Liverpool FC Forum

[maypaxvobiscum]

you choose not to believe in ur human form*
do you think there is life after death?

[Ciggy]

When I used to sleep with me nan when I was a kid someone used to sit on the bed, I couldnt look just felt the weight of the matras sinking.
I used to sh!t meself and say to me nan the next day did you feel anyone in the room last night she'd say oh its just our Hughie, her twin brother who died in the war she had this picture of him over the bed.
Dont know if it was him, my grandad or someone who had died in the house before we had moved in.

Once I was babysitting for me auntie she moved into the flats on Vauxhall road, Id heard her mentioning this ghost before so I was a bit scared babysitting so I told her I wouldnt sleep she had to be in early.
The baby fell asleep I was watching telly, thought Id make a cup of tea, kept lookin in the living room brickin it, saying it was all in my mind.
Went the toilet came back and there he was the old man sitting on the arm of the chair stunk of smoke and just vanished, I was screamin ran upstairs got our Sean out of bed and legged it to me mothers.
I never stepped foot back in that house again.
She moved out two weeks later.

And then my nan she would fling the lid from the washing basket across the floor, the kettle used to turn itself on, the leather couch would creek when you where sitting there in the chair on your own, she would turn the telly off  .
She would move aarons shoes all the time and I mean move them one night we where sitting there watching telly it had already happened before but when I was on my own, but me, me mum and her fella where there his shoes where up against the fireplace next thing they turned on the side and just separated I shouted see did yous see that, we where scared but I knew it was me nan and she would never harm us.
My mum said shes watching his steps, and nothing has ever happened since.

I was terrified on the 3 occasions even though I know my nan would never ever harm us just letting us know she was still round 

[woof woof !]

  Ok ! which one of you f'uckers sneaked into my kitchen and switched on the kettle ?

I'm sitting here reading the threads when I suddenly hear a hissing sound in the kitchen , I walk in there to find the kettle just beginning to boil, I certainly didn't switch it on,been in front of the pc for the last hour and there's no one else at home.

[maypaxvobiscum]

theres this toilet in my school that is locked up by the authorities after receiving complains from many girls. (its a ladies toilet). apparently them girls hear the sound of running water, or they hear a baby crying when they are in there. we were the 3rd school to occupy those grounds and according to senior teachers 3 girls had killed themselves in that loo.

1) cus she was pregnant
2) failed her exams
3) i dont know about the other.

it got pretty bad to the point the headmistress called a priest to do some rites.

[Ciggy]

  Ok ! which one of you f'uckers sneaked into my kitchen and switched on the kettle ?

Two sugars and stery milk woof

[woof woof !]

I was terrified on the 3 occasions even though I know my nan would never ever harm us just letting us know she was still round 

Right attitude Cig. When my mum died I slept in her room the following night . People have asked "weren't you scared" , my attitude was the same as yours , ie "my old lady's not gonna harm me"

Guess thats the closest I ever came to considering there might be something to this "ghost" stuff.

Nothing happend, nada zero zip . Mum was gone and thats it.

[LFC2007]

you choose not to believe in ur human form*
do you think there is life after death?

I didn't say what my belief was, reading between the lines you are inferring that I do not believe in a 'creator'..... and I do not know if there is life after death otherwise I would not be on this forum I would be on the streets of Liverpool claiming to be THE Messiah.

[red37]

1.

I can understand the idea of not believing in the paranormal entirely, because of the idea that evidence must be provided in order to believe something.

Conversely it could also be argued to the contrary. That is, show me the evidence that completely disproves the notion out of hand. The evidence that eradicates the original debate from the table...entirely. Equally up in the air that one. Odds would not be great like, but its not exactly been confirmed by anybody.

2.

The accounts of people who say they have experienced the paranormal are nothing more than unsubstantiated stories.

Fair comment and likely to be the view that holds most weight (credibility). But as ive maintained throughout, Fear is the greatest 'block' that understandably remains insurmountable for many. From my experience, those willing to dismiss out of hand any relevance to the subject, usually have the most curiosity towards it of them all.  And the most questions naturally.

