That's no 'little girl'...

[starise]

Muadib- Here is an interesting discussion on the matter of martial arts. You can draw your own conclusions. There are better put together explanations but I haven't had the time to search them.

Are Martial Arts Esoteric practices and beliefs a match for Witchcraft? - Yahoo! Answers

With regards to Yoga being an entry point-

Spiritualism and Yoga

Yoga - Relaxation or Occult?

You can draw your own conclusions from this as well. I have arrived at mine.

Of course much of the time in this day and age people don't beat around the bush they simply seek and worship satan.

The greatest harm IMO is in blindly accepting these things as harmless. Even though few people delve this deeply into it and enjoy the benefits of the physical only.

I don't label anyhing as something until I have proven what it really is. People can become mentally unstable either from certain drugs or from their physiology or imbalance therof. People can also become possessed. The largest fallacy today is in thinking it was a thing that someone said happened 2000 years ago.

I'm not sure really what to make of the little girl sighting. It could be many things. I find time slips interesting and don't rule that out. I mentioned suicide because in some cases the deceased spirit seems to still be there,almost as if they didn't get on the right track and now they are in some kind of limbo.

I seen the TV show concerning the rain that was backwards and raining uphill. This followed the one individual whatever it was IMO it was an evil entity. The description of it from others was that it didn't seem exactly like water...water but not really water. This leads me to believe that it was a very very good deception of the senses or the environment to the point of swearing it was real water.


I think the question of whether this is a residual energy or not is tied to if this is intelligent. Beds were likely not located where she was standing if she lived there years ago.

 

[Muadib]

Thanks for the links but especially in the case of the Yahoo Answers page about martial arts I find nothing compelling and nothing that would stand up as evidence, it's just a bunch of opinions. I think this is the most intelligent answer on the whole page:

The mysterious fact behind all magic is this................................ Its a lie! How ignorant are you? If people could actually do any kind of magic at all, Las Vegas, Reno, Atlantic City, Macao, Tivoli, Monti Carlo and other huge Gaming Resorts around the world, would not exist. Pull your head out of that dark place you have been keeping it! No one in the world has ever proven any kind of ability at all to use any kind of "magic" at all.

This guy hits the nail squarely on the head, there's no such thing as magic, just like there's no such thing as demons or possessions, just sick people and the frailty of human thinking and dependence on arcane belief systems.

 

[starise]

The only delusion here is the one you are living in.

 

[Muadib]

The only delusion here is the one you are living in.

ROFL

This coming from the guy who believes that demons are waiting to invade our minds whenever we clear them and that we've yet to figure out how the sun works. That one really made me laugh, you calling anyone else delusional is hilarious.

In short, get bent fundie.

 

[mike]

The only delusion here is the one you are living in.

The end of this video makes the salient point

People who believe in imaginary beings are delusional.

I'd urge you to watch this video in its entirety, its logic is spot on

 

[Stagger Lee]

Whether you believe demons are responsible, or not -there have been some cases involving some type of force manipulating conditions around those involved. The "rain" case in eastern pennsylvania is one of those. The solution for the individual centered in the phenomena, was an exorcism. One could argue that his mental state led him to believe the ritual was a cure, but that wouldn't explain the extraordinary events witnessed by many seperate people.

 

[Muadib]

Whether you believe demons are responsible, or not -there have been some cases involving some type of force manipulating conditions around those involved. The "rain" case in eastern pennsylvania is one of those. The solution for the individual centered in the phenomena, was an exorcism. One could argue that his mental state led him to believe the ritual was a cure, but that wouldn't explain the extraordinary events witnessed by many seperate people.

Witness testimony is the lowest form of evidence. Is there any video or pictures of this so called exorcism? If not, why? Where's the proof? Unless there's some kind of physical evidence, it's all just hearsay, whether it's from 2 people or 200. Groups of people have claimed to be abducted by flying saucers, does this make it 100% undeniably true? Absolutely not, especially when you consider that the people pushing the story are people with an agenda, whether it be an agenda promoting alien abduction as real or an agenda promoting exorcism and demons as real.

