Who is to provide proof?

So I am having a conversation/debate with an individual on a different site. One individual posted that ghosts don’t exist. Multiple people, including myself says otherwise. I simply asked if the individual can prove that the paranormal is non-existent. Another individual came in their defense and told me it’s impossible to prove a negative, but it is the beilever’s responsibility to provide proof.

Why must the believer provide proof in the act of defending their belief when one comes without proof of the opposite? Should I waste energy providing proof if one comes to me to tell me what I believe in doesn’t exist?

it is hard to can someone to believe that ghosts do exist. is more question does spirits exist from the grave?

a couple of weeks ago, I happened go through photos on a website that had 25 to 50 photos that somewhat ghostly images behind a real person in a photo.

read anything in my life, that a ghost talk to a real person, but only a real person see the ghost.

everybody that has a discussion on the subject that we had in the past on the forum. where really does the spirits comes from?

most science fiction tv shows, especially dr. who or star trek, would use time ripple effect that cause time opening in time and space. which allows spirits to enter our space and time.

scientists believe that people have the ability of esp and sychronity that I believe that give the edge of sense things that average person doesn't know to active, it isn't natural to them. but, we have this six sense ability, but more natural not something turn or off at will. it just happen.

only way, you prove there are ghosts, you and someone see the ghost at the same time. it not an illusion, a fact.

The believer must provide the evidence because science works that way. For example, the General Theory of Relativity has made many claims. Some of which even Einstein did not believe, but as technology has improved, evidence has been found.

The word, spirit, comes from a Latin word that means wind or breath. I think that Iron Age people thought of wind as a physical manifestation of God, and they thought of breath as a manifestation of a life. Ghost and spirit mean the same thing in modern language. So, people wonder where does the ghost go when it leaves the body? In that way ghosts fill part of human tradition. So, I suppose the first question which must want an answer, "When did we stop believing that the lack of breath signaled a ghost's escape from the body?

the post above, when or why does a spirit enter a living body, when the living body take a breath of air?

in Hollywood, they have like this concept of the human touch or a breath of life into a human body that the spirit can control the soul of a live human body for decades.

you see more in movies and tv, a breath of air from one mouth through another mouth or breathe of air goes another nose to have a spirit comes into another human body.

Hollywood used have the host of spirit psychical touch someone's body absorbed the spirit into a new host they don't this much these days, if you saw " fallen " in 1998, you know why!

one of the better versions of movie or tv version of this tech. of have the spirit come one mouth or nose enter through another nose or mouth. a 90's version of " the outer limits ".

the episode two police detectives chase after a serial killer that his spirit can leap into anybody's body just before the host dies.

at the end of episode, the detectives corners the host of his new victim, but now, the detectives know how to kill the spirit. they learned the spirit is trap inbetween be absorb in a new host that how it dies. they can't let the spirit enter living being, it must be trapped into a dead body or enter a dead body. outside the host without no place to go, it will die.

the two detectives finally corner the serial killer, the serial killer brag that if they kill him, he will escape again. the male detective shot him right into the heart, but the killer shot the detective in the guts. he fall to the ground.

other detective, who is the woman, goes to his aid, but the male detective dies in her arms. of course, she starting cry, but she turned back toward the dead killer, and see the spirit come out of the killer's mouth.

then she realize the spirit comes after her. she smiles at the spirit. all sudden, she hold her gun to her mouth, her last word at the spirit,

this end of the line, a*****e!

before the spirit move quick to absorb her, she kills herself. then the spirit dissolve into non ness.

this where whole idea to me, if there is ghosts are real, because where is the proof? where is everyone can't see them? are they friendly or evil? can they kill?

is not enough proof that ghosts do exist.

Do you also believe in vampires, werewolves, zombies?

Do you believe that the Dodo bird still exists?

Is the world hollow with lizard people living inside with mammoths as their pets?

When someone claims the world is flat, do they need proof?

Was Michael Jackson an alien from outer soace?

Was President Obama not really born in the USA, even though there is proof that he was?

Are leprechauns running around Ireland?

Why don’t we all just believe anything we’re told, even if there is no proof of it?

Because things like facts and evidence matter.

Why does the science work that way? Why should it only work that way?




I feel like debates are really one sided when it comes about the existence of something. I may have a flawed perspective, but it sounds a bit idiotic. Many individuals may not have a certain belief off the fact they don’t know, yet can challenge any believer saying that individual believes in something false. It doesn’t matter if the believer is defending or attacking, they must have more information, put in more effort and remain mature and logical in order to win in an debate. Yet, it doesn’t work well when the individual the believer is debating may be closed minded, or simply a troll will not put forth a solid argument, but sit there with a solid non-belief.

Are you debating beliefs or facts?

Your OP implies you are arguing about FACTS - There IS / There IS NOT.

This is quite different from I Believe there is / I Don't Believe there is, and even I Do Believe There Is Not


And if you drill down to the nitty-gritty, it will be a discussion along the lines of Emeritus' posts on "Truth"

At the time I was debating beliefs and facts. Being told that no matter which one, if I believe in something, or the facts that are there (i.e. ghosts are real) I must come up with the evidence and facts, even though I may be the defender.

Back in the day, people believed that illnesses were caused by evil spirits (ghosts), demons, witchcraft, etc.

Then some scientists pondered the nature of things and believed that illnesses were caused by tiny things that could not be seen with naked eye... bacteria & viruses...

People of the day threw down the BS flag.

The scientists eventually proved their theory to be true, with facts and evidence.

Some people for many years refused to believe and called the scientists witches and followers of Satan.

Maybe the scientists were wrong... even though they have evidence supporting their beliefs....

...even though those other people to this day have no proof that illness is caused by evil spirits (ghosts), demons, witchcraft, etc., maybe they were right... maybe illness is caused by evil spirits (ghosts), demons, witchcraft, etc.

back in the days, use leeches on a wounds to suck out the infection of the wounds. I think some doubts if the leeches were the most practices used on a wound.

definitely, back then, the town people hanged ugly male nurses that worn blue dresses to put leeches on wounds. there were a lot of ugly male nurses back then.

back then, they didn't called them: " male nurses ". they just called male nurses back then, just called them: " ugly white women ".

In one of my classes somewhere I had heard a story - maybe an old wives tale, or maybe embellished some ...(or maybe a joke):

One of these international relief / support organizations was trying to explain to some 3rd world community that pregnancy occurs when a husband and wife are "together". But the women would not believe it because, they argued, even when the husbands were away on long fishing or hunting trips, they still got pregnant.

Don't be cracking jokes on the blue dress... them is fight'n words...

PS
Leeches are fun... especially if you are a porn star and your leech gives you a lot of money not to talk about your affair.

back then, leeches wore red dresses to such on their victims, leeches thought blue dresses make them look fat.