FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


What's your most compelling evidence for unproven phenomena?





chasbeen
In a nutshell for example:
"
A UFO shaped like a saucer landed in your local park. The aliens left some gadgets behind that seem to defy known laws of physics"
The above would score a 10/10. Complete proof of superior life form visiting earth.

Here is a real list/league table of phenomena with (In my opinion) a score proving likeliness of existence.
Ghosts 8/10
Telepathy 7/10
Telekinesis 7/10
UFO/Aliens 3/10
Loch Ness Monster, Big foot etc 2/10

Have you go a list and with high scores? What is the best proof that made the high score possible?
watersoul
Hi Chasbeen,

You probably know from reading my posts over the years that I am pretty much a skeptic about anything and everything which has no peer reviewed evidence to back it up.

As far as my thoughts on 'unprovable' things go, I have zero belief in ghosts, gods, demons, fairies, angels, pixies, trolls (outside of the digital world at least), monsters, vampires, souls, afterlifes, indigo children, reiki, homeopathy, tarot cards, astral projection, astrology, numerology, spirit guides and everything in between.

Regarding other possible life forms, from single cell to sentient beings in the universe, my thoughts are that we have no proof to confirm or deny such things, but with the billions of stars out there it would be rather arrogant to assume that Earth is the only place that life has evolved.
chasbeen
Yes WS it would be hard to put zero next to them all. Loch Ness "Nessie" would be the first. I'm thinking I saw a ghost once though, so in that case I would find it hard to put zero next to that.It would be an admission that I imagined it.
watersoul
Ah, totally understand any anecdotal evidence which you may have witnessed yourself being influential.
I'm sure if I see anything in life which is out of the ordinary or unexplainable then my position would change. To date though, I've seen nothing to draw me towards believing in anything as mentioned in my list previously. I do not say such things do not exist though, just that I have zero belief in any of them. My position is not unchangeable though Wink
nickfyoung
It does seem strange that some one who believes in a God can also believe in the 'spiritual' zone. So tarot card reading and seance type stuff is believable because to believe in a God is to believe in the spiritual. To believe in God is to believe in the 'god of this world' which is certainly spiritual. Some explain it as a fourth dimension where we live in three dimensions and the spiritual realm is the fourth. Because they believe that we are essentially spirit living in a temporary body we can relate better in the spiritual realm. So all that spiritual type stuff is quite believable but not so sure about aliens etc.
watersoul
As I said, I don't believe in any of it and to be blunt I consider it all as silly nonsense.
If any of that unprovable stuff helps you or anyone else out in getting through life while harming no-one else then good luck, I just ignore it and carry on concentrating on the 'real' world which I'm able to influence and adapt to as needed.
deanhills
I'm open for evidence, as I think one has to be open for being wrong. How many centuries did mankind think the world was flat? Then round? And then not quite so round?

Having said that, I'm perhaps a little too rational as I haven't seen evidence of miracles yet, other than the real ones that happen in our daily lives and for which there is usually a scientific explanation.
chasbeen
DH I have a curious interest in statistics.
I don't believe in Religion I'm afraid but I do feel certain things happen at certain times for a reason.
Of course I cannot accurately record the odds on some of the things that have happened to me.
Neither can I relate these events to you.

CHANCE THAT WE ARE BEING CONTROLLED BY A SUPERIOR INTELIGENCE OUTSIDE OUR CONTROL???
8
deanhills
chasbeen wrote:
DH I have a curious interest in statistics.
I don't believe in Religion I'm afraid but I do feel certain things happen at certain times for a reason.
Of course I cannot accurately record the odds on some of the things that have happened to me.
Neither can I relate these events to you.

CHANCE THAT WE ARE BEING CONTROLLED BY A SUPERIOR INTELIGENCE OUTSIDE OUR CONTROL???
8
AHA! You've touched a cord here. What does 8 mean? I'm using 8 every where. I picked it up from a previous boss who was from Malaysia. All of his user names have one or two eights in them. The reason I'm using it is both rational, in that it's a number that is very easy for me to remember, and irrational, a number that could bring me luck.

But would be interested to know what 8 is supposed to mean from a superior intelligence point of view.
chasbeen
DH
I mean't 8/10 in relation to things happen at a certain time for a certain reason and these occurrences appear very high odds.
For example:
I was leaving North America and on the very last day I met half the people I had not seen in weeks. I told them I was leaving and that I was sorry I hadn't had a chance to say goodbye.

I ran into these people out shopping but I had been out shopping several times in the same area in the previous weeks.
inoshi
I find the the Baalbek site enigmas in Lebanon to be quite indicative of some unknown yet previously understood phenomenon for quarrying colossal stone blocks. Other sites demonstrate that though not as colossal, similar massive stone blocks were also quarried at other sites and regions as well, in the Middle East.