Christians are not above lying, blatantly sometimes in order to further their religion or beliefs, just look at the whole creationism debacle for proof of this fact, not to mention their disgusting behavior towards individuals who stood in their way, which included threats of violence and death. The bottom line is, I'm not impressed by cases that consist of nothing besides witness testimony, especially when it comes from people with an obvious agenda.

 

[Randall]

It's really interesting where this has gone ... More and more I'm leaning towards thinking that 'ghosts' aren't so much the spirits of those that have died, but more likely a left over, or residual energy left behind ...

It's always interesting to theorize. One of my two pet theories is that genuine apparitions ( if there is such a thing ) are a ruse ... possibly some kind of holographic projection from a clandestine source, the object of which is to study how you react to the image ( the same way we put 2 way mirrors mirrors in dolphin pools to study what they do when they see their own reflection ). That's why I suggest looking outside for strange or out of place vehicles or whatever ... to continue with the analogy ... try to get a look behind the mirror. You're watching the girl, but someone or something else is watching you.

 

[Randall]

Witness testimony is the lowest form of evidence ...

Sounds like you're just parroting a popular skeptic's slogan without being skeptical of that claim. I think a very good case can be made that faulty machines, proven lies, deception, utter nonsense and hearsay are all "lower forms of evidence" than "witness testimony".

 

[Muadib]

Sounds like you're just parroting a popular skeptic's slogan without being skeptical of that claim. I think a very good case can be made that faulty machines, proven lies, deception, utter nonsense and hearsay are all "lower forms of evidence" than "witness testimony".

It's not just a slogan for skeptics, talk to just about any scientist and he'll tell you the same thing. Even people like Hopkins, Mack and Jacobs have admitted that the evidence they have is the weakest form of evidence available, witness testimony. Besides that, it's just common sense really, people can make up whatever they want, what separates valid testimony from nonsense is the evidence that accompanies it and the credibility of the witness. I don't find religious nuts with an agenda to push credible, therefore I'm unlikely to accept that their witness testimony is valid.

I had a feeling you would respond to what I wrote because I know you have a thing for witness testimony, which makes sense because you're a ufologist and unfortunately, ufology is a field that relies on witness testimony and observation more than anything else, at least at this time. The difference between ufology and something like exorcism though, is at least ufology has some genuine photographs, genuine videos, and landing trace cases that feature physical evidence to back up some of their claims. Exorcism has no such evidence that I'm aware of, just spurious claims advanced by religious fanatics and primitive cultures. In the end, this belief hurts more people than it helps. The amount of death and misery caused by the ignorant belief in things like demons and possession is staggering, enough is enough.

 

[Randall]

It's not just a slogan for skeptics, talk to just about any scientist and he'll tell you the same thing. Even people like Hopkins, Mack and Jacobs have admitted that the evidence they have is the weakest form of evidence available, witness testimony. Besides that, it's just common sense really, people can make up whatever they want, what separates valid testimony from nonsense is the evidence that accompanies it and the credibility of the witness. I don't find religious nuts with an agenda to push credible, therefore I'm unlikely to accept that their witness testimony is valid.

I had a feeling you would respond to what I wrote because I know you have a thing for witness testimony, which makes sense because you're a ufologist and unfortunately, ufology is a field that relies on witness testimony and observation more than anything else, at least at this time. The difference between ufology and something like exorcism though, is at least ufology has some genuine photographs, genuine videos, and landing trace cases that feature physical evidence to back up some of their claims. Exorcism has no such evidence that I'm aware of, just spurious claims advanced by religious fanatics and primitive cultures. In the end, this belief hurts more people than it helps. The amount of death and misery caused by the ignorant belief in things like demons and possession is staggering, enough is enough.

