hubby says he has seen a ghost five times so far.

[lowresidue]

Hubby has taken our dog to a local wood, and lets the dog go for a run.
He goes at different times and different days.
He came home and told me that he has seen the same woman ghost five separate times so far. Tonight with bonnet wearing woman made him jump when she popped up in front of him. When he said 'you made me jump', she smiled nodded and walked away from him.

He was quite serious but I asked why he thought she was a dead/ ghost? He said because she is wearing a long coat and a bonnet type hat.
AIBU to suggest that this woman isn't dead, isn't a ghost and is an odd lady with a strange fashion sense?
He is quite firm she is a ghost, and walks along the path but not on it though the trees.

personally I am glad we are going on holiday soon my hubby really needs it asap.
Then again AIBU?

Thing is, you don't have to be some sort of 'woo evangelist' to pause for a moment and wonder if somewhere, somehow there might be a little bit of truth in some of the thousands of bits of anecdotal evidence from all over the world.

You just need a normal amount of curiosity and humility.

This thread is massively entertaining though. I enjoy the anecdotes, but not as much as I enjoy watching Plimmy getting increasingly self-righteous and Bertrand maintaining her jolly, good-natured mode of questioning against all the odds.

Everyone should entertain the possibility that they might be wrong.

And wonder if somewhere, somehow there might be a little bit of truth in some of the thousands of bits of anecdotal evidence from all over the world.

But there's equally thousand of anecdotes about Zeus and moth-men. It's not about humility, it's about going where the evidence leads and at the moment the evidence leads away from anything paranormal.

No. Zeus and all the other ancient gods were part of a highly detailed, story-based religion.

Hardly the same as an isolated weird experience in a lifetime of completely unremarkable experiences, where the person concerned is just saying "can't explain it" rather than "it was Thor swinging his hammer".

I get that you want to put all stuff you don't agree with in the same box, but it's not like that.

I am absolutely prepared to admit that I might be wrong. I actually want to be wrong about unicorns and dragons in particular. The problem is that accounts of supernatural events are, while unique to the individual, broadly similar, so tend to have the same boring explanations. And somebody saying "I definitely wasn't asleep" is not proof that the apparition they saw/thing they experienced at bed time or in the early morning really happened. However real it felt to them. And I honestly don't see how it's bossy/arrogant/egotistical or any of the other things I've been accused of being to say "Well, you were probably dreaming"

And this does not mean that there are not loads more things to discover -that's what makes life exciting. We just don't need to discover another explanation for the "incubus/succubus" type experience that people have been recording since recording began. Because we know about sleep paralysis now, and that's what it is. We don't need an explanation for those orbs that were trendy for a while-because we know that's something that happens in photographs. We know about how faulty our memory is. We know about the ideomotor effect. We know loads of stuff. Not everything. But loads!

*For crying out loud. If you can't tolerate having your beliefs pulled apart don't post in AIBU. If you can argue your case, great. If you can't, spend sometime working out why.

Play the ball, not the player.*

I agree with you, provided that the player follows these rules too. Plimmy has been rude and aggressive, and has displayed an unusual persistence and anger around trying to control the beliefs of others. To me that goes outside the boundaries of ordinary debate, and becomes offensive rather than merely tedious.

It's not about being unable to tolerate 'beliefs being pulled apart'. Nothing that has been said by the sceptics on here is new to me. I've considered it all before, and I frankly don't give two hoots whether anybody, let alone strangers on the internet, agrees with me or thinks I'm a loon. What I do object to, though, is descending into rudeness and insults.

From a psychological perspective I find this, and the various anxious and angry attempts to get people to disbelieve 'woo' fascinating. However, to be so angry about the beliefs/experiences of a stranger - and their persistence in not bowing to your own view - displays some worrying issues around a need to control others, in my opinion. The level of anger is completely over the top, and unnecessarily beings a sour note to what would otherwise be an enjoyable thread.

I get that you want to put all stuff you don't agree with in the same box, but it's not like that.

It's got nothing to do with me agreeing or how I feel. It's to do with the evidence. People can be mistaken in their interpretation. We know this very well. What we have no evidence for are ghosts. There's no data. But we have data on people seeing patterns where there are none.

If what people claim is the evidence then it follows that you're suggesting there are actually 8 foot moth/human hybrids inhabiting the woods outside Chicago?

From a psychological perspective I find this, and the various anxious and angry attempts to get people to disbelieve 'woo' fascinating. However, to be so angry about the beliefs/experiences of a stranger -

Are you new to MN? People here get just as impassioned during debates about washing up liquid

The appeal for me on these threads is similar to meeting someone who believed in a flat earth. It's something I want to understand.

