Kasz216 said:
Hence, "Yes and No." I am open to it being so, but don't believe it because I feel like there should be an alternate explination. Not accepting something becuase "there has to be another explination" I feel is one of the greatest weaknesses of a scientist and a viewpoint I try to avoid. It's why scientific revolutions are usually made at the feet of outdated scientists rather then the new and old going hand in hand together. Heck "ghosts" may actually end up having a rational explination not yet known, invloving string theory or intersecting dimensions or who knows what that has nothing to do with peoples spirits. |
I'm not saying that "there has to be another explanation", I'm saying that it's likely that there is another explanation.
If a heavy door slammed shut and I wanted to know why, the possibility that it was a ghost would certainly not be one of the first things I would investigate because I would see that as an incredibly unlikely event when taking into consideration other possible events.
Obviously though you could never rule out the possibility that it was influenced by a ghost because as I said earlier in this thread you can't really prove a negative. If the ghost doesn't exist, then you can't prove that it doesn't exist. all you could really ever say is "It's not known whether this was an influence or not due to a lack of evidence".
And your last statementabout the rational explanation being something to do with string theory is a popular one with Muslims when they try to explain Djinn, which I guess are kind of like ghosts.