Question

Inoshi
nickfyoung
deanhills wrote:
chasbeen wrote:
DH I have a curious interest in statistics.
I don't believe in Religion I'm afraid but I do feel certain things happen at certain times for a reason.
Of course I cannot accurately record the odds on some of the things that have happened to me.
Neither can I relate these events to you.

CHANCE THAT WE ARE BEING CONTROLLED BY A SUPERIOR INTELIGENCE OUTSIDE OUR CONTROL???
8
AHA! You've touched a cord here. What does 8 mean? I'm using 8 every where. I picked it up from a previous boss who was from Malaysia. All of his user names have one or two eights in them. The reason I'm using it is both rational, in that it's a number that is very easy for me to remember, and irrational, a number that could bring me luck.

But would be interested to know what 8 is supposed to mean from a superior intelligence point of view.


One take is,

"Eight is the number of Jesus, whose name in Greek is:
I = 10
H = 8
Σ = 200
O = 70
Υ = 400
Σ = 200
Total: 888"

http://www.biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/8.html
deanhills
chasbeen wrote:
DH
I mean't 8/10 in relation to things happen at a certain time for a certain reason and these occurrences appear very high odds.
For example:
I was leaving North America and on the very last day I met half the people I had not seen in weeks. I told them I was leaving and that I was sorry I hadn't had a chance to say goodbye.

I ran into these people out shopping but I had been out shopping several times in the same area in the previous weeks.
Thanks Chas. That's happened to me too. Or an at arms length in relationship person is on your mind and you bump into the person three times in one day. There has to be a law of attraction somewhere. Or my day starts off with missing the first bus, and with everything else I have to wait an equal amount of time. Or like today I get it slap bang on time, and everything else for the day happens the same, zero waiting time.

nickfyoung wrote:
deanhills wrote:
chasbeen wrote:
DH I have a curious interest in statistics.
I don't believe in Religion I'm afraid but I do feel certain things happen at certain times for a reason.
Of course I cannot accurately record the odds on some of the things that have happened to me.
Neither can I relate these events to you.

CHANCE THAT WE ARE BEING CONTROLLED BY A SUPERIOR INTELIGENCE OUTSIDE OUR CONTROL???
8
AHA! You've touched a cord here. What does 8 mean? I'm using 8 every where. I picked it up from a previous boss who was from Malaysia. All of his user names have one or two eights in them. The reason I'm using it is both rational, in that it's a number that is very easy for me to remember, and irrational, a number that could bring me luck.

But would be interested to know what 8 is supposed to mean from a superior intelligence point of view.


One take is,

"Eight is the number of Jesus, whose name in Greek is:
I = 10
H = 8
Σ = 200
O = 70
Υ = 400
Σ = 200
Total: 888"

http://www.biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/8.html
Didn't know that Nick. Thanks for explaining it to me.
Bikerman
nickfyoung wrote:


One take is,

"Eight is the number of Jesus, whose name in Greek is:
I = 10
H = 8
Σ = 200
O = 70
Υ = 400
Σ = 200
Total: 888"

Exlaining? Where, exactly, is it explained? I see no explanation, just a bunch of letters which are given some numeric value which, for all I know, is just invented to fit a pattern.
An explanation would tell me WHY I = 10 and H = 8 etc etc ? Obviously it cannot be the position of that letter in the Greek alphabet because there are not 200 Greek letters, let alone 400. Would you please explain where these numbers came from?*
If you DID know, you would also know that this is a typical example of religious dishonesty. Jesus in Greek is Ἰησοῦς . Notice that there is no repetition of the S symbol, because the constructions in Greek are different. What the apologists do is start with the Anglicised version (Jesus) of the Latin form (Iēsous) of the greek form (Ἰησοῦς) of the Hebrew original (ישוע) - and then lookup those letters in Greek so that they can play their silly number games, but that is NOT 'Jesus' in Greek.

* I'm betting you haven't got a clue, since you have followed your normal practice of just cut-pasting without understanding (or in many cases even reading) the material beforehand.
nickfyoung
Bikerman wrote:
nickfyoung wrote:


One take is,

"Eight is the number of Jesus, whose name in Greek is:
I = 10
H = 8
Σ = 200
O = 70
Υ = 400
Σ = 200
Total: 888"

Exlaining? Where, exactly, is it explained? I see no explanation, just a bunch of letters which are given some numeric value which, for all I know, is just invented to fit a pattern.
An explanation would tell me WHY I = 10 and H = 8 etc etc ? Obviously it cannot be the position of that letter in the Greek alphabet because there are not 200 Greek letters, let alone 400. Would you please explain where these numbers came from?*
If you DID know, you would also know that this is a typical example of religious dishonesty. Jesus in Greek is Ἰησοῦς . Notice that there is no repetition of the S symbol, because the constructions in Greek are different. What the apologists do is start with the Anglicised version (Jesus) of the Latin form (Iēsous) of the greek form (Ἰησοῦς) of the Hebrew original (ישוע) - and then lookup those letters in Greek so that they can play their silly number games, but that is NOT 'Jesus' in Greek.

