**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community.
We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v
---
'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.'
_-J. Allen Hynek_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oh nah I heard it from WAIT WHAT THE FUCK! okay so. Uhh you might wanna watch this:
https://youtu.be/5Dpy5xm7z08?si=HlJl9hASwJXyRfjm
https://youtu.be/RTEWLSTyUic?si=ABqy_sW3x6pDprFL
There's no evidence of a large hominid species inhabiting the Americas before humans. Are ghosts geographically bound? If they are it could explain Yetis and such but not Bigfoot. If not, I guess it works.
Maybe they're human ghosts that hit super puberty after they died and that's why they're so hairy. Or they were terrible painters in life, now cursed to wear their wasted brushes in the afterlife.
Well, you know, thinking about it: The quintessential ghost location is the haunted house. What would ghosts do if they never had houses or only knew temporary shelters? If anything we know about ghosts turns out to be true, probably haunt the range they knew in life or the general area where they died. But wandering ghosts is an idea. Unprecedented but so is the rest of this theory.
Same thing I call people who claim to speak directly to god, liars. I always listen to any argument that could change my mind but there is always an absence of provable facts.
You think that everyone who says they are experiencing a "supernatural" or "mystical" experience is straight up lying?
That is less believable than ghosts being real.
As a skeptic, ask yourself what if all these people are telling the truth? Without changing the laws of the universe as a staunch skeptic sees them, how would you explain these experiences if people are not lying?
Taking the position of a skeptic, you question the cause of the experience, but to just say everyone is lying is lazy, silly, and not very scientific.
I believe they are lying, having a mental problems, or simply confused about what they are seeing. It’s strange you say that is less believable when there are many instances of it, and zero instances of proof of ghosts. Tbf I give your theory as much credibility as any other Bigfoot theory, none whatsoever. Interesting read though. From a scientific perspective, the burden of proof lies with the people making extraordinary claims, not skeptics
Armchair skeptics can deny whatever they want, but leading scholars and scientists in physics and neuroscience are revealing how subjective and illusory our experience of the universe really is. They'd tell you to throw the idea of a provable, concrete reality out the window.
Before we understood it, electricity was magic. Clarke nailed it: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." This applies to our understanding of the "supernatural" too.
True science isn't rigid denial—it's being open to the possibility of being wrong. Dismissing unexplained experiences is unscientific.
Real skepticism involves questioning and investigating, not just denying.
Leading scientists will tell you having a hypothesis is just the first step in the scientific method. Come with more and you’ll have more credibility. Right now it sounds like you want to believe more than having any sort of proof whatsoever, a dangerous precedent for science. I’m not simply denying, you haven’t brought anything to consider evidence wise. Youre Using an unproven hypothesis as evidence for your theory. You speak of true science, and bring none
im not a scientist. but there are many scientists who have studied these things. In 30 minutes i was able to compile a cursory list:
**Telepathy:** Significant research, including the Ganzfeld experiments and meta-analyses by Honorton (1985) and Bem & Honorton (1994), have shown statistically significant results suggesting telepathy could be real. Radin (2006) also consolidated studies that demonstrate telepathic interactions under controlled conditions, suggesting potential unknown natural laws at work.
**Existence of Ghosts:** Studies like those by French et al. (2009) and Persinger’s (1983) "God Helmet" experiment show that ghostly experiences often have psychological and neurological bases, rather than being purely supernatural. These studies validate the reality of these experiences, even if they don’t confirm traditional beliefs about ghosts.
**Scientific Perspective:** The scientific community maintains open-minded skepticism towards these phenomena, focusing on empirical study and understanding rather than supernatural explanations, as supported by the American Psychological Association’s stance on paranormal phenomena.
This approach invites deeper exploration and acknowledgment of these intriguing experiences within scientific frameworks.
References:
Bem, D. J., & Honorton, C. (1994). Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 4-18.
Honorton, C. (1985). Meta-analysis of psi ganzfeld research: A response to Hyman. Journal of Parapsychology, 49, 51-91.
Persinger, M. A. (1983). Religious and mystical experiences as artifacts of temporal lobe function: A general hypothesis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57(3), 1255-1262.
Radin, D. I. (2006). Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality. New York: Paraview Pocket Books.
