Some theories say ghosts are people that died violently. Then what about those millions that died in wars? What about the Victims murdered in the Holocaust?.
What about them? Are you saying they are not ghosts? How do you know? You have offered no "proof" that ghosts are not dead people.
Some theory. Though that theory is false, it is a fact that The people who gain a lot of money, power, control and 'prestige' from ghost stories of any kind might state as a fact not a theory that ghosts are the people who have died in the past -not future? 0 They are as deceptive as psycoanalysts, also for money, in their humonongous portrayal of what is falsely called knowledge, to promote themselves or their religion.
I couldn’t be more confused even if I was listening to a Biden speech. The title doesn’t reflect the opening post. The declaration that ghosts aren’t dead people is followed by a theory that ghosts are dead people who died violently which is followed by people who died violently. How is the opening post proof of anything?
There have been several reported sightings of ghost soldiers. I don't think that believers in ghosts generally believe that everyone becomes a ghost after they die.
Really? in the conspiracy section ? Even in all the other sections and threads, does ANY opening post prove anything ? Simply no.
One would think that the premise that is set up would be backed by the person posting that premise. The opening post should do just that. In this case, the premise is that there is proof that ghosts aren’t dead people. The opening post should have expounded on that idea rather than going wherever it went. And Yes, opening posts more often than not do offer some proof verifying and expounding on the validity of the title.
With so many false premises , almost all the threads, why pick on one that could be seen as a question or throught encouraging to understand something almost nobody understands ?
Proving that something is 'not' is the attempt to prove a negative - very difficult and prone to all kinds of logical fallacies. It also places the burden of proving the counter claim on the challenger. Beth, can you prove that ghosts are dead people? No, because applying logic and trying to prove things supernatural is a useless endeavor. It's called 'supernatural' because it is outside the realm of our everyday reason and reality. I'm offering no opinion on the topic as of yet - still reading this thread.
You missed my point, as did the OP. His thread title is "Why Ghosts are Not Dead People." So I assumed his opening post would support that statement. It does not; it simply asks "Then what about those millions that died in wars? What about the Victims murdered in the Holocaust?" Well, what about them? They are dead, aren't they? Are they ghosts?? Who the hell knows. I expected the thread to support the subject as titled, providing basis for his assertion. And that's all I have to say about that, because I have no idea whether ghosts exist or if they were a victim of the Holocaust.
I missed your point but my remarks about proving or disproving anything supernatural were pretty good, I thought. I'm so darned smart I scare myself sometimes. What does OP stand for?