XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.christnet.christianlife   
   From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/8/2025 11:18 PM, JTEM wrote:   
   >   
   > So, how do you describe a ghosts?   
   >   
   > A foggy apparition?   
   >   
   > A disarticulated limb or head?   
   >   
   > A cold spot?   
   >   
   > Noises?   
   >   
   > A 100% normal appearing human that is later discovered   
   > to have died years ago?   
   >   
   > Objects moving or breaking, doors opening?   
   >   
   > Etc.   
   >   
   > Ghost are commonly described as ALL OF THE ABOVE!   
   >   
   > Hmm. If an animal was described with such wildly   
   > varying descriptions you'd conclude that people were   
   > seeing different animals. That, more than one animal   
   > was being given the same label...   
   >   
   > Why not ghosts? Why suddenly change the rules for   
   > ghosts?   
   >   
   > What I'm saying is that for pretty much another other   
   > thing, stepping away from the topic of the supernatural,   
   > the many varied descriptions of ghosts would EXCLUDE a   
   > single phenomenon at play.   
   >   
   > Yes, something that appears invisible and passes through   
   > solid matter would be a different phenomena than   
   > something that looks like an ordinary person and interacts   
   > with the world as a real person would.   
   >   
   > Two different things. And between them spans a number of   
   > other very different things...   
   >   
   > The simpleton approach would be to shout "They don't   
   > exist" and leave it at that. But, that is objectively   
   > false in many cases.   
   >   
   > There are noises. People do feel cold spots. There are   
   > EMFs detected. EVPs are recorded. Multiple witnesses do   
   > report the same sighting... on & on.   
   >   
   > The experiences are real and in countless cases external   
   > in origins. All I'm saying is that there's more than one   
   > explanation.   
   >   
   > More than two explanations.   
   >   
      
   Simple.  There are no ghosts.  If you disagree, cite the peer-reviewed   
   paper, preferably, from Science, Nature, Proceedings of the National   
   Academy of Sciences, or some other society or at least reputable journal   
   (such as the New England Journal of Medicine.)   
      
   Dawn   
      
   P.S.  Don't hop on your conspiracy bandwagon; I have too much going on   
   today to deal with that!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)