3.

It cannot be proven either way

There IS light at the end of your tunnel!

4.

Religion almost certainly predisposes those to the idea of the paranormal.

So no bold sweeping generalisations there then?

I'll speak for myself - In my case, God or any Religious predilection whatsoever doesn't even enter into it. Nor does any 'Supreme Power' other than that afforded by the Potential of the Human Mind, to transgress the planes of expression and Dimensions that are yet to be proven to co-exist alongside present assumptions. (great word)

5.

I would however choose to believe the empirical evidence of which there is none.

Not blinkered at all....RE: Reply to Quote 1. Alongside the limitations by which contemporary standard rules and theories exist, by which to measure these phenomena. It is extremely difficult to calibrate anything against - nothing. Scientifically, Pseudo-scientifically or otherwise. There simply is NO other way of Proving the case evidentially. As yet.


It is Highly presumptuous to perpetuate the circumstance that the Universe CANNOT contain matter and/or the capacity for altered states of consciousness to exist within it, that we are NOT aware of.  You simply fail, when you close your Mind to the possibility, then go on to implode upon yourself in refuting others claims when they attempt to challenge the conventional view. A healthy mind, will flourish under conditions correctly and judiciously prepared for it. It may even go as far as to completely believe what it comprehends...but nobody can state with absolute authority whether or not, WHAT it understands is in actual fact a falsehood. Based on the premise, of it being 'fantastic' or unfamiliar....or simply, not the 'norm'.

However, Scepticism, is of course equally healthy in order for ANY discussion/revelation to bloom, as im certain you are in full acknowledgement of. There are several clearly established 'avenues' down which to pursue such gratification. Any studies involving the paranormal/supernatural/parapsychological fields can provide/throw up sufficient ammunition for the cause...Do they provide answers to the questions asked though?  And can anyone corroberate their findings in order to state with all certainty that 'mind' is infact a 'myth'?  Honestly?

[LFC2007]

1.

I can understand the idea of not believing in the paranormal entirely, because of the idea that evidence must be provided in order to believe something.

Conversely it could also be argued to the contrary. That is, show me the evidence that completely disproves the notion out of hand. The evidence that eradicates the original debate from the table...entirely. Equally up in the air that one. Odds would not be great like, but its not exactly been confirmed by anybody.

2.

The accounts of people who say they have experienced the paranormal are nothing more than unsubstantiated stories.

Fair comment and likely to be the view that holds most weight (credibility). But as ive maintained throughout, Fear is the greatest 'block' that understandably remains insurmountable for many. From my experience, those willing to dismiss out of hand any relevance to the subject, usually have the most curiosity towards it of them all.  And the most questions naturally.

3.

It cannot be proven either way

There IS light at the end of your tunnel!

4.

Religion almost certainly predisposes those to the idea of the paranormal.

So no bold sweeping generalisations there then?

I'll speak for myself - In my case, God or any Religious predilection whatsoever doesn't even enter into it. Nor does any 'Supreme Power' other than that afforded by the Potential of the Human Mind, to transgress the planes of expression and Dimensions that are yet to be proven to co-exist alongside present assumptions. (great word)

5.

I would however choose to believe the empirical evidence of which there is none.

Not blinkered at all....RE: Reply to Quote 1. Alongside the limitations by which contemporary standard rules and theories exist, by which to measure these phenomena. It is extremely difficult to calibrate anything against - nothing. Scientifically, Pseudo-scientifically or otherwise. There simply is NO other way of Proving the case evidentially. As yet.


It is Highly presumptuous to perpetuate the circumstance that the Universe CANNOT contain matter and/or the capacity for altered states of consciousness to exist within it, that we are NOT aware of.  You simply fail, when you close your Mind to the possibility, then go on to implode upon yourself in refuting others claims when they attempt to challenge the conventional view. A healthy mind, will flourish under conditions correctly and judiciously prepared for it. It may even go as far as to completely believe what it comprehends...but nobody can state with absolute authority whether or not, WHAT it understands is in actual fact a falsehood. Based on the premise, of it being 'fantastic' or unfamiliar....or simply, not the 'norm'.

