That one appears to be fake.
I do not believe in ghosts. As a rational person, I do not believe in anything that there is no reason for me to believe in.
Even if I were to have an experience with a "ghost like thing" and even if it were specific and unique (e.g. My grandfather) I would be more likely to believe in it having been all in my mind than in reality.
There is a lot of evidence for lots of tricks that ones own mind plays on oneself daily, there is plenty of evidence for tricks the mind plays less often, apart from all the biases that we all fall victim to every day and various states of temporary insanity, let us also consider deja vu!
I've had one particularly intense and euphoric episode which seemed to last forever and was likely two episodes of deja vu in short succession. I felt I could tell the future in extreme detail, every animal, vehicle, rustling leaf, all of it in perfect clarity and predictability, near the end I felt almost like I didn't just know the future, but that I dictated it, that it followed my will, like I MADE things happen.
I'm not crazy, just what I experienced was not as it appeared/seemed. I've had similar euphoric clarity as if the whole world slows down on countless occasions but that is the only time I had it with deja vu.
I believe there is a lot we do not understand about the universe because there is lots of evidence for this belief. A lack of complete understanding of one thing, in no way calls for a belief in things which have no evidence for them whatsoever, nor does it justify a belief in such things.
I would never advocate belief in something extraordinary without extraordinary evidence. The absolute lack of evidence for ghosts beyond anecdotes would make a ghost something extraordinary.
For me to even bother considering what happened I would need an experience of at least this level:
A "ghost" to pass me hitherto unknown and later verifiable information.
For me to consider that what happened might actually be a ghost:
A "ghost" to communicate with myself, a rational friend, and a stranger and be recorded. The three of us to be sure that no trickery was involved beyond any reasonable doubt (ideally this should happen in a large open field and we should have access to at least 10k lumens of light for a search for equipment afterwards). We should all test negative for hallucinogens asap.
For me to actually believe:
A "ghost" to appear, be empirically measured by many observers, including my self and repeated many times.
I do not believe in ghosts. As a rational person, I do not believe in anything that there is no reason for me to believe in.
Even if I were to have an experience with a "ghost like thing" and even if it were specific and unique (e.g. My grandfather) I would be more likely to believe in it having been all in my mind than in reality.
There is a lot of evidence for lots of tricks that ones own mind plays on oneself daily, there is plenty of evidence for tricks the mind plays less often, apart from all the biases that we all fall victim to every day and various states of temporary insanity, let us also consider deja vu!
I've had one particularly intense and euphoric episode which seemed to last forever and was likely two episodes of deja vu in short succession. I felt I could tell the future in extreme detail, every animal, vehicle, rustling leaf, all of it in perfect clarity and predictability, near the end I felt almost like I didn't just know the future, but that I dictated it, that it followed my will, like I MADE things happen.
I'm not crazy, just what I experienced was not as it appeared/seemed. I've had similar euphoric clarity as if the whole world slows down on countless occasions but that is the only time I had it with deja vu.
I believe there is a lot we do not understand about the universe because there is lots of evidence for this belief. A lack of complete understanding of one thing, in no way calls for a belief in things which have no evidence for them whatsoever, nor does it justify a belief in such things.
I would never advocate belief in something extraordinary without extraordinary evidence. The absolute lack of evidence for ghosts beyond anecdotes would make a ghost something extraordinary.
For me to even bother considering what happened I would need an experience of at least this level:
A "ghost" to pass me hitherto unknown and later verifiable information.
For me to consider that what happened might actually be a ghost:
A "ghost" to communicate with myself, a rational friend, and a stranger and be recorded. The three of us to be sure that no trickery was involved beyond any reasonable doubt (ideally this should happen in a large open field and we should have access to at least 10k lumens of light for a search for equipment afterwards). We should all test negative for hallucinogens asap.
For me to actually believe:
A "ghost" to appear, be empirically measured by many observers, including my self and repeated many times.
Last edited: