Paranormal energy (ghosts) are real.

=========== INTRODUCTION =========== Apparently PRO is oblivious to his own resolution: "I am now going to try to convince you that ghosts, for simpler phrase, are completely and one hundred percent real." The only "evidence" PRO has produced for this contention is his own "paranormal experience" which I will address later. All negative arguments, PRO has either misunderstood or failed to refute. ================== AFFIRMATIVE ARGUMENTS ================== CONTENTION 1 PRO states that "[T]hese things have been proven false…However, though many ‘paranormal' experiences have been disproved, there are just the same amount of ones that science has NOT been able to prove (or disprove, for that matter.)." I'll start by pointing out that PRO has very clearly conceded "science has NOT been able to PROVE (emphasis added)" many paranormal experiences. This violates his 1R contention that he will prove that ghosts are "one hundred percent real." Second, PRO has apparently abandoned his ad antiquitatem argument for a burden of proof fallacy.[1] Example (taken directly from source): Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers." Jill: "What is your proof?" Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers." "The burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data)."[1] ____________________________________ CONTENTION 2 CON has now introduced a fallacious appeal to faith. "It's called faith and answers, man." "Faith, by definition, relies on a belief that does not rest on logic or evidence. Faith depends on irrational thought and produces intransigence."[4] PRO has again tried to shift the burden of proof to the negative. Of course I can't come up with a verifiable religion, otherwise I wouldn't be an atheist! Additionally, PRO has conceded that he is also unable to come up with a verifiable religion, thus failing to meet the ACTUAL burden of proof he placed on himself in 1R. ____________________________________ CONTENTION 3 PRO states that "You obviously didn't check my source. My source stated that 48 percent of Americans said that they believed in ghosts, comparative to 45 percent that do not." However, he stated explicitly that: "22 percent of Americans report that they have had some sort of experience with ghosts or paranormal activity, including me. But unless sixty-six million people imagined their experiences, ghosts must exist." In any case, the number of people who believe something does not negate the ad populum fallacy. PRO states that "Sixty-six million people believe that they have had a paranormal experience. Yes, they could be deluded. But not all of them." However, he has not given a SHRED of evidence that a SINGLE ONE of these experiences is valid, other than to point out that there have been a lot of them. The only new argument presented by PRO is his own experience: "We were all situated in the living room. Suddenly, we heard a large crash in our hallway. A very large shelf had fallen over five feet from where its original position was on the wall." Shocking indeed! A shelf falling! At long last we have evidence of the paranormal! Perhaps this explains where the missing socks in the dryer go or why I always seem to be losing my car keys! The shelf was probably poorly balanced. Who HASN'T seen something come crashing down? If this was evidence of the paranormal, there is not a man alive who has not observed it! Given the choice between Newton's theory of gravity and PRO's experience, which he did not, in fact, observe, since he was not in the same room at the time it occurred, I'll take gravity. Additionally, this is yet another example of the infamous, age old "God of the Gaps" fallacy: "Because A is unexplained, it must be caused by X." PRO attempts to use "ghosts" to explain it, however the existence of ghosts is yet unverified! Thus, he begs the question. "Ghosts" is no better an explanation than, say, "quantum fluctuations" or "gremlins" or "a disturbance in the Force!"[3] Thus he has still failed to fulfill the resolution. ____________________________________ CONTENTION 4 Yes, Batman and Superman are fictional characters, so are Casper and the monsters from Scooby-Doo. The non causa pro causa fallacy still stands. Extend my argument. ================= THE NEGATIVE CASE ================= CONTENTION 1 Prolonged exposure to electromagnetism causes low blood pressure, slow pulse, chronic excitation of the nervous system, stress, headaches, dizziness, sleeplessness, irritability, anxiety, and inability to concentrate.[2] This, particularly excitation of the nervous system, stress, and anxiety, explain how one might be more likely to think they have had a paranormal experience. Electromagnetism is usually caused by electronic devices, such as TV's, radios, power lines, and poorly insulated wires, however, the earth itself has its own magnetic field which is stronger in some places and weaker in others. Electromagnetism can also come from the sun.[2] I address why ghosts cannot produce electromagnetic fields in the following argument, which I will clarify for PRO's convenience. ____________________________________ CONTENTION 2 1) To do work requires energy 2) Any physical interaction with the physical world requires energy 3) Ghosts interact with the physical world 4) Therefore ghosts use energy However: 1) "Souls" are composed of energy 2) Ghosts are disembodied souls 3) Without the body, the soul can have no source of energy 4) Ghosts use energy 5) Therefore, ghosts do not exist And: 1) Electromagnetism is a form of energy 2) Ghosts have no source of energy 3) Therefore, ghosts cannot produce electromagnetic fields =========== CONCLUSION =========== PRO ends by again trying to shift the burden of proof to the negative, which, as I have pointed out several time is fallacious.[1] The resolution was not "you cannot prove that ghosts do not exist" (although I believe my negative arguments have done this sufficiently). Therefore, I eagerly await the evidence that ghosts are , in PRO's own words, "completely and one hundred percent real." Until then, NEGATED [1] http://www.nizkor.org... [2] http://www.health4youonline.com... [3] http://skepticwiki.org...