Posted 26 November 2003 - 01:36 PM
I find it interesting that these people claim to help something that is so unpredictable and has no real concrete pattern of happening in the first place. I think its a bit much to help someone or something cross over to the other side that you cant even prove exists in the first place. Doing it out of faith and belief I can understand to some degree but what blows my mind is that they try to control something that is totally unpredictable and unproven . How can you help something that your not even sure exists to go to a place that no one has ever returned from to prove that its even there? And how do you know it was helped at all or done any service if you cant communicate with it ? And if you can help, how can you be sure your help was accepted or even wanted. ???
Im interested in some informative feedback and some real answers to this one . Not just because I say its so or you just know it helps Have any of you ever gotten any comfirmation of your help ? Have you ever suffered any negative effects from doing this? if so what were they and how did they manifest?
Just curious? Help me out here ;D
I began writting my thesis about a year ago and am seeing the light at the end of the tunnel ( I have about another month of writting and I will have it . Its amazing what you can learn from writting your thoughts and experiences. I am certainly not what I was 12 years ago when this all began. and I still learn something new every day .
Posted 26 November 2003 - 02:24 PM
I think the only confirmation that is ever received by ghost hunters who claim to help spirits cross over is if the hauntings stop. It's interesting, though, that people who perform these things seldom go back to check on the place again. They just assume that it worked and move on.
Posted 26 November 2003 - 07:25 PM
This is my main beef with the 'crossing over' concept. I'm in no position to determine what is in their best interests.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 03:48 AM
In answer to your two questions: 1. Yes; 2. Yes.
You are an honorable man and a seeker. "IM" me if you want to talk. With all the 'computer chair investigators' who dwell here further discussion would be a waste.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 04:38 AM
Hunh? This coverall statement, from a moderator, is just wrong... I work in the field... quite often! I also research studies, books, and papers at my desk in my computer chair...
S'pose it's time to move on... again...
I should learn.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 05:21 AM
(And PS: going undercover is about the worst thing you can do to science! NOT sharing your knowledge, or avoiding criticsm of it, can never yield knowledge, only dogma)
Posted 27 November 2003 - 05:51 AM
Sharing knowledge is one thing stevenedel, but when we share it with the wrong people, it is nothing more than pure waste of time. Certain things are not worth debating. Thinking real hard doesn't help either, because that thinking should be in the right direction.
And also, being a moderator doesn't restrict Dennis (flyingorb) from stating such a statement which happens to be truly VALID in every sense.
I am not against discussing things. I am not against believers. I am not against skeptics. I am not against unbelievers. What I meant is just that certain things are better shared with likeminded people - who share common interests FOR ACTING more not mere knowledge sake or a debate sake.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 06:46 AM
"Thinking should be in the right direction?" Who determines the right direction? Are you willing to close your mind completely to stay the course and not take different avenues to broaden your concepts and thoughts? Egads!
I disagree... As a moderator of a message board for the exchange of ideas, one should be promoting that exchange, not defeating it.
...and never shared? Never expanded upon by others?
I'm sorry, but I believe that one should be OPEN to all data and "Adopt, Adapt, and Improve"... in other words, take from it that which is useful to you and discard (quietly) that which may not be, BUT absorb it all for a well rounded view.
Is it not the task, in many ways, for people to assist and help educate others of similar interests and, in turn, learn from those that they are teaching and reverse the rolls or, should we limit the knowledge, thoughts, concepts, and ideas to an elite few who are deemed (by someone or some people) worthy?
I'm sorry, this line of thinking is elitist and unhelpful... it does a disservice to the average reader and to the researchers and investigators who do come here to learn and exchange ideas.
In essence, this is just awful and now, truly, I'll stay away... Obviously, "we're" not welcome.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 07:25 AM
"Wrong people?" Oh dear... Line up, folks! Time to measure your worth! Dear goodness, that is a sign of very limited thinking... Are you saying that some people have NOTHING to offer where other's are "more blessed"?
the person who want information decides. If I wanna know I decide to know and no one has any right to tell me I cannot! If there is someone to help, it should be in trying to add on to my interests, not in opening an argument and discouraging and questioning my beliefs.
All data absorbtion doesn't work. If we don't use our consious mind - the keeper of the counsios - to check on what we receive, boy! we are MAD in a chaotic world!
It's all in your mind and it gets only as good as your thoughts. I am in no way responsible to change your thoughts, but I may be helpful in trying to tell ya, see what ya wanna see, hear what ya wanna hear!
Posted 27 November 2003 - 07:34 AM
The point of the post was to get some answers not to argue the validity of the question or the opinions offered.
Too often and all too easily , questions like this get ignored and fall to the bottom of the page very quickly. I'd really like to understand the art of helping the dearly departed to the other side. ???
I will IM you Dennis .
I was hoping that with all the folks who do this kind of thing that someone could help me understand the nature of the task. I have no interest in opinion bashing nor do I wish to put anyone down . I just want to understand the usefulness of helping them and in understanding how they know it works.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 08:26 AM
Ah, that kind of "flat Earth/poisoness tomato" thinking is nasty. This is a study of the unknown... There are hypotheses and theorems that do require study and proper debate... but why bother (even though one of those hypotheses or theorems could be correct) when it doesn't fit YOUR model, correct?
