ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags ghosts

Reply
Old 23rd May 2020, 05:47 PM   #641
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,538
The difference between UFOs and ghosts is that nobody sees UFOs in their garage.

The atmosphere will distort and reflect images over a great distance, and sunlight makes distortion worse. Combine this with the fact that most people are unfamiliar with the sky and you get most UFO sightings.

In short: External input.

Ghosts are seen as a result of Internal input.

For example a security guard hears a familiar sound, and as he looks in that direction he is moving, and in that split second the visual aspect ratio changes making it seem as if a shadow moved before vanishing. The security guard combines the misidentified shadow with the sound he heard, and - if he believes in ghosts - comes away from the incident thinking he's seen one. Even if he doesn't believe in ghosts the guard is disturbed by what he THOUGHT he saw before correctly blowing it off as an active imagination.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2020, 05:11 AM   #642
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by EHocking View Post
People always underestimate the difficulty of gauging distance, size and speed of any object against/in a featureless sky.

Even experienced sky watcher, plane spotters, pilots and birders for instance, can be fooled and certainly fool themselves. Even when you are aware of this, mistaken estimates are easy to make.
I never intimated how far away it was. Though knowing the maximum height of stratus clouds and my viewing angle I can infer that it was not miles away. There's a detail I left out. Since it was tending towards dusk I specifically remember looking for a orange glow on the cloud, I saw none. From that I can infer two things either it was much too low to cast a glow or if it did the glow was too dim too see. Though the sky was featureless that wasn't how I referenced its speed. There were trees nearby that help. In my years I've seen many aircraft that appear to fly slowly for reasons such as they actually were or do to great distance or they were flying slowly coming towards me. This orange ball of light was moving from my left to right.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2020, 09:43 AM   #643
Reformed Offlian
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
The accuracy is, in the fact I witnessed an orange ball of light moving slowly across the sky.
But that's not a measure of accuracy; that's only an allegation of fact. The only way to establish its accuracy would be to measure it against other verifiable facts, which neither you nor anybody else can do at this point. The apparent vividness and clarity of detail you attribute to your memory gives no indication either way as to how accurate it is. Not even to yourself.

Quote:
All of the other details I wrote are irrelevant.
I've noticed something about your modus operandi. And that is you like to argue over the most nitpicky things just for the sake of it. Your reply is evidence of that characteristic.
If the claim is that your memory is accurate, then your ability to report details with consistent fidelity is relevant, even crucial. If it turns out you can't even pin down when you saw this thing, that justifiably calls into question the accuracy of your report.

Our brains are not camcorders, nor our memories playbacks of faithfully-recorded and largely intact video files. Which is one reason why it's a bad idea to get butthurt when somebody makes the perfectly reasonable suggestion that maybe the event didn't occur exactly the way you narrate.

Quote:
Now certainly there must be a reply somewhere if this forum that is surely worthy to argue over instead of wasting time and brain power doing it with my trivial story.
Sour grapes. Your butthurt here suggests a higher degree of emotional investment in having your audience believe your story than you are admitting to.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2020, 10:06 AM   #644
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,041
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
The accuracy is, in the fact I witnessed an orange ball of light moving slowly across the sky. All of the other details I wrote are irrelevant.
I've noticed something about your modus operandi. And that is you like to argue over the most nitpicky things just for the sake of it. Your reply is evidence of that characteristic. Now certainly there must be a reply somewhere if this forum that is surely worthy to argue over instead of wasting time and brain power doing it with my trivial story.
I think it's actually a central part of the discussion: The limitiations of human memory and perception.

All I'm saying is that we can't evaluate your UFO sighting, first and foremost because fifty years on we have no way of knowing whether you actually saw what you remember seeing. Human memory just isn't that reliable.

Given what you know about the limitations of human memory, why are you so confident that you remember this particular incident accurately?

My contention is that it's pointless to try to explain ghosts or UFOs that come to us from decades-old memories.

