Then you will never begin.
Then there is no where to go.
How can you propose something exists if you can't define the thing you think exists?
Spirits are something that man has no control over and can only be observed when the opportunity presents itself. Spirits have plenty of recorded lore which almost parallels mens civilations.
This requires demonstration, not just assertion.
Aliens, pixies and elves have a history in human culture too, but that doesn't make them real.
I'm still wondering what a spirit is - how it is defined, how it exists and how it is measured.
Spirits do not follow the laws of physicality of man. It is believed they exist on a different plane parallel to man and are able to influence, help ,or hurt man.
Again, this requires demonstration, not just assertion.
Now you've added yet another two more undefined elements to this - now you claim there is a "different plane parallel to man” and that “spirits don’t follow the laws of physicality.” How do you know that? That also needs to be demonstrated, rather than just asserted.
And if spirits can influence, help or hurt man, then they should be easily detectable and measurable, because that would mean that they operate within the laws of nature, in this world, which is the only one we actually know exists.
Now many apparitions of people are believed to be residual energy. I say that because in video evidence of apparitions they are often seen repeating an action similar to when they were alive, even when spotted more than once. This could be an invisible enitity walking through a door and sliding a chair to sit down, street cameras the that show apparitions appear then cross the street, or for example Gettysburg apparitions and most clothed humanoid apparitions that are spotted.
The show has many videos of apparitions caught on street cameras. One video that comes to mind shows an apparition appear In the middle of a busy street. One car swerves to avoid It but goes right through it. As cars pull over it disappears and several drivers check the street puzzled.
Lots of things are believed by a great many people. But I'm interested in what can be demonstrated rather than simply just asserted.
What is an "invisible entity?" And if they're invisible, how are people supposedly seeing them?
If you can't define what a ghost is, or explain how it can be measured and tested, then you have no business assigning "ghost" or "spirit" as the cause of anything. I could just as easily say those supposed apparitions that people saw were caused by snurflebergs and have just as strong an argument as you've got.
Poltergeists and Manifestations of a spirit are a little different.
What is a poltergeist? How is it detected and measured? How is it different from a ghost or spirit?
Poltergeist activity is one that could probably be studied as these are usually the most frequent activity. A study could probably be done but, of course at the total discretion of the poltergeist. This would probably involve devices and you guessed it, video documentation, something you seem to be against which makes it impossible to even study with any validity.
Now you’re asserting that poltergeists not only exist, but also have discretion.
This is another claim that needs to be demonstrated, rather than just asserted.
I’m not against video documentation, per se, in addition to other empirical evidence. What I’m against is “video documentation” of “something” that nobody has measured or tested or anything, but simply claim is a ghost or a poltergeist or a snerfleberg.
There is quite a jump from “I saw something weird” to “it’s a poltergeist or a ghost.” There is a lot of work that needs to be done in getting from the first claim to the last one. You don’t get to just assert it.
Manifistations of unknown spirtis are random and in essence, uncontrollable. This is your shadow figures, full hauntings, demons and spirits in general. These things do not succumb to mans laws not even a little. They arent objects that man can control over to study. They can only be observed and evidenced by rigorously filming at all times. Its funny because the lore and stories go back eons but much of the current video evidence supports thats these things have always existed in the way that they are known to exist.
Now you’re claiming there are demons and shadow figures? What are those? How are they defined and measured? What’s that, they’re uncontrollable and can’t be studied? Then how on earth do you assert that they exist?
More assertions without demonstration.
Again, lore and stories about all kinds of things like leprechauns and banshees go back for centuries – that doesn’t make them true stories.
In dealing with these things you have to go by the evidence that is there, not evidence that you want presented to give your earthly perception basis in something that isn't earthly, due to lack of understanding. To be frank spirits are present but, the knowledge of them is as limited as our knowledge of the beginning of existence. However, there is a positive in that spirits can provide answers but solely at their discretion.
No, we don’t. We can and should investigate using the most successful and useful method of investigation we have available to us – the scientific method. It’s far more reliable than just asserting the thing you want to believe and declaring it to be real.
We all have “earthly perception” given that we are earth dwellers.
“Spirits are present” is an assertion that needs to be demonstrated. “Spirits can provide answers but solely at their discretion” is also an assertion that needs to be demonstrated. Of course, you’d have to define spirits and demonstrate that they exist in the first place, before you could make such a claim.
Also, if we have a lack of understanding and knowledge about a thing, then we can’t draw conclusions about it. Instead, we need to investigate further.
Video evidenc quite frankly is the best evidence of spirits since man is at the spirits descretion. The best studies are ones that observe the evidence and then scientifically decide wether it is factual or not. Any other form of evidence would be hearsay as there is no tangible way to study a spirit in the method you decribe without video documentation. To deny all video evidence before observing it is to limit your perception of any evidence at all. It would literally have to happen to you directly.
Studies that decide that things are spirits without defining what a spirit is, or that it exists in the first place aren’t helpful at all and amounts to not much more than wishful thinking.
If there is no tangible way to study and test for a spirit, then you don’t get to claim their existence. You simply couldn’t, if you were being honest. Sorry.
Video evidence of some phenomenon is one thing. But jumping to the conclusion that said phenomenon is a ghost or spirit or demon or a snerfleberg requires a lot more evidential support than just your say-so.
Someone could set out to study a poltergeist and chronical it scientifically and their findings would probably be talked about in scientific circles and aired on discovery channel... thats funny
Yes, they would be, if they could provide demonstrable, empirical evidence for such. That’s how it works.
You know, like how we know about every single other thing on this planet via the scientific method? It actually works. And it works a whole lot better than “I saw a thing and I conclude it’s a ghost, even though I haven’t defined a ghost and haven’t demonstrated that ghosts exist in the first place.” We don’t actually get to the bottom of things by just asserting the thing we want to be true.
In essence all you are really doing is explaining a mysterious thing with an even bigger mysterious thing. That doesn’t get us to actual answers.
As i said to dismiss all videos as not evidence, is to be in denial of any factual evidence subitted. You cannot know if it has any factual grounding or not until you view all of the evidence presented and judge based on the totality. If even a portion any of the totality of video evidence is factual then the truths would correlate and they do.
You keep saying there are facts but can’t even define the thing you say factually exists.
