So, as much as I love the idea of them, I’ve always had a problem properly believing in ghosts. There’s so much to swallow – that people’s essences survive after death, that they come back in an anthropomorphic form, that they have something to communicate – as Scully from the X-Files puts it:
‘…that we witness these spirits clad in their own shabby outfits with the same old haircuts and hairstyles never aging, never in search of more comfortable surroundings – it actually ends up saying more about the living than it does about the dead.’
But poltergeists I’m not so sure about. From what I’ve read they seem to be more * real*, somehow. I like the idea that they represent some kind of uptapped psychokinetic energy or perhaps some other kind of, er, undiscovered force. (No, I’m not a physicist.) And I’ve heard they generally congregate around teenage girls, which is interesting.
What do you all reckon? Are they supernatural or veering towards the pseudo-scientific?
I lived ina haunted house although I never SAW anything, they were there and more than one.
I don’t know if I buy into the teenage girl thing - I do think that we have an energy that goes on after death. Not sure about the whole heaven/hell/purgatory thing or why some people go and some just hang around - maybe we find all that out when we pass on. But I think there are places that are kind of a thin spot between here and there and that these energies can pass through the thin spots and that it takes a lot of energy for them to be known.
Hanging around int he same shabby clothes sounds like somthing out of a Goosebumps book to me.
You think poltergeists are more ‘real’ than ghosts because there is no force that will explain them?
Hmmm.
As far as I know there is no evidence of either ghosts or poltergeists.
Neither have ever registered on scientific instruments, or been recorded.
Do you believe in aliens making crop circles?
Do you believe in dowsing?
Do you think the US faked the moon landings?
Do you think the Earth is flat?
Does phlogiston exist?
The one thing that all the above have in common is that there is precisely zero evidence for them.
By contrast, I believe there is an invisible force that causes masses to attract each other (which varies with mass and less distance).
I believe that I can press keys on my computer, and that you will get my message soon after, wherever you live.
I’m a scientist!
Yeah I know, glee, it sounds dodgy. But as a stout Fortean I have to examine the possibilities.
For example, there are levels of crackpottedness. Aliens making crop circles = extremely crackpotted. Dowsing = perhaps relying on just one scientific notion that hasn’t been discovered yet.
And I feel that way about poltergeists. They need only one unknown factor to prove their ‘scientificness’, IMHO. We know that soundwaves can do odd stuff. What other factors (produced by people, or not) may be out there, also doing stuff that couldn’t be explained two centuries ago?
Poltergeist (German for "mischievous ghost) activity is associated with boys and girls going through puberty. Generally there is telekinetic activity, objects moving, noises, but nothing distinctly “human.” Ghosts often manifest the human shape of their living body. Poltergeists are not believed to be the spirits of the dead.
Us scientific types examine both possibilities and evidence. (Gil Grissom is my hero!)
I think you have something interesting here. Perhaps ‘crackpottedness’ is a bit crude, but there certainly are levels of likelihood.
Consider aliens making crop circles. The crop circles do exist. However we have film of hoaxers making them (and clear instructions on the Internet!).
But people have been dowsing for centuries. Cecil posted a column saying that experiments started in 1641 (!). So for over 450 years dowsers have failed every single test. When is your ‘scientific notion’ going to appear? Why would anyone still believe in something that has failed for centuries?
Well soundwaves don’t do odd stuff. What happens is that scientists consistently expand human knowledge, and we do indeed know more than two centuries ago.
The problem you have is not that it can’t be explained. It’s that it’s never been scientifically observed.
if something happens just once, then scientists will investigate and start hypothesising.
Alas no poltergeist has ever been scientifically observed.
I say, old boy, we’re the Straight Dope. We like a sound, polite argument based on the facts.
But surely no telekinetic activity has ever been scientifically observed?
The whole idea of poltergeists (and ghosts) comes from stories and anecdotes (like Father Christmas).
I’m not going to argue whether poltergeists and ghosts exist or not. However, in classical parapsychology, from what I can remember, poltergeists (“noisy ghosts”) are centered on an individual. They are personal manifestations, and the psychic energy is connected with the individual involved (as stated before, normally a pubescent girl). A classical ghost is not centered on an individual, and is an extra-personal manifestation.
A poltergeist will follow a person around, since it is theorized to be the psychic energy of the person him/herself. Ghosts are generally connected with places.
Well if they don’t the rest of your post is pointless. :eek:
I’m curious about the use of ‘classical’ in this context, since no parapsychology has ever been proven. If it doesn’t exist, how can there be a classical version of it?
I would say that the standard myth is that poltergeists associate with an individual. Just like classical dragons that breathe fire and eat virgins.
There is no scientific evidence of manifestations or psychic energy. So what does all the above mean?
I used to be a skeptic too…until I was there. I have no desire to scientifically document. I simply moved but there was something very hinky in that 400 year old house in Germany what ever you want to call it.
glee - The above means that in parapsychological texts, this is usually the distinction made between poltergeists and ghosts. I don’t see your problem with the word “classical.” Something need not be proved for there to be a cohesive and generally accepted belief system behind it. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe in parapsychology. But there are definitions and standards which classical/orthodox/whatever parapsychologists usually ascribe to.
I think the main difference is that Ghost had Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze, whereas Poltergeist had the guy from Coach and a couple of really bad sequels.
They’re similar though, in that they both have names of imaginary creatures in their titles.
Well there are a lot of things that haven’t been proven that a preponderance of people belive - basic religion.
Or how about quantum physics? How many people actually understand the relativity of space and time and yet that exists too.
100 years ago if you told someone that men could fly hoo-boy, y ou’d be laughed right off of your bale of hay. Or that pictures could be transmitted from a war in real time for the entire world to see? How about if you said in the middle ages that bacteria caused illness? Or that insanity had nothing to do with the moon?
Just because it hasn’t been scientifically proven to date doesn’t mean it won’t eventually.
This is absolutely true and I don’t disput3e any of what you have said. All I was trying to illustrate is that each generation assumes we are close to knowing alll that can be proved and proving all there is to be proved when in fact that MIGHT not be the case. In other words, no without a doubt it had not been proven even though people have tried but it doesn’t mean that it definitively doesn’t exist. It just means as a society we aren’t in a place to prove or disprove. Doctors used to try and cure illness with leaches and my guess is that with the exception of clearing the dead flesh of an infection, it often didn’t work. Doesn’t mean one day someone won’t invent a super duper quantum physics orerated laser guided ghostbuster.
Keep an open mind Luke and let the force guide you.
Indeed. There are religions that contradict each other. Which one is true? Or are you saying because there are thousands of sects that one of them must be true?
Can we give up on the Egyptian Sun Gods yet? The ancient Egyptians believed in them so strongly that they built the Pyramids! Do you believe in those Gods? Or were those millions of people all wrong?
People also believe in astrology. They read newspaper forecasts and pay astrologers. Does that make astrology true?
What do you mean ‘that exists too’? Nobody has ever seen any evidence of a ghost, a poltergeist or a God.
But scientists make successful predictions based on quantum physics. It might be a bit difficult to understand, but at least we know it exists.
Yes, and all these things have been proven to exist. At the same time that people were ridiculing flight, TV and bacteria, they also believed in ghosts, poltergeists and God.
So they were wrong twice.
Because it really doesn’t matter what the public believe (unless you’re a politician or an advertiser) - what counts is if is there any evidence for it.
Do you believe the Sun will fail to rise tomorrow?
Do you think gravity will not apply on the Earth tomorrow?
‘Just because it hasn’t been scientifically proven to date doesn’t mean it won’t eventually.’