I'm still learning... One hopes, you're still learning... We ALL should be still learning and trying to help each other... Unless, as opposed to being a researcher, investigator, or even and open-minded fan of the paranormal, you really are nothing more than a preacher of your particular faith and the rest of us are nothing more than heritics which should be silenced without discussion... If that's the case, don't travel too far lest you plummet off the edge of the planet.
"Adapt" - See what works for you. What doesn't... And why.
"Improve" - Put together a new idea (or substantiate an old one) with the new data.
You're correct, if you tried to ADOPT (only) everything, you would go nuts, but you should endeavour to understand it and work with it... Either that, or continue the "shouting down" and "shutting down" of others and enjoy the bubble you create.
I get into discussions with "believers" and with "sceptics" ("sceptdebunkers") all the time... I listen, I ask questions, I learn, and usually come out richer for the experience... Whether that experience enriched my views by helping "prove" a point or by making me "re-examine" my own views... Sure, some may kibbitz and get angry, but in the long run, I usually shut down most "arguments" by one simple statement...
"Where's your evidence? What's your data? Why do you think it's relevant? How much work have you done to prove/disprove this?"
The concept of an educated discussion is lost when it's closed down to all and only people with your views or with whom you think are "worthy" are disincluded.
The only time that should happen is "personal" reference.
In the above case, I don't think it was "personal" data... it was relevant to the study.
I slapped your hand as you seemed to be slapping OURS (not just mine) by saying discussion on the data was pointless.
It seems that in your mind, we're all in the dark.
I guess that's your opinion... I would argue, however, that it is not all "in my mind" as I quote my references, back up my statements, and credit those people and situations that were pertinant.
For example, I quoted your lines about "the right people" and "the right direction" and asked valid questions...
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Okay, sorry... Rockhauler, if I may answer your question... Despite being one of the "great unwashed" who should be silent...
In 1998, Jennifer Krutila started a study where she asked members of The Spiritualist Church of Canada, various "house clearing" ghost-groups/investigators, generic (if one can use that term) psychics and the like about "why" we "should" clear homes... (something that the GHRS doesn't do... for various reasons.)
The answers she got from her cross-scetion of data from these groups was that the majority actually DID say that not all ghosts "should" or "want" to be moved along... and then, many did qualify that by saying "it's for the best" for these ghosts...
When she did ask about that, she was told that these folks (for the most part) knew that they were better off moved on to wherever... let's say "into the light".
How do these people know? Got me... Seems to me that the only "concrete" evidence of things "after death" would be difficult if not impossible to find out about without a certain type of experimentation and observation that would require one to die and stay dead for a while.
If we accept the theory that ghosts are indeed "survival of bodily death" of some sort, (again a theory based not on fact but on belief or hypothesis... and with so many alternative thoughts, I think we should all be wary of this...) I agree with you and Jennifer that indeed, maybe it's not our place to "push people along".
I'll be interested to see your final paper... Of course, if it is available for consumption by us cave-dwelling, unworthy, low-forhead, mouth-breathing folks unworthy to discuss such things.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 09:12 AM
What a way to put an end to a potentially meaningful discussion just as it's getting started. Congratulations. A skeptic couldn't have done the job better.
Well...that's that, then.
<grabs punch glass and heads off in search of another thread>
Posted 27 November 2003 - 09:35 AM
Once again, I would say that you are in the wrong place. But you are a moderator, so you should know that. You should EXPECT the kind of response you got in the skeptics board. If you don't want people's opinions.. DON'T ASK FOR THEM. Don't start what you expect to be a private conversation in a public place... especially a public place where many people don't agree with your views.
I can see that maybe there was some kind of misunderstanding between all of us here. In fact, I hope there was because right now I am fuming. > > >
Posted 27 November 2003 - 09:58 AM
Posted 27 November 2003 - 02:52 PM
That is what Im trying to do ;D
I posted it on the Skeptics board because the very nature of the question is skeptical .
I wanted opinions from both sides of the point .
What I fail to understand is why anyone would get upset over the question in the first place ???.
Is it because the answers are unknown and Im trying to find them? I value the opinions of all the folks who post here . I wasnt trying to cause any problems at all . I was simply asking for opinions on the topic.
I expected a reasonable conversation on the board , nothing less or more.
The bottom line is that no one has yet to answer the question . The only thing that has happened so far is Ive begun World War 3 by posing a basic skeptical question about helping the dead find their way . :
[glow=green,2,300]P.S. The board is titled Skeptics and it states : Disbelievers,alternative theories,all viewpoints are welcome :-/
One more thing . The question does belong here because Im skeptical of the people that claim to do this and am looking for their reasoning for doing such a thing . How can that be an irritant ? If you are not one who has claimed to help the dearly departed to the other side and think its all hogwash then simply say so and move on . Why bash each other in the head over a question that you think has no validity? Minus my question only , dont you think everything else on this thread should be moved to the Trolls Lounge? None of it pertains to the question . Its nothing more than a strong arm contest between skeptics and believers .
Since you all decided to cut it off at the pass, I guess you'll never get the interesting responses that may have been posted. :
Im with Camille on this one
* Grabs glass of punch and looks for a more meaningful conversation *
In the immortal words of Forrest Gump " Thats all Ive got to say about that "
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users