It's one thing to look at a radar plot or a photograph and try to deduce what it shows. It's another thing to try to deduce what happened, from a decades-old memory. Did you see it? Sure, whatever. Can we be certain enough that you saw it to bother trying to explain it? I don't think we can.

Why did you bring up this anecdote, anyway?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2020, 03:14 PM   #645
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I don't think you're intimating aliens.

Inaccurate memories aren't characterized by the absence of detail, but by the presence of inaccurate detail.

This is one of the problems with trying to identify UFOs from secondhand reports. There's no way to be sure that the reporter is remembering the right details.

ETA: Earlier you said it was the summer of '72. Then you said it was the summer of '71 or '72. The details are there, but where is the accuracy?
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
The accuracy is, in the fact I witnessed an orange ball of light moving slowly across the sky. All of the other details I wrote are irrelevant.
I've noticed something about your modus operandi. And that is you like to argue over the most nitpicky things just for the sake of it. Your reply is evidence of that characteristic. Now certainly there must be a reply somewhere if this forum that is surely worthy to argue over instead of wasting time and brain power doing it with my trivial story.

This touches on what I pointed out in the thread "Trial By Jury". A nitpicker will point out some irrelevant detail in your recollection (A detail you never gave much attention to.), and use that to discredit your recollection of that which was the centre of your attention.

While ready to admit to the susceptibility of error in eye witness testimony, I think we must allow some credibility in many cases, and try to find explanation rather than dismiss the testimony automatically. This is particularly so when no other evidence is on offer.

Some years ago when observing the night sky I noticed a bright object moving up, then down. I pointed this out to a friend who drew my attention to the fact that I was standing on the deck of a ship. The rolling of the ship was so slow I didn't feel it.

This is the way we honestly assess the accuracy of an observed event. We try to find explanations for the apparently unexplainable, not just automatically dismiss the observation out of hand, with the claim that it was only an eye witness account after all.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 04:39 AM   #646
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
You could look at it that way, although I do think that there is an explanation, or, explanations, for why we endure these stories, and why we create them, why we pass them on, etc. Folklore, IMO. Modern folklore seems to be more based around conspiracies than wailing women in white or hairy man-beasts stalking the local woodland.
Agree, that's another way to look at it. To explain "Ghosts" as a system of traditions and folklore , I think it is a social and psychological phenomenon, that is : It is nearly impossible to have conscious beings and intelligent civilizations without exhausting the scope of different psychological experiences that might emerge from the many possibilities that our brain is capable of.

So, in a sense : religion, folklore, traditions are a psychological phenomenon. They do not prove "Gods" or "ghosts" or "Djinns" , but they prove that humans exhaust all their creative experiential resources.
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 04:50 AM   #647
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
No. Ghosts are a side-effect.

Not explaining them can get people hurt, as in the case of CO2 poisoning, and outgassing from toxic sheetrock. They may also be diabetic.

This is why it is important to understand why people see, or think they see them. Non-existence is a starting point, not an end point.
Yes, I might misunderstand the question.

If you look at it that way, it is the "belief in Ghosts" and "subjective experience of Ghosts" that needs to be explained, this is the phenomenon : Why do people 'see' ghosts'.

And not : Ghosts.

A phenomenon must be objective in order to qualify as a phenomenon as far as science is concerned. The objective phenomenon here is that people see and believe things, and not the content of what they see.

The contents of our conscious experience are never taken seriously in science, what is taken seriously is why the content exists and why does the brain give rise to the qualitative aspects of it.

Here is an example, this is an example of a "Ghost"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GALLMJxLvgA


The illusion itself is not important, the content "what white or gray look like" are not important, and are not taken seriously in science. This is not the phenomenon.

What is important though, is that why this psychological illusion takes place? why is it that the gray looks like white under the shadow?

One of the answers lies in the integration of information in the brain, the space of our experience is not a space with separate independent entities, but everything is integrated in such a way, that adding a dot or line to the scene, makes the brain recompute the whole scene.

