ghost in apartment?

[MrDoobie]

My girlfriend's great grandfather was an exorcist in Puerto Rico. He used to get rid of ghosts by running around the house swinging a machete dipped in holy water and muttering prayers.

Try it. Even if it doesn't work it sounds hella fun.

 

[Billy]

Huh?
What makes one person a fraud is that they are lying about their lack of skill. What makes one person a genuine PI is their skill level.

By what criteria is this judged though? By what standards do we decide who is a real PI and who is not?

 

[Soulful]

By what criteria is this judged though? By what standards do we decide who is a real PI and who is not?

Well, I'm certainly in no position to decide what the criteria is as this isn't my area of knowledge or expertise, but I imagine it's like anything else. What makes a qualified mathematician vs. a fraud? If they can do math vs. someone who claims to in spite of not having any skill. Same thing with a real PI. If someone can sense ghosts and communicate with them, or is informed and skilled in getting them to leave, then I'd say they are a real PI.

 

[Billy]

Well, I'm certainly in no position to decide what the criteria is as this isn't my area of knowledge or expertise, but I imagine it's like anything else. What makes a qualified mathematician vs. a fraud? If they can do math vs. someone who claims to in spite of not having any skill. Same thing with a real PI. If someone can sense ghosts and communicate with them, or is informed and skilled in getting them to leave, then I'd say they are a real PI.

But you are trapped, We cannot say the Warrens are frauds and Joe Blow is not, because we are simply going on opinions, there is no way to objectively prove either one as real or false. Proving someone is a real mathematician vs a fraud is easy, can they do the math and show the work? Math is an easy case to prove... ghosts, possessions, etc? Those are unprovable things, sensing ghosts even less liable to be proven. So going on that how can 1 person be an expert and the other not objectively? Its like a Christian telling a Pagan that their version of God is wrong, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Lemonworld]

For a while I lived in a 200 year old house and it just had a bad energy. I basically ignored it and then moved out as soon as possible. It felt like a very cold, oppressive place to live, and that's coming from someone who absolutely loves old houses. I'm living in a 100 year old house again now, and it has a very peaceful, warm energy.

Good luck with your situation!

...PS I have heard that scattering salt on the floor can ward away bad spirits. My friend does it every time she moves somewhere new.

 

[Soulful]

But you are trapped, We cannot say the Warrens are frauds and Joe Blow is not, because we are simply going on opinions, there is no way to objectively prove either one as real or false. Proving someone is a real mathematician vs a fraud is easy, can they do the math and show the work? Math is an easy case to prove... ghosts, possessions, etc? Those are unprovable things, sensing ghosts even less liable to be proven. So going on that how can 1 person be an expert and the other not objectively? Its like a Christian telling a Pagan that their version of God is wrong, wouldn't you agree?

I agree that it is difficult, and I agree that we all have opinions about this. I suspect there could be a way to determine when one is false and one is real, but to do so we need to first believe that 1) ghosts are real, 2) some people can sense ghosts, and then to rely on the word of those who can sense them. This is not easy to do, and not always wise to do, because people can be mistaken, delusional, and/or corruptly motivated, but this is also where our own sense of discernement consisting of our reasoning powers and our sense of intuition (gut feeling) to decide whether or not to believe someone come in. Maybe one day we will have arrived at an understanding of science and the creation of technology that can prove these things, but until then all we have is that discernement. The outcome can get messy. For some people, sensing these entities is proof enough. For others, believing they are able to trust someone (whom they deem reliable, honest, capable, and credible) may also be enough, for others there may be another means or nothing may be enough. There's no objective and fool-proof way to do this, and naturally that raises skepticism. That's okay. We all have our proclivities, abilities, and needs. Nothing wrong with wanting tangible proof.

But think of it this way: An ET arrives from a planet where emotions do not exist, and asks you how you know that you feel protective of your little niece. You tell them that you know because you feel it -- your feelings are a sense that you can discern, even though not everyone shares it. You know your sibling might love their daughter, but you also know that their landlord who is also in the same room is not aware of this feeling and does not experience it. The ET then tells you that you are mistaken in what you interpret, that what you feel cannot possibly be real because there is no way to prove that this is what you feel or to prove that it is possible to feel something. You can understand what he is reasoning and his need for proof, but you also know that what you feel is indeed present in spite of the fact that there is no way to prove to him that you are experiencing a feeling and identifying it correctly. It may seem like a silly analogy (although hopefully not too removed), partly because feelings seem so innate and real to us, but it is only because it is a sense that is experienced by (we assume) everyone and therefore we give validity to it. There is no way to prove what we experience, only to accept the feeling as real to us. You are not alone in doubting the existence of ghosts and everything associated with the paranormal, and your points are entirely valid and understandable -- I also think they're important -- but perhaps there is more to consider, namely the possibility that some people can genuinely sense these things, they are not making them up in spite of the fact that not all of us are attuned to them. But if this sounds implausible to you, then that's okay, too. Skepticism has its place and is important.

