I am schizophrenic, you may have just as well stated it for a fact. The way you worded it was insulting. I didn’t insult you by stating that I saw a ghost. If you don’t believe me, fine. But you have no right to say I was hallucinating. You said “It’s nothing to be ashamed of if you are (schizophrenic).” Let me state for the last time, I AM NOT SCHIZOPHRENIC. Why the hell do you have to insult me like that? I can take criticism, but I haven’t read you posting anything so hateful in response to anyone else in this thread.
As for proof, I have asked before, what do you consider proof? You have not attacked others who posted before I did, and they offered less “proof” than I did.
BTW, if I have to PROVE everything I say, then where is the debate? If something is known to the entire world as a fact, then there is NOTHING to talk about.
Okay, ULTIMATE academic publisher. HAPPY NOW???
Granted, it’s a poor quality video, but I am REALLY unimpressed.
Nothing spooky except the appearence, just someone(possibly dead but much more likely alive) trying to close the fire door.
Point taken.
Will personal testimony suffice?
I assure you that I am not able to see ghosts. One of the various reasons being, of course, that they don’t exist.
Jay
chicksdigscars, I think you will be more welcome when you learn the ropes and rules at SDMB.
Also, you might want to refine your terminology. Do you understand the difference in anecdotal evidence, empirical evidence and proof?
If he had wanted to call you a schziophrenic, it would have looked more like this: