|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 14:25:28 GMT -5
it's extremely unlikely that there will ever be a method to communicate with ... an eligible female, on the extreme off chance one should be found to exist. Yes, you're unfortunately right. This fits in perfectly with what badwolf & I have been lamenting. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:30:20 GMT -5
Yep, it's always a friend of a friend of a friend...and the photos always turn out to be fake. Especially, from what I hear, on dating websites (applies equally for men and women, so I'm told). |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:33:06 GMT -5
I always thought the scientific community was too indignant and dismissive over concepts that didn't fit into their theories of the universe. The SF trope of parallel universes for example was thought to be as outlandish as ghost or after-life stories. That is until string-theory physics opened up the possibilities of parallel dimensions. Ghosts and after-life occurences might be manifestations of parallel universe convergences. EXcept that science has also pretty clearly (and depressingly, TBH) demonstrated that it's extremely unlikely that there will ever be a method to communicate with another one, with a very small amount of wriggle room for gravity waves. If science fiction is any example, it's probably good if we can't communicate or visit parallel universes. It never seems to work out well. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:34:32 GMT -5
Some do indeed argue that, Dan, but I feel prompted to point out that there are far more people claiming they have seen ghosts than people claiming they have seen coelacanths. Yet only the latter managed to give evidence of it. Not a logical proof either way, but it raises the question "why are ghosts so darn hard to catch even when you're looking for them"? They're sneaky? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 14:34:44 GMT -5
Yep, it's always a friend of a friend of a friend...and the photos always turn out to be fake. Especially, from what I hear, on dating websites (applies equally for men and women, so I'm told). Are you suggesting I'm not an exact duplicate of Mel Gibson circa 1982? |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:37:58 GMT -5
Especially, from what I hear, on dating websites (applies equally for men and women, so I'm told). Are you suggesting I'm not an exact duplicate of Mel Gibson circa 1982? Since we've been instructed not to comment on posters' appearances, all I'll say is that Mel Gibson felt a sudden chill a few minutes ago that he was unable to explain. He thought it was a ghost, but we know better. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 14:40:49 GMT -5
He was also eating a banana at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:45:58 GMT -5
He was also eating a banana at the time. Which, if he's a long time evil-herb eater, could explain some of his anti-social behavior. Banana-poisoning is well known, in enlightened circles, to cause rampant insanity. And ghosts. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 14:48:45 GMT -5
He was also eating a banana at the time. Which, if he's a long time evil-herb eater, could explain some of his anti-social behavior. Banana-poisoning is well known, in enlightened circles, to cause rampant insanity. And ghosts.  -M |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 14:51:33 GMT -5
Which, if he's a long time evil-herb eater, could explain some of his anti-social behavior. Banana-poisoning is well known, in enlightened circles, to cause rampant insanity. And ghosts. -M Not sure which would be more wrong, her having the banana or if it were his. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 24, 2014 15:13:16 GMT -5
Some do indeed argue that, Dan, but I feel prompted to point out that there are far more people claiming they have seen ghosts than people claiming they have seen coelacanths. Yet only the latter managed to give evidence of it. Not a logical proof either way, but it raises the question "why are ghosts so darn hard to catch even when you're looking for them"? They're sneaky? Clould be, but so are coelacanths. I'd never hear one sneaking up on me, while ghosts are all "WooOOOOooooOOOOoooooOOOOooo"! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 15:30:10 GMT -5
Shriekback never had a song called "Ghosts," AFAIK ...
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 24, 2014 15:43:02 GMT -5
Clould be, but so are coelacanths. I'd never hear one sneaking up on me, while ghosts are all "WooOOOOooooOOOOoooooOOOOooo"! So ghosts are sneaky and jerks? |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Nov 24, 2014 15:57:03 GMT -5
Shriekback never had a song called "Ghosts," AFAIK ... No, but they did say that everybody's happy when the dead come home. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 18:26:05 GMT -5
Some do indeed argue that, Dan, but I feel prompted to point out that there are far more people claiming they have seen ghosts than people claiming they have seen coelacanths. Yet only the latter managed to give evidence of it. Not a logical proof either way, but it raises the question "why are ghosts so darn hard to catch even when you're looking for them"? Perhaps it's because what we're using to look for them is no better than what ghost hunters in the 19th century used. Fancy things like REM Pod EMF Detectors might be as useless as bicycle peddles on a wheelchair. And yet level-headed people back then saw...or sensed them too. |
|