* I'm betting you haven't got a clue, since you have followed your normal practice of just cut-pasting without understanding (or in many cases even reading) the material beforehand.



You are right. This is the first time I have come across it too. It is taken from an article at the link given which was, http://www.biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/8.html
Bikerman
And you don't see any issue or problem with posting stuff and links that you haven't read and/or don't understand - which means you have no clue how accurate or otherwise it/they may be? You don't see why that might be considered by some, including me, to be bordering on dishonest, since it is generally assumed that people understand what they post - or have, at least, read it ? You don't see that it gives people a very good reason to suppose that ANYTHING you post is quite likely to be not just wrong, but complete nonsense?

Or do you just not care as long as you get chance to get Jesus into the conversation?

I don't particularly mind what you post here, so I'm not speaking as a moderator and I'm not threatening sanctions or post removal or anything like that - I'm genuinely interested in how your basic sense of right and wrong works...
nickfyoung
Bikerman wrote:
And you don't see any issue or problem with posting stuff and links that you haven't read and/or don't understand - which means you have no clue how accurate or otherwise it/they may be? You don't see why that might be considered by some, including me, to be bordering on dishonest, since it is generally assumed that people understand what they post - or have, at least, read it ? You don't see that it gives people a very good reason to suppose that ANYTHING you post is quite likely to be not just wrong, but complete nonsense?

Or do you just not care as long as you get chance to get Jesus into the conversation?


I am beginning to think that you follow me around just to criticize everything I post for some reason. It is almost as if you have some sort of personal vendetta.
What is complete nonsense is your slanderous comments which are completely untrue and unfounded and starting to get a little boring.
If there is something wrong with my posts that you can prove then moderate them, otherwise it is all hot air.
Bikerman
Huh? What new weirdness is this?
You've already said that you didn't read/understand what you posted. So what, exactly, is it that I have said that you consider:
Quote:
complete nonsense
and
Quote:
...slanderous comments which are completely untrue and unfounded

So far as I can tell, I have posted nothing which is not both factually accurate and bleedin' obvious.
nickfyoung
Bikerman

Quote:
And you don't see any issue or problem with posting stuff and links that you haven't read and/or don't understand



I was reading an article and came across an interesting bit so posted it to share it with others who might be interested. I have never posted links that I have not read. That is bordering on dishonest and that is far removed from me.
Bikerman
You certainly HAVE posted links you have not read. You did exactly that in a recent thread in P&R - you posted a link to wiki and the wiki page linked to basically said 'we have nothing on this at the moment'.
Lest this be in doubt. here is exactly what you posted:
NickFGYoung wrote:
Can you elaborate on this sect you keep referring to that I am part of. I am most certainly speaking for evangelical Anglicans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Mainstream.
If one follows the link it is absolutely clear that you did not read it before posting, so don't try this 'I am honest and would never do such a thing' routine - it won't wash, matey.

In any even, the accusation I made was 'not read AND/OR not understood' - you may well have read it (this time) but you certainly didn't understand it...so why would you post something you cannot understand and cannot therefore say is correct....or even sensible?
nickfyoung
I knew you would bring up that recent Wiki link. I posted an article on Wiki that I had read. The link subsequently lead to an empty page. I don't know if it was an error on my part, hardly possible with copy and paste' or on Wiki's part, more likely. Whichever, I can't 'prove' either way so label me dishonest and a liar if you wish.
As for posting articles that I don't fully understand, that would cover many of them. It must be difficult for you to understand the workings of the mind of a lessor intellect.
I would be more likely to post an article that I don't fully understand than not because if I am trying to debate a superior intellect I need the help of other viewpoints when I am having difficulty getting a viewpoint across. I may understand the gist of it in trying to defend my view but not necessarily all the highly technical terminology and logical sequences.
Bikerman
You didn't understand ANY of this posting. You don't even know how they got the numbers which are the whole point of the article. It isn't a case of a few technicalities.

And yes, I do call you dishonest. If you can explain how you posted a link to a blank wiki page if you HAD first read it, then I'll be fascinated to hear, but I don't think such an explanation is credible. It was NOT an error on wiki, the page has never contained content as can easily be checked by looking at the history. It was a straight case of posting what you had not first checked. Denying it just makes it worse, since you compound the original dishonesty. I would never actually have raised the p&r posting if you hadn't denied that you post such links, and called ME dishonest. That I will not put up with.
nickfyoung
The original question.

