Posts made in 2011
Skeptics & Skeptics
Having to defend your skepticism can become quite tiring when it is the very thing that is constantly used against you in every argument, debate or discussion you have with people who hold beliefs – or entertain ideas, that have shaky evidence to support them.
I’ve often interviewed people for Righteous Indignation who, instead of answering the questions about the evidence that supports their beliefs, will turn the question on me/us and demand that we provide evidence to support our skeptical stance on the subject (which in itself serves to fuel said skepticism by refusing the supporting evidence we seek). You can read about other such logical fallacies in this great post by my co-host, Trystan Swale.
We’ve interviewed people on Righteous Indignation who tell us that our skepticism is ‘okay’ or ‘good’ but that some skepticism isn’t. That we’re different from other skeptics and that there are bad skeptics out there – and then we ‘good skeptics’ have to defend ourselves because of these ‘bad skeptics’ rather than, you know, the person we’re interviewing just providing us with the evidence to support their claims. It’s a bit like a game of tag… but on a treadmill.
It is incredibly frustrating to be open minded about the things being discussed, but having to prove that you’re open minded before you can even try to make any progress into the subject. If we were to believe that, say, aliens abducted a cow – we wouldn’t have it demanded of us that we prove that we believed it in the “right way”, but because I dare to doubt something exists it is often demanded that I prove I doubt its existence in the “right way”.
When I’ve spoken at believer-oriented events in the past I’ve always had to set aside part of my talk to outline what skepticism is and what I mean when I call myself a skeptic; the blame for this general misunderstanding does lay with the media misrepresentation of skeptics in many ways. However, I think it often serves people well to create this false sense of what skepticism is – the “bad” skepticism that they are keen to insist their “naysayers” demonstrate in order to weaken the argument against them from said skeptic.
I’m not denying that there are people who call themselves skeptics who demonstrate terrible behaviours and attitudes towards people who are less skeptical about things than they are. This behaviour shouldn’t be tolerated – and isn’t tolerated by a proportion of other people who call themselves skeptics.
If someone is being closed minded though, then they are not using skepticism, for skepticism requires an open mind. Just as there are a variety of people who believe in ghosts – those who act well, those who don’t; there are also a variety of people who are skeptical about ghosts – those who act well, and those who don’t…
I generally thought society had stopped tarring whole groups of people with the same brush but it’s clear that as far as engaging with skeptics go, some believers would rather tar all skeptics with the same brush as those skeptics they may have had a negative experience with in the past. When, and if the same is done to them it’s a huge issue, yet those ‘victims’ have no issue treating others in exactly the same way.
Hypocritical much?
Six feet under
I noticed a ‘click-through’ to my blog that came from a forum called ‘World of ghosts’ so I clicked it out of curiousity and noticed that one of my blog posts (called ‘Dear New Ghost hunter’) was being discussed there. There’s nothing new with my posts being discussed on forums that cover paranormal topics, I had just never heard of this one.
One comment in particular, by ‘Iain’, caught my attention and I wanted to respond to what was said. I could sign up to the forum, but I don’t want to so I thought I’d address the point here where I can clear up this misunderstanding.
Iain said:
“Hayley seems nice, but she says she doesn’t believe in ghosts. Cool. She may not, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. The definition of a ghost is apparantly the continual existance of a life force after death which shows its self in the atomical world in some way. Hayley has no concept of what happens when she dies, there for has no oppinion. Nice and simple. Am I then insinuating that ghost exist, of coure not. But I’m still looking, even if I do use some of the methods she puts forward as silly. But pro-active endeavour is one step closer to achievement than mono-visioned denial and none-productive posts or blogs. She may have had fun posting her oppinions, but I think she should research more. Or at all.”
Even if I didn’t have a concept of what happens to me when I die (which I do, actually) I would still have an opinion – it might be an incorrect one or a correct one, but it would still be an opinion regardless. My posts and writing is not “mono-visioned denial’ because I always strive to be factually correct. I am obsessive about detail, to the point of my fellow researchers rolling their eyes at my constant questioning.
Iain is right to say I don’t believe in ghosts and he is also right to say that simply because I choose not to believe in them doesn’t mean they don’t exist. That is a correct assessment. It is the lack of evidence that supports the existence of ghosts that suggests they do not exist.
I am open minded and willing to change my mind should evidence that supports the idea that ghosts are real emerge. Some would argue that such evidence has already been presented, but I have found such ‘evidence’ to be lacking (and I’m not the only one…)
I have outlined my thoughts about death before in a post titled ‘The other side and the end’, but I will outline things once again to counter the idea that I don’t have a concept of what happens when I die (and thus, apparently have no opinion…)
Many people who are more spiritually inclined believe that the ‘life energy’ within us, the very thing that keeps us alive, must be what becomes a ghost or spirit when our bodies die. I used to hold such a belief too.
However, The energy associated with our bodies is chemical energy and that energy transforms when the matter with which it’s associated transforms.
Burn or decompose our bodies and you’ll transform not only our matter but also our energy — from chemical energy to other forms of energy such as heat, light, or to chemical energy stored in somebody/something else’s body (insects, animals, bacteria etc.)
So upon death, the matter and energy associated with our bodies transform into other forms of matter and energy, ones that are no longer organized in a way that create muscles, bones, brains, and internal experiences of hunger, pain, and consciousness.
I am not a scientist (which is probably very obvious) and I only studied science up to GCSE level – yet this information I have about what happens to our bodies when we die was gained through a little research which Iain accused me of needing to do more (or any) of.