Here, just adding the shadow makes the brain recompute the colors of the whole scene. That's why "ghosts" arise. The brain is highly interconnected so that one can never predict what might arise just by introducing some stimuli to the system.
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.

Last edited by MohamedTaqi; 25th May 2020 at 05:00 AM.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 05:18 AM   #648
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
People here don't see Ghosts, they see Djinns .. Because the Qur'an states that Djinns are just like humans, but created from fire instead of clay, and there are Muslim and non-Muslim Djinns according to the Myth, and they also will be judged like humans in the hereafter.

The Qur'an says that they served Solomon to build his temples and statues, and many Muslims believe that Solomon controlled them using his magic ring, and bad Djinns are kept in lamps.

In Morocco, fanatics insist on eating salt at least once in 40 days (since they believe salt keeps Djinns away), they also believe that not eating salt for 40 days helps you see Djinns , and sorcerers and witches use this method to communicate with them and use them (sorcerers are still executed in Saudi Arabia to this day !!). According to the folklore, pouring hot water in a sink or wash basin may cause you harm, since hot water may kill a Djinn's children and bring harm to yourself.

When I was a kid in the 90s, people used to talk about Djinns more often compared to now, as the technology and the internet made people less interested in those stories, and many people in the 2000s don't believe in them anymore. Many reported seing Djinns and such hallucinations, but personally I've never had such an experience.

The only "magical" experience I've had personally is this : I was dreaming a couple years ago that I saw myself looking for "camilidae" and llama species on google.

Believe me, the results page and its images were exactly the same thing I saw when I verified upon waking, the same images, the same titles, but the order is different.

The only explanation of this is that I have already searched that, and the impression stuck in my long term memory. Although I don't remember searching that exact term, but it must be the case, since I am used to take zoology and systematics courses at home.

That's the closest I got to a "miracle", and it was amazing ! To know that a google result page is stored in my brain without me knowing.. wow! I know it is not a big deal, but having the experience is a shock, to know that your brain stores things you don't know about.
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.

Last edited by MohamedTaqi; 25th May 2020 at 05:25 AM.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 08:28 PM   #649
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
This touches on what I pointed out in the thread "Trial By Jury". A nitpicker will point out some irrelevant detail in your recollection (A detail you never gave much attention to.), and use that to discredit your recollection of that which was the centre of your attention.

While ready to admit to the susceptibility of error in eye witness testimony, I think we must allow some credibility in many cases, and try to find explanation rather than dismiss the testimony automatically. This is particularly so when no other evidence is on offer.

Some years ago when observing the night sky I noticed a bright object moving up, then down. I pointed this out to a friend who drew my attention to the fact that I was standing on the deck of a ship. The rolling of the ship was so slow I didn't feel it.

This is the way we honestly assess the accuracy of an observed event. We try to find explanations for the apparently unexplainable, not just automatically dismiss the observation out of hand, with the claim that it was only an eye witness account after all.
Next thing ThePrestige and Reformed Offlian will be arguing after I restated the time frame is my inaccuracy calls into question I saw anything at all. I posted this story of mine merely as a curiosity, never expecting it to be cross examined nor wanting to be.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 08:44 PM   #650
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Reformed Offlian View Post



Sour grapes. Your butthurt here suggests a higher degree of emotional investment in having your audience believe your story than you are admitting to.
No sour grapes. Do you know why? Because it's just a story of no importance to anyone not even to me.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2020, 08:53 PM   #651
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think it's actually a central part of the discussion: The limitiations of human memory and perception.

All I'm saying is that we can't evaluate your UFO sighting, first and foremost because fifty years on we have no way of knowing whether you actually saw what you remember seeing. Human memory just isn't that reliable.

Given what you know about the limitations of human memory, why are you so confident that you remember this particular incident accurately?