Well ... your psychic vibes were right! I was all over that slogan ... skeptical or scientific it makes no difference ... It's simply not true. The types of evidence provided in my earlier post are five levels ... no wait a minute ... let's add anecdotal evidence in there ... six levels lower than witness testimony, which puts witness testimony ( at least witness testimony based on firsthand experience ) right up in second place just under verifiable scientific evidence ( in which firsthand experience still plays an important role ).

BTW: I almost agree with you on exorcisms compared to ufology, but I have to point out that religion and exorcisms involve belief in the supernatural while ufology believes that UFOs are squarely within the realm of scientific plausibility. There is nothing scientifically impossible about interstellar travel. On the other hand the infestation of a persons "spirit" with a "demon" requires a whole other kind of belief system that IMO is much further removed from rational thought.

 

[Muadib]

Well ... your psychic vibes were right! I was all over that slogan ... skeptical or scientific it makes no difference. The types of evidence provided in my earlier post are ( to count them ) five levels ... no wait a minute ... let's add anecdotal evidence in there ... six levels lower than witness testimony, which puts witness testimony ( at least witness testimony based on firsthand experience ) right up in second place just under verifiable scientific evidence ( in which firsthand experience still plays an important role ).

Errrrrr, no. I don't know what hierarchy of evidence you're working from but let's examine your statement:

I think a very good case can be made that faulty machines, proven lies, deception, utter nonsense and hearsay are all "lower forms of evidence" than "witness testimony".

It could be argued that, besides faulty machinery, all of the so called forms of evidence you've alluded to here are forms of evidence that come directly from witness testimony. More importantly, in a scientific investigation, anything that was proven untrue or deemed unverifiable (like deception, utter nonsense and hearsay) would be thrown out and not counted as evidence at all. So that doesn't leave, well, anything besides faulty machinery which would be corrected or it's data would have to be discarded in any kind of science based investigation. So witness testimony is back on the bottom of the heap right where it belongs since anyone can say anything, without something to back it up it's meaningless. I get that you have an agenda to push here, but I'm not buying your particular brand on this one I'm sorry to say.

 

[Muadib]

.

BTW: I almost agree with you on exorcisms compared to ufology, but I have to point out that religion and exorcisms involve belief in the supernatural while ufology believes that UFOs are squarely within the realm of scientific plausibility. There is nothing scientifically impossible about interstellar travel. On the other hand the infestation of a persons "spirit" with a "demon" requires a whole other kind of belief system that IMO is much further removed from rational thought.

I agree 100% with everything you've written here. I have a particular problem with exorcism and the belief in demons that's often perpetuated by fundamentalists. The effect it has had on individual lives here and in poor countries like Nigeria is so despicable it makes my skin crawl. I can't remember the name of the documentary but it's truly cringe worthy to watch the preachers and holy men in that country make wads of cash by claiming that children are possessed by demons, at which point they are made to undergo horrific and costly exorcism rituals or they are abandoned by their parents and exiled from their villages to fend for themselves or just killed outright, and we're talking about kids that range in ages from 3 years old and up. That's the legacy of exorcism and this ridiculous belief in demonic possession that fundamentalist missionaries have perpetuated without concern for the lives that they destroy.

 

[Randall]

Errrrrr, no. I don't know what hierarchy of evidence you're working from but let's examine your statement:

It could be argued that, besides faulty machinery, all of the so called forms of evidence you've alluded to here are forms of evidence that come directly from witness testimony. More importantly, in a scientific investigation, anything that was proven untrue or deemed unverifiable (like deception, utter nonsense and hearsay) would be thrown out and not counted as evidence at all. So that doesn't leave, well, anything besides faulty machinery which would be corrected or it's data would have to be discarded in any kind of science based investigation. So witness testimony is back on the bottom of the heap right where it belongs since anyone can say anything, without something to back it up it's meaningless. I get that you have an agenda to push here, but I'm not buying your particular brand on this one I'm sorry to say.