In the case of knowing whether to trust someone's opinion (PI's opinion), it's a matter of judgment. And -- for me, at least -- that judgment is in part decided by a gut feeling about the person. An inherent knowing, if you will. I don't think this is the same thing as one religious group claiming to be informed about God enough to denounce another group's teachings because I think some people are genuinely capable of sensing spirits whereas I don't believe religious groups understand that which we call God well enough to make such a judgment.

 

[Billy]

I agree that it is difficult, and I agree that we all have opinions about this. I suspect there could be a way to determine when one is false and one is real, but to do so we need to first believe that 1) ghosts are real, 2) some people can sense ghosts, and then to rely on the word of those who can sense them.

As a non-believer I would require more than just someones word. There are tests that can be done I am certain, information that can be discovered that couldnt possibly be known by a medium etc. To my knowledge there has never been any.

This is not easy to do, and not always wise to do, because people can be mistaken, delusional, and/or corruptly motivated, but this is also where our own sense of discernment consisting of our reasoning powers and our sense of intuition (gut feeling) to decide whether or not to believe someone come in.

Thats an understatement. Most people are self-delusional in general on many things, we delude ourselves daily. I dont think using our gut, or trust of a friend is a valid way to decide if someone is able to actually sense something or not.

Maybe one day we will have arrived at an understanding of science and the creation of technology that can prove these things, but until then all we have is that discernement.

Not sure if this is true. We will get to why in a min.

The outcome can get messy. For some people, sensing these entities is proof enough. For others, believing they are able to trust someone (whom they deem reliable, honest, capable, and credible) may also be enough, for others there may be another means or nothing may be enough. There's no objective and fool-proof way to do this, and naturally that raises skepticism. That's okay. We all have our proclivities, abilities, and needs. Nothing wrong with wanting tangible proof.

Not only is there nothing wrong with needing tangible proof, its essential to prove something as real. I would even be impressed by objective data that isnt tangible... asking a ghost where it hid its will, or some data that couldnt be known by the sensor for example. IMpressed does not mean a believer because there are ways to fake that too, but its at least a start.

But think of it this way: An ET arrives from a planet where emotions do not exist, and asks you how you know that you feel protective of your little niece. You tell them that you know because you feel it -- your feelings are a sense that you can discern, even though not everyone shares it. You know your sibling might love their daughter, but you also know that their landlord who is also in the same room is not aware of this feeling and does not experience it. The ET then tells you that you are mistaken in what you interpret, that what you feel cannot possibly be real because there is no way to prove that this is what you feel or to prove that it is possible to feel something. You can understand what he is reasoning and his need for proof, but you also know that what you feel is indeed present in spite of the fact that there is no way to prove to him that you are experiencing a feeling and identifying it correctly. It may seem like a silly analogy (although hopefully not too removed), partly because feelings seem so innate and real to us, but it is only because it is a sense that is experienced by (we assume) everyone and therefore we give validity to it. There is no way to prove what we experience, only to accept the feeling as real to us. You are not alone in doubting the existence of ghosts and everything associated with the paranormal, and your points are entirely valid and understandable -- I also think they're important -- but perhaps there is more to consider, namely the possibility that some people can genuinely sense these things, they are not making them up in spite of the fact that not all of us are attuned to them. But if this sounds implausible to you, then that's okay, too. Skepticism has its place and is important.

We do actually have the technology to monitor a human brain and see which areas of the brain light up and go into use when certain thoughts and feelings occur, its not 100% conclusive, but we do have a way of figuring out which parts of our psyche come from which parts of our brains. To my knowledge there isnt any proof of mediums using any extra parts of their brains to tap into this sixth sense. But you could certainly hook me up and ask me about my nieces and see that the same area of my brain consistently lights up and correlates with the feelings I am describing.


Be that as it may, there is no judge for which medium is real and which is not, its completely subjective wouldnt you agree?

And as such, if we want to be consistent, we cannot say anyone is a fraud because we simply dont know that for certain. Even if someone commits a hoax, they can still be a medium.

 

[the]

I recommend you keep some lit candles in a shallow pool of salt water around the house...within reason ofc. The salt water will attract any negative energy that the ghost may carry, while the flame will burn.

If you are a praying type of person, you can ask/pray that it be sent to the Light.

You can also burn sage and waft it through the rooms.

How do you feel around it, or when you think you sense it?

I remember when my grandma died and I started living in her house. my gf wanted to burn sage through the house. I thought to myself: why do you want to get rid of my grandma?

 

[Tin Man]

I've been through something similar. There was something strange in my neighborhood. There was something weird and it didn't look good. I wondered to myself; "Who am I going to call?"

 

[Soulful]

As a non-believer I would require more than just someones word. There are tests that can be done I am certain, information that can be discovered that couldnt possibly be known by a medium etc. To my knowledge there has never been any.