My contention is that it's pointless to try to explain ghosts or UFOs that come to us from decades-old memories.

It's one thing to look at a radar plot or a photograph and try to deduce what it shows. It's another thing to try to deduce what happened, from a decades-old memory. Did you see it? Sure, whatever. Can we be certain enough that you saw it to bother trying to explain it? I don't think we can.

Why did you bring up this anecdote, anyway?
I wasn't asking for an analysis. I just wanted to share. As hard as that may be to see that is the truth.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 12:32 AM   #652
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,538
Originally Posted by MohamedTaqi View Post
Yes, I might misunderstand the question.

If you look at it that way, it is the "belief in Ghosts" and "subjective experience of Ghosts" that needs to be explained, this is the phenomenon : Why do people 'see' ghosts'.
As I explained earlier in this thread and in others, the question isn't, "Are ghosts real?", the question is. "Why do rational people see ghosts?". As I said, there are many latent factors which can make a person an unwilling witness to what they believe is a paranormal encounter. Things like outgassing from bad sheetrock, bad wiring, CO2 poisoning, and infrasound all contribute to what is a very real experience to the person who has the experience. Throw in the crazy way the brain takes shortcuts in processing sensory input, and you have a bunch of factors which was not obvious to the general population.

Quote:
A phenomenon must be objective in order to qualify as a phenomenon as far as science is concerned. The objective phenomenon here is that people see and believe things, and not the content of what they see.

The contents of our conscious experience are never taken seriously in science, what is taken seriously is why the content exists and why does the brain give rise to the qualitative aspects of it.
Again, the biggest factor which turned me away from a believer was that the most common "ghost" is that of a living person. Understanding the sensory input which leads someone to believe a family member is somewhere in the home when they are not is the master key to understanding the engine behind the illusion.

Quote:
People here don't see Ghosts, they see Djinns .. Because the Qur'an states that Djinns are just like humans, but created from fire instead of clay, and there are Muslim and non-Muslim Djinns according to the Myth, and they also will be judged like humans in the hereafter.
That is a whole other can of worms, and infrasound runs wild in parts of the middle east due to the heat rising keeping the air circulating. There are a lot of stories which came out of our invasion and occupation of Iraq that could have been told by soldiers from a thousand years ago. Men on edge being effected by infrasound, and seeing and hearing things. Shooting at shadows only to find an empty perimeter.

There is so much to the human brain and the mind we have yet to explore.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 09:28 AM   #653
Reformed Offlian
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
Next thing ThePrestige and Reformed Offlian will be arguing after I restated the time frame is my inaccuracy calls into question I saw anything at all.
Is that what we will be arguing next? Well, damn. Now that you’ve predicted my plot twist on the internet, I guess I’ll have to rewrite what I was going to post.

*types furiously*

There. Now: neither thePrestige nor I made this about the details; you did. Specifically, you, like Nessie earlier upthread, progressively added details to your story as you went along. It’s a pattern I’ve noticed before. The script goes something like this:

Claimant: “I once saw an orange light moving across the sky/heard footsteps in an empty hallway.”
Audience: “Maybe it was just x”.
Claimant: “No, it couldn’t have been x, because new and conveniently-recalled detail a.”
Audience: “…or maybe it was y.”
Claimaint: “No, it couldn’t be y, either, because new and conveniently-recalled detail b.”
Audience: “Are you sure you recall a and b correctly? I mean, you admit you don’t even remember the exact date.”
Claimant: “Yes, my story is totally accurate, and you can trust me because I also vividly remember new and conveniently-recalled details c, d, and e.”

The claimant wants to keep alive the notion that whatever they experienced defies easy explanation, while dismissing the alternative that they simply missed or forgot details that would indicate such an explanation. And to do so, he increasingly assures us both that his recollection of the event is rich in accurate detail, and that those details happen to preclude the proposed explanations.

