spontaneous human combustion, haunted houses, UFOs, Elvis is still around, Sasquatch, Loch Ness, Oswald was a patsy, the Bermuda Triangle OR the VRWC really exists?
I'm sorry those are your options and you have to choose one. It's my hunch that BB is going with (none of the above) but I've discussed this with people and my personal favorite is Nessie.
You never let us sceptics have any fun...:)
ReplyDeleteI believe that aliens have invaded Idaho and are using blogs to try to infiltrate our planet.
ReplyDeleteBeth...you've blown my cover!
ReplyDeleteWell here's my rundown:
ReplyDeletespontaneous human combustion - NO
haunted houses - not a problem
UFOs - don't believe in them per se but find it hard to believe we're the only intelligent life in the universe (did I say intelligent life?)
Elvis - this is the weakest conspiracy theory going imo, that he didn't like the Beatles' drug-addicted music and went to work for Nixon and later on went deep undercover you could say. I mean I'm more open to conspiracy theories than your average conservative you could say but this one doesn't have any traction in my book, it's just 'cause we love the guy is all.
Sasquatch - if they're really out there the government would've captured one by now. My friend said even if they did get one they'd cover it up and I asked him why? and he said "they're weird that way."
I gotta break this down into two parts, we're getting into Oswald territory.
Even if we didn't have Oliver Stone to guide us I think the various JFK conspiracy theories are well-thought out, analytical if not plausible but I haven't come to final conclusions yet you could say. For years the CIA did it, now the latest consensus seems to be the Mob but for your rank-and-file conservative all of this is paranoid delusional thinking although the same conservatives just love 24 which every season has some big nefarious government conspiracy at the heart of things so this is their guilty pleasure, a way to get off on conspiracy theories in a hologram sex kind of way but who are they kidding?
ReplyDeleteBermuda Triangle - is it another dimension? Kind of a passe topic in these later years but would you go there on your next vacation?
and now everyone's favorite, the VRWC - fodder for much right-wing humor but with the recent misuse of the Lisa McPherson/Terri Schiavo pictures I'm paying attention. Blogged about this recently but sure enough it's still up there in any google image search, my pastor still acts like there's no newsworthy contradiction here ("Brothers and sisters in today's reading...") and, well anyway it's all kinda weird.
I tried to e-mail you just now and my computer froze, part of that VRWC perhaps?
ReplyDeleteI was reading my e-mail just a half hour ago and the thing went so slow, dangit! then just yesterday after work I went to the local libray just a block away but couldn't find a parking space right away and then when I did everyone was using the computer so I reserved one and the wait was for 45 minutes and do I accept? and I clicked on YES anyway and just went home to have some kielbasa and pierogies. HAHA!! Mr. YouTube frivolous computer user will just have to wait 10 minutes for the matter to clear itself up and by then library closing in about 20 minutes.
ReplyDeleteI knew a fellow back some years that was fascinated by spontaneous human combustion, he had photos and documents and was a fervent believer. Scared the crap out of me so much, I was afraid to light my pipe! There are a few who believe that prehistoric animals still exists in the remote Congo swamps. When a lad in 7th grade, I read Arthur Conan Doyle's Lost World, I was pretty sure a few Allosaurus, triceratops and pterodactyls were lurking over the other side of the pond....
ReplyDeleteWhy do people always need to try to come up with explanations for everything? Sometimes just not knowing is okay, right BB?
ReplyDeleteWell they say Nessie is really a group of Plesiosaurs that got landlocked in Loch Ness, Scotland. So I push the Bigfoot issue with my friend and say well why would the government cover it up if they caught one and he goes "because they're evil taskmasters, they'd make him into a janitor at some Army base in North Carolina."
ReplyDeleteI believe in most of the above, except that I don't really think that Elvis is alive.
ReplyDeleteMost of the things you listed have interesting evidence that point to their existence and well, you know, anything is possible.
Here's an interesting side line. Some have claimed that UFOs live beneath the earth, rather than in outer space, as is evidenced by many USO (Unidentified Submerged Objects) sitings, or flying UFOs that come up out of the Ocean.
