U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-04-2017, 09:58 AM
 
4,195 posts, read 2,866,301 times
Reputation: 10137

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MillennialUrbanist View Post

I'm wondering at this point if the proliferation of urban legends in North America is because of its short history; unlike Europe, Middle East, or even South America. Virtually everything is no older than 300 years, with the West Coast being just 100 years old. There are very few castles, temples, burial mounds, stone-paved plazas, etc. to be awed by; the kind of things that just seem to breathe history of past civilizations at you, and give you that borderline-spiritual feeling. So, many people long for some mystery in their daily lives. As a result, urban legends emerge, where "somebody, somewhere" was killed at some historic point in the past.
There is no SMH emoji big enough for this....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-04-2017, 10:50 AM
 
Location: equator
1,309 posts, read 455,442 times
Reputation: 2752
Nobody really knows how the Naztec Lines (sp?) in Peru were made, do they?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Colorado
768 posts, read 641,982 times
Reputation: 2110
I think, for me, it's not that I'm unwilling to accept a paranormal explanation--it's just that all other rational explanations have to have been exhausted/found to be flawed.

For example, let's say Jane goes backpacking solo across the Rocky Mountains in late fall, and is never seen again. To me, that's not 'mysterious' or 'paranormal'--it's tragic, but there's too many mundane explanations for what happened to her: She died of exposure and her body just hasn't been found or was taken away by scavangers. She ran afoul of a wild creature that attacked her. She ran afoul of a human being that attacked her. Her disappearance is tragic, and we may never find out what happened to her, but it's hardly mysterious.

In another example, let's say John, Jane, Bob, and Alice go for a short hike in a popular state park that tends to have tons of people on the trails. It's a clear, pleasant day. And let's say John is a big guy--six foot five, 225 pounds, ex-Marine, 3rd degree black belt. And at some point, John just *really* needs to urinate. So he ducks behind the trees right to the side of the trail so he doesn't expose himself to all the other hikers going back and forth. And after ten minutes, Jane, Bob, and Alice start telling him to hurry up. When they don't get a response, they go look, and John is nowhere to be found. No signs of a struggle, no signs of broken branches/disturbed foliage, no signs of any wild animals, or random humans, and if John had moved from behind the tree, *somebody* would have seen him. So a big guy with the ability to handle himself disappears five feet away from crowds of people, and nobody saw or heard a thing, and there's nothing to indicate where he might have gone too. And for fun, let's say the police (or whoever would investigate a disappearance from a state park) bring in the bloodhounds, who can only pick up John's scent on the trail and at the tree, but nowhere else. This, I would consider mysterious, because it's a lot harder to come up with a mundane explanation as to what happened to John. This isn't to say there couldn't *be* one, it's just harder to come up with one that would explain why people were five feet away, and nobody saw/heard anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 12:10 PM
Status: "Good bye, sweet Bella." (set 8 days ago)
 
Location: The New England part of Ohio
16,044 posts, read 19,123,167 times
Reputation: 36560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Watkins View Post
To sheena12:

If the scientific method doesn't work, what does?

"The very essence of anything paranormal, it that it can seldom be controlled and it does not really respond to scientific method" is begging the question because it gives attributes to something that hasn't been shown to exist. IOW, you're assuming the conclusion in your premise.
An OPEN MIND is a good place to start. The realization that not everything that occurs in the material world has a "scientific explanation" - an explanation that can be explained using one limited field of inquiry that is studied at the university level. Hard or natural science and it's sister subject mathematics.

Is science useful? Of course it is! I am a well educated woman with an advanced degree (not in a scientific field) and I was a registered nurse.

Here is an example - scientists are very useful when it comes to the natural world. Meteorologists and environmental scientists have come up with a theory called climate change, that I feel adequately explains the spate of violent storms that we have had in recent years can be attributed to global warming as a result of human abuse and neglect of the ecosystem.

Only a moronic, superstitious. and willfully ignorant individual would deny climate change on this relatively sudden spate of extreme storms.

No, it isn't witchcraft that has been practiced in New Orleans, or gay people living in the Houston area, that have caused these storms. Or the wrath of God. It's climate change.

I am satisfied with this explanation.

However useful science may be, it is NOT useful when analyzing a work of literature. Or evaluating good art from bad. And no, that is not "subjective". Is scientific method useful in the field of philosophy? Government or Sociology? There may be some over laps, but in general, "Scientific Method" does not explain "Social Deviance". Observational social science, developed by sociologists at the University of Chicago have developed theories that have little to do with scientific method.

I think science is not completely useful when it comes to human behavior. There are those who are complete behaviorists who might disagree with me there, but they are few and far between.

Dr.Sigmund Freud did not employ scientific method when he developed his theories of human personality, and behavior, and the treatment of psychological disorders. His methodology was observational and has been criticized for that. As have Carl Jung, Heinz Kohut and Carl Rodgers.