You saw this light almost 50 years ago, and you obviously didn’t take notes at the time (because then you would be able to consult them for the date) so we have to consider seriously the possibility that you simply don’t remember the event nearly as well as you claim to, especially when your addition of details follows the rhetorically-convenient pattern mentioned above.

Quote:
I posted this story of mine merely as a curiosity, never expecting it to be cross examined nor wanting to be.
You posted a UFO anecdote on this thread never expecting it to be cross-examined. Oooookay.

Last edited by Reformed Offlian; 26th May 2020 at 09:30 AM.
Reformed Offlian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 11:12 AM   #654
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
As I explained earlier in this thread and in others, the question isn't, "Are ghosts real?", the question is. "Why do rational people see ghosts?". As I said, there are many latent factors which can make a person an unwilling witness to what they believe is a paranormal encounter. Things like outgassing from bad sheetrock, bad wiring, CO2 poisoning, and infrasound all contribute to what is a very real experience to the person who has the experience. Throw in the crazy way the brain takes shortcuts in processing sensory input, and you have a bunch of factors which was not obvious to the general population.

Thank you .. Yes, I misunderstood an interesting question, It is easy to deceive the brain, just consider the case of Pareidolia : when you wake up late at night, and see a curious face staring at you : You turn on the light to find it is just a curtain ...

Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Again, the biggest factor which turned me away from a believer was that the most common "ghost" is that of a living person. Understanding the sensory input which leads someone to believe a family member is somewhere in the home when they are not is the master key to understanding the engine behind the illusion.
I think in the absence of stimulus (e.g during sleep), the brain works in a random way which gives rise to dreams, hallucinations, and maybe the so-called OBEs.

The brain is an amazing organ.


Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
That is a whole other can of worms, and infrasound runs wild in parts of the middle east due to the heat rising keeping the air circulating. There are a lot of stories which came out of our invasion and occupation of Iraq that could have been told by soldiers from a thousand years ago. Men on edge being effected by infrasound, and seeing and hearing things. Shooting at shadows only to find an empty perimeter.

There is so much to the human brain and the mind we have yet to explore.
Iraqi people are more into Imams and religious figures (like Ali, Fatima and a about 12 Imams...etc) compared to Moroccans. I guess soldiers started to see deceased (or coming) Imams
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 03:12 PM   #655
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,538
Originally Posted by MohamedTaqi View Post
Iraqi people are more into Imams and religious figures (like Ali, Fatima and a about 12 Imams...etc) compared to Moroccans. I guess soldiers started to see deceased (or coming) Imams
I forget the Djinn run the length of North Africa all the way into the Hinu Kush. The great thing is the way the Djinn stories vary depending on landscape, which is a wonderful clue as to how infrasound works on the mind.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 03:29 PM   #656
AmyW
Thinker
 
AmyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 172
Thanks Axxman just read your replies :-). Hope you all are safe and well
AmyW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 04:19 PM   #657
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
Next thing ThePrestige and Reformed Offlian will be arguing after I restated the time frame is my inaccuracy calls into question I saw anything at all. I posted this story of mine merely as a curiosity, never expecting it to be cross examined nor wanting to be.

Well maybe they get off on doing this sort of thing - mustn't deny them their jollies. I see Reformed Offlian is having another quite elaborate and detailed go at it ^.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 04:23 PM   #658
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Well maybe they get off on doing this sort of thing - mustn't deny them their jollies. I see Reformed Offlian is having another quite elaborate and detailed go at it ^.
I just skimmed through it. Poor chap is gettin' his knickers in a knot over nothing.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 06:13 PM   #659
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,287
I notice that I was not similarly cross-examined about my UFO story.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 11:19 PM   #660
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I notice that I was not similarly cross-examined about my UFO story.

The nit pickers are picky about who they nit pick.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 03:00 PM   #661
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,538
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I notice that I was not similarly cross-examined about my UFO story.
Because airplanes have green running lights on their wing tips.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 03:48 PM   #662
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,041
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I notice that I was not similarly cross-examined about my UFO story.
LOL.

