Paranormal “Investigating” Is A Pseudoscience

» Home » The Unknown

I was watching Ghost Hunters, for the first time, on the SciFi channel earlier today. Upon doing so, I noticed that no part of the “investigation” was scientific in any sense whatsoever, despite what the “investigation” team seemed to believe. The “investigators” use no form of scientific experimentation to verify the existence of the “ghosts” they encounter, nor do they provide objective evidence to corroborate their, or anyone else’s, claims. I also noticed a lack of knowledge concerning physics through the equipment they use to “detect” ghosts (EMF meters, infrared and night vision cameras, audio recording devices, ect.)

Hizashi

28 Aug 2008 05:13

(What's this?)

Add to Firefox

RSS

I agree with your point

freakyboy

16 Sep 2008 17:35

Add a Comment

I think your absolutely right.......now why don't you bring science to this pseudoscience and prove if there are ghosts or not.....
I've read your entries before and your a knowledgeable person. I've also see you argue against things that can't be seen as not real. Lots of things can't be seen, but are real.
I was always told that if you see a need ....Fill it. People that do that become very wealthy.

paladen

29 Aug 2008 00:04

5 Comments

“I think your absolutely right.......now why don't you bring science to this pseudoscience and prove if there are ghosts or not..…”

Whether or not ghosts exist wasn’t the topic of the debate. Also, science wouldn’t be capable of detecting the supernatural were it indeed supernatural. If science could detect it, then it wouldn’t be supernatural at all. Therefore, paranormal “investigating” will give absolutely zero results for detecting the supernatural even if the “investigators” did use scientific methods.

“I've read your entries before and your a knowledgeable person.”

Thank you. I enjoy conversing with you as well.

“I've also see you argue against things that can't be seen as not real.”

Things that cannot be detected by natural means are supernatural, so to speak. Since they cannot be detected naturally (including the sensory perceptions of humans), making assumptions about them comes purely from subjectivity and personal interpretation. I only argue against such things when people claim that their interpretation or opinion on the matter is objective, of which I normally attempt to demonstrate how it is not.

“Lots of things can't be seen, but are real.”

Exactly. A few examples would be gravity, dark matter, black holes, the wind, ect. But these forces are still not supernatural, as they can be detected through natural means and explained through natural laws.

Hizashi

29 Aug 2008 00:22

Comment

“I think your absolutely right.......now why don't you bring science to this pseudoscience and prove if there are ghosts or not..…”

Whether or not ghosts exist wasn’t the topic of the debate. Also, science wouldn’t be capable of detecting the supernatural were it indeed supernatural. If science could detect it, then it wouldn’t be supernatural at all. Therefore, paranormal “investigating” will give absolutely zero results for detecting the supernatural even if the “investigators” did use scientific methods.

“I've read your entries before and your a knowledgeable person.”

Thank you. I enjoy conversing with you as well.

“I've also see you argue against things that can't be seen as not real.”

Things that cannot be detected by natural means are supernatural, so to speak. Since they cannot be detected naturally (including the sensory perceptions of humans), making assumptions about them comes purely from subjectivity and personal interpretation. I only argue against such things when people claim that their interpretation or opinion on the matter is objective, of which I normally attempt to demonstrate how it is not.

“Lots of things can't be seen, but are real.”

Exactly. A few examples would be gravity, dark matter, black holes, the wind, ect. But these forces are still not supernatural, as they can be detected through natural means and explained through natural laws.

Comment

“I think your absolutely right.......now why don't you bring science to this pseudoscience and prove if there are ghosts or not..…”

“I've read your entries before and your a knowledgeable person.”

Thank you. I enjoy conversing with you as well.

“I've also see you argue against things that can't be seen as not real.”

“Lots of things can't be seen, but are real.”

Comment

“Lets just say for a moment ghost are real.... They are the spirit energy of the person who has died. Why couldn't an instrument of some kind detect it?”

Supposing that it is true our “presence” or “energy” still remains here when we die, this presence wouldn’t be supernatural at all if it could be detected by natural means. Spirits are normally thought to be supernatural. So, even if we did detect them, this would mean that they are not in fact supernatural, but purely natural. This defeats the purpose of calling it a paranormal (impossible to explain by natural means) phenomenon if can be explained through science.

“If after we die, we go to a different dimension or just a different frequency that isn't normally detected by people, then there must be some way to detect and see evidence of it. Like you see the evidence of the wind....even though you may not fell it.”

