A Week in a Haunted House

[Infected Mushroom]

And I'm still afraid with Valak on the conjuring film. how the ghost figure is portrayed as coming from someone who is actually a nun who should be able to expel evil forces.

I will, England is the land of the haunted houses.

What about Bagul/Mr. Boogie from the Sinister films?

[The New California Republic]

England is the land of the haunted houses.

No. It isn't.

[Ifreann]

England is the land of the haunted houses.

No. It isn't.

England is obviously the land of Eng.

[The Sakhalinsk Empire]

Depends on how trash the place is. If it's absolutely disgusting, then no. But if it's still okay, then I'm good. I don't really believe in the supernatural.

[The New California Republic]

No. It isn't.

England is obviously the land of Eng.

Eng was our true God before the Church of England started rewriting doctrine.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

What we have is evidence of people saying they have seen a ghost. You know full well that is not the same thing, and even if you don't people have written at length many times on this thread to explain to you why it isn't (Human beings are pathetically easy to fool and are laughably prone to misinterpreting the events of the world around them.). It should also be pointed out that not a single one of those millions of eyewitnesses have brought anything even remotely resembling solid proof (or even a clear, authentic photograph).

Come on. At least update your argument in light of what you've been told instead of just repeating the same 5 or 6 sentences over and over again.

So then a testimony that someone saw a murder isn’t evidence for the murder somehow?

Not the same thing and as a "supoosed" law student, you know this.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence that UFOs are real. Its just evidence that I said I saw a UFO. Lear the difference.

[Norja]

And I'm still afraid with Valak on the conjuring film. how the ghost figure is portrayed as coming from someone who is actually a nun who should be able to expel evil forces.

I will, England is the land of the haunted houses.

What about Bagul/Mr. Boogie from the Sinister films?

What, I don't know about that, but is scary in imagining the various ghost from there.

[Norja]

England is the land of the haunted houses.

No. It isn't.

Yes, it is. Sir

[Norja]

No. It isn't.

England is obviously the land of Eng.

I think the land of industrial revolution is good.

[The New California Republic]

No. It isn't.

Yes, it is. Sir

No, it isn't. Take it from someone who lives in the UK.

[Ifreann]

Yes, it is. Sir

No, it isn't. Take it from someone who lives in the UK.

Maybe YOU are the ghost!

[The New California Republic]

No, it isn't. Take it from someone who lives in the UK.

Maybe YOU are the ghost!

People are often frightened by my appearance, it all makes so much sense now!

[Ifreann]

Maybe YOU are the ghost!

People are often frightened by my appearance, it all makes so much sense now!

The New Casper Republic.

[Infected Mushroom]

So then a testimony that someone saw a murder isn’t evidence for the murder somehow?

Not the same thing and as a "supoosed" law student, you know this.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence that UFOs are real. Its just evidence that I said I saw a UFO. Lear the difference.

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days. Please do not go there. Its a personal attack. I don't like where this is going...

evidence that you saw the UFO is evidence of UFO's existing... now you can lower the weight of the evidence by attacking credibility or specifics of the sighting or by alleging that it never happened but its evidence of existence nevertheless

[Sicaris]

I’d do it. Easy 10k for staying in some old house for a week.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Not the same thing and as a "supoosed" law student, you know this.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence that UFOs are real. Its just evidence that I said I saw a UFO. Lear the difference.

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days. Please do not go there. Its a personal attack. I don't like where this is going...

evidence that you saw the UFO is evidence of UFO's existing... now you can lower the weight of the evidence by attacking credibility or specifics of the sighting or by alleging that it never happened but its evidence of existence nevertheless

I fail to see how that is a personal attack. You supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. I pointed out that testimony of seeing a murder is not comparable to someone saying they saw a UFO.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence of the existence of UFOs. It’s just me saying I saw one. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, the truth of it will not change. Murders are palpable and happen. We have evidence of them. UFOs, ghosts? Not so much. All we have is here say and here say is not evidence of anything.

[Infected Mushroom]

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days. Please do not go there. Its a personal attack. I don't like where this is going...

evidence that you saw the UFO is evidence of UFO's existing... now you can lower the weight of the evidence by attacking credibility or specifics of the sighting or by alleging that it never happened but its evidence of existence nevertheless

I fail to see how that is a personal attack. You supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. I pointed out that testimony of seeing a murder is not comparable to someone saying they saw a UFO.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence of the existence of UFOs. It’s just me saying I saw one. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, the truth of it will not change. Murders are palpable and happen. We have evidence of them. UFOs, ghosts? Not so much. All we have is here say and here say is not evidence of anything.