French, C. C., Haque, U., Bunton-Stasyshyn, R., & Davis, R. (2009). The "Haunt" project: An attempt to build a "haunted" room by manipulating complex electromagnetic fields and infrasound. Cortex, 45(5), 619-629.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who exactly claims that these phenomena "simply do not exist"? Let's delve deeper into this discussion, rather than just skim the surface. Consider this: the brain, encased in the skull, has evolved complex sensory organs that relay information back to it, allowing it to construct our perceptual experiences. However, this system provides us with a limited dataset.
On a quantum level, the very nature of matter remains elusive. There's a widely accepted notion in quantum mechanics that matter relies on the probability wave, which only collapses into a definitive state upon observation. This challenges the very idea of a concrete, observable reality.
Is it sufficient to merely accept what's directly in front of us as the full extent of empirical reality, especially when scientific advancements continually suggest that reality is far more complex and less tangible than it appears?
I'm not attempting to prove anything definitively here. However, it's worth noting that skepticism without basis—perhaps like the kind a 14-year-old might express dismissively from a basement—doesn't inherently challenge or advance our understanding. Such skepticism often lacks the depth of rigorous scientific inquiry.
We all bear the responsibility of substantiating our observations and beliefs. So, where is the proof that what we are experiencing is indeed 'real'? Interestingly, vast segments of global populations over centuries have believed otherwise, and modern science increasingly supports the notion that our perceptions of reality are not as straightforward as they seem.
This discussion isn't about disproving skeptics with a single answer but inviting them to explore the profound, sometimes paradoxical insights that science and philosophy offer about the nature of reality.
Yes they explored those topics, and remain skeptical per their own conclusions. Just look at the scientific perspective you pasted here. Also numerous studies have debunked this, why didn’t you put that in? You jump right into believing them. By being here I’m exploring the possibility with an open mind, but without evidence how would you expect me to change my mind? you seem to be convinced you couldn’t be wrong about ghosts, where is the open mindedness?
How can i be wrong about ghosts when i have no idea what they are?
I know people experience them.
You might say that experience is not real.
I would respond that what is and is not real is not fully understood by science.
Science hasnt even cracked the hard problem of conciousness itself which can be said to be the absolute kernel of any discussion along these lines.
I kinda like the theory, it's somewhat plausible, imo. I've personally long believed Bigfoot to be tied into the greater phenomenon as a whole in some type of way, just have zero idea how.
The only thing I'm almost certain of is that they're not simply some undiscovered, massive primate/man that's wondering around the United States in our 3-D, physical world...
Think about how people still don't believe aliens when there's been thousands of sightings. Think about the hundreds of giants we've uncovered and yet they're all a 'hoax'. Zero point energy? Impossible! Efficient cars? Impossible! Think about all the false conspiracies that turned out to be true. Covid originated in a lab? No way! Funded by the states? DARPA? No way!
We are constantly being fooled by 3 letter agencies on a daily basis. Just add Bigfoot to the list. Even if you kill a Bigfoot and post a video online, you'll still hit a road block and then be met by dudes in a suit to shut you up
Check out this guy’s channel. He says the Sasquatch are inter-dimensional and can appear as ghosts/ spirits. He even thinks he got some video of them:
https://youtube.com/@sasquatchontario?si=d9_rCYN8fMxXIPcN
This is actually fantastic. AND it makes sense given that people's actual physical encounters with them tend to be having rocks thrown at them. That's remarkably similar to house ghost hauntings, where someone may have items thrown around, doors closed, and in extreme situations they might be scratched, but they're never seriously hurt (afaik). Like I've never, ever heard a story of someone having a bigfoot push or strike them. That of course could be for many reasons if they are physical beings, of course; such as them being nonconfrontational, or that once a bigfoot reaches you physically, you're a goner. Nonetheless, I really love this theory!
What if they're a parallel universe evolutionary line that has the ability to move between worlds, so they're still not really "here", but they do really exist in a world close to ours?
edit: In the last 30 minutes, suddenly there are a ton of downvotes on various comments on this post. Brigade, or did we say something others don't want to be said?
Yes. There is a bleeding edge of consciousness research and it is plausible such densifications of matter persist in forms yet to be revealed and defined.
**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS. This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community. We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v --- 'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.' _-J. Allen Hynek_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bigfoot is just Martians living on earth as ghosts from nuclear holocaust wdym
Weren't they from Maldek?
No no they’re actually idk lol
I thought you were referring to the law of one. https://www.lawofone.info/s/9#18
Shout out to my StO homies!
Dozens of us!