Sure "it could be argued ... ", but then again anything can be argued. The first point being that even I conceded you're absolutely right about faulty machinery being first, it still means the slogan is wrong. The next point is that even scientific evidence has to be presented by someone, which under your imposed rules also means that when a scientist is presenting evidence, it's also "witness testimony" ... so let's be reasonable here. Lies, deception, utter nonsense & anecdotal evidence are all different kinds of evidence and can often be proven with reasonable certainty to be those types of evidence. And let's not forget that scientific evidence isn't always correct either. There are plenty of examples of mistakes and outright fraud in scientific papers, particularly in medicine.

​

Misconduct Widespread in Retracted Science Papers, Study Finds:​

​

"In the new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two scientists and a medical communications consultant analyzed 2,047 retracted papers in the biomedical and life sciences. They found that misconduct was the reason for three-quarters of the retractions for which they could determine the cause." Article Here​

 

[Muadib]

Sure "it could be argued ... ", but then again anything can be argued. The first point being that even I conceded you're absolutely right about faulty machinery being first, it still means the slogan is wrong. The next point is that even scientific evidence has to be presented by someone, which under your imposed rules also means that when a scientist is presenting evidence, it's also "witness testimony" ... so let's be reasonable here. Lies, deception, utter nonsense & anecdotal evidence are all different kinds of evidence and can often be proven with reasonable certainty to be those types of evidence. And let's not forget that scientific evidence isn't always correct either. There are plenty of examples of mistakes and outright fraud in scientific papers, particularly in medicine.

​

Misconduct Widespread in Retracted Science Papers, Study Finds:​

​

"In the new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two scientists and a medical communications consultant analyzed 2,047 retracted papers in the biomedical and life sciences. They found that misconduct was the reason for three-quarters of the retractions for which they could determine the cause." Article Here​

We're basically in agreement, I think we're both mistaking what the other is saying in this case. I'm not saying that witness testimony is completely worthless, indeed it can be very powerful when it's backed up by physical evidence or something similar. However, by itself, it's weak and it's easily invalidated when it doesn't match up with observations or physical evidence. Do you believe people like Billy Meier or Steven Greer? Why not? They both have a lot of witness testimony to throw around, but it's invalidated by the higher forms of evidence they've provided that has been proven to be fraudulent.

We're far from my original point here, which was, in the case of supernatural claims about demons and exorcisms, I'm skeptical of witness testimony when it's the only form of evidence provided. Why didn't they save some of that magic rainwater in a bottle to be studied? Why didn't they film the proceedings? I'd bet money it's because they knew that scrutiny of anything beyond their testimony simply wouldn't hold up.

 

[Randall]

We're basically in agreement, I think we're both mistaking what the other is saying in this case. I'm not saying that witness testimony is completely worthless, indeed it can be very powerful when it's backed up by physical evidence or something similar. However, by itself, it's weak and it's easily invalidated when it doesn't match up with observations or physical evidence. Do you believe people like Billy Meier or Steven Greer? Why not? They both have a lot of witness testimony to throw around, but it's invalidated by the higher forms of evidence they've provided that has been proven to be fraudulent.

We're far from my original point here, which was, in the case of supernatural claims about demons and exorcisms, I'm skeptical of witness testimony when it's the only form of evidence provided. Why didn't they save some of that magic rainwater in a bottle to be studied? Why didn't they film the proceedings? I'd bet money it's because they knew that scrutiny of anything beyond their testimony simply wouldn't hold up.

Fair enough, I just had to jump on the slogan there. We're still basically on the same page. Thanks for indulging me with such class ... definite "like" points as usual

 

[boomerang]

Posture, If it's any consolation, my wife of almost 30 years has always seen such things. They are usually innocuous looking "people" she describes as appearing in her peripheral vision for brief instants. My wife is a very stable and beneficent person who is very well grounded in dealing with the "real world". "Second sight" runs strongly in her family and I have come to see it as a source of spiritual strength for her. It did take some getting used to in the early months of our relationship.