I have done plenty of research and arrived at the conclusions I currently hold as a direct result. It is fine to disagree with my thoughts and ideas, but please do not suggest that because I’m not as open minded as you consider yourself to be, it means I am lazy when it comes to my research. Especially when you confess to using methods I have ‘put forwards’ on my site as ‘silly’.
Pic credit: 6pro
No regrets
Today I counted up the friends and acquaintances I have lost as a direct result of me being outspoken with my thoughts and opinions, and I tried to work out how terrible it was for such friendships to have been lost.
I then realised that the alternative would have been for me to bite my tongue and hide my true feelings and still have those people as friends; what sort of friends are those whose friendship demands you aren’t honest and open about the way you feel or think? Not friends at all and not worth the sacrifice of ones voice.
Dear new ghost hunter,
You’ve decided to become a ghost hunter, and so have applied the title to yourself because after all there is no mandatory training or registration to go through. You just need a team name (maybe), a website and you’re done.
You can check out other ghost hunting team websites and maybe buy the same bits of kit they have, and copy their techniques too – especially if they’re a ghost hunting team who has been on television because if they’re on TV they must know their stuff.
Then all you have to do is visit some locations – those that have ghost stories attached to them, or those that look haunted. Then, on your website make sure to explain to people that you are rational because you debunk stuff with articles like ‘when orbs are and aren’t paranormal’ so people know you’re an open minded skeptic and all…
Congratulations, you are now a ghost hunter.
At some stage you might catch something a bit odd and you’ll think it is news worthy and will send it to your local newspaper, they’ll publish it, but don’t be mistaken in thinking this means you’re a great ghost hunter because newspapers will actually just publish anything.
You’ve probably not realised that there are hundreds of people who have done exactly the same thing as you for years and years before you got the idea. People who don’t properly research their techniques and methods, but happily act as though they’re experts are nothing new – unfortunately.
You can normally tell a copy-cat ghost hunter from those who’ve done proper research because they excitedly present you with “evidence” that is really poor, and they’ve considered it as evidence because they’re desperate to either a) prove to themselves and others that they’re right to think ghosts exist or b) make a name for themselves in the ghost research field (just like dozens of wanna-be ghost hunting celebs before them).
You can tell everyone you debunk stuff as though that’s proof that you’re open minded, but the fact you use pseudo-scientific techniques (because you’ve not actually researched what you’re doing before jumping in the deep end) gives the game away.
Seriously, before you do anything else you should probably learn about the field you’ve decided to join. If you choose to ignore the information out there then it’s evident that you’re not at all open minded like you claim.
Also, it doesn’t matter if you’ve been investigating for three years or thirty-three years – you can have been investigating for decades and still get it wrong.
A great resource for reasonable information about Ghost Hunting is the site of the Association for Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena. You don’t have to be a member to read the online articles.
You can click the ‘Ghost basics’ tab at the top of my site to read my summary of basic subjects you will come across as a Ghost Hunter. You can also read through the topics listed under ‘paranormal’ on the Skeptics Dictionary.
Up to date information is available – you just need to bother to find it. As I’ve said many times; it’s easy to copy other people, but thinking for yourself takes effort but it’s worth it. Trust me, I speak from experience.
The scariest ghosts
The scariest ghosts I’ve ever encountered are the ones who, for a brief moment in time, lived on my bedside cabinet. These spectres live on ear-marked pages, their every action dictated by printed words. Ghosts in literature span time – from early greats such as Banquo’s ghostly appearance in Macbeth (that I first encountered while sitting in my English Literature classroom), to the ghost of Jacob Marley – with Marley it was the chains that scared me the most.Those chains and everything they represented scared me just as much as my primary school teachers telling me that their god could see my soul and all the sins that had marked it. Until I became Atheist at least…
Last night was the first time for ages that I’ve gone to bed with that slightly uneasy feeling in the back of my mind; the result of overdosing on fictional ghosts and their frightful ways. I blame Susan Hill and ‘The Woman in Black’, as last night I watched the trailer for the upcoming remake starring Daniel Radcliffe. The trailer has the verse:
During afternoon tea, there’s a shift in the air.
A bone-trembling chill that tells you she’s there.
There are those who believe the whole town is cursed.
But the house in the marsh is by far the worst.
What she wants is unknown, but she always comes back.
The spectre of darkness, the Woman in Black.
The first two lines of that verse are really quite eerie - well, the whole thing coupled with the trailer (and the young girl reciting the verse) is eerie, but those first two lines are something that anyone who has ever thought their house is haunted can appreciate.
I’ve stood in buildings reputed to be haunted, and I’ve felt ‘the shift in the air’ when you think suddenly something has changed and you’re no longer alone. It could just be a feeling, a change in temperature, a nudge on your back* or perhaps a noise you can’t place… it is the worse feeling and it inspires an instinctual reaction of fear (and usually panic). Sure, the shift is probably due to the heightened mind of the ghost hunter or atmospheric reasons, but there’s still no denying that fear.
I truly cannot wait to see ‘The Woman in Black’ when it comes out, I’ve just bought a copy of the book (I originally read it in the school library a decade ago). Last weekend we watched BBC 2′s Ghostwatch, another fictional ghost story that gets it very right. This weekend my mother and I are going to watch the old BBC version of ‘The Woman in Black’, just because…
Ghosts are very real, they just happen to live in the pages that sit on your bookcase awaiting the time you open the cover and release them. That’s when they lurk just out of sight, in the corner of your bedroom, waiting for you to turn out the light…
*(Yes I’ve had my back nudged when nobody was there while standing in a “haunted chapel”… you can learn more at my ’skeptics in the pub’ talks)
I support…