"Cross-examined". My whole point is that it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on.

STEVE: Here's a curious thing I remember from fifty years ago.

ME: Speaking of which, one of the curious thing about human perception and memory is that we can't even be sure that happened the way you describe it.

STEVE: How dare you question my memory?

ARTH: Nobody questioned my memory!

Arth, I missed your story, but I'll happily cross-examine you about it. I don't even need to see it. Here's how it'll go: Do you remember seeing something inexplicable once? The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time. The end.

Last edited by theprestige; 27th May 2020 at 04:00 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 09:46 PM   #663
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,287
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Arth, I missed your story, but I'll happily cross-examine you about it. I don't even need to see it. Here's how it'll go: Do you remember seeing something inexplicable once? The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time. The end.
I agree.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 11:00 PM   #664
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post

Sprinkling of BS.

Arth, I missed your story, but I'll happily cross-examine you about it. I don't even need to see it. Here's how it'll go: Do you remember seeing something inexplicable once? The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time. The end.
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I agree.

Well I don't agree!

The quality of the memorised event is very much influenced by the impact of the event and how front and centre it was for the rememberer. Because someone does not remember the detail of some peripheral stuff does not necessarily mean the the memory of the other is suspect.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 11:12 PM   #665
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,287
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Well I don't agree!

The quality of the memorised event is very much influenced by the impact of the event and how front and centre it was for the rememberer. Because someone does not remember the detail of some peripheral stuff does not necessarily mean the the memory of the other is suspect.
I just said that to get him off my case. Of course what you say is true. At the extreme end, PTSD sufferers can experience vivid flashbacks which include very graphic memories.

This doesn't mean that these memories are 100% reliable replays of actual events, though. The accuracy is variable, and as theprestige suggested, the further back in time they are, the less accurate they become. But it is not completely pointless to ask someone about events that occurred in the past. Imagine that!

"Hey, did you see that show last night?"

"I think so, but I can't be sure because memory is unreliable."
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 11:23 PM   #666
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Well I don't agree!
I do.

Quote:
The quality of the memorised event is very much influenced by the impact of the event and how front and centre it was for the rememberer.
The more impactful the event, the more likely it is to be remembered and re-examined multiple times. Memory is not like a filing system, where the file stays the same no matter how many times you read it. Every time the memory is retrieved and rehearsed there's a chance it will be altered, and it's the altered version that is then put back.

Quote:
Because someone does not remember the detail of some peripheral stuff does not necessarily mean the the memory of the other is suspect.
All memory is suspect.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 11:38 PM   #667
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,287
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
All memory is suspect.
But that doesn't mean that it is useless.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 01:01 AM   #668
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
But that doesn't mean that it is useless.
Indeed. It's like our tendency to see patterns even when they're not there - it doesn't mean we should ignore all the patterns we think we see. It just means that we should be aware of the possibility of error, and double check before jumping to conclusions.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:37 AM   #669
StillSleepy
Critical Thinker
 
StillSleepy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Where the wild goose goes
Posts: 450
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Indeed. It's like our tendency to see patterns even when they're not there - it doesn't mean we should ignore all the patterns we think we see. It just means that we should be aware of the possibility of error, and double check before jumping to conclusions.
Aw man, I have to get probed again??
__________________
I just want some outdoors left to enjoy.

"Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary." ~ Patrick F. McManus, “Never Sniff A Gift Fish”
StillSleepy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 01:52 PM   #670
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
I forget the Djinn run the length of North Africa all the way into the Hinu Kush. The great thing is the way the Djinn stories vary depending on landscape, which is a wonderful clue as to how infrasound works on the mind.
I don't know about other countries, but in Morocco, we have Shamharosh (the king of Djinn), and all that nonsense, some fanatics even worship these entities, and can be easily deceived...