This fits really well with another idea that UFOs are demon related. I've heard claims that the Anti-Christ may actually be a UFO and that is why he will be able to do amazing "Signs and Wonders". It's a really interesting thought. I don't dismiss any of this, for just as I just said, anything is possible.
I don't know about the Oswald thing. I guess it's possible, but if they are covering something up, it would be impossible to know exactly what.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the Elvis thing is unbelievably weak. Dunno if this has ever happened but I can think of far better candidates to fake their deaths over but as for UFOs I remember the late Fr. Malachi Martin on the Hannity show saying just what you said, that they are demon-related. LaSalette/Fatima:
ReplyDelete"In the last days Rome itself will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist. The demons of the air together with the Antichrist will perform great wonders on earth and in the atmosphere and men will become more and more perverted..."
As for Oswald whatever happened but I no longer own a copy of the Warren Commission Report, went in the circular file some time ago.
The Elvis thing has a lot of motive issues connected with the idea of making something like that up. The motive is that we like him.
ReplyDeleteThe UFO issue does not have as much motive connected with it because there are some sitings that involve very respectable, credible people who would not have any motive for making up a story that might ruin their credibility.
The Government does not seem quite as interested in covering up stories about UFOs as they used to be.
Another interesting phenomena that gives credence to the idea of UFOs living under the earth and being Demon related is that quite often there is a report of the smell of Sulfur connected with the sitings. Hell is often associated with a place under the earth and with the "Lake of Fire". Sounds sort of Volcanic to me and the smell of Sulfur fits right in with this.
As for Nessy and Sasquatch. That's a strange one, for they are really elusive animals, yet again, I'm not sure if I understand the motive for making these stories up.
to continue from Fatima:
ReplyDelete"...he (the Beast) will fall, and the earth, which will have been in a continual series of evolutions for three days, will open up its fiery bowels and he will be plunged with all his followers into the everlasting chasms of hell..."
so yeah according to this hell is in the middle of the earth. I was thinking about Martin's comments last night, that when people see UFOs it's actually demonic activity at work and it makes more sense than actual aliens from beyond the Horsehead Nebula finding a speck of debris called Earth and landing on it, what are the chances?
Some credulous folk, true-believer types, term themselves cryptozoologists ..like that Tennesse pair that taped up a gorilla suit, put it in a deepfreeze and foisted off as another sasquatch. As Beth noted up aways, we need keep an open mind
ReplyDelete(for example the discovery of the prehistoric fish found still populating the deep a few years back. Tis a bit interesting...the local Indians out here have legends of 'stick people' haunting the pine forests
(especially on dark scary nights)
..and I know of some folks that go to special high places seeking to communicate with angels. New Age stuff, huh?
I wish that I knew more about prophecy than I do. It's actually not my area of expertise, yet I do remember something about Satan's Angels being Tied or maybe it was Chained up for so many years, and than later released (thus a period of not quite as many UFO sitings).
ReplyDeleteThis would explain the pyramids, Greek Mythology and the like, followed by the absence of such "Mythology" and/or UFO sitings, followed by another time, possibly our time, in which UFOs become really common again and perhaps may even one day interact with us again in a more obvious way.
I wonder, though, the distinction between Demons of the Demon Possession and Haunted House type, verses the UFO type, perhaps Satan's "Fallen Angles" that still have bodies. Is there a distinction between Demons in the Spirit World and Satan's UFO type "Fallen Angles"? Evidence seems to point to the answer yes. Watching this whole thing unfold in the Fulfillment of Prophecy is really going to be interesting.
It would be nice to get a Bible Scholar, Prophecy expert involved in this conversation.
BB,
ReplyDelete"New Age Stuff, huh?"
Interesting that you should say that, BB, for that is something I was tempted to mention, but left out. The UFO phenomena has also been connected to the New Age Movement. I've heard some people suggest that maybe they even started it. Even this fits Scripture, for the main purpose of the Anti-Christ and his Fallen Angels is to deceive the masses.
The initial message of the Anti-Christ is going to be the promise of Peace. What better way to encourage this than to suggest that there are many paths to God and that all religions are true.
Jesus says, however, that "Jesus saith unto him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me.'" (John 14:6, KJV). Because of this verse, Christianity rejects New Age thinking.
