Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Question For Naomi
209 Answers
I read on another thread that you used to live in a haunted house. Can you tell us a little more about what happened there? Im genuinely interested. One of my sisters seems to constantly have unexplained things happening to her and other members of my family have had 'spookey' experiences.
Anyone else lived in a haunted house or had experiences of the 'impossible'?
Anyone else lived in a haunted house or had experiences of the 'impossible'?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I can only say that you have to be the person who experiences these happenings. My daughter visited a lady whose sister had died about a year previously she knew the ladies very well. They were sitting in the lounge and the 'vision' of the deceased sister appeared before them. My daughter said she looked happy and well dressed. On a visit to see my friend later she confirmed that they had seen her sister looking happy and well, then faded away. This was something my daughter hasn't forgotton, she was about 14 at the time. I haven't seen anything like that, perhaps it is a sort of 'mirage' effect. I believed what they both said and I wouldn't disbelieve anyone's account of their experience it isn't something you would forget.
After reading my first sentence pixie I have to agree, my only defence was I was making my tea. To explain an experience to someone who dismisses this kind of thing as hocus pocus is a waste of time. You have to go through it yourself, but I believed my daughter, and she said that strangely she wasn't afraid or felt spooked in any way and neither did my friend who said she felt comforted.
pixie, in naomis first post in reply to my question she mentions that she had experienced pictures jumping of shelves (NB not falling off walls), clocks all loosing an hour simultaneously, and items turning up in very ordinary places after been missing for months on end. These happenings (and others) had also been witnessed by others. I'm at a loss as to how PHYSICAL phenomona, such as the above, can be ascribed to illusion/hallucination and also as to how several people who have witnessed the same can all be self deluded?
I have also- as i have told Naomi before. I was sitting in my living room with a friend and we were discussing my upcoming holiday to France. As we were talking, the suitcase in the corner of the room rocked several times -lengthways (so not even the "easiest" way). My friend and i just looked at each other in surprise. It wasn't touching anything, no windows open, no pets near it... Naomi asked if i lived near a train line, i didn't.
Absolutely no idea still- but it wasn't a ghost!
Absolutely no idea still- but it wasn't a ghost!
As far as physical phenomena, nailit, that needs to be tested immediately. Every person separately writing down accurate accounts before there is any chance of discussion/agreement. It's too late once suggestions have been made to get anything objective. Yes, mass hallucinations exist and are perfectly possible.
what i would like to ask is, if ghosts exist, why can't one single person who has experienced it, ever actually prove it to someone who wasn't there? That's all it would take...
what i would like to ask is, if ghosts exist, why can't one single person who has experienced it, ever actually prove it to someone who wasn't there? That's all it would take...
-- answer removed --
I;m not sure anyone on this thread has "dismissed these things as hocus-pocus" though (except possibly mikey earlier). I, at least, am saying that the problem with personal accounts is that it's hard to test possible explanations against each other -- which devalues them as evidence of the (currently) unexplainable. There are other risks associated with personal accounts, which are too numerous to mention. I'll always be interested in people's accounts of such incidents but I don't think it's a bad thing that I don't let it sway my view of the world. There are just too many factors to take into account -- from, indeed, the sad possibility that on occasion some people may be lying, through their not properly remembering or misinterpreting what they saw, through to some explanation being possible but unprovable -- before you can really get to the stage where you can say "Yes, we definitely need a new understanding of the world."
