• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can Science Prove There Are No Ghosts

james bond

Well-Known Member
Not evidence for your myth. What makes you think that is of any value at all? Just because you found an empty tomb does not mean that it was the tomb of Jesus. In fact there is no reason that that tomb could not have been used again. Even if the Jesus story was true one might find an empty tomb that was not Jesus's and an occupied tomb that actually belonged to him.

All you are doing is clutching at straws because you have nothing.

It's not a myth. It's history. Facts, reasoning and historical truths seem to escape you. It's why atheists are usually wrong. Maybe it's you and the atheists that are clutching at straws because you have nothing*. The Christians and I have God, faith and have used facts, reasoning and historical truths to validate it all. Even the Biblical prophecies have come true.

* You claim to have science, but it's atheist science. The Christians are the ones who created the scientific method and modern science in order to honor God. What you have is the 1800s when atheist Charles Lyell, Darwin's teacher, came up with uniformitarianism to challenge catastrophism. Later, science would not accept the supernatural and they kicked the creation scientists out of their fake science. That isn't science, but biased science.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
Wow. Ghosts seem to absorb or reflect photons. And they seem to be subject to the laws of gravitation. And look at that ghost walking the stairs. It does not just go through the floor, so they also seem to sensitive to electronic repulsion. They are just fuzzy enough to be identified as ghosts, so they must be ghosts.

A miracle! :)

Ciao

- viole

Ha ha. They seem to absorb photons to a degree as they are missing their legs in the photos. What unusual is these "ghosts" were not seen except for the camera lens. The people there did not remember any of the ghosts being there. I don't think one can have a double image with digital photos. If you took a photo and the ghosts weren't there and suddenly they appear in your photo, how do you think it happened? It could be a reflection or some light phenomenon which you seem to infer, but I have to see some photos of such to believe that it could happen. I would agree that if we set up video cameras at these locations and can replicate what happened, then it would be stronger evidence for a ghostly event or not.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Ha ha. They seem to absorb photons to a degree as they are missing their legs in the photos. What unusual is these "ghosts" were not seen except for the camera lens. The people there did not remember any of the ghosts being there. I don't think one can have a double image with digital photos. If you took a photo and the ghosts weren't there and suddenly they appear in your photo, how do you think it happened? It could be a reflection or some light phenomenon which you seem to infer, but I have to see some photos of such to believe that it could happen. I would agree that if we set up video cameras at these locations and can replicate what happened, then it would be stronger evidence for a ghostly event or not.
Why are you assuming the “ghosts” are humanoid figures? We have a natural tendency to see figures and faces in random patterns so you can’t rely on what it looks like to you.

We presumably don’t know how formally and controlled the assessment of this image was. We been offered no specific information about what the people saw (or didn’t) at the time the picture was taken but nothing definitive about that either way.

I’ve not been through every post in the thread but I suspect “ghost” hasn’t yet been formally defined and hypothesised here (as it hasn’t anywhere). You say you know science yet you seems to be trying to make a leap from observation to conclusion without passing through the other stages of proper scientific method. You need to describe exactly what your hypothesis is, what mechanisms you’re proposing to explain this phenomena. Only then can those mechanisms be properly tested. The idea of some kind of reflection or “trick of the light” could form the basis of such a hypothesis and could be tested.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It's not a myth. It's history. Facts, reasoning and historical truths seem to escape you. It's why atheists are usually wrong. Maybe it's you and the atheists that are clutching at straws because you have nothing*. The Christians and I have God, faith and have used facts, reasoning and historical truths to validate it all. Even the Biblical prophecies have come true.

* You claim to have science, but it's atheist science. The Christians are the ones who created the scientific method and modern science in order to honor God. What you have is the 1800s when atheist Charles Lyell, Darwin's teacher, came up with uniformitarianism to challenge catastrophism. Later, science would not accept the supernatural and they kicked the creation scientists out of their fake science. That isn't science, but biased science.
Nope, you merely have myth. You don't seem to know what history is. Faith only leads to people believing what they wanted to believe anyway. That is why there are so many different religions out there. And I can name many failed prophecies, I doubt if you can name any real fulfilled prophecies. Christians do not seem to understand what it takes for a prophecy to be claims to be fulfilled.

And science is science, in fact I don't know of any science that is not atheistic.. Lastly there are no "creation scientists". You don't appear to know what science is at all. You are in fact using "atheist science" right now. Doesn't that make you a hypocrite?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
To the contrary, I understand science very well and probably have a higher degree than you.

That is clearly not the case. You continually show that you are completely ignorant about all of the sciences. You really should not tell fibs. You are not fooling anyone here.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
It's not a myth. It's history. Facts, reasoning and historical truths seem to escape you. It's why atheists are usually wrong. Maybe it's you and the atheists that are clutching at straws because you have nothing*. The Christians and I have God, faith and have used facts, reasoning and historical truths to validate it all. Even the Biblical prophecies have come true.

* You claim to have science, but it's atheist science. The Christians are the ones who created the scientific method and modern science in order to honor God. What you have is the 1800s when atheist Charles Lyell, Darwin's teacher, came up with uniformitarianism to challenge catastrophism. Later, science would not accept the supernatural and they kicked the creation scientists out of their fake science. That isn't science, but biased science.

“But I don’t want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can’t help that," said the Cat: "we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad."
"How do you know I’m mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn’t have come here.”
Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
 
Top