However, Scepticism, is of course equally healthy in order for ANY discussion/revelation to bloom, as im certain you are in full acknowledgement of. There are several clearly established 'avenues' down which to pursue such gratification. Any studies involving the paranormal/supernatural/parapsychological fields can provide/throw up sufficient ammunition for the cause...Do they provide answers to the questions asked though?  And can anyone corroberate their findings in order to state with all certainty that 'mind' is infact a 'myth'?  Honestly?

1) Which is exactly why I said "It cannot be proven either way". I would however add that the onus is on the believer to prove why they believe in something, otherwise the claim to a belief in anything is endless.

2) When you say fear creates a 'block', a 'block' to what exactly? I have no fear of exploring the possibility of the paranormal. I haven't seen anyone dismiss it out of hand perhaps other than Destro, I would just phrase the debate along different lines, and not claim to understand what it is like after death.

3) You see, I did not claim that it was out of the question.

4) I think if you read my post, I clearly infer that the idea of life after death is endorsed by most Religions and hence those who are religious are more likely to believe in the idea of the paranormal. The rest is jibberish.


5) You are correct, not blinkered at all, thank you. And that is exactly my point, there is no evidence with which to base your belief on other than personal experience.

I haven't closed my mind to it, you again ignore where I said: "It cannot be proven either way".

I have never said that the Universe CANNOT contain matter and/or the capacity for altered states of consciousness. I do not fail, nor do I implode, I base my views on empirical evidence or at the very least strong and consistent anecdotal evidence.

You then go on a rant containing no content other than jibberish.

[Sabre]

So no bold sweeping generalisations there then?

I'll speak for myself - In my case, God or any Religious predilection whatsoever doesn't even enter into it. Nor does any 'Supreme Power' other than that afforded by the Potential of the Human Mind, to transgress the planes of expression and Dimensions that are yet to be proven to co-exist alongside present assumptions. (great word)

That's my case, and that's why I find this debate you're having with LFC2007 interesting. I'm Christian, but when I approach this things I approach with my scientific view.

Your first quote's anwer, the one that asks for evidence to eradicate the original debate is a good one. As humans we're too arrogant with our math models to explain the universe and humanity, yet, we're hardly able to explain so many things we see. In the things I understand, computers, I know how humble we are humans when it comes to explain or even imitate humanity. What we call "Artificial Inteligence" for instance, doesn't match the intelligence of a mosquito. I cannot see the day in which we'll program a KIT, or a C3PO, we're unable to progam a conscious machine. We can make faster calculations and thus making decent models for weather prediction, but programming a conscious being? we simply don't know, not that we haven't the technology, we haven't the algorythm.

So, we must be very humble to eradicate arguements about somethings we cannot really even understand.

Same applies for non believers. It's easy to accept that one must not believe in God necessarily with no proof, but if you want to show that God doesn't exist, then you have a problem. For instance why universe exists, why it has rules, why different forces like gravity and electricity respond to similar math formulas, why the gravity exists if we don't see it, and why gravity applies in all the universe instead having a chaos. Denying God, is like pretending to scatter a handful of sand to the ground and expect it becomes a castle of sand by itself, as the sand drops.

Please continue the debate, I might ask some things red37, some of the stuff you wrote in the last page really rised my curiosity. But I have to check a couple of words in the dic and sentences I didn't grasp first.

[LFC2007]

Same applies for non believers. It's easy to accept that one must not believe in God necessarily with no proof, but if you want to show that God doesn't exist, then you have a problem.

I could argue that there is a tea pot in orbit around the earth, I believe that, prove me that I am also wrong Sabre.

[Sabre]

Same applies for non believers. It's easy to accept that one must not believe in God necessarily with no proof, but if you want to show that God doesn't exist, then you have a problem.

I could argue that there is a tea pot in orbit around the earth, I believe that, prove me that I am also wrong Sabre.