Thats an understatement. Most people are self-delusional in general on many things, we delude ourselves daily. I dont think using our gut, or trust of a friend is a valid way to decide if someone is able to actually sense something or not.


Not sure if this is true. We will get to why in a min.



Not only is there nothing wrong with needing tangible proof, its essential to prove something as real. I would even be impressed by objective data that isnt tangible... asking a ghost where it hid its will, or some data that couldnt be known by the sensor for example. IMpressed does not mean a believer because there are ways to fake that too, but its at least a start.

We do actually have the technology to monitor a human brain and see which areas of the brain light up and go into use when certain thoughts and feelings occur, its not 100% conclusive, but we do have a way of figuring out which parts of our psyche come from which parts of our brains. To my knowledge there isnt any proof of mediums using any extra parts of their brains to tap into this sixth sense. But you could certainly hook me up and ask me about my nieces and see that the same area of my brain consistently lights up and correlates with the feelings I am describing.


Be that as it may, there is no judge for which medium is real and which is not, its completely subjective wouldnt you agree?

And as such, if we want to be consistent, we cannot say anyone is a fraud because we simply dont know that for certain. Even if someone commits a hoax, they can still be a medium.

Ok. Fair enough.

 

[jyrffw54]

I remember when my grandma died and I started living in her house. my gf wanted to burn sage through the house. I thought to myself: why do you want to get rid of my grandma?

It gets rid of unwanted negative energy. If your grandma's energy was at a low frequency, then it would be did away with.

 

[CindyLou]

I remember when my grandma died and I started living in her house. my gf wanted to burn sage through the house. I thought to myself: why do you want to get rid of my grandma?

Did you let her burn the sage throughout your house? How did you respond to that?

 

[Soulful]

[MENTION=2873]Serenity[/MENTION], when burning sage, do you know if it's necessary to walk throughout all of the rooms of a residence and be thorough in where the smoke reaches, or is it a more casual affair?

 

[Soulful]

My girlfriend's great grandfather was an exorcist in Puerto Rico. He used to get rid of ghosts by running around the house swinging a machete dipped in holy water and muttering prayers.

Try it. Even if it doesn't work it sounds hella fun.

Whoa. Well, it sounds like his intent was strong enough, even if the execution seems a little creative. Do you know if he was effective?

 

[Azazel]

I haven't met any ghosts but I'm willing to!

What I've experienced is only uneasy energy mostly in a very old building or where somebody died and I think it's no wonder. It isn't always the case, though. What can someone do about it? Only move out elsewhere. Unfortunately, there are no Ghostbusters (damn, I'd love to be one!).

 

[the]

Did you let her burn the sage throughout your house? How did you respond to that?

I think I presented the idea to her in a joking manner and coupled with her own lack of conviction on the subject she just ended up not doing it.

 

[Elis]

do you fear the ghost?

 

[MrDoobie]

I've been through something similar. There was something strange in my neighborhood. There was something weird and it didn't look good. I wondered to myself; "Who am I going to call?"

An elderly Puerto Rican with a machete dipped in holy water.

 

[jyrffw54]

@Serenity, when burning sage, do you know if it's necessary to walk throughout all of the rooms of a residence and be thorough in where the smoke reaches, or is it a more casual affair?

I personally, would just waft it through all the rooms of the residence, and a feather can help you waft it.

 

[Vicarious]

Oh trust me, I think they are ALL hoaxes and frauds. I dont believe in ghosts or possessions. But if we are going to pretend, lets go all the way.

I'm not trying to debate this shit with you, nor I didn't label anything you said as wrong. I was just pointing out that Amityville and the Warrens have been called out and like I said, that most people are unaware of that. There was no hidden meaning in my post. If I were going to call you out as wrong, I sure wouldn't be that passive-aggressive.

Anyway, it kind of goes without saying that the Warren's are frauds after Butch DeFeo's lawyer admitted that the whole ordeal in the Amityville house was a hoax. He and George Lutz came up with the whole idea one night over several bottles of wine, yet the Warrens still insisted that "thar be demons in this hooouse", though no other occupants of the house report even the simplest haunting. LULZ. Not to mention how the Warren's seem to find "demons" in every single freaking case they encounter and the "killer Raggety Ann" doll? Seriously? LOL. They all sure made a buttload of money off of it, though. Sniff, sniff, I smell a motive.

Our opinions of this subject are going to differ vastly because I do some PI as a hobby, and I assure you, I am no fraud, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that matter. I wouldn't even know where to start making fraudulent evidence (I'm a lost cause at photoshop or any of that stuff) and I have no motive, I get no monetary or any other gain from it other than proving to myself that they exist and I think the whole thing is fascinating. I'm not here to try to convince you or anyone else of their existence, either. I know that the stuff I've caught myself is, fo shiz, the real deal after considering all other possibilities and explanations, and that's all I need. I've already explained in another thread my theory on "ghosts" and how they could exist without there being a dogmatic or spiritual tie to it. I chalk it up to intelligent and residual energy, pure and simple. Just my opinion.