 

[starise]

I am far from being "bent" . I actually tend to feel a little sorry for anyone who continually thows entire subjects and lines of thought out the window because they don't have personal proof or are not personally convinced of it. If you are not personally convinced it is fair enough to have reservations. To label individuals who you don't know regarding things you may not be fully informed about shows your total inability to correctly deal with an alternate view you either don't undertstand,don't believe or disregard. Furthermore the childish slang terms you tend to throw around regarding some of these people and groups shows real immaturity on your part. If an immature person can't win an argument they tend to start throwing the name calling around or the labeling.

Do we need to start handing pacifiers out here?

So back to square one.......This guy and his wife seen something.He says it looked like a girl. It was apparently a real figure that materialized. This whole thread is based on WITNESS TESTIMONY. Do you know what it was? You have little use for witness testimony which is the ONLY testimony we have so far. I would love to hear your explanation. It was something that possibly you choose not to believe in so what was it in you opinion Mr. smart guy?Swamp gas? You think this guy was doing drugs? You think he made the whole thing up? How do you begin to explain cases of possession where the person has superhuman strength and speak in a language that they don't know? Yes it happens in the 2oth century.

I did more than you, I gave possible explanations, I repeat possible explanations. What have you offered except a shallow mealy mouthed statement about how little you value witness testimony.

 

[Muadib]

I am far from being "bent" . I actually tend to feel a little sorry for anyone who continually thows entire subjects and lines of thought out the window because they don't have personal proof or are not personally convinced of it. If you are not personally convinced it is fair enough to have reservations. To label individuals who you don't know regarding things you may not be fully informed about shows your total inability to correctly deal with an alternate view you either don't undertstand,don't believe or disregard. Furthermore the childish slang terms you tend to throw around regarding some of these people and groups shows real immaturity on your part. If an immature person can't win an argument they tend to start throwing the name calling around or the labeling.

Do we need to start handing pacifiers out here?

So back to square one.......This guy and his wife seen something.He says it looked like a girl. It was apparently a real figure that materialized. This whole thread is based on WITNESS TESTIMONY. Do you know what it was? You have little use for witness testimony which is the ONLY testimony we have so far. I would love to hear your explanation. It was something that possibly you choose not to believe in so what was it in you opinion Mr. smart guy?Swamp gas? You think this guy was doing drugs? You think he made the whole thing up? How do you begin to explain cases of possession where the person has superhuman strength and speak in a language that they don't know? Yes it happens in the 2oth century.

I did more than you, I gave possible explanations, I repeat possible explanations. What have you offered except a shallow mealy mouthed statement about how little you value witness testimony.

Awwww sounds like someone is a little upset, if anyone needs a pacifier it's you, every time someone asks for proof of your ridiculous claims you get all upset and go off on some ridiculous tangent about how "these things happen" or "I know because I know" If they happen then it shouldn't be that hard to provide proof.

I wasn't questioning the guy who started this thread's claims, I was questioning yours. I have no doubt he's sincere about what he thinks he saw. The problem is the human brain is an extremely fallible organ, this has been proven time and time again by scientific testing. That's one of the reasons that I don't accept witness testimony at face value in cases like this. I wouldn't hazard a guess at what he saw because I simply don't have enough information to come to any kind of conclusion. You, on the other hand, are quick to jump to any conclusion which seems to back up your twisted, religious view of things. That's all you're doing, jumping to conclusions, not offering possible explanations.

If you reread the thread, you'll see that it was in fact you who insulted me first, so take your high horse and shove it. You're a typical fundie, quick to insult anyone who doesn't value your ignorant opinions and disagrees with you on the nature of reality, which you are clearly not living in. Tell me more about how we don't know what makes the sun work Mr. Fantasy Land.

 

[starise]

Pfffft....Believe me if I were upset Maudib you would know it. You have yet to tell us what you think this apparition is all about???? Still waiting.. All you seem good at is telling us what you think it's not.Anyone can do that.