<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Polterheist</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/</link>
	<description>The official blog of the Skeptologists</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:38:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aardvark Soup</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1888</link>
		<dc:creator>Aardvark Soup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:42:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1888</guid>
		<description>@SeanJJordan

Actually that isn&#039;t such a strange combination. Where I live (west of the Netherlands) about 60% of the people is athiest (or can be called deist, when they say they don&#039;t believe in God but do think there is &#039;something&#039;). But many of them still believe in things like ghosts, UFO&#039;s or homeopathy. When you are atheist that really does not have to mean that you are a skeptic, just that you do not believe in a God or other &#039;divine force&#039;. Of course America differs from West-Europe in this because atheism isn&#039;t that common there, so probably American atheists are more likely to also be skeptics than European atheists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@SeanJJordan</p>
<p>Actually that isn&#8217;t such a strange combination. Where I live (west of the Netherlands) about 60% of the people is athiest (or can be called deist, when they say they don&#8217;t believe in God but do think there is &#8216;something&#8217;). But many of them still believe in things like ghosts, UFO&#8217;s or homeopathy. When you are atheist that really does not have to mean that you are a skeptic, just that you do not believe in a God or other &#8216;divine force&#8217;. Of course America differs from West-Europe in this because atheism isn&#8217;t that common there, so probably American atheists are more likely to also be skeptics than European atheists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jose the Paranormal Skeptic</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1739</link>
		<dc:creator>Jose the Paranormal Skeptic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1739</guid>
		<description>Oooooh a poltergeist!

Somehow, I find sock puppets more convincing than the tale of a would-be burglar being taken down by unseen forces of the paranormal. I wonder if this tale of burglar woe has dodged the typical attempt in logical explanations like most cases of the &quot;paranormal&quot; tend to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oooooh a poltergeist!</p>
<p>Somehow, I find sock puppets more convincing than the tale of a would-be burglar being taken down by unseen forces of the paranormal. I wonder if this tale of burglar woe has dodged the typical attempt in logical explanations like most cases of the &#8220;paranormal&#8221; tend to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1736</link>
		<dc:creator>Max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1736</guid>
		<description>SeanJJordan, of course Christian fundamentalists are &quot;skeptical&quot; about the paranormal (occult) and the New Age movement. They&#039;re also &quot;skeptical&quot; about Islam, Hinduism, and anything else that doesn&#039;t follow the literal interpretation of the Bible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SeanJJordan, of course Christian fundamentalists are &#8220;skeptical&#8221; about the paranormal (occult) and the New Age movement. They&#8217;re also &#8220;skeptical&#8221; about Islam, Hinduism, and anything else that doesn&#8217;t follow the literal interpretation of the Bible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Mason</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1717</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Mason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:57:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1717</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve had a few strange experiences through the years, seeing things and hearing voices for a few seconds. Now I&#039;ve read Susan Blackmore&#039;s book &quot;Conciousness - an introduction&quot; I know that the brain can send a message to the wrong place, thus producing a false audible or visual experience. Who knows what else there is still undiscovered and unexplained in nature, including the human mind.
File under &quot;interesting&quot; and see if an explanation turns up is my response to honestly told mysterious events. Sensible, rational people do have them and don&#039;t regard them as messages from the other side or other woo but know that they don&#039;t understand them. &quot;I don&#039;t know&quot; is a rational and logical response to many things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve had a few strange experiences through the years, seeing things and hearing voices for a few seconds. Now I&#8217;ve read Susan Blackmore&#8217;s book &#8220;Conciousness &#8211; an introduction&#8221; I know that the brain can send a message to the wrong place, thus producing a false audible or visual experience. Who knows what else there is still undiscovered and unexplained in nature, including the human mind.<br />
File under &#8220;interesting&#8221; and see if an explanation turns up is my response to honestly told mysterious events. Sensible, rational people do have them and don&#8217;t regard them as messages from the other side or other woo but know that they don&#8217;t understand them. &#8220;I don&#8217;t know&#8221; is a rational and logical response to many things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Devil's Advocate</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1694</link>
		<dc:creator>Devil's Advocate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 13:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1694</guid>
		<description>I think there&#039;s a difference when one declares he&#039;s proficient in long division before he botches an attempt at long division. 

We all have our thoughts and theories as to how to respond to stories and story-tellers like this. That mine doesn not match another&#039;s does not make either the &#039;correct&#039; response. 

I was impressed far more by the internal inconsistencies of the story-teller than the rather pedestrian story told.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think there&#8217;s a difference when one declares he&#8217;s proficient in long division before he botches an attempt at long division. </p>
<p>We all have our thoughts and theories as to how to respond to stories and story-tellers like this. That mine doesn not match another&#8217;s does not make either the &#8216;correct&#8217; response. </p>
<p>I was impressed far more by the internal inconsistencies of the story-teller than the rather pedestrian story told.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1687</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 02:47:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1687</guid>
		<description>This is an excellent reminder that no amount of rational thought is proof against the compelling feeling we get from our own experiences. I&#039;ve been a hard-headed materialist for at least all of my adult life, but the times I&#039;ve been willing to believe that I may have been dead wrong were always because of personal experiences.

Experiences that, like BEZ&#039;s, were easy to explain rationally by someone who wasn&#039;t there, but left me with an eerie feeling that felt completely unaddressed by explanations that were solely of the mundane.

Skeptics so often fail to appreciate the force of this kind of experience, resulting in rather naive comments like those of Devil&#039;s Advocate in #5. In reality it&#039;s quite easy to be a skeptic about other people&#039;s experiences and still be fooled by our own. (And if you think that makes someone less of a skeptic, you might as well laugh at someone for not being born knowing how to do long division.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an excellent reminder that no amount of rational thought is proof against the compelling feeling we get from our own experiences. I&#8217;ve been a hard-headed materialist for at least all of my adult life, but the times I&#8217;ve been willing to believe that I may have been dead wrong were always because of personal experiences.</p>
<p>Experiences that, like BEZ&#8217;s, were easy to explain rationally by someone who wasn&#8217;t there, but left me with an eerie feeling that felt completely unaddressed by explanations that were solely of the mundane.</p>
<p>Skeptics so often fail to appreciate the force of this kind of experience, resulting in rather naive comments like those of Devil&#8217;s Advocate in #5. In reality it&#8217;s quite easy to be a skeptic about other people&#8217;s experiences and still be fooled by our own. (And if you think that makes someone less of a skeptic, you might as well laugh at someone for not being born knowing how to do long division.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CNoble</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1683</link>
		<dc:creator>CNoble</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 00:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1683</guid>
		<description>@Devil&#039;s Advocate-
All right already.  Let the man up, he&#039;s had enough.  
You probably mean well, and you probably are not indending this, but let&#039;s not smack BEZ around for asking an honest question.  You are most likely correct that his belief that he saw something unexplainable was wrongheaded from the start- but he has had the courage to ask a group of skeptics for their opinion.  Your opinion has been given- one I think is a very likely explanation.  Let&#039;s not be smug.
We *want* people to ask these questions, not be sorry they asked.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Devil&#8217;s Advocate-<br />
All right already.  Let the man up, he&#8217;s had enough.<br />
You probably mean well, and you probably are not indending this, but let&#8217;s not smack BEZ around for asking an honest question.  You are most likely correct that his belief that he saw something unexplainable was wrongheaded from the start- but he has had the courage to ask a group of skeptics for their opinion.  Your opinion has been given- one I think is a very likely explanation.  Let&#8217;s not be smug.<br />
We *want* people to ask these questions, not be sorry they asked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BEZ</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1680</link>
		<dc:creator>BEZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:58:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1680</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t believe I said I thought I had seen an actual ghost. Nor was I setting-up my story so that the paranormal might seem a plausible explanation. I do believe I am science-minded and skeptical but the way you are describing that stance makes it sound a kind of doctrine or party affiliation rather than a way or line of thinking along which some of us are more experienced than others.  

I don&#039;t know how to make it any clearer that I don&#039;t believe in ghosts, a (so-called) after-life, psychism, spirit-worlds, etc. The reason for my bringing this up (aside from honestly trying to square my unbelief with what the event suggested to me at the time) is that programs like the one proposed here are going to come across other skeptical people who really don&#039;t know how to explain unusual phenomena they have encountered. 

I know that you (Devil&#039;s Advocate) mean well in dressing me down concerning my lack of intellectual rigour but this is exactly what will be encountered in the audience the skeptics program hopes to reach - regular, generally skeptical folks, not just nutcases, woo-mongers and those merely hoping to be entertained. Your calling into question my motivation in asking for help in forming a rational explanation for what I saw would, I fear, alienate a number of viewers and potential skeptics.