We have four dimensions in our universe (three spatial coordinates and one of time). We don’t know of any others that exist outside of select theories (which may not even be falsifiable). Before attempting to detect a spirit from another dimension, you would first have to find another dimension we don‘t know of. Even if this were accomplished, the same thing I stated above applies. What’s the point in calling something supernatural or paranormal if can be explained through natural laws?

“But that paragraph on the paranormal you had there, is the kind of negitive thinking an athiest does(don't get me wrong I'm not implying anything) this is just an example. Athiest say, there is no God. There are no instruments to detect him/her so he doesn't exist.”

Statements like what you’re speaking of are not apart of my belief system. I don’t rule out a possibility simply because it cannot be demonstrated scientifically. I simply don’t accept the idea as objective in that case, since if it cannot be demonstrated then it is subject to opinionated perception. I don’t reject a possibility because it lacks evidence, I just do not embrace a possibility without evidence. As the saying goes, “The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence”.

“The truth is they don't know and haven't ever tried to find out, therefore they will never know...until they die. As with spiritual things, there are spiritual techniques that prove it to the person that believes it's possible.”

I’ll be the first to tell you that I have absolutely no idea whatsoever if any god exists within our universe. The kind of act you’re speaking of is something I do not condone nor particularly enjoy seeing people exhibit. What I’m talking about is when people set predetermined boundaries for themselves when they claim to search for the truth (most often these boundaries are spiritual). These types of people claim to be on a journey for the truth, but won’t even consider possibilities outside of their own beliefs. This type of issue can be seen within almost any religion, and even atheism. A theist might claim to look for the truth, yet won’t accept a possibility that doesn’t deal with their vision of whatever god they worship. The same can be said visa-versa for atheism. How can you claim you’re searching for the truth, when you’ve already confined yourself inside of a boundary you’re not willing to cross should the truth lie outside of it? This is one of the main reasons I am not affiliated with any theistic or atheistic belief system. Most people I’ve seen who are apart of these beliefs systems have no intention of finding truth. They only seek to confirm their own predetermined conceptions. I intend to search for the truth, wherever it may lead me. My belief system has no predetermined boundaries at all.

Comment

No. You just watch the wrong shows.
X-files while on TV were good paranormal shows.
Although I don't recommend the movies.

Scorpion

28 Aug 2008 06:10

5 Comments

Whether or not you think the show is good doesn’t address the topic of this debate, since the show itself wasn't particularly the topic to begin with. The paranormal "investigating" done within the show is the topic. I think The X-Files was a fairly good series, but it is far from science as possible (mainly notable by the fact that its genre was science fiction).

Hizashi

28 Aug 2008 06:20

Comment

Sign In

Sign Up?

Login and Debate!
Username:
Password:
Forgot your Password?

For and Against Recent Activity

Latest Responses

Latest Comments

2 minutes ago

A lot of beauty pageants give out prize money or scholarships, which is the reason girls enter. Beauty pageants also require... read more...

7 minutes ago

I agree with demo. People only look to movie stars to see what's "in," but they don't really base themselves on them. I... read more...

23 minutes ago

Why promote homosexuality in an undeveloped country that needs more people to industrialize it? You can't promote homosexuality.... read more...

26 minutes ago

As sad as it is, I must agree with this. Somebody needs to clean the toilets. It's kind of like high school cliques; you... read more...

32 minutes ago

We've already beat 'em. *hee hee* read more...

Related Debates

	Better To Be Poor And Keep Your Integrity Than Be Rich And Perverse In Your Ways.
	The Earth Is A Living Thing.
	Debate Comments On This Site Can Be Hard To Find
	After Being Resurrected And Leaving The Earth, Jesus Went To Teach About Salvation To Other Worlds.
	The Greatest Cause Of Atheism Is Christians.
	Godbot Is A Bigoted Slur.
	You Can't Define "Religion"
	The Whole Creation Process Took Only 7 Days
	Religion Should NOT Be Banned.
	One's Life Can Expire By Any Existing Entity.

New Debates

	The Chicken.. Or The Egg?
	Porn Is Good For You And Your Partner.
	Meat Is All That Is Needed To Survive.
	Gordon Brown Has Lived Forever
	The Following Two Pseudo-scientific Terms Should Be Added To All English Lexicons: Heterochromofoliphile...
	God Created Man For The Lulz
	Britain Is The Best Country In The World
	Personhood Is Eternal:
	Citizens Of UK Must Be Too Afraid To Speak Up To Their Government. Why Else Would A Supposed Free People...
	Ashkenazim Are Descended From Abraham.