There's always the coelecanth, that prehistoric fish found off the coast of Japan but as for Sasquatch, my friend is a big believer but I'm not. Saw a thing a few days ago on the Internet, Israeli researcher claims Moses was on psychedelic drugs when he was given the Ten Commandments. Makes ya think but which one?
ReplyDeleteWell lista as far as I know that 19th century Augustinian nun, Anne Catherine Emmerich, the one who inspired Mel Gibson divided demons into two groupings. There are the devils in hell and in the second group are the demons of the air inhabiting certain spheres each influencing mankind in their own way but negatively. These were the original ones who rebelled with Lucifer but had second thoughts and so the first group was hurled into hell but the others are held midair you could say, Emmerich has them being condemned at the Final Judgement. This is dangerous territory though as Emmerich is not Scripture, far from it and was even known to say an anti-Semitic thing or two.
ReplyDelete(free-range and far-roving discussions, that's what we get at this blog)
ReplyDeleteFunny Z,
ReplyDeleteThe Ten Commandments make sense. I doubt that anything so logical and accurate can come from someone on drugs?
As for Sasquatch, if UFOs exist, which I'm quite confident they do, than I don't see any reason to disbelieve some of the other things that large numbers of people have claimed to see.
I would think that the Demons without bodies (in the Spirit World) would be the ones who were punished more harshly than those beneath the earth, that appear to still have UFO bodies.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't help that folks excerbate the situation: you know,
ReplyDeletethe college kids that sent up helium balloons with luminary candles hanging from them one night; had every squad car in town out and half the locals running into the streets with sidearms...or the character in Missouri that spent months running up and down creek beds with large wooden feet strapped on...they combed the woods for ol Sasq on that one. heh
This April Fools day, some enterprizing team hit the downtown, put up crime scene tape
and made a few chalk body drawings on the side walk. heh (no it was
NOT me) I shall remain extremely sceptical until I can examine the dead body of a UFO pilot, horny demon, two-headed gorgon, smelly Sasquatch or diaphanous ghost.
Admittedly a saintly attribute..
Thomas, I think. As Z notes, free ranging discussion and "BB-none of the above. Tis fun, though, even for a party-pooper. :)
BB,
ReplyDeleteYour example shows exactly why some of these things can be true. Just because someone fakes a Crime Scene for a Crime that never happened does not change the fact that we all know that Crime does in fact happen. When people insist on definite proof of everything, they have trouble believing in much of anything.
"When people insist on definite proof of everything, they have trouble believing in much of anything." Well, it helps us withstand advertising and politicians. I guess being in explosives science made me aware of rigorous proof..seems to work better than hoping, wishing, or
ReplyDeletegambling you don't get blown to bits. Belief without proof can be just as troublesome as not believing in much of anything, IMO. Curious, though, why would
making fake sasquatch footprints
show "exactly why these things can be true" prove the existence of sasquatch? I proves the existence of a guy faking it...does it not?
Well, that's true. I guess I would rather not be blown up. lol.
ReplyDeleteEvidence that continues to come in over time, though, is more impressive than just guessing based on what appears to be so when observed over shorter time periods, such as Advertising and Political Speeches.
No, BB. It was the fake Crime Scene that I used as an example. Weren't you listening?
And also the phrase "exactly why these things can be true" implies only possibility, not proof. The point is that if the presence of a fake Crime Scene, does not prove that Crime does not exist, than the presence of fake foot prints does not prove that Sasquatch does not exist.
Now, Lista, you a drawing us into the area of constructive vs noncostructive proofs..
ReplyDelete"Many nonconstructive proofs assume the non-existence of the thing whose existence is required to be proven, and deduce a contradiction. The non-existence of the thing has therefore been shown to be logically impossible, and yet an actual example of the thing has not been found." ..which gets into logic-chopping, an uncomfortable area for an old
pragmatist. :)
BB,
ReplyDeleteThe word "Proof" is what gets us all messed up because there are levels a "Faith" and "Belief" and the lowest level is just being opened to the possibility. A little higher level is considering something not only possible, but even probable. Neither of these conclusions requires "Proof".
