Oh, well in that case Id have to conclude that you and your mother have very impressionable minds and therefore after you dreamed the ghost the first time you became more susceptible to seeing him and anything you just caught out of the corner of your eye became attributed to this ghost. Your mother, having been told that there was a ghost in the house and believing in them herself, was similarly tricked into imagining the ghost through the power of suggestion.

But you have to remember that I didnt believe my house was haunted at the time. I didt even believe in them. I was a sceptic every time someone brought that subject up.

How could it be a mind trick when my brain wasnt anywhere near it.

lmao zed. if somthing was so phenomenal as a ghost, or anything for that matter. Do you really think it would be caught so easily by us mere mortals? we only use what? 15% of our brain capacity? what would happen if we could break it down to 55%? would you still abide to your argument?

actualy we only use 10% of our brain.
just saying

didn't Einstein use 15?

(Edit: Oh, shit. Triple ninja. Response is pending)

There are a number of explanations for this sort of thing, ranging from epileptic fits like St Paul's on the road to Damascus, to the presence of infrasound. Freud would have said that you believed in ghosts from the beggining but you repressed that belief because you didn't like it very much. I don't know enough about you, the situation, or psychology in general, to diagnose the problem right now, but to point to that as a flaw in my reasoning that it could be explainable would be just as silly as for me to claim ghosts physically impossible solely on the grounds that the laws of physics as we know them do not support them, as Schwa has pointed out earlier.

but it goes back to my point. i don't think it would be easy to capture evidence of this sort of phenomenal. All im just saying is " Anything is possible"

Quote from soulless

didn't Einstein use 15?

Yes, he did. But you are not Einstein, and neither is anyone here.

true. ever wonder if he tried to figure out the past life?

Quote from soulless

lmao zed. if somthing was so phenomenal as a ghost, or anything for that matter. Do you really think it would be caught so easily by us mere mortals? we only use what? 15% of our brain capacity? what would happen if we could break it down to 55%? would you still abide to your argument?

Actually, we only use 10/15% of our brain capacity at a time. The whole thing gets used at some point. It's an often misquoted statistic.

Either way, I don't see what this has to do with ghosts at all. If we were three times smarter than we are, the results of all our scientific testing would be exactly the same, so yes I would stand by my argument.

How phenomenal is a ghost exactly? By what measure do you arrive at this conclusion? Your logic is circular. Why can't we catch ghosts? Because they're phenomenal. How do we know they are phenomenal? Well we've never caught one, so they must be.

Your post seems to close too trolling to warrent a bigger esonse than this, so I'll finish with a brief offensive: do any of you ghost believers (not Schwa - he seems to only be defending the possibility) believe in vampires, werewolves, or witches? How about Osiris, Apollo, or Thor? Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, or Humpty Dumpty? These things all have just as much evidence, so why believe in ghosts and not them? Strange things happen. It would almost be greater evidence of supernatural powers at work if they didn't. Billions of things happen every day. Some of them are going to be unlikely simply by the law of averages.

Quote from Zed

Actually, we only use 10/15% of our brain capacity at a time. The whole thing gets used at some point. It's an often misquoted statistic.

Either way, I don't see what this has to do with ghosts at all. If we were three times smarter than we are, the results of all our scientific testing would be exactly the same, so yes I would stand by my argument.

How phenomenal is a ghost exactly? By what measure do you arrive at this conclusion? Your logic is circular. Why can't we catch ghosts? Because they're phenomenal. How do we know they are phenomenal? Well we've never caught one, so they must be.

Your post seems to close too trolling to warrent a bigger esonse than this, so I'll finish with a brief offensive: do any of you ghost believers (not Schwa - he seems to only be defending the possibility) believe in vampires, werewolves, or witches? How about Osiris, Apollo, or Thor? Harry Potter, Frodo Baggins, or Humpty Dumpty? These things all have just as much evidence, so why believe in ghosts and not them? Strange things happen. It would almost be greater evidence of supernatural powers at work if they didn't. Billions of things happen every day. Some of them are going to be unlikely simply by the law of averages.

so you don't agree with the " anything is possible"? i mean i know that in some theories god and ghosts and saints and angles were just created out of fear to get out of the darkness but there is a little thing called faith and belief. to be precise this topic is way out of our understanding there is a lot of what ifs and surely science and prove every bit of piece of evidence with a cause and effect but there still leaves to many holes for what if.

and nah vamps and werewolf sorry... never really was a twilight fan.

Quote from soulless

and nah vamps and werewolf sorry... never really was a twilight fan.

Precisely. You prefer ghosts so they're the ones you're believing in, but that is a completely irrational way of selecting belief. I'd like to believe that there's a planet made entirely out of chocolate somewhere, but I don't.

so you don't agree with the " anything is possible"? i mean i know that in some theories god and ghosts and saints and angles were just created out of fear to get out of the darkness but there is a little thing called faith and belief. to be precise this topic is way out of our understanding there is a lot of what ifs and surely science and prove every bit of piece of evidence with a cause and effect but there still leaves to many holes for what if.

Yes. There are many holes that can be filled with a "what if". There are trillions of them. "What if gravity is an illusion and it's just a huge coincidence that objects appear to be attracted to each other in ratio with the inverse square of their mass and distance". The point I'm trying to make is that it is ludicrous to fixate on any one of these trillions of possibilities and claim it's true with no supporting evidence.

but that's entirely up to you. there are people who guide there lives with fact and there are those who guide with belief. the only way i can prove to you is if i came to your house and showed you a ghost. then two people would have seen it but what makes you think they will believe you and i? though you have proven a steady case on that ghost do not exist i think hands on experience is way more fact based then any science can prove.

but hey. thats just me.

Dammit. I've run into a wall of faith again. I hate it when debates turn out to be subjective.

Debates are always subjective, otherwise there'd be nothing to debate because no one would disagree. I would have thought, based on your obvious intelligence, you would have realized that?