5 Pieces of Evidence Against the Paranormal

P

Poison Pen

Member
One thing I love about the paranormal is the fierce debates that it causes. The comments left at the bottom of the articles here at Paranormal Haze are sometimes just as entertaining, if not more entertaining, than the articles themselves. I have presented evidence in support of the paranormal in several articles on this site and in the interest of fairness and to stir up a debate I wanted to present 5 pieces of evidence that those who believe in the paranormal will have to contend with in order for their beliefs to continue to hold water.
Click to expand...

5 Pieces of Evidence Against the Paranormal - Mystic Files
 
When one has a life changing paranormal experience, I'd liken it to a spiritual awakening. Articles either way are entertaining at best.. yes. :rolleyes:
 

CDS said:
When one has a life changing paranormal experience, I'd liken it to a spiritual awakening. Articles either way are entertaining at best.. yes. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yep. But that article is 5 years old so a lot can change in that time frame.
 

CDS said:
When one has a life changing paranormal experience, I'd liken it to a spiritual awakening. Articles either way are entertaining at best.. yes. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I agree.

Articles are entertaining also...well then again..perhaps sometimes. ;)

When something likened to the paranormal happens to us, we are all to blame for not
happening to have a camera taped to our foreheads for proof..so it would seem.:rolleyes:

And...Thanks to the hoaxers...:mad:...even if proof were right there...it still would never
see the light of day as evidence, not in todays general society.

Chris, I think you've said you 'never doubt someone's personal experience(s)
evidence however....'

I totally agree with you in that as well.
 
Wind7 said:
And...Thanks to the hoaxers...:mad:...even if proof were right there...it still would never
see the light of day as evidence, not in todays general society.

Chris, I think you've said you 'never doubt someone's personal experience(s)
evidence however....'

I totally agree with you in that as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do say that.

I'll also say:

Most people involved in the paranormal usually try to prove the existence of it. Those who go out of their way to disprove are in my book just trolls. :cautious:
 
Well isn't the goal of a paranormal investigator to try to find a natural cause for the strange happenings in a place? It proves difficult for a single person to prove their paranormal experience simply because there is no primary evidence to back their claim other than their word. I don't believe people that have these experiences are lying but it only takes a few to destroy the many. The world of the paranormal has become the world of the hoaxers and fraudsters and that makes those who claim paranormal experiences job even harder. They are put under a microscope.

I think there maybe a spirit world beyond this life and there maybe those who have passed on that cannot accept their spiritual limbo and just want to hang with the living.
 
Of course we should try to find natural causes for such things.

My remark was not directed at anyone specific (here).

I have run into those that make it their life's work to hammer down anything paranormal. You know, like what the government does but on a more personal level :cautious: Like the person that wrote the article you posted.
 
CDS said:
Of course we should try to find natural causes for such things.

My remark was not directed at anyone specific (here).

I have run into those that make it their life's work to hammer down anything paranormal. You know, like what the government does but on a more personal level :cautious: Like the person that wrote the article you posted.
Click to expand...

Thats why you don't accept this stuff at face value. While the article itself centers on evidence against the paranormal on the other hand it fails to consider the other evidence that may well prove paranormal claims. Given the amount of information that is out there on this stuff I think it would be hard to disprove any paranormal claim in one short article because I don't think the evidence as a whole has been totally examined. But then again doubters of the paranormal are only looking for evidence that disproves it and are not considering the entire scope of work that has been done on the subject.

Historians often refer to what they call Primary and Secondary sources. Primary sources being that where one or more people actually witnessed an event and then proceeded to write about it. In Secondary sources, these are claims written by those who never witnessed an event but drew from those sources who wrote before them. The Bible is a good example of this Primary and Secondary source material.

In this case (paranormal), those that actually experience this stuff would be considered a primary source and those that write later about these events would be considered secondary sources. I will post a link to this primary and secondary source stuff in a bit but the overall point is look at the primary sources of the material and compare it to the secondary sources written later and you will be surprised how it changes from person to person.

Primary vs Secondary Sources
 
Last edited:

Top