Sometimes two people get into a discussion and neither can "Prove" their point and yet they both scream at the top of their lungs "Prove it!". This is so silly. If neither the existence, nor non-existence of something can be proven, then we are in the realm of trying to guess how likely it is and "Proof" is not the issue, only Evidence.
I thought about the psychedelic angle re Moses and drugs or no the Big 10 just make so much sense. Some of the visions of Emmerich were downright weird though if you read some of them, makes you wonder. I worked with a woman once who said she was going through a tough time and the late Padre Pio appeared to her and helped her. Personally I believe her but who's to say?
ReplyDeleteYou may be touching on something, Z. Many primitive religions rely on psychodelics for their visions and out-of-body 'uber reality' ecstatic experiences..make prophecies, cure sick, etc. No drugs? No problem..they fast for
ReplyDeleteweeks (common American Indian) until visions appear. Then, we have the Greeks with their Bacchanalia..drunken orgy, where
they felt closer to their dieties.
One wonders about self-hypnosis
(Joan of Arc?)(Nordic berserkers?)
as well as other practices (Hindu mystics) which attempt to reach some higher spiritual plane. It is a bit interesting, but we need recall that our knowledge has grown since earlier times and we can observe 'in context' or objective outsiders. We likely all have our opinion about the source, development, delivery, of the 10 Commandments...but we can hardly argue their wisdom.
BB,
ReplyDeleteI guess I was thinking about a comment you made further up on this Comment Thread. Yesterday at 5:09 PM, you said that "Rigorous Proof..seems to work better than hoping, wishing, or gambling you don't get blown to bits.".
As I thought more on this, I was thinking about the factor of Risk. When the Risk is High, you want to have very good Proof before you try something that could be Dangerous. Believing in Sasquatch carries with it no real Danger or Risk and that is why absolute Proof is not needed in this case.
Believing in God doesn't carry any Risk either. In fact, just the opposite is true. Not believing in God is what carries the Risk because if what Christians are saying is correct, those who do not believe are not going to end up in a good place when they die, so if Risk is the factor that causes a need for Proof, I would say that Proving that God does not exist, would be more important than Proving that He does.
Unfortunately, though, there is no Proof either way in this matter. So what do we Prove when we can't Prove that something exists or that it doesn't. Well, we Prove that we can not find the answer to this Question Scientifically.
There is Evidence, though, supporting both sides. I don't know that I would want to take the Risk of being wrong on this one. Believing is the safer of the two positions.
The fact that there is Evidence supporting the existence of God makes Belief in it Rational. As long as there is Evidence supporting one's point of view it is not Blind Faith.
"So what is the Evidence?", you say. Well, mostly it is because of the intricacies within the world around us that point to the presence of "Intelligent Design".
The Evidence of most of the things listed on this Post are the sitings. In court this is called Eye Witness Testimony.
BB,
ReplyDeleteYesterday at 5:35 PM, you said something about "Constructive verses Nonconstructive Proofs". I'm guessing that this has something to do with Chemistry.
In relation to Debate, though, each person has to either Prove or show Evidence of their Position. If the Debate is about whether or not something Exists, than those who Believe need to show Evidence that it Exists and those who do not need to show Evidence that is does not.
Z,
When people say they experience things and see things, I usually do believe it. What I never am too sure of is what exactly that something that the person Experienced or Saw actually was.
The Bible makes mention of both Angles and Demons, but not Ghosts. The absence of this subject in the Scriptures bothers me a little and makes me wonder what these Ghosts actually are. In the case of a Haunted House, it is easy to call these Spirits Demons, yet when the experience is more positive, this Explanation doesn't fit quite as well, except that Satan does sometimes appear as an "Angel of Light". See 2 Corinthians 11:14.
BB,
Well, I think Fasting is way more Healthy than taking Psychedelic Drugs. Christians and Jews do not believe in the use of Drugs to produce Visions, nor do they believe in Orgies or Self-Hypnosis, though they do believe in Fasting, so if you want to guess which was used in Moses' case, stick to the Religion that he Believed in.
I guess I should add to my most recent Comment above that another Evidence of God is our Personal Experiences relating to God in our hearts and for some even direct Visions. Eye Witness Testimony holds Weight in Court, so when not in Court, why are we so prone to disregard it?