My law school experience/past is not relevant to the topic. I don't like it when people bring it up.

Its in the same vein as if someone said: "Well, since you are a 'supposed' divorced person, you are supposed to know X, Y, Z about divorce etc... since you are a CHEMISTRY TEACHER it should be common sense that [insert some theory about chemistry]" You wouldn't like it either if in discussions people started saying, "Well since this is PERSONALLY TRUE OF YOU... you OUGHT to know X, Y, and Z..."

Just no.

Also, a lot of very terrible things happened to me from law school, I do not wish to revisit these things...

[Chan Island]

Depends on how trash the place is. If it's absolutely disgusting, then no. But if it's still okay, then I'm good. I don't really believe in the supernatural.

That didn't even cross my mind actually. No way am I going to stay a week in some decrepit place with no roof and mould everywhere for just 10 grand.

EDIT:

I fail to see how that is a personal attack. You supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. I pointed out that testimony of seeing a murder is not comparable to someone saying they saw a UFO.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence of the existence of UFOs. It’s just me saying I saw one. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, the truth of it will not change. Murders are palpable and happen. We have evidence of them. UFOs, ghosts? Not so much. All we have is here say and here say is not evidence of anything.

My law school experience/past is not relevant to the topic. I don't like it when people bring it up.

Its in the same vein as if someone said: "Well, since you are a 'supposed' divorced person, you are supposed to know X, Y, Z about divorce etc... since you are a CHEMISTRY TEACHER it should be common sense that [insert some theory about chemistry]" You wouldn't like it either if in discussions people started saying, "Well since this is PERSONALLY TRUE OF YOU... you OUGHT to know X, Y, and Z..."

Just no.

Also, a lot of very terrible things happened to me from law school, I do not wish to revisit these things...

This makes me think that there are ghosts in your life. Not supernatural ones though, but mental ones.

If you ever need a confessor or a sympathetic ear, you can TG me.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I fail to see how that is a personal attack. You supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. I pointed out that testimony of seeing a murder is not comparable to someone saying they saw a UFO.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence of the existence of UFOs. It’s just me saying I saw one. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, the truth of it will not change. Murders are palpable and happen. We have evidence of them. UFOs, ghosts? Not so much. All we have is here say and here say is not evidence of anything.

My law school experience/past is not relevant to the topic. I don't like it when people bring it up.

Its in the same vein as if someone said: "Well, since you are 'supposed' divorced person, you are supposed to know X, Y, Z about divorce etc" You wouldn't like it either if in discussions people started saying, "Well since this is PERSONALLY TRUE OF YOU... you OUGHT to know X, Y, and Z..."

Just no.

Again, you supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. They’re not comparable, in evidence and all. Something you should know. I fail to see how this is a personal attack.

Show me undeniable evidence of the existence of ghosts. Show me photos, show me scientific studies that prove ghosts exist. Not here say. Not folk tales. Anyone can say anything. That still doesn’t make it evidence of the undeniable existence of ghosts.

[Infected Mushroom]

My law school experience/past is not relevant to the topic. I don't like it when people bring it up.

Its in the same vein as if someone said: "Well, since you are 'supposed' divorced person, you are supposed to know X, Y, Z about divorce etc" You wouldn't like it either if in discussions people started saying, "Well since this is PERSONALLY TRUE OF YOU... you OUGHT to know X, Y, and Z..."

Just no.

Again, you supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. They’re not comparable, in evidence and all. Something you should know. I fail to see how this is a personal attack.

Show me undeniable evidence of the existence of ghosts. Show me photos, show me scientific studies that prove ghosts exist. Not here say. Not folk tales. Anyone can say anything. That still doesn’t make it evidence of the undeniable existence of ghosts.

Its a personal attack because it invokes a personal experience/qualification of the poster. Its not focused exclusively on argument, it encourages others to draw an inference or to view the opponent's arguments unfavourably by inferring something personal about the opponent rather than the pure substance of the argument itself.

There are no scientific studies precisely because science's official position is: "Ghosts do not exist unless someone else proves it to me and since they are not scientists they won't be able to do it in a way that we find satisfactory... in the meantime, we (the scientists) can also conclude ostensible experiments to 'prove ghosts' but our real purpose is to discredit specific instances of ghosts; this way we can generate a continuous and permanent trail that suggests they don't exist even though we are using a scientific method to measure a supernatural phenomenon..."

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Again, you supposedly went to law school and you brought up a comparison with murder. They’re not comparable, in evidence and all. Something you should know. I fail to see how this is a personal attack.