Probably by people such as yourself who are hell bent on debunking anything that can not be studied in a laboratory. If I am wrong, I apologize. However your posts indicate that you see the world only through that very limiting lens.

And that your mind is far from open.

If it were up to people such as yourself, my thought is that you would shut down entire university departments that teach philosophy, theology, literature, fine art, and theology.

I am open minded. Open minded enough to know that I personally can not explain or isolate and test everything in the natural world.

We spent almost a decade in a haunted house. The fist phenomenon had to do with electricity.

When the lights in my laundry room went on and off all night long, first my husband checked the circuit breaker. We changed bulbs. Used different wattages, other brands. Nothing stopped this.

Finally we called an electrician. He could find nothing wrong. He left.

When it persisted, we called him back. He observed the light switch go on and off by itself and justly stated that he was "mystified". And he said that he didn't have an answer, adding that he'd "never seen anything like that".

We called another electrician who was referred by a client of my husband's, an engineer. He similarly visited and observed the light switch moving without human hands. He took it apart. Put it back together again. Found nothing wrong.

When he was about to leave he said "I don't know what to tell you - maybe you should have your house blessed?"

My point in duel fold. When we experienced something wrong electronically -we called an electrician. Not a psychic, a minister, a witch, or a medium.

So, we looked first to the natural world. And it gave us no relief from our annoying problem.

When electricians - people who world with correcting situations using natural techniques could not find an answer, then yes, we did look in other directions. But, at first we looked to science.

Secondly, why is it that people such as yourself who are otherwise intelligent can not grasp that there are things that can not be explained by science, and essentially SHOULD NOT be explained by science?

What your want to do is almost silly. It's kind of like trying to quantify a work of art. Or smell the number eleven. Wrong technique. Wrong field.



However, psychology his not a "hard science". Other than Skinner, I know

Nor did Carl Jung
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 12:55 PM
Status: "Good bye, sweet Bella." (set 8 days ago)
 
Location: The New England part of Ohio
16,044 posts, read 19,123,167 times
Reputation: 36560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indigo Cardinal View Post
I think, for me, it's not that I'm unwilling to accept a paranormal explanation--it's just that all other rational explanations have to have been exhausted/found to be flawed.

For example, let's say Jane goes backpacking solo across the Rocky Mountains in late fall, and is never seen again. To me, that's not 'mysterious' or 'paranormal'--it's tragic, but there's too many mundane explanations for what happened to her: She died of exposure and her body just hasn't been found or was taken away by scavangers. She ran afoul of a wild creature that attacked her. She ran afoul of a human being that attacked her. Her disappearance is tragic, and we may never find out what happened to her, but it's hardly mysterious.

In another example, let's say John, Jane, Bob, and Alice go for a short hike in a popular state park that tends to have tons of people on the trails. It's a clear, pleasant day. And let's say John is a big guy--six foot five, 225 pounds, ex-Marine, 3rd degree black belt. And at some point, John just *really* needs to urinate. So he ducks behind the trees right to the side of the trail so he doesn't expose himself to all the other hikers going back and forth. And after ten minutes, Jane, Bob, and Alice start telling him to hurry up. When they don't get a response, they go look, and John is nowhere to be found. No signs of a struggle, no signs of broken branches/disturbed foliage, no signs of any wild animals, or random humans, and if John had moved from behind the tree, *somebody* would have seen him. So a big guy with the ability to handle himself disappears five feet away from crowds of people, and nobody saw or heard a thing, and there's nothing to indicate where he might have gone too. And for fun, let's say the police (or whoever would investigate a disappearance from a state park) bring in the bloodhounds, who can only pick up John's scent on the trail and at the tree, but nowhere else. This, I would consider mysterious, because it's a lot harder to come up with a mundane explanation as to what happened to John. This isn't to say there couldn't *be* one, it's just harder to come up with one that would explain why people were five feet away, and nobody saw/heard anything.
Yes! And I, who believe selectively but deeply in the existence of the paranormal, would agree with you.

When we had electrical issues in our haunted house we did not first call a witch doctor or a medium. We called an electrician. Two of them. And consulted with an electrical engineer. First.

When people go missing, there is almost always a natural explanation - either they want to not be found and they have decided to assume a new identity, or they have met with foul play, of some sort.

There is nothing paranormal about the case of Amelia Eahart -nothing at all. She captured the imagination of the world because aviation was in it's infancy and she was a woman.
Other wise, we wouldn't be disusing this today, as I said in a previous post.

As for spontaneous human combustion being the result of obese people who drink a lot and are overweight, that is laughable beyond belief!

If so, there would be a rash of cases of spontaneous human combustion in lower socioeconomic areas of the country, such as North Eastern PA and parts of Appalachia.
Fat heavy drinkers and smokers would be going up in flames at least once a week!