This is why I believe in Fatima, you had the Miracle of the Sun on Oct. 13, 1917 so it doesn't pose a problem for me. Lots of things the Saints have written down through the centuries I really don't have an opinion when the subject is their visions or their take on prophecy. I'm not Bill Maherish about it but I don't swallow it hook line and sinker either.
ReplyDeleteAs you would expect, I have some problems with 'eye-witness testimony' of the legal sort. The classic problem is exemplified by those law classes where someone rushes in screaming profanities, shoots the professor and exits.
ReplyDeleteIt is all fake, of course. Each
student (witness) is interviewed and a variety of descriptions ensues. Circumstantial evidence, while harder (eg ballistics signatures, DNA, blood typing) can be tampered with in the same way an eyewitness can lie under oath, or be mistaken. Consider some court testimony about a specific time, circumstance, happening may take place over a year later, and of course lawyers rehearse witness testimony. (among other weird stuff, I was at one time military defense counsel in Court-Martial proceedings and later contributor to forensics writings: not to prove credibility, but where I come up with my ideas) Circumstantial evidence does not change, while testimony may: consider the recent case in Germany--a specific DNA started showing up at murders, one after another. Over time, these became classified as 'the DNA serial killer. Just a couple weeks back, the source of the DNA was traced to a woman that worked at the q-tip factory!!. The law made some reasonable assumptions, but the science was correct. I find the miracles and relics of the middle ages as kind of marketing of the times; the risk of believing or not believing in a higher power (Pascal's Wager..we may have discussed it prior) is, as a well-known religion professor informed me, not really a Yes/No proposition, the reality being there are hundreds if not thousands of religious beliefs which tender the same bet, each believing they are the true one.
That said, believing what we want to believe is what us humans do and there must be merit in it, for we have thrived, have we not?
BB,
ReplyDeleteYou are talking as if you think that there is no such thing as Proving anything and perhaps in a way you are right, yet we do have to Believe in something. It's really not good to be so Resistant to Evidence that we Disregard everything and Believe nothing.
Lista,
ReplyDeleteTechnical proof is either by objective logic or mathematics. I think I am pondering 'proof' being bandied about in a subjective manner. I had a HS Literature teacher whose favorite quote was from Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice.."the truth will out". I think I may have used it myself on my guilty-looking kids when they were knee-high. Example: when
Nazi Germany invaded Poland in 1939, the citizens believed Poland had started it. The 'proof' was in Hitler's statement (and the Germans dressed up as Polish soldiers fomenting a fake event)
It wasn't until long afterwards that some found out...and longer still that some were convinced, but ultimately, the 'truth will out'. Truth is a different subject, one which Pilate found
need to question..and to which Pilate was given no answer. (John 18:38) All of which is leading us further astray from Z's conjectures regarding the denizen of Lake Ness. :)
BB,
ReplyDeleteIn a subtle way, the subject of this Post is in fact, Faith and Belief, for he wants to know which of the above we the most Believe in. He didn't mention God or Religion, but the subject is similar because the Existence of God is also something that can not be absolutely Proved. It is based on Subjective Experiences and Testimony and if you haven't experienced it yourself, than you will choose to Believe it or not.
BB, being of liberal tendencies yourself is there anything to Hillary's VRWC??
ReplyDeleteNah. Perception, a lot of people
ReplyDeletedid'nt like her or Bill. Wait a week and you will hear of the vast left wing conspiracy, if you haven't yet. Its like if things don't go our way....its a conspiracy, ya know?
You know what's weird about this recent violence we've been having? Some guy shoots up immigrants in upstate New York and just yesterday three police officers are killed in Pittsburgh by some man who feared Obama was gonna take away his guns. Now I haven't heard this yet but you know the liberals are thinking it, both incidents make the right-wing look bad and when are we gonna blame Rush?
ReplyDeleteNever crossed my mind. But, I suppose a lunatic could be fired up by ol Rush? More likely, like a lot of these cases recently, it was the job loss problem. Nothing like a flack jacket and some assault weapons. Small wonder law enforcement dislikes the NRA...
ReplyDelete