It was funny the 2-3 times before but this time it wasnt so i think we got that we must call ghost busters bye

An educated adult capable of exercising logic and weighing evidence.

There are lots of educated adults that believe in the supernatural actually so that does not validate your opinion in the least.

Okay, SCIENTIFICALLY educated adults do not believe in ghosts because of the physical impossibility of ghosts existing, Partnered with the fact that there is no evidence other than people(crazed). This is also the reason 90%+ of physicists and biologists and chemists etc. are irreligious.

So your saying that my college professors with PhD's in various sciences that believe in ghosts aren't educated? There have been a few conversations with them around Halloween about the supernatural and some of them believe. I'm a college senior this year in a SCIENCE degree and I believe in both ghosts and God. I'm not saying anyone has to believe one thing or another, but scientifically educated adults will also believe in ghosts. There's also plenty of evidence out there for both ghosts and God (I'm not starting a religious debate here, just mentioning it since you did). Some people just refuse to see it. Science only goes so far and definitely doesn't explain everything.

Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree because the evidence IS out there and some people just don't understand it or know it when they see it but I know you won't beloved that either. Science can't explain everything no matter how hard it tries :)

1. Or maybe there just isn't any evidence. You haven't even given any examples of your evidence of ghosts/God, so it's not really an issue of people not being able to understand the evidence given to them. 2. Science explains things much better than religion does, that's indisputable. If you don't believe me, look up how many diseases are treated by science every day versus those which are undoubtably treated by religion. And science adapts to new knowledge, while religion, when new knowledge comes around (like... say... evolution,) stays the same. So science really does do the better job of "explaining things."

You know, there's this awesome Facebook post going around. It's about this college professor who likes to call kids stupid for believing in God. He says since you can't see, feel, taste, or hear God, He doesn't exist. The student replies and says the same thing about the professor's brain. You can't see, feel, taste, of hear it. Unless you open the head up and look inside. But what if, in order to see God, you have to do something specific, as in pray, be saved, and be forgiven for your sins? You can't say that just because you can't prove it, something doesn't exist. It's like getting mad at your girl/boyfriend because they can't physically prove that they love you. I, as a devoted Christian, believe that God led the evolution and made science the way it is. Both are true, in my opinion.

First, you CAN touch, see, etc a brain. Besides, we don't need to be able to see something to know it is there. I cannot directly see the air, but I can feel it in other ways, and I can see certain phenomena it causes, such as the sky being blue (Rayleigh scattering of the sun's light) or the shimmer above asphalt on a hot day (heated air having a different refractive index than cooler air above it). Plus, science allows us to make predictions with a high degree of certainty in the outcome. Example: drop an object and the theory of gravity predicts it will fall. This conformance with reality is what leads rational people to have confidence in scientific theories. On the other hand, let's take a prediction of your religion, like, oh, Mark 11:24- basically promises that prayers will be granted. How about you pray that all disease, hunger, war, and poverty are immediately eliminated, and get back to us on how that works out for you? My prediction: your prayer will not be granted.

that is here in the united states idk how that law works in the uk?