Читать книгу The Case for an Afterlife - J. J. Jennings - Страница 6

What are the skeptical comments associated with apparitions?

A great number of those skeptical comments pertain to religious apparitions – apparitions we’ve excluded from our searches. However, there are some comments that relate to the sightings of apparitions in general. Here is a representative list of those general comments: (9) (10) (11) (12)

1.The sightings of apparitions at séances are often the result of “trickery”.

2.Some of the evidence in a “haunted” dwelling is likely to be staged by those who are claiming to be investigators or witnesses.

3.Some of the images sighted on surfaces in the rooms being investigated are more likely reflections of live persons in the room.

4.“Orbs” and “Vortices” are most likely not spirits, but the result of environmental effects, such as rain, dust, pollen, or reflections picked up by the camera lenses or video equipment in use.

5.Ghosts are psychological phenomena – we see them because we expect to or want to see them. They are hallucinations.

6.Most of the sightings of apparitions are unsubstantiated – the person “seeing” the apparition is the same person reporting it – and there are no other witnesses.

Some skeptical comments in the published material are essentially statements of disbelief regardless of the evidence. For example: “We don’t care what the evidence says – apparitions are nonsense.” We view such comments as not being consistent with the concept of reasonable doubt – the concept that a “reasonable, average, prudent person” would be convinced if the evidence were compelling enough.

Given the list of six representative skeptical comments about apparitions, what are the resulting “credible evidence” criteria for apparitions?

The first five “credible evidence” criteria that we use for apparitions are deliberately matched to the six skeptical comments listed for apparitions:

1.The sighting of an apparition in a potentially staged setting such as a séance or a “haunted house” should not be viewed as credible (Matched to skeptical comments 1 and 2).

2.The sighting of an apparition on a reflective surface should not be viewed as credible evidence (Matched to skeptical comment 3).

3.“Orbs”, “Vortices”, and “Shadows” should not be viewed as credible evidence (Matched to skeptical comment 4).

4.Witnesses should not be expecting or wanting to see an apparition (Matched to skeptical comment 5).

5.Single-witness sightings of an apparition should not be considered credible evidence (Matched to skeptical comment 6).

We also use three additional criteria to evaluate whether or not an apparition sighting is to be considered credible evidence:

6.The apparition should be recognizable as a specific person who once lived (but confirmed as deceased at the time the apparition is seen).

7.Some of the multiple witnesses to an apparition should not be related to the deceased person.

8.Photographs or video images of apparitions should not be viewed as credible evidence (since photographs and video images are subject to “photo-shopping”).

In Chapter 4, we apply the eight criteria listed above to evaluate which apparition sightings in the published material are to be considered “credible evidence” of an afterlife – assuming there are any that are to be considered “credible”.

*****