Here's an interesting common scam : a Faqih walks into a villa still under constuction, burries some random stuff (leather with talismans and secret words written on it..etc) in different parts in walls and floor of the villa without anyone noticing. Then disappears for about 5 - 10 years, waiting for someone to buy it.

Of course only a wealthy person can buy a villa, the Faqih shows up, tells them that there is a treasure guarded by the Djinn in the villa, and that they need very expensive and special bakhoor (incense) and special sacrifices and large sums of money to dig it out.

Then the Faqih shows them the signs that he already hid years ago in the floor and the walls, which would be very convincing especially if they believe in Djinns and hidden treasures, these stories often end by a victim losing millions (Moroccan millions) to charlatans (the last I heard of is a wealthy old man who sold 2 shops in spain so that he can cover the expenses to dig out a treasure in his villa...)

I don't know how could such an idiot make a lot of money. I am a software engineer and 10 years of work, I still can't buy an appartement.
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.

Last edited by MohamedTaqi; 28th May 2020 at 02:00 PM.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 03:21 PM   #671
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
I just said that to get him off my case. Of course what you say is true. At the extreme end, PTSD sufferers can experience vivid flashbacks which include very graphic memories.

This doesn't mean that these memories are 100% reliable replays of actual events, though. The accuracy is variable, and as theprestige suggested, the further back in time they are, the less accurate they become. But it is not completely pointless to ask someone about events that occurred in the past. Imagine that!

"Hey, did you see that show last night?"

"I think so, but I can't be sure because memory is unreliable."

Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.

Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.

"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."

"what colour sox was he wearing?"

"I have no recollection off that."

"Your memory is unreliable."
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 03:23 PM   #672
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,276
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post


All memory is suspect.

I think it would be hard navigating your way through life with that conviction.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 04:01 PM   #673
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,041
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
But that doesn't mean that it is useless.
Nobody said all memory is useless.

Somebody did say: " The further back that memory goes, the less it makes sense to put any effort into trying to explain it. Because we have no way of knowing if the details we're trying to explain are details that actually belong to that event. Because of how human memory works over time."

And then you lied and said you agreed with that. Even though you don't agree.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 08:58 PM   #674
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.

Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.

"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."

"what colour sox was he wearing?"

"I have no recollection off that."

"Your memory is unreliable."
That is a gross misrepresentation of the well established scientific understanding of how memory works.

Simple memories can be altered too. In extreme cases, even manufactured entirely.

Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I think it would be hard navigating your way through life with that conviction.
Oh I don't know, I think I've done pretty well.

Going through life with the conviction that your memory is 100% accurate, OTOH, can have all sorts of unfortunate consequences, e.g. believing in nonsense like ghosts.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Pixel42; 28th May 2020 at 09:27 PM.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 09:45 PM   #675
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,287
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
And then you lied and said you agreed with that. Even though you don't agree.


Look, what you said is not completely untrue. Memory does get less reliable the further back you go. I've already said that I agree with that part of what you said. But I do not agree with all of what you said, for the reasons that I agreed with Thor2 over.

You said "it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on". And I don't agree with that. It can be quite instructive to enquire about old memories.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 04:45 AM   #676
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,874
Originally Posted by MohamedTaqi View Post
Here's an interesting common scam : a Faqih walks into a villa still under constuction, burries some random stuff (leather with talismans and secret words written on it..etc) in different parts in walls and floor of the villa without anyone noticing. Then disappears for about 5 - 10 years, waiting for someone to buy it.

Of course only a wealthy person can buy a villa, the Faqih shows up, tells them that there is a treasure guarded by the Djinn in the villa, and that they need very expensive and special bakhoor (incense) and special sacrifices and large sums of money to dig it out.

Then the Faqih shows them the signs that he already hid years ago in the floor and the walls, which would be very convincing especially if they believe in Djinns and hidden treasures, these stories often end by a victim losing millions (Moroccan millions) to charlatans (the last I heard of is a wealthy old man who sold 2 shops in spain so that he can cover the expenses to dig out a treasure in his villa...)
That was an interesting story. I did not know that scammers would make long term investments like that in order to return years later and reap the profits.

