I have the 'woo' gene, do you?(217 Posts)
A nicely coined phrase from another thread. I have it, I do believe
It was right above us, as if on the ceiling about a metre long, and zoomed across, i saw flames very clearly.
I just got my niece and took her upstairs to check everywhere, switched off all appliances and left heading for my parents house.
It was pretty strange.
If it was an experience I had as a child I would have doubted it perhaps, at the time I was 20 and it still is very clear.
At first I thought it was just street lamps switching on, until I glanced up again after noticing my niece looking up too, that's when we saw the flame.
So on response to your question indigo along with other experiences I would like to think I have a 'woo gene'
I can completely understand sceptics, if they haven't experienced anything at all.
I've never seen a UFO , some people claim they have, so I'm sceptic, but certainly don't think they are bonkers or confused
Well UFOs are a whole different issue. Wouldn't it be a bit odd if a sentient race from another planet capable of interstellar travel over millions of light years arrived at our planet undetected by any of our space monitoring systems, discovered 'intelligent' life here and decided to periodically drop in on us in isolated incidents over a period of several centuries, revealing themselves only to individual people at a time without ever offering us any kind of hard evidence that they were here?
Can you imagine us doing the same if we ever found a new planet with life?
I think everyone is a bit woo because it is an ancient survival skill we are born with embedded deep in our brains - probably the amygdala. Most people dimiss it or ignore the signs but we all have it dont we?
Everyone can divine water because finding water is pretty essential for survival. Everyone can see a Ley line once pointed out to them because they mark ancient routes across open landscape for animal herds - another pretty essential survival skill. Sixth sense is essential when avoiding danger - another essential survival skill.
Yeah I think everyone has it - it's called intuition. Yet, we are told we have 'overactive imaginations,' or believe in something irrational, or worse - that there is no evidence, scientific or otherwise that could ever prove the existence of anything.
Not everyone has it, and it's called gullibility. HTH
To quote Daniel Dennett, "There's no polite way to tell someone that they've devoted their life to a folly"
I feel that if I have devoted my life to a folly, however gullible it may seem: I'd never trade any of my experiences for a life without them.
......that there is no evidence, scientific or otherwise that could ever prove the existence of anything
No one has ever said that. There's potentially an awful lot of evidence that could prove the existence of all things woo - unfortunately none has ever been discovered in spite of a great deal of searching.
Everyone can divine water Erm, no they can't. And the people who claim that they can can only do so when there's no annoying scientist around to record it.
I think everyone is a bit woo because it is an ancient survival skill we are born with embedded deep in our brains
Not exactly. There's certainly an argument that we are predisposed to believe in the supernatural on the basis that are brains are wired to attempt to understand the world around us, but all it's doing is filling in the gaps until we actually understand what goes in those gaps.
More importantly, we are predisposed to trust what our superiors tell us as children because THAT is an evolved survival skill. But this is a trait which should wear off as we age. Sadly, many people are told lies as children and the trust is so strong that they never stop believing them.
I'm still feeling it.
ellie what you said re the discovery of it, YES. Like before they knew ultraviolet existed?
Pedro Yes, re the lies. Hence, being told that your imaginary friend is purely imaginary as no one else in the room can see or hear them - is just that. Not exactly lies - but a perception from a differing point of view, based in and with the best intentions of love but still, however, can be wrong. Children are predisposed to believing what adults tell them.
what you said re the discovery of it, YES. Like before they knew ultraviolet existed?
Oh, for goodness sake. UV light was discovered in about 1800. Science was in it's infancy then and people believed all sorts of crackpot things. We've moved on since then, in case you haven't noticed. Some of us.
Ellie, in my opinion science is still in some aspects in a period of infancy. Things always change and move on and are discovered.
By moved on you mean what exactly? I merely chose that example as one which displays the fact that at one point in time there was no knowledge or way to achieve a measurement of something that science couldn't measure/prove. And then, they did.
I feel that your tone in your repsonse is rather abrasive. In what way was I attacking your post, or do you just feel like all people who do not share the same view as you should be put in their place? I was merely asking you a question Ellie.
I think to suggest that science is still in its infancy is to grossly misunderstand science.
I was merely recycling Ellie's terminology to say that in perhaps another 300 years time, someone somewhere might point out that science in 2013 was still in its infancy.
Science isn't the only methodology in the universe, but, it's not constant either, it always changes and progresses.
Indigo OK - here's what I think. You are almost certainly right - compared to where we'll be in 300 years, our science is probably (comparatively) primitive. But this does not mean that your "woo" ideas are somehow more credible because we don't know what we'll know in the future.
It's quite simple - anything you, personally, can detect is detectable by science. Just is. Science can take us back to within a nanosecond of the BB, it has rid the world of things like small pox, put men on the moon & given us the internet (to name but a few, few things). Are you seriously suggesting it can't spot ghosts, auras and psychic healing (or whatever it is you're actually talking about)?
I have a real problem with people saying things like "I know for a fact that the dead walk next to us" - because you don't.
Your ideas will be credible the very second you present some evidence.
Oh, and by the way - if any evidence is found for your beliefs, guess who will find them? Yup....scientists. And I bet you won't be so quick to dismiss science then, will you
Science isn't the only methodology in the universe
Yes, it is.
Name one great mystery that was solved with anything other than science? Just one.
I've got a sceptic gene, but with a hankering for a woo one.
When was I dismissing science? You've taken my comments very personally and I am sorry about that.
I do know that my dead loved ones walk beside me as I can see, hear,feel and sense them. But, what of it? It happens to many people.
I personally need no other evidence other than the experiences I've had.
It's you who has a problem with that: so tell me: how can science assist to help provide evidence of this? I am being genuine is my questioning.
If you can see them, then they must reflect light. If they reflect light they can be detected and measured. A simple experiment would prove that you can't see them.
If you can hear them, they must produce sound waves. If they produce sound waves they can be detected and measured. A simple experiment would prove you can't hear them.
Pedro you seem swayed to prove that I cannot see them. I mean this by referring to your comments that they must reflect light. There are also things visible when we close our eyes, is this a method of light refraction/reflection too?
My dad was a very intelligent, wise and good honest man, I want to stress this to give you a little of what he was like so some of you don't think this is a load of rubbish.
He told me of a couple of experiences he had and never mentioned them again...
He was driving home one afternoon and took the road around the castle to avoid the rush hour traffic.
The high castle walls were to his left, and out of nowhere a woman was falling from the top of the wall, he said she was falling so quickly he slammed on the brakes as he thought she would land infront of his car, she didn't and was gone.
Another time my dad said he was in the sitting room with my grandad and my dad got up to go into the kitchen, my grandad was stood at the kitchen sink, yet could be seen clearly still sat in his chair.
My grandad died within a month of that happening.
I would never have told my dad he was talking rubbish, nor would anyone else have, he just wasn't the kind of man to do that.
He never believed in anything woo, but he saw it.
"Pedro you seem swayed to prove that I cannot see them. I mean this by referring to your comments that they must reflect light. There are also things visible when we close our eyes, is this a method of light refraction/reflection too?"
Yes, that's how the eye works.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.