Show me undeniable evidence of the existence of ghosts. Show me photos, show me scientific studies that prove ghosts exist. Not here say. Not folk tales. Anyone can say anything. That still doesn’t make it evidence of the undeniable existence of ghosts.

Its a personal attack because it invokes a personal experience/qualification of the poster. Its not focused exclusively on argument, it encourages others to draw an inference or to view the opponent's arguments unfavourably by inferring something personal about the opponent rather than the pure substance of the argument itself.

There are no scientific studies precisely because science's official position is: "Ghosts do not exist unless someone else proves it to me and since they are not scientists they won't be able to do it in a way that we find satisfactory... in the meantime, we (the scientists) can also conclude ostensible experiments to 'prove ghosts' but our real purpose is to discredit specific instances of ghosts; this way we can generate a continuous and permanent trail that suggests they don't exist even though we are using a scientific method to measure a supernatural phenomenon..."

It’s not a personal attack, so get over yourself.

Me saying I saw a UFO or a ghost is not evidence of their existence. You comparing evidence of murder with here say about ghosts being real is rather silly. They’re not comparable. Learn the difference.

[Infected Mushroom]

Its a personal attack because it invokes a personal experience/qualification of the poster. Its not focused exclusively on argument, it encourages others to draw an inference or to view the opponent's arguments unfavourably by inferring something personal about the opponent rather than the pure substance of the argument itself.

There are no scientific studies precisely because science's official position is: "Ghosts do not exist unless someone else proves it to me and since they are not scientists they won't be able to do it in a way that we find satisfactory... in the meantime, we (the scientists) can also conclude ostensible experiments to 'prove ghosts' but our real purpose is to discredit specific instances of ghosts; this way we can generate a continuous and permanent trail that suggests they don't exist even though we are using a scientific method to measure a supernatural phenomenon..."

It’s not a personal attack, so get over yourself.

Me saying I saw a UFO or a ghost is not evidence of their existence. You comparing evidence of murder with here say about ghosts being real is rather silly. They’re not comparable. Learn the difference.

If you're actively bringing up people's personal past in your arguments, then I consider that to be a personal attack.

There is a very valid analogy to be made as they both involve eyewitness testimony.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It’s not a personal attack, so get over yourself.

Me saying I saw a UFO or a ghost is not evidence of their existence. You comparing evidence of murder with here say about ghosts being real is rather silly. They’re not comparable. Learn the difference.

If you're actively bringing up people's personal past in your arguments, then I consider that to be a personal attack.

There is a very valid analogy to be made as they both involve eyewitness testimony.

You talked about comparing heresay with evidence of murder. I told you that they’re not comparable and as a law student you should know that. You getting this “upset” about it is ridiculous. It’s as if I were to get pissy when someone brings up I studied art history in a pertinent subject. The truth is, I did. I studied art history. That’s not a personal attack so really, get over yourself.

It’s not a valid analogy because murder is something proven to happen. Someone saying they saw a UFO is not proof of the existence of UFOs or ghosts. Until there’s undeniable proof with scientific studies and concrete evidence, every account of someone saying they saw a ghost is just heresay.

[Infected Mushroom]

If you're actively bringing up people's personal past in your arguments, then I consider that to be a personal attack.

There is a very valid analogy to be made as they both involve eyewitness testimony.

You talked about comparing heresay with evidence of murder. I told you that they’re not comparable and as a law student you should know that. You getting this “upset” about it is ridiculous. It’s as if I were to get pissy when someone brings up I studied art history in a pertinent subject. The truth is, I did. I studied art history. That’s not a personal attack so really, get over yourself.

It’s not a valid analogy because murder is something proven to happen. Someone saying they saw a UFO is not proof of the existence of UFOs or ghosts. Until there’s undeniable proof with scientific studies and concrete evidence, every account of someone saying they saw a ghost is just heresay.

I shall have to ask you not to bring up law school again, my law school past has got nothing to do with this topic

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

You talked about comparing heresay with evidence of murder. I told you that they’re not comparable and as a law student you should know that. You getting this “upset” about it is ridiculous. It’s as if I were to get pissy when someone brings up I studied art history in a pertinent subject. The truth is, I did. I studied art history. That’s not a personal attack so really, get over yourself.

It’s not a valid analogy because murder is something proven to happen. Someone saying they saw a UFO is not proof of the existence of UFOs or ghosts. Until there’s undeniable proof with scientific studies and concrete evidence, every account of someone saying they saw a ghost is just heresay.

I shall have to ask you not to bring up law school again, my law school past has got nothing to do with this topic

For someone not wanting his past brought up, you keep bringing it up. Are you going to address my points?