In the late 1990s a number of studies demonstrated that people's memories could be influenced beyond what anyone might think possible -- we do at times trust ourselves too much it seems. Even before anything else, that means that evidence that relies as heavily upon memory as do personal accounts can't be weighted that highly. This is not to say that I know you remember the accounts wrong, merely that you might be, and as long as that is an open question everything else that the memory would imply must also be open to doubt. (The relevant papers include http://
But I'm certainly not saying that anyone here who's described an experience is deluded, lying, thick, talking nonsense or hocus-pocus, or anything else that is dismissive. It's a sensitive and difficult topic because no-one likes their own memories to be called into question. It does seem like a personal attack, but it's not really meant that way: after all, the same risks of unreliable memory apply to all of us. I don't mean to offend with the above and I don't think that it should be taken that way. If these topics are to be discussed, though, we should share the different possible opinions on this without fear of feeling in some way attacked: either by being called deluded or mad or lying, etc etc... or for expressing the sceptical viewpoint and being labelled arrogant or patronising, etc. etc. And they do need to be discussed because, after all, if there is some new truth in them to be discovered then this will happen best by subjecting the accounts to as much scrutiny as possible.
In the late 1990s a number of studies demonstrated that people's memories could be influenced beyond what anyone might think possible -- we do at times trust ourselves too much it seems. Even before anything else, that means that evidence that relies as heavily upon memory as do personal accounts can't be weighted that highly. This is not to say that I know you remember the accounts wrong, merely that you might be, and as long as that is an open question everything else that the memory would imply must also be open to doubt. (The relevant papers include http://
But I'm certainly not saying that anyone here who's described an experience is deluded, lying, thick, talking nonsense or hocus-pocus, or anything else that is dismissive. It's a sensitive and difficult topic because no-one likes their own memories to be called into question. It does seem like a personal attack, but it's not really meant that way: after all, the same risks of unreliable memory apply to all of us. I don't mean to offend with the above and I don't think that it should be taken that way. If these topics are to be discussed, though, we should share the different possible opinions on this without fear of feeling in some way attacked: either by being called deluded or mad or lying, etc etc... or for expressing the sceptical viewpoint and being labelled arrogant or patronising, etc. etc. And they do need to be discussed because, after all, if there is some new truth in them to be discovered then this will happen best by subjecting the accounts to as much scrutiny as possible.
"I'm at a loss as to how PHYSICAL phenomona, such as the above, can be ascribed to illusion/hallucination ..."
This is probably the hardest to explain... so I'm not even going to try. I think Naomi's shared the "floating marble" tale before, and it's stuck in my head since (although in my head it morphed into being a rubber for some reason).
This is probably the hardest to explain... so I'm not even going to try. I think Naomi's shared the "floating marble" tale before, and it's stuck in my head since (although in my head it morphed into being a rubber for some reason).
Pixie, Read my posts. Where have I ruled it out, where have I said it’s down to stupidity, and where have I said I can always tell if I’m mistaken or not? You need to correct me? I think not. No surprise you have the illusion that you know all about illusion.
//Absolutely no idea still- but it wasn't a ghost!//
Isn’t that an ironic thing to say? Had you stuck at ‘Absolutely no idea’, I could have accepted that you are genuinely curious about the unknown. As it is you are clearly determined to believe it wasn’t a ‘ghost’ even though in truth you have no idea whether or not they exist. That smacks of the closed minded blind faith of the religious somehow.
//if ghosts exist, why can't one single person who has experienced it, ever actually prove it to someone who wasn't there? That's all it would take... //
Well, that sounds simple enough. How would you suggest they do it?
Jim, I’ve been asked to elaborate on my experiences, I’ve done so, and quite honestly if people don’t believe it, they remain in ignorance. And the marble didn’t ‘float’ - it whizzed across the room at breakneck speed.
//Absolutely no idea still- but it wasn't a ghost!//
Isn’t that an ironic thing to say? Had you stuck at ‘Absolutely no idea’, I could have accepted that you are genuinely curious about the unknown. As it is you are clearly determined to believe it wasn’t a ‘ghost’ even though in truth you have no idea whether or not they exist. That smacks of the closed minded blind faith of the religious somehow.
//if ghosts exist, why can't one single person who has experienced it, ever actually prove it to someone who wasn't there? That's all it would take... //
Well, that sounds simple enough. How would you suggest they do it?