Nevertheless, I reiterate my appreciation for the points you raised regarding my particular story and apologize to others for holding-forth here. I will not comment further.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t believe I said I thought I had seen an actual ghost. Nor was I setting-up my story so that the paranormal might seem a plausible explanation. I do believe I am science-minded and skeptical but the way you are describing that stance makes it sound a kind of doctrine or party affiliation rather than a way or line of thinking along which some of us are more experienced than others.  </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know how to make it any clearer that I don&#8217;t believe in ghosts, a (so-called) after-life, psychism, spirit-worlds, etc. The reason for my bringing this up (aside from honestly trying to square my unbelief with what the event suggested to me at the time) is that programs like the one proposed here are going to come across other skeptical people who really don&#8217;t know how to explain unusual phenomena they have encountered. </p>
<p>I know that you (Devil&#8217;s Advocate) mean well in dressing me down concerning my lack of intellectual rigour but this is exactly what will be encountered in the audience the skeptics program hopes to reach &#8211; regular, generally skeptical folks, not just nutcases, woo-mongers and those merely hoping to be entertained. Your calling into question my motivation in asking for help in forming a rational explanation for what I saw would, I fear, alienate a number of viewers and potential skeptics.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I reiterate my appreciation for the points you raised regarding my particular story and apologize to others for holding-forth here. I will not comment further.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Devil's Advocate</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1672</link>
		<dc:creator>Devil's Advocate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:46:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1672</guid>
		<description>&quot;Bear in mind that when I’ve told this story in the past almost everyone wants to give it a supernatural spin.&quot;

Are you quite sure you&#039;re a science-minded skeptic? It sounds like you were swayed by what believers in the supernatural felt about your story. Why does that require bearing in mind? 

&quot;Thus my appeal to fellow skeptics and unbelievers.&quot;

I can only speak for myself, but I&#039;d venture a guess that very few skeptics and unbelievers, a number I&#039;d place somewhere in the neighborhood of none, would jump to the paranormal explanation after failing to find a natural explanation. Given the offered details, I think about 99% of them would have responded with pretty much the same points I did. 

You describe yourself as scientific and a skeptic. You were entertaining the possibility of having seen a ghost because of the inability to locate a mundane explanation. How do you reconcile these two things internally? 

Are you *sure* you&#039;re science-minded and skeptical? 

&quot; I am quite sincere (and appreciative).&quot;

You are more than welcome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Bear in mind that when I’ve told this story in the past almost everyone wants to give it a supernatural spin.&#8221;</p>
<p>Are you quite sure you&#8217;re a science-minded skeptic? It sounds like you were swayed by what believers in the supernatural felt about your story. Why does that require bearing in mind? </p>
<p>&#8220;Thus my appeal to fellow skeptics and unbelievers.&#8221;</p>
<p>I can only speak for myself, but I&#8217;d venture a guess that very few skeptics and unbelievers, a number I&#8217;d place somewhere in the neighborhood of none, would jump to the paranormal explanation after failing to find a natural explanation. Given the offered details, I think about 99% of them would have responded with pretty much the same points I did. </p>
<p>You describe yourself as scientific and a skeptic. You were entertaining the possibility of having seen a ghost because of the inability to locate a mundane explanation. How do you reconcile these two things internally? </p>
<p>Are you *sure* you&#8217;re science-minded and skeptical? </p>
<p>&#8221; I am quite sincere (and appreciative).&#8221;</p>
<p>You are more than welcome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BEZ</title>
		<link>http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/17/polterheist/#comment-1660</link>
		<dc:creator>BEZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://skepticblog.org/?p=705#comment-1660</guid>
		<description>&quot;One wonders if you aren’t really hoping no one will be able to normalize your experience - the trajectory of belief and a triumph over reason.&quot;

Untrue. You have given me some &quot;normalizing&quot; points to ponder for which I am grateful and more than willing to grant greater credence than my own &quot;qualms&quot;. Bear in mind that when I&#039;ve told this story in the past almost everyone wants to give it a supernatural spin. Thus my appeal to fellow skeptics and unbelievers. I am quite sincere (and appreciative).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;One wonders if you aren’t really hoping no one will be able to normalize your experience &#8211; the trajectory of belief and a triumph over reason.&#8221;</p>
<p>Untrue. You have given me some &#8220;normalizing&#8221; points to ponder for which I am grateful and more than willing to grant greater credence than my own &#8220;qualms&#8221;. Bear in mind that when I&#8217;ve told this story in the past almost everyone wants to give it a supernatural spin. Thus my appeal to fellow skeptics and unbelievers. I am quite sincere (and appreciative).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