Is this scam public knowledge?
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 05:21 AM   #677
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,041
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post


Look, what you said is not completely untrue. Memory does get less reliable the further back you go. I've already said that I agree with that part of what you said. But I do not agree with all of what you said, for the reasons that I agreed with Thor2 over.

You said "it's not worth interrogating someone about their memory of the details of a UFO sighting fifty years on". And I don't agree with that. It can be quite instructive to enquire about old memories.
How so?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 07:03 AM   #678
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Best of luck in getting the prestige of your case.

Yes I agree with what you said but would add the proviso that the accuracy of the recollection of the event in question, is also dependent on the complexity of the event. The adding and subtracting of bits and pieces must be limited if the event is uncomplicated.

"I saw a guy run out in front of a car and get run over a few years ago."

"what colour sox was he wearing?"

"I have no recollection off that."

"Your memory is unreliable."
Therefore are you certain you witnessed someone getting run over? Under many circumstances such as ghost hunting people are primed with anticipation. In my case I was doing normal things without anticipating something out of the ordinary. In the first case a was naked eye stargazing. In the orange light I was playing catch. My reaction was not jumpin' Jehoshaphat, it's an ***** alien spaceship!, my reaction was, huh, that's odd. In both cases I had time too observe leisurely.

Last edited by Steve001; 29th May 2020 at 07:37 AM.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 07:34 AM   #679
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,041
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
Therefore are you certain you witnessed someone getting run over?
One way to try to identify an unidentified flying object is to study the details of the circumstances in which it was seen.

If a pilot, in the moment or shortly thereafter, logs a sighting at a certain time, altitude, heading, etc., and that's all corroborated by flight recorders, radars, weather reports, etc., then we can reasonably start hypothesizing about possible explanations like Venus, other planes, etc.

On the other hand, if the pilot says he remembers seeing something fifty years ago, and there's no corroboration, just his memory, we can't reasonably start hypothesizing anything at all. We have no way of knowing which of the remembered details actually belong to that event. We have good reason to assume that at least some of the details are misremembered.

I'm not saying you didn't see what you remember seeing. I'm saying that because of what we know about human memory over time, we have no way to choose between any of the possible explanations. And I'm saying that it's a waste of time to try.

This isn't an issue with your anecdote as such - you're not trying to attribute the sightings to a paranormal cause. But it is an issue with paranormal UFO claims generally: The reports often lack enough reliably-corroborated detail to even attempt a mundane explanation.

You took this a lot more personally than I intended.

My point was simply that inability to attribute a mundane explanation to a UFO sighting does not open the door to paranormal explanations. It simply means that the sighting doesn't include enough facts to even attempt an explanation.

Not that you were making any such claim. Your sighting was simply a good example - in my opinion - of the kind of sighting that isn't worth trying to explain: It's a fifty year old memory. Who knows what really happened or what that thing really was?

(And yes, even to the point of misremembering something as supposedly memorable as seeing someone run over.)

Anyway, the bottom line is, I'm not saying you didn't see it. I'm saying there's no point in trying to explain it.

Last edited by theprestige; 29th May 2020 at 07:35 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th May 2020, 09:08 AM   #680
MohamedTaqi
Thinker
 
MohamedTaqi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Casablanca, Morocco
Posts: 188
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
That was an interesting story. I did not know that scammers would make long term investments like that in order to return years later and reap the profits.

Is this scam public knowledge?
Yes, in Morocco, they do .. a Faqih would invest in many houses and villas under construction, and wait for someone to buy it.

Look what they find in newly constructed villas, it's from a documentary where a man lost 80 millions (about $ 80,000 ) to guarded treasure scammers :


https://youtu.be/6uGBYqH61mo?t=142
__________________
Some watch the news, some make them.
MohamedTaqi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:01 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.