Oh nah I heard it from WAIT WHAT THE FUCK! okay so. Uhh you might wanna watch this: https://youtu.be/5Dpy5xm7z08?si=HlJl9hASwJXyRfjm https://youtu.be/RTEWLSTyUic?si=ABqy_sW3x6pDprFL
Well, how would you test this theory?
There's no evidence of a large hominid species inhabiting the Americas before humans. Are ghosts geographically bound? If they are it could explain Yetis and such but not Bigfoot. If not, I guess it works. Maybe they're human ghosts that hit super puberty after they died and that's why they're so hairy. Or they were terrible painters in life, now cursed to wear their wasted brushes in the afterlife.
i think you found a hole in my theory!
Well, you know, thinking about it: The quintessential ghost location is the haunted house. What would ghosts do if they never had houses or only knew temporary shelters? If anything we know about ghosts turns out to be true, probably haunt the range they knew in life or the general area where they died. But wandering ghosts is an idea. Unprecedented but so is the rest of this theory.
Very woo woo. I like it. Don't think it's right, but I like it.
I don’t believe in ghosts for humans, so I wouldn’t for Bigfoot either.
Well people are experiencing something to that affect. What do you call it?
Same thing I call people who claim to speak directly to god, liars. I always listen to any argument that could change my mind but there is always an absence of provable facts.
You think that everyone who says they are experiencing a "supernatural" or "mystical" experience is straight up lying? That is less believable than ghosts being real. As a skeptic, ask yourself what if all these people are telling the truth? Without changing the laws of the universe as a staunch skeptic sees them, how would you explain these experiences if people are not lying? Taking the position of a skeptic, you question the cause of the experience, but to just say everyone is lying is lazy, silly, and not very scientific.
I believe they are lying, having a mental problems, or simply confused about what they are seeing. It’s strange you say that is less believable when there are many instances of it, and zero instances of proof of ghosts. Tbf I give your theory as much credibility as any other Bigfoot theory, none whatsoever. Interesting read though. From a scientific perspective, the burden of proof lies with the people making extraordinary claims, not skeptics
Armchair skeptics can deny whatever they want, but leading scholars and scientists in physics and neuroscience are revealing how subjective and illusory our experience of the universe really is. They'd tell you to throw the idea of a provable, concrete reality out the window. Before we understood it, electricity was magic. Clarke nailed it: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." This applies to our understanding of the "supernatural" too. True science isn't rigid denial—it's being open to the possibility of being wrong. Dismissing unexplained experiences is unscientific. Real skepticism involves questioning and investigating, not just denying.
Leading scientists will tell you having a hypothesis is just the first step in the scientific method. Come with more and you’ll have more credibility. Right now it sounds like you want to believe more than having any sort of proof whatsoever, a dangerous precedent for science. I’m not simply denying, you haven’t brought anything to consider evidence wise. Youre Using an unproven hypothesis as evidence for your theory. You speak of true science, and bring none
im not a scientist. but there are many scientists who have studied these things. In 30 minutes i was able to compile a cursory list: **Telepathy:** Significant research, including the Ganzfeld experiments and meta-analyses by Honorton (1985) and Bem & Honorton (1994), have shown statistically significant results suggesting telepathy could be real. Radin (2006) also consolidated studies that demonstrate telepathic interactions under controlled conditions, suggesting potential unknown natural laws at work. **Existence of Ghosts:** Studies like those by French et al. (2009) and Persinger’s (1983) "God Helmet" experiment show that ghostly experiences often have psychological and neurological bases, rather than being purely supernatural. These studies validate the reality of these experiences, even if they don’t confirm traditional beliefs about ghosts. **Scientific Perspective:** The scientific community maintains open-minded skepticism towards these phenomena, focusing on empirical study and understanding rather than supernatural explanations, as supported by the American Psychological Association’s stance on paranormal phenomena. This approach invites deeper exploration and acknowledgment of these intriguing experiences within scientific frameworks. References: Bem, D. J., & Honorton, C. (1994). Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 4-18. Honorton, C. (1985). Meta-analysis of psi ganzfeld research: A response to Hyman. Journal of Parapsychology, 49, 51-91. Persinger, M. A. (1983). Religious and mystical experiences as artifacts of temporal lobe function: A general hypothesis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57(3), 1255-1262. Radin, D. I. (2006). Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality. New York: Paraview Pocket Books. French, C. C., Haque, U., Bunton-Stasyshyn, R., & Davis, R. (2009). The "Haunt" project: An attempt to build a "haunted" room by manipulating complex electromagnetic fields and infrasound. Cortex, 45(5), 619-629. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Who exactly claims that these phenomena "simply do not exist"? Let's delve deeper into this discussion, rather than just skim the surface. Consider this: the brain, encased in the skull, has evolved complex sensory organs that relay information back to it, allowing it to construct our perceptual experiences. However, this system provides us with a limited dataset. On a quantum level, the very nature of matter remains elusive. There's a widely accepted notion in quantum mechanics that matter relies on the probability wave, which only collapses into a definitive state upon observation. This challenges the very idea of a concrete, observable reality. Is it sufficient to merely accept what's directly in front of us as the full extent of empirical reality, especially when scientific advancements continually suggest that reality is far more complex and less tangible than it appears? I'm not attempting to prove anything definitively here. However, it's worth noting that skepticism without basis—perhaps like the kind a 14-year-old might express dismissively from a basement—doesn't inherently challenge or advance our understanding. Such skepticism often lacks the depth of rigorous scientific inquiry. We all bear the responsibility of substantiating our observations and beliefs. So, where is the proof that what we are experiencing is indeed 'real'? Interestingly, vast segments of global populations over centuries have believed otherwise, and modern science increasingly supports the notion that our perceptions of reality are not as straightforward as they seem. This discussion isn't about disproving skeptics with a single answer but inviting them to explore the profound, sometimes paradoxical insights that science and philosophy offer about the nature of reality.
Yes they explored those topics, and remain skeptical per their own conclusions. Just look at the scientific perspective you pasted here. Also numerous studies have debunked this, why didn’t you put that in? You jump right into believing them. By being here I’m exploring the possibility with an open mind, but without evidence how would you expect me to change my mind? you seem to be convinced you couldn’t be wrong about ghosts, where is the open mindedness?
How can i be wrong about ghosts when i have no idea what they are? I know people experience them. You might say that experience is not real. I would respond that what is and is not real is not fully understood by science. Science hasnt even cracked the hard problem of conciousness itself which can be said to be the absolute kernel of any discussion along these lines.
Pretty neat theory that I’ve never heard before.
I kinda like the theory, it's somewhat plausible, imo. I've personally long believed Bigfoot to be tied into the greater phenomenon as a whole in some type of way, just have zero idea how. The only thing I'm almost certain of is that they're not simply some undiscovered, massive primate/man that's wondering around the United States in our 3-D, physical world...
Think about how people still don't believe aliens when there's been thousands of sightings. Think about the hundreds of giants we've uncovered and yet they're all a 'hoax'. Zero point energy? Impossible! Efficient cars? Impossible! Think about all the false conspiracies that turned out to be true. Covid originated in a lab? No way! Funded by the states? DARPA? No way! We are constantly being fooled by 3 letter agencies on a daily basis. Just add Bigfoot to the list. Even if you kill a Bigfoot and post a video online, you'll still hit a road block and then be met by dudes in a suit to shut you up
Check out this guy’s channel. He says the Sasquatch are inter-dimensional and can appear as ghosts/ spirits. He even thinks he got some video of them: https://youtube.com/@sasquatchontario?si=d9_rCYN8fMxXIPcN
cool i will check it out, thanks!
This is actually fantastic. AND it makes sense given that people's actual physical encounters with them tend to be having rocks thrown at them. That's remarkably similar to house ghost hauntings, where someone may have items thrown around, doors closed, and in extreme situations they might be scratched, but they're never seriously hurt (afaik). Like I've never, ever heard a story of someone having a bigfoot push or strike them. That of course could be for many reasons if they are physical beings, of course; such as them being nonconfrontational, or that once a bigfoot reaches you physically, you're a goner. Nonetheless, I really love this theory! What if they're a parallel universe evolutionary line that has the ability to move between worlds, so they're still not really "here", but they do really exist in a world close to ours? edit: In the last 30 minutes, suddenly there are a ton of downvotes on various comments on this post. Brigade, or did we say something others don't want to be said?
ב''ה, ghosts are probably just G-d fucking around but particularly as such I like the hot take.
This is fascinating. Certainly plausible under certain assumptions/beliefs.
Yes. There is a bleeding edge of consciousness research and it is plausible such densifications of matter persist in forms yet to be revealed and defined.