Quote:
But would be interested to know what 8 is supposed to mean from a superior intelligence point of view.


My reply is

One take is,

"Eight is the number of Jesus, whose name in Greek is:
I = 10
H = 8
Σ = 200
O = 70
Υ = 400
Σ = 200
Total: 888"

http://www.biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/8.html


My comment, " one take is', means someone's viewpoint on the answer to the question, not necessarily mine. The link is there for further explanation if required.
I have explained since that it is the first time I have come across this 'take'. I don't consider it necessary for me to have an intimate knowledge of a topic to post to help someone else.

I will endevour to find the Wiki link in question and try and find out what happened with the link.
Bikerman
Repeating the posting serves no purpose - one can easily scroll back to read the original. Yes, I know that you said 'one take' - that isn't the point. One take might be that pink elephants invented the number 8 in a plot to overthrow the US Government. Why would one not post such a 'take'? Because it is lunatic. If you don't understand something you have no way to say it isn't ridiculous, lunatic or even a wind-up - which is why you shouldn't post stuff you don't understand. The other reason is that there is an implicit assumption that people DO understand what they post, and if you don't then you are misleading people, no matter if non-deliberately. If you post something then naturally one would assume that you post it for a reason - perhaps to agree with, perhaps to disagree with, perhaps to illustrate a point. One would not tend to think that you had posted it without having a clue what it meant and how it was arrived at. That doesn't help anyone as we see - it just introduced a whole layer of confusion. The link doesn't help because the article doesn't explain either.
nickfyoung
I had a look for that Wiki post that didn't work and got to a page where I was at before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Evangelical_Anglicans

This brings you to 75 pages of category but I can't find which one I used that didn't work. Sick of posting links in my email to check them.

So I will have to remain dishonest.
Bikerman
I don't know what you were hoping to find.
The accusation was that you posted a link that you hadn't checked/read. You did. There is nothing you can produce that would refute that, since we have the link and it obviously was not checked before posting...
The accusation of dishonesty follows because when you said that you don't do such things, above, you already KNEW that you had, because I pointed out the other link yesterday.

Anyway, I suggest you drop it and I will not bring it up again unless there are any repeats.#
Is that fair?
nickfyoung
Bikerman wrote:
I don't know what you were hoping to find.
The accusation was that you posted a link that you hadn't checked/read. You did. There is nothing you can produce that would refute that, since we have the link and it obviously was not checked before posting...
The accusation of dishonesty follows because when you said that you don't do such things, above, you already KNEW that you had, because I pointed out the other link yesterday.


Quote:
The accusation was that you posted a link that you hadn't checked[
/quote]

Guilty as charged. I don't generally check links that I post because there is very little chance of an error with copy and paste.

But what you are also saying is that I didn't read the article before posting the link. Why would you think I would deliberately post a link to a blank page. I always search for an article on Google .I will usually go to several such pages from Google till I find the one I want and, 'AFTER READING IT', and it is relevant, I will copy and paste the link into my post. I don't check it after the post is published to see if it is working or not.

In this case, when the link was clicked it went to a blank page. Like I said, I can't explain that so I will have to wear the dishonest label.
watersoul
Back on topic though, numerology is as unproven as pixies, goblins, ghosts, indigo children, trolls (outside of the digital world), elves, demons, gods, dragons, bigfoot, loch ness monster, mermaids, angels, tarot, astrology, unicorns, remote viewing, astral projection, and everything in between.

If anyone has any conclusive evidence to present to the discussion then I'm open to reading about it of course, but I suspect I shall await such a paradigm change in scientific assumptions for quite some time Wink
ocalhoun
watersoul wrote:
Back on topic though, numerology is as unproven as [...]

No, I'd go as far to say it's worse than 'unproven'.
It is disproven.
chasbeen
The golden ratio is that part of numerology? I did a cross search.
I mean is it possible that numerology could be too general a term?
On another extreme, Maths attempts to describe a physical shape but it can never do this completely.
I think that there are attempts to derive meaning from a set of numbers on one side there is science and on the other side....
Nonsense...
Related topics
What did Bush lie about?
Urban Legends About the Iraq War
the 9/11 truth
Bible Verses: Do Disbelievers Go To Hell?
The Middle East Conflict
Re-Incarnation
A question for all you monotheists.
How much water?
Christ coming back before the end of the world
Sea Fossils on Mountain Tops
Is the Universe Rotating?
Are you scared to die?
Libertarians, deregulation, and the current economic crisis.
Stuxnet: nation-on-nation viral first strike...?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.