Posted: Feb 19, 2019 3:14 am
Cito di Pense wrote:The problem with ghost stories is that they pre-date the scientific method by millennia. Someone like you may use that fact to give the stories some kind of priority, but really, the odds are that the people who originated ghost stories were ignorant of a great deal that we take for granted, and it's a crude kind of ancestor-worship to speculate that they were somehow wiser than we are.
I don't even believe in ghosts. I cannot dismiss it.., and promote tolerance. But this doesn't mean I would give old stories priority over recent data. If I'm going to listen to stories.., I'd prefer the opposite.
Cito di Pense wrote:Asking someone to prove something does not exist, in order to keep your story alive is just very old and very bad poetry.
Bad poetry? Perhaps.
Old? Perhaps.
Correct? Yes.
Scientifically accurate? Yes.
You say a witness MUST prove what they saw.., or basically shut up. Yes sir comrade dictator. Screw basic rights, right?
Why can't they say what they saw? What affect does it have? Others may believe him? Okay.., what's up with that? Do you think next comes a cult of ghosts? And they all give their money away? All these billionaires getting rich and famous by saying they saw a ghost? What's up?
What if they ARE having mental issues.., and you just laugh at them, and tell them to shut up?
Sorry mate.., but I think that's pretty cruel to treat the mentally disabled that way. People are people.
Cito di Pense wrote:If you want to promote the scientific investigation of ghosts, no one is stopping you, but don't come begging people to collaborate with you at the same time you're begging them to drop the mocking of anecdotes that are simply lame copies of very old and very tired stories.
Seeing things from the other perspective. Both sides. Unbiased. Not sticking to the same routine.., till death.