I understand your point. Well, how lucky we are then to have the universe as it is then. If we had to design an universe we hardly would make efficient nuclear motors like the sun. We're lucky to live in a tea pot like the universe, so lucky that an initial explosion that didn't have to happen yet it seemed to happen developed a system like this.

Non believers must be very optimistic people. 

[LFC2007]

Same applies for non believers. It's easy to accept that one must not believe in God necessarily with no proof, but if you want to show that God doesn't exist, then you have a problem.

I could argue that there is a tea pot in orbit around the earth, I believe that, prove me that I am also wrong Sabre.

I understand your point. Well, how lucky we are then to have the universe as it is then. If we had to design an universe we hardly would make efficient nuclear motors like the sun. We're lucky to live in a tea pot like the universe, so lucky that an initial explosion that didn't have to happen yet it seemed to happen developed a system like this.

Non believers must be very optimistic people. 

I am presuming you are refering to the Big Bang Sabre, well - at least there is evidence to support it.

[Sabre]

Of course there is, and they can calculate how the universe is expanding, and they're discussing if it will keep expanding or instead have a big crunch. But it's impossible to explain how or why it had to happen in the first place. Of course I'm not talking about a God with white beard and dress, I'm just stating the point that we have little reasons to be arrogant to rule out things like paranormal activity or God since our science fails to explain many things.

That doesn't mean we have to be gullible and believe everything a tarot expert or a religious priest says, on the contrary scepticism is a good approach IMHO. But we can't be arrogant or too vehement to rule out explanations that are out of our scientific knowledge.

[red37]

Its like 'mental tennis' this. Great for the creative juices!

In truth, there isn't exactly any real value in claim versus counter-claim at all really when it boils down to it. Particularly within the boundaries of subjects similar to this..On that note alone, along with the unfortunate fact that my 3 kids are still up and vying for my sparse attention away from the delicious fruits of any meaningful jibberish discussion on here. The pleasure will have to be declared as all mine...

However, not being the kind of Dog to let a bone pass by, unsavaged. I will address your swift, yet unsurprisingly curt response albeit briefly. And not at all with any note of veiled arrogance either. Promise.

Point 1. Stagnant argument then. Either way up, neither stance is valid. Until irrefutably proven otherwise.

2a. Block - Mental state of being, (contextually held) that through some triggered instance shuts down certain cognisant areas of the Brain (Conscience) maybe more apt. That otherwise allows free egress of any rationale capable of handling the situation at hand. Much akin to the requisite will-power necessary for the damnation of nicotine, amongst other 'evils' for want of a suitable analogy. I could go on about neuro-transmitters and their lack/profusion of yadda yadda... Basically, in this example 'Fear' of the unknown is likely to induce such a 'block' to the subscriber/believer call it what you will.

Hang on a mo...

2b.

I have no fear of exploring the possibility of the paranormal

But you find consummate ease with which to dismiss the word of others (who have experienced it) at the same time? Strange, i was under the illusion that you were quite flexible.

3. Good lad. Right answer.

4. In all probability, an accurate statement to offer. However, the intrusion of my own thoughts on the subject are not infact grounded in any Religion. (the consequences of which iam more than willing to entertain) Just, not for the purposes of my own agenda.

5. Clarification of your own beliefs might help proceedings descend into further - jibberish. Of course, thy will be done.

5b.

I base my views on empirical evidence or at the very least strong and consistent anecdotal evidence.

Do i detect an inconsistency in your standpoint, a chink in the armour....


Jibberish alert:

anecdotal

Tell me you didn't Google this article: Please!

Anecdotal approach (RE: Paranormal - Wiki)

"An anecdotal approach to the paranormal involves the collection of anecdotal evidence, which is an informal account of something that presumably happened. Anecdotes are often in contrast to empirical evidence, which are types of formal accounts that can be investigated using the scientific method".

when you could have casually 'plumped' for one of the other 4 options...unless of course the cracks are assuming abyss like proportions!

Anyway, gotta go, the kids are murdering the missus' state of well being...and im on a promise