I believe in ghosts and aliens because of statistics. What do you think?
-
Any alien photos of a coloured shaped were already disproved by an optic expert. Just ike you get sunflare in a regular camera lens as hexagons, you get triangle flare in military recording lenses.
-
No no no, with gods, you can kind of shop around, most of them won't mind much, at least not in the 'send a lightning bolt down to fry [email protected]' kind of way. Essentially, gods need people to believe in them (so they can exist), and people need someone to blame. Offler, the crocodile-headed god, is quite popular, as is Blind Io, chief of the gods.
I work in IT, so in my headcannon, I pray to the gods of DNS. Put into a classical context, I imagine this is Hermes from Greek mythology (messenger of the gods), Thoth from Egyption mythology, etc.
Completely honestly though - I think faith is similar to energy, in the 'conservation of energy' type of way. So the total amount of faith humanity holds has stayed the same, but instead of praying to gods, we now have faith in things like... Ryzen processors. DNS. Manual transmissions. Black coffee. Subaru. These are just some of the things I have faith in, if you asked my daughter, the answers would probably be Peppa Pig, mom & dad, Everest the Paw Patrol character, a blue baloon, cheesecake is best cake, her stuffed animal squid, etc. Both answers are completely valid
-
Any free/open online crash courses on it?
-
By this logic, if I post 10000 videos claiming 2+2=5, it becomes true by 'statistics'?
To answer your question though, statistics are not predetermined independently from the truth. Truth is the basis and the number of claims for any statement does not change that.
There are many examples from the past, like witches, werewolves, vampires, giants, ... People used to claim their existence but not anymore. By your logic they must have existed back then but suddenly they dont anymore?
Also how come ghosts and aliens exist almost exclusively in the US? There are almost no reports in any other country. -
You claimed that you are basing your belief on statistics, which are the opposite of 'a hunch'. Turns out it was just that.
-
Ghosts expire once they complete their unfinished business. So any Neanderthal ghost around now would have to be spectacularly incompetent. Despite their popular reputation, Neanderthals were quite successful in their survival strategies.
Dinosaurs can't be ghosts. They can become zombies though.
So basically we can understand ghostliness as a property of the tool using hominids, and almost exclusively those which have developed civilization.
Personally, I don't believe in ghosts but their existence doesn't depend on my belief.
-
Ohhhhh i see, well, I'm relieved to know this means the ancient greek pantheon is the right one to follow and not just my personal preference. Guess I might start showing some public devotion then.
I agree with you in faith ≈ conservation energy. I already pray to my own personal Patron Saint of the Parking Spot, his name is José btw in case you ever find yourself stressing over finding where to park; you're welcome to pray to him too. So far I've always managed to park in time.
I hope Zeus and co. don't mind I pray to him, times have changed I guess, I'm sure they'll all get along well. Okay gotta go now, I need to go read my horoscope now that I know statistics back it up.
-
everyone in here shitting on op (in a rather unfriendly fashion btw)
getting hung up on the 1:99 thing, when what they actually said was
As long as the percentage is not 100%
obviously i'm not saying op has presented firm evidence of the supernatural (nor did i read anywhere they said they did). but the irony of supposedly espousing the scientific method, while completely ignoring the critical part of op's argument.
who here is claiming to know 100.000000% of all supernatural evidence is absolutely disproven? that would be an unscientific claim to make, so why infer it?
is the remaining 1E-X% "proof" of ghosts/aliens? imo no, but it isn't unreasonable to consider it may suggest something beyond our current reproducible measurement capacity.
it's quite unreasonable to assume we're at the apex of human sensory capability, history is full of this kind of hubris.
until the invention of the microsocpe, germs were just "vibes" and "spirits"
-
other cryptids
some cryptids are real. for example in the past 40 years, giant squid have quite literally moved from the pages of 'fun' ghosts and cryptid books into scientific journals. and this process has repeated many times throughout history.
-
our sensory capabilities are probably better than you think, and, among other things, that doesnt make any sense anyway. if they can tangibly interact with the world in any way, such as a human noticing them, knocking stuff off tables, showing up on videos… there is really no scenario where this logic works, and while toxicity isnt nice, the argument presented is wrong in humorous ways.
-
OP, it's fine to believe in whatever you feel like it, and IMHO ghosts and aliens are better beliefs than some other options.
With that said, I think it would be better to say that you believe those things and use the "not 100%" as a justification.
There is no way to gather all evidence about any topic, so we need to define what is acceptable as "enough" evidence and what "make sense" according to what we know; at least when we (as a society) talk about science.
-
our sensory capabilities are probably better than you think
however good our current capabilities are, it's not exactly reasonable to think we're at the apex. we don't know everything - perhaps we never will, but even if we do it'll surely be in 100, 1,000 or 10,000 years, rather than 10 years.
i'm not aware of any sound argument that the final paradigm in sensing capability has already happened.
there is really no scenario where this logic works
assuming you mean there's no known scenario where this logic works? then yes, that's the point - we currently don't know.
this is asklemmy not a scientific journal. there can be value or fun in throwing ideas around, or helping op improve their discussion, rather than shit on it.
-
my friend, think this through. if they can move stuff off tables, if cameras can record them, if humans can see them, if they create chills… these are all measurable, tangible, things. if your explanation of ghosts requires that they be immaterial and incapable of affecting reality in any way, then that's trivial and inane.
