Can the dead talk to us?

[naomi24]

Something a bit different to talk about. Last night's offering from 4thought TV.

The presenter mentions controlled experiments that suggest it is a reality – personally I don’t know of any experiments that are verified - but he also says he seems to have a faculty of mind that takes his awareness beyond his physical five senses to become aware of things that others simply cannot be aware of. Is that possible?

http://www.4thought.t...dy-byng?autoplay=true

[Old_Geezer]

Ah I assumed it was programme length, say 30 odd minutes minimum.

[naomi24]

Mike, I know several people who live in houses they inherited from their parents - and the aristocracy do it all the time. ;o)

[naomi24]

OG, 4thought TV is a little bit tacked on to the end of Channel 4 news just before 8pm every week night.

[jake-the-peg]

So rather than being a rationalist or Atheist you're a "strong" agnostic? a la Huxley?

Someone who not only professes not to know whether God exists but thinks it's impossible for anyone to know?

[naomi24]

Jake, What on earth are you talking about? Why bring God into this?

[Old_Geezer]

Ok watched it. Basically an account of a medium giving a brief chat on "their gift".

Whilst one can understand skepticism; from personal experience I know at least some of these mediums can insist unlikely information it the case, that turns out to be true, and that they could not have known from "normal" means and which they certainly were not fed. So it is sad in some ways that some feel they have to dismiss the possibility out of hand. Whenever I start to feel it all sounds irrational and unlikely I remind myself I've experienced things that simply can not be dismissed easily, I'd have to deny my experiences and that would make no sense.

[naomi24]

OG, my thoughts exactly.

[Khandro]

naomi; //unlike the religious, I don’t claim to know the cause of people’s experiences.// I don't believe all the "relgious" do. Could you please expand on that.

[naomi24]

Khandro, my pleasure. In my experience the religious generally connect these things to God and religion in some way – I don’t.

[LazyGun]

On a related note, you might find the attached links of interest. To summarise, 2 psychics, confident of their ability, recently agreed to a test under scientific conditions. The results were negative - no better than chance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20145664
http://www.guardian.c...hics-scientific-trial

So its another in the long list of trials which have failed to demonstrate psychic or mediumship abilities. It is telling I think that in this most recent test, one of the mediums commented on the results, saying that they needed face to face contact with their subject. This, despite signing a disclaimer and verbally confirming they were happy and confident that their abilities would still manifest under the conditions of the trial.

The problem with claims of extrasensory abilities is simply that they do not hold up when examined. Despite many anecdotal claims of the ability, there is little or no evidence to support such a claim under validated and controlled conditions.

Nor can anyone offer a plausible biochemical and neurological mechanism by which such abilities might work that are consistent with the laws of physics. Given this lack of evidence, given the lack of a plausible mechanism, I cannot quite understand why people continue to exhibit faith that such powers exist.

Now I know its true that we cannot claim to have an exhaustive and complete understanding of physics and the architecture of the brain. We do not need to though to assess these claims of psychic ability. We merely have to test it, under controlled conditions. And there is simply no evidence to suggest such powers exist.

[naomi24]

LG, I take nothing on ‘faith’ – I want evidence. Personal experiences, which I can’t reproduce and present to you for examination – if only! - leave me with no alternative but to believe there are things happening in the world that we simply don’t understand. Would you concede that the cause could be something we have never yet encountered, and therefore, since we don’t know what we’re actually looking for, it’s possible that the equipment we’re using isn’t capable of providing the answers?

[modeller]

#So what's the difference between that and the extraordinary claims of the religous?#

There is a vast difference ; telepathic experiences are here on earth and although not yet understood they are widely known about in humans and animals. Many dogs have an enhanced sense of " knowing " something has happened to their owners miles away.
.

[ummmm]

My Nan, even though she suffers with dementia, knew her twin brother had died before she was told.

[modeller]

Did she tell you, before you or the family had been told. ?

[ummmm]

My mum went to see her and she said 'I'm not a twin anymore' before anything was said to her. She stopped talking about him after that.

[Khandro]

naomi // the religious generally connect these things to God and religion in some way//. I think you are confusing religion with spiritualism, neither Christianity, Islam, Buddhism nor any other major religion I can think of supports the possibility of talking directly to the dead. It might exist in 'tribal' societies though.

[LazyGun]

@Naomi - It would be an unwise scientist who claimed to know everything :)

Balance of probabilities, on the basis of our current understanding - Telepathy has not been demonstrated under controlled conditions, and there have been plenty of attempts, with well designed and controlled trials. Nor has anyone been able to posit a plausible mechanism by which such powers could work.

I am well aware that people are often convinced that such abilities exist - Modeller has posted their certainty that such powers can happen- and there are lots of anecdotal evidence about human and animal telepathy.I will continue to be highly sceptical of such claims until someone can show me some controlled, validated evidence ;) There is a guy called Rupert Sheldrake who has made claims of proving the existence of "telephone telepathy" and also animal telepathy - but his trial design, number of experiments and controls leave a lot to be desired and certainly do not merit his positive assertions of proof.

What we do know about how the mind works is how easily we can fool ourselves.Dreams as memories. False memories. imperfect recall. corroboration bias.The mind can be a very imperfect organism :)

[naomi24]

Khandro, // I think you are confusing religion with spiritualism, neither Christianity, Islam, Buddhism nor any other major religion I can think of supports the possibility of talking directly to the dead.//

You are mistaken. I’m confusing nothing. Spiritualism is an officially recognised religion with its own churches – in fact one of my best friends is a church-going spiritualist. Another, a real bible-thumping Anglican, believes that ‘clairvoyance’ (I dislike that word intensely), and everything else deemed ‘supernatural’, ghosts included, come directly from the Devil – oh, except for anything he thinks comes from God – like Jesus meeting with Moses for example. That ‘ghost’ didn’t come from the Devil. ;o)

LG, //@Naomi - It would be an unwise scientist who claimed to know everything :)//

I’m pleased to hear it. :o)

//on the basis of our current understanding//

Exactly – on the basis of our ‘current’ understanding. Scepticism is healthy – as is curiosity.

//What we do know about how the mind works is how easily we can fool ourselves.//

That’s true, but sometimes our experiences are physical and shared, and therefore cannot possibly be construed as tricks of the mind.

[jake-the-peg]

I think Naomi I'm just very confused

You take the religious to task (I think quite rightly) for irrational beliefs, and superstitions - didn't you just suggest some google "Innacurate science Koran"

Yet when the subject turns to ghosts and voices from beyond the dead you abandon rationalism and take the same "science cant explain everything" sort of tack that we so often get from people like keyplus.

I just don't quite see how those two sit together with you because they seem contradictory to me.

From where I stand Ghosts talking to us from beyond the grave falls in exactly the same category as carpenters turning water into wine.

Now I can see the point about the authority of religion and that's a good point but really you either go with rational investigation or you dont

[naomi24]

Jake, //From where I stand Ghosts talking to us from beyond the grave falls in exactly the same category as carpenters turning water into wine.//

That’s because as someone who has never experienced something you really can’t explain it’s the only place you’ve ever stood. I think you - and many others - are making a big mistake in confusing this with the superstition of religion. I cannot deny my own experiences – it would be irrational to do so. Having said that, since I don’t believe the ‘supernatural’ exists, it follows that I think my experiences emanated from natural causes even though I have no idea what those causes are. I relish rational investigation – always - but since rational investigation into this subject has so far drawn a blank, I’m all for continuing with it, perhaps with different equipment in the future. I’d love to find the answer.

Yes, I did tell someone to google the inaccurate science of the Koran – because it is inaccurate.