Jim, I’ve been asked to elaborate on my experiences, I’ve done so, and quite honestly if people don’t believe it, they remain in ignorance. And the marble didn’t ‘float’ - it whizzed across the room at breakneck speed.
Well, floating, whizzing, the point is it's something that has stuck in my mind to an extent. I don't dismiss and forget is what I'm trying to say (sadly I've shown myself to be a bit vague on the details, but the "floating" thing was just the wrong word.)
"...if people don’t believe it, they remain in ignorance."
But this is what I mean. Pixie and I apparently can now be accused of "ignorance" because we don't change our world views based on what someone said on the internet.
It's not a case of not believing -- it's a case of not basing our opinions on it. It's evidence that can't be given enough weight to change an opinion -- for the reasons I've outlined and many others besides. If we say so and get labelled ignorant, arrogant, patronising, blind, short-sighted, or the various other labels I've seen bandied about, the discussion ends and we all lose out.
This is not about ignorance. It's about the very nature of personal experiences. They cannot be shared; and you can rarely prove or disprove any proffered explanation, by either side. And it's sad that drawing attention to these risks has, once again, led to accusations of ignorance, arrogance or of patronising attitudes.
"...if people don’t believe it, they remain in ignorance."
But this is what I mean. Pixie and I apparently can now be accused of "ignorance" because we don't change our world views based on what someone said on the internet.
It's not a case of not believing -- it's a case of not basing our opinions on it. It's evidence that can't be given enough weight to change an opinion -- for the reasons I've outlined and many others besides. If we say so and get labelled ignorant, arrogant, patronising, blind, short-sighted, or the various other labels I've seen bandied about, the discussion ends and we all lose out.
This is not about ignorance. It's about the very nature of personal experiences. They cannot be shared; and you can rarely prove or disprove any proffered explanation, by either side. And it's sad that drawing attention to these risks has, once again, led to accusations of ignorance, arrogance or of patronising attitudes.
-- answer removed --
It is as you say Jim, it is an experience that cannot be shared by anyone who wasn't there at the time, it is not something that can be tested because there is no telling when these events happen. If you have not experienced anything like that you can either believe or disbelieve. It would be wrong to say that the person is a liar or has misunderstood the situation. As you say they can rarely be proved or disproved. I haven't seen any patronising attitude to this or accusations of ignorance or arrogance, just people describing their experiences and others who do not understand how these things could happen and questioning their version of events, who are no wiser how it happened than you are.
Back in and caught up with this. Ref naomi's comment to pixie and I - naomi, that was and never had any intention of being patronising, that is personalising this debate and nothing to do with the thread of argument.
As to: //Well, that sounds simple enough. How would you suggest they do it?// That was the most interesting thing in the SW Paranormal Soc report on the New Inn - that they have an established protocol for folk entering a room with their electromagnetic pulse detectors in that they aren't allowed contact before or after entry and the report out is done with other folk, the New Inn demonstrating consistency on the presence of something in two rooms at similar strength and locations within the room.......
As to: //Well, that sounds simple enough. How would you suggest they do it?// That was the most interesting thing in the SW Paranormal Soc report on the New Inn - that they have an established protocol for folk entering a room with their electromagnetic pulse detectors in that they aren't allowed contact before or after entry and the report out is done with other folk, the New Inn demonstrating consistency on the presence of something in two rooms at similar strength and locations within the room.......
Naomi, I'm on my phone, it's difficult to c&p all your posts, but you have said "haunted" which explains it as something external and stating it as fact. Also, we just had a conversation about "figment of the imagination" not being due to intelligence- starting with your claim that apparently, i should not suggest that intelligent people can be fooled.
I'm not claiming to know "everything". But we have a very promising start in what we know about the mind already.
I'm not claiming to know "everything". But we have a very promising start in what we know about the mind already.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles28 mins ago
The Perils Of Privatisation - Part X
News85 mins ago
ChatterBank115 mins ago
Masterchef - The Professionals
Film, Media & TV147 mins ago
