Alright.

If you don’t want to check it out, that’s fine. I can’t force you to. We can agree to disagree.

Definition. I’ve already given you something to dive into. The Skinwalker Ranch. You can listen to the story on this channel. Great voice, and visuals.

If that’s your stance, it’s ok. We can agree to disagree. I still choose to sit on the fence.

Well, if that’s what they’re calling it, they’re right. It’s not science now, is it? This is supernatural shit. I still recommend watching this video if you’re feeling too lazy to research. The guy behind the channel is great for skeptics. Debunks what he can, leaves the unexplained for you to decide.

There are obviously criticisms lol. What supernatural case doesn’t have any? I still recommend checking it out though. There’s a lot to the story.

You’re reluctant for some reason. If you don’t challenge your beliefs, how do you expect to grow? There’s more to it than just cattle mutilations and alien abductions.

People are dedicated out here.

No, like dive into his work. The gateway tapes, his books, his partnership with the CIA… etc. You should read the documents. Just a glance at a few Google results isn’t enough.

Yes, that’s what I said. No one has ever proven that it doesn’t exist. Therefore, you can’t completely denounce it. This concept is also applied in Science. It’s why I said that the most accurate answer you can give is “I don’t know”, if asked if you believe in it. As for James Randi, other factors can contribute to why no one showed him anything. One can be word of his challenge not getting to enough people. Like me. This is the first time I’ve heard of him and his challenge. Another one can be those who actually had something to show wanting privacy. Another can be disinterest, gatekeeping… etc. There’s many factors. If you’re interested, the story of The Skinwalker Ranch is a bizzare unexplained case involving the supernatural that you can dive into if you’re looking to research this stuff. I recommend listening to it on this channel. The guy behind it has a great voice, and nice visuals. You should also check out this channel. It’s great for skeptics, because the guy behind it debunks what he can, and leaves it for you to decide what to think of it.

An interesting case for you to dive into: The Skinwalker Ranch.

I’m devastated.

Bro, you’re retarded lmfao.

Look up Robert Monroe.

They have their bailey, belief in things like the occult, ghosts, demons, etc, that are almost certainly bullshit. To the extent that they can be falsified, they have been. This is the typical definition of what people think when you say “supernatural” and people are right to answer “no” when asked if they believe in it.

You say that people are right to answer “no” when asked if they believe in this stuff. That is just not true at all. That’s because that as much as good evidence can be hard to come by for supernatural stuff, there is also no official evidence whatsoever that proves that such things do not exist. Therefore, the most accurate answer should really be “I don’t know”, because of the subject’s unfalsifiable nature, and how it’s outside scientific testing. You still have a right to say “yes”, or “no” though.

But then you have OP falling back on their motte when this happens, taking a nebulous definition of supernatural and asking philosophical questions about reality, perception, and the unknown. The fallacy is that these questions do nothing to strengthen or refute the original argument about the supernatural.

That “nebulous” definition of supernatural that I keep using IS the literal definition of the word. You even described it yourself how I described it on your second paragraph, first line. Yes, I have been “asking philosophical questions about reality, perception, and the unknown”. And why can’t I do that? My post is an open-ended question. This means that the conversation can go anywhere, provided that the context continues to match the topic of the post. What do you mean by “original argument about the supernatural”? Again, this post is meant to be an open-ended question where others contribute their thoughts on the supernatural, I share my opinions on their thoughts, and we agree, or disagree. There is no “original argument about the supernatural”.

Nobody is here to argue that nothing is unknown and even unknowable but that doesn’t make the things that people typically call “supernatural” any less bullshit. Demons and ghosts are just not the kinds of things that are waiting around to surprise us. And shifting the conversation from your bailey to your motte to protect your feelings on the former is not a good way to have a friendly debate.

Actually, people here have argued such, as supernatural phenomena is a mysterious topic. Nowhere have I declared that there are no BS claims in the supernatural world. However, saying that all supernatural claims are complete BS without evidence supporting it is a biased take. Some are debunked, and some aren’t, which is how we end up with unexplained claims that are beyond rational explanation. A scenario like this is the reason why we should stay open-minded about supernatural phenomena, instead of completely denouncing it.

Alright, bro.

What are you on about lol. I asked people about their thoughts on the supernatural, and I’m sharing my thoughts back. Conversation. I also haven’t denied that there are false claims out there. You sound like the many argumentative pseudo-intellectuals I usually meet on Reddit. Always looking to start shit. You’re really crashing out because I asked bro what a hallucination is. I know what it is. I’m just trying to talk to him, but unfortunately, you hijacked our conversation for unknown reasons.

If you think the word supernatural is so unneeded, you can petition for it to be taken out of dictionaries and Wikipedia.

Fair. You should check out Robert Monroe.

Astral projection/OBEs.