@wanderer said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:
Then don't. When you call it "beliefs" you're directly insulting me. You're calling my mental faculties deficient and my judgment worthless.
Everything is a 'belief' until proven otherwise. I don't call 'the earth being round' a belief because there is conclusive logical evidence confirmed in multiple independent ways that demonstrates it.
The difference - for some folks - can only be made up by being able to offer conclusive evidence for a belief to be transferable. If someone thinks something is true they must be able to conclusively demonstrate that somehow to others.
Transfer to me the conclusive evidence that man has walked on the Moon. Preferably you will be able to take me there so I can walk myself, or repeat the act where I can witness it.
See, this is where I 'believe' you are willing to read responses and argue like an adult. I have no way of knowing that is to be true but I'll act under the assumption that it is.
For starters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings .
Also we have plenty of evidence that human beings have been in space for a pretty long time, participating in increasingly more elaborate activities there as our technology allows. We have GPS, satellites orbiting the globe providing communication and TV, there are agencies in different - competing - nations all engaged in a race to extend their presence there as well as private businesses attempting to do the same.
Nothing about science demands that you must be taken to a place or watch a thing happen. In fact that's quite irrelevant since we began with the assumption that the human mind can be tricked - the evidence for some of humanity's greatest leaps has been found on the back of envelopes, notepads and plain text digital files. So if you had the expertise (I don't) you could read the documentation of how the Apollo missions were carried out, what the physics and engineering behind the endeavor were, what the plan was and how it was executed, then you could decide if you are satisfied after all.
That's why hard evidence is needed. It's not not because we're sceptics ready to cast down anything that doesn't fit our narrow definitions of the truth but because without a recreatable chain between observation ("...hey, that's weird...") to conclusion ("oh, so THAT's what happened") there must be steps in between someone else can follow from beginning to end and arrive at the same result.
Hard evidence? Ok, bring me a stone from the Moon and prove to me you didn't just pluck that off the side of the road. As with high level mathematics, some types of proof are not accessible to everyone, because they require certain prerequisites. Some of them are physical (getting access to the stone), some are mental (understanding mathematical proof) and some are psychological/evolutionary (developing the senses and abilities to observe supernatural phenomena). This is why I've said that I'm not interested in discussing the subject, and why convincing anyone is completely futile.
Not all of us are scientists. To give you a counter-example I believe in strong cryptography and I use it on a daily basis both at work in the form of RSA keys, to sign my e-mails with GPG, etc - but I am not a cryptologist myself. The extensive source code however is readily available and has been reviewed by those who are independently and now and then someone founds a flaw (see the shellshock exploit, for instance) in which case they aren't vilified, they are celebrated for that discovery.
That's where I was getting at. Having ones 'beliefs' challenged should be something to be thankful for; it's a crucial part of progress. Science doesn't work because a genius has a great idea and then everyone marvels at it and it's there forever afterwards; it works because a bunch of smart, determined people try to poke holes into it and see how it holds up. If it does, great! If it doesn't then it either collapses or becomes refined, the edges are rounded, the exceptions are noted and it moves forward.
Talk to me about being open minded after you've spent over a decade researching this stuff in depth.
No, I am talking to you now. What were the results of your decades of research? What were your methods? Show me.
Or y'know, don't, and just throw fits at anyone who doesn't immediately agree with you.