I just don't get why people who see/hear/experience things and are not able to immediately find a cause, why it must be assumed the experience should be attributed to something supernatural... instead of assuming it was something else much more likely and logically proven.
The thing that also vexes me a little is when someone says, "No, I really don't think that was a ghost", then the believer says something like "Ok then, if it wasn't a ghost, what was it?"
Just because something cannot be disproven, does not make it true.
Do I believe there are things about our world that are beyond the comprehension of our defined world and laws? Sure, new discoveries are made all the time. There was a time when everyone knew a larger and heavier object would fall to the ground at a faster rate than a smaller one. I also believe that the large majority(more than 95%) of people who say they had a supernatural experience are full of shit. The definition of what a ghost is or isn't varies so much from believer to believer. If you interviewed 20 people who say they've seen a ghost, the likelihood that you would come back with at least 10 different ways to define a ghost are pretty good, IMO.
For those that believe in ghosts and think they know something about them, do you also believe in vampires? Witches? Werewolves? Leprecauns(sp?)? Or any other number or supernatural beings. And just so I'm clear, as far as I know, no one know's anything about ghosts. Ghosts don't fall under what can be called knowledge yet. Belief? sure. Faith? sure. Knowledge? Sorry, no.
There's a bunch of people who believe that John Edwards fag really speaks to their dead relatives, so it's not like I'm all that surprised people believe believe in other things in large numbers.