When people ask whether or not they believe ghosts or aliens exist, they typically point to something that is somewhat tangible as proof such as “the government says it is real” or “this video explains it all”. I think these responses are valid, but with low confidence in what they’re trying to prove. A government can simply be making stuff up and a video explaining it could of simply been misinformed into some false truth.

On the contrary, I think they exist because of statistical improbability. I see that there are an uncountable amount of videos claiming to have recorded proof for ghosts and aliens. Assuming that 99% of them are hoaxes, clout chasers, or misidentified phenomena, that still leaves 1% of all those videos to be true. As long as the percentage is not 100%, it means that there is solid proof out there, weak in confidence or not, it’s a lead to the truth.

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    Thing about Nessy is that it is localized. It started in an area in Scotland. Assuming Nessy was a worldwide phenomenon where sightings are found more than a couple of times a month, it’d be different.

    Nessy is purported to be a single creature living in a single Loch in Scotland; why would there be sightings elsewhere in the world? That’s like saying “The Eiffel Tower is only ever sighted in Paris, isn’t that suspicious?”

    Given the relatively small number of visitors to Loch Ness vs. the number of people in the world with cameras who could presumably document aliens or ghosts, I’d argue that the sightings per visitor are at a significantly higher rate than UFO or ghost sightings.