Also I have very woo relatives and I can't thrash it out with them. It's safer to do so here because you can't spit in my tea.

Are you new to MN? People here get just as impassioned during debates about washing up liquid grin

Ha ha! You are right, of course, MN does seem to bring out some peculiarly intense and over-invested-in-the-choices-of-others- type behaviour!

"The level of anger is completely over the top, and unnecessarily beings a sour note to what would otherwise be an enjoyable thread."

Genuine question -as mumsnetters say. Do you really think that the "anger" comes from the sceptic side? Because that's certainly not how it feels from where I'm sitting! I've never raised my voice or called names-but I've certainly been on the receiving end of some surprising unpleasantness!

I've certainly been on the receiving end of some surprising unpleasantness!

Pot. Kettle. Black.

The ‘anger’ certainly does not come from the sceptics I agree.

And Bertrand you haven’t been unpleasant or rude - people just don’t like to be told their nonsense is nonsense. You have done so quite politely.

I am perfectly on board with most of what you say Bertrand And I appreciate that you are always good-natured (if infuriating !!)

I do wish you'd concede, though, that it's condescending to offer the explanation "you were asleep" to someone who's already thought through all the rational explanations ! I'm not talking about any specific example here - I just mean in general. I guess I am more willing to believe people than you are, based on my own security in my perception. I've literally never neen confused as to whether I'm awake.

All this chanting of "data, data, where's the data" makes me laugh because it reminds me of our senior managers at school... There we are, using our professional judgement and everything, and believing ourselves to know what we're doing... and they value all that at nothing - all they want is a table of numbers

I don't have much to add but these threads fascinate me.
Have never seen anything but have 'felt' things and have heard loads.

Your DH should see a doctor to rule out physical and psychological causes of visual hallucinations.

"I've literally never neen confused as to whether I'm awake."

I honestly think you're quite unusual in that. Have you never woken from a dream thinking for a moment that it was real? Or had a conversation with a partner that you don't remember later because you were mostly asleep? I know I have.

The idea of rational discourse, where arguments are subject to critical examination, attacked and defended, is entirely lost to modern, popular discussions. Any attempt to challenge someone’s arguments just results in personal counter attacks or inane responses that one is entitled to one’s opinion.

Yeah, Bertrand, I've had vivid dreams, moments of confusion, sleepy conversations that I don't remember. But those things are so obvious that they're prettt self-explanatory. Eg I will be reading before I go to sleep and I'm so tired that I can't take it in properly; next time I pick up the book, I have to go back several pages before I can carry on. But this is easy stuff. It doesn't take a moment to work out what's happened there.

People are generally talking about experiences that they've looked at every which way and still can't explain.

But Bertrand I genuinely don't have any issue with your stance. You've said you'd be open to being proved wrong

And you're right, there isn't any evidence to prove you wrong. I'd suggest there's evidence enough to make us stop and think - but I don't think you'd agree.

The only thing I've really objected to is the arrogance of posters (who shall remain nameless) who have "promised" OP that it wasn't a ghost and not only claim that there is currently no verifiable evidence but also claim there can never be any.

There have been proper scientific investigations (someone linked to one of them) - yes, the results were negative!! But the scientists went to the trouble of investigating. They didn't write the conclusion before they'd done the test!

My youngest DD has an intellectual disability as well as some significant medical issues. We have almost lost her several times.

She insists that she is visited by a woman who is "small, has a squeaky voice, and red curly hair". She says the fist time she saw this person was when she was intensive care at the age of 5.

She is describing my DH's late mother to a tee. My DD never met her gran.

Believer or not, that is creepy.

Bertrand I don't see anger from you, or any other of the sceptics, other than Plimmy. You will note from my posts that I was talking specifically to her/him. I will reiterate what I have previously stated: I have no problem with sceptics putting forward their views. I do have a problem with rudeness, sneering, belittling etc. Plimmy has behaved like that on numerous occasions on this thread. My comments were directed at her.

I am surprised you do not also get a sense of the great anger in Plimmy's posts, but maybe you are focussing your attention more on the posts of the 'believers'. I am sorry if you have been the subject of rudeness on the thread Bertrand, but it hasn't come from me.

👻

Most ghost sightings happen when it’s quiet, dark, deserted... no one ever see ghosts at ten o’clock on a Tuesday morning in Tesco.

My granddad never believed in ghosts.

He was working to work with a friend one day when a co-worker walked towards them, they stopped and chatted, asked why he was 'in his best clothes', he laughed waved good bye and granddad and friend carried on to the mill where they worked.

The third friend had been killed in an accident on the night shift.

He had no explanation. The friend with hi had no explanation.

BTW if you love a good woo thread have a look on youtube for a film about ghosts on the London underground I think it is this one