However, we all no, that is not the case. This is a rare phenomena.

Also, in cases of SHC, only the torso burns. The surrounding areas are relatively unaffected as are the extremities of the affected individual. The combustion is also spontaneous - and has been witnessed by others. There are also survivors of spontaneous human combustion. They were not sleeping and smoking at the time. In one case, the man was fishing on a lake with his brother, which was probably why he lived to tell the story.

I saw this man interviewed by the way. While I know nothing of his personal habits - weather he is a drinker or a smoker, he was of an average weight and involved in a physical activity at the time.

Honestly, the lengths to explain naturally events that are clearly unexplainable, verge on being laughable. It's as though they are seriously grasping at straws.

Just admit it. No amount of absurd mental gymnastics can explain the unexplainable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 01:10 PM
 
11,886 posts, read 10,619,864 times
Reputation: 5698
Two cases;
This

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendle...orest_incident

and this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyatlov_Pass_incident

( I've spotted some similarity there, in terms of "burned tree branches" and high level of radiation.)


So I'd like to know what that was all about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 01:27 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
63,272 posts, read 52,586,531 times
Reputation: 54368
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Two cases;
This

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendle...orest_incident

and this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyatlov_Pass_incident

( I've spotted some similarity there, in terms of "burned tree branches" and high level of radiation.)


So I'd like to know what that was all about.
The Dyatlov Pass incident has been posted here before. This is the first time I've read that one team member's tongue and eyes were missing. IDK, the story seems to get more embellished every time I encounter it.

However, the reason several team members fled their tents and tore off their clothes is known. It's due to extreme hypothermia, which causes an odd phenomenon of people thinking they're too hot. The team was very poorly prepared for the conditions they encountered; canvas tents were completely inadequate for survival in the snow.
By comparison, the historic Donner expedition in the Sierra mountains of California, in the early days of California's statehood, at least managed to build some crude log huts, when winter overtook them in their trek westward. Several of the expedition members survived a harsh winter. Some didn't (mainly due to starvation). A few members, who didn't have sufficient shelter, did eventually exhibit the behavior associated with severe hypothermia, and ran out into the snow, throwing off their clothes. They died. You'd think that Russian science, due to the country's northerly location, would be familiar with this phenomenon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 03:46 PM
Status: "Want to be rugged up in Aran sweaters drinking tea." (set 10 hours ago)
 
1,271 posts, read 510,419 times
Reputation: 1659
Skepticism and cynicism don't allow the earth to have any mystery or magic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MillennialUrbanist View Post
You might be right, and what you're saying makes sense. But I like the legend, at least. In a blatantly suburban area like Bartlett, it's nice to have a bit of historic mystery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Naperville, Illinois
2,946 posts, read 2,497,083 times
Reputation: 4873
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12 View Post
Only a moronic, superstitious. and willfully ignorant individual would deny climate change on this relatively sudden spate of extreme storms.
Although I agree with some of what you said in your post, a sudden spate of storms may have nothing to do with long-term climate change, in one direction or the other. It's not that simple, and the consensus that populist climate change hysterics like Al Gore claim isn't as solid as you might think. From the National Climate Assessment:

Quote:
...The recent increases in activity are linked, in part, to higher sea surface temperatures in the region that Atlantic hurricanes form in and move through. Numerous factors have been shown to influence these local sea surface temperatures, including natural variability, human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases, and particulate pollution. Quantifying the relative contributions of natural and human-caused factors is an active focus of research. Some studies suggest that natural variability, which includes the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, is the dominant cause of the warming trend in the Atlantic since the 1970s,,, while others argue that human-caused heat-trapping gases and particulate pollution are more important.,

Hurricane development, however, is influenced by more than just sea surface temperature. How hurricanes develop also depends on how the local atmosphere responds to changes in local sea surface temperatures, and this atmospheric response depends critically on the cause of the change...
Sound like a rock-solid consensus to you?

I did graduate work in environmental sciences in the 70s, including coursework in climatology and environmental modeling. Several of the meteorology faculty members then are among the so-called deniers today - an unfair label since their positions tend to be more nuanced than the black and white picture the Chicken Little crew are selling. Labeling critics "deniers" is a political move, not a scientific one.

It's as unfair to label these people who have devoted long careers to meteorology and climatology as "moronic, superstitious, and willfully ignorant" as it is to label those who believe in spiritual or paranormal realities as "moronic, superstitious, and willfully ignorant."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2017, 07:02 PM
 
Location: Connecticut
200 posts, read 193,057 times
Reputation: 181
I may have missed it in your post, (where you made a few assumptions about me) sheena12, so where did you answer my question about what other way than the scientific method can the paranormal or supernatural be examined?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top