You are here: Real Ghost Stories :: Haunted Places :: Flushing Ghost? :: Comments :: Page 1

Comments for Flushing Ghost?: Page 1

Return to the ghost story Flushing Ghost?

Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-14)
Ok Rook I'll respect your wishes and apologize I should not have brought up that subject at all really since it's unrelated to the subject of your story.
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-14)
Hey rook!
Excuse me, but I'm down beneath all these other comments too. What? My red flag doesn't count?
**kicks dirt and walks away with head down**

Jav
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-14)
Both of you know how hard I try to stay on topic... Even when I've invited conversations that have waxed a bit religious onto one of my experiences... This is really no big deal, I even had my say... But your correct, it had drifted to far into Conspiracy Theory and to far away from the Paranormal so I tossed the 'red flag' and it's time to move on to more topical things.

Respectfully,

Rook
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Rook: My apologies to you for my part in this... Sometimes my stubbornness gets the better of me 😆 😆 ❤
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
rook - I know, but the subject matter was getting way out of hand and taking away from your story. I guess we've been there before, though, many times, haven't we?
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Miracles,

No, that won't be necessary. It came up as an individual trying to make a point and got a bit out of hand... Not the first time something like that's happened here on YGS.

Respectfully,

Rook
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
rook - it's your story. Do you want any comments deleted if they are made after your request?
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Not that I totally believe the Official Version of the story I will say this... 🤔

Bbrave,

You stated...

"Now if the impact of those planes caused the collapse of the towers then why did they not fall immediately?
Even if I assume the collapses were caused by those aircraft explain why the buildings collapsed neatly in place."

Answer: It took time to compromise the structural integrity to the point that the floors began to collapse upon themselves. They collapsed so neatly upon themselves because that was what they were designed to to in the event of catastrophic failure.

As far as the 'explosions' the Emergency Workers heard... Can you imagine what steel I beams sound like as they 'shatter and fail' due to the worst case scenario event taking place?

I'm I right? I have no clue, but I would hope the engineers and architects who designed towers that tall took into consideration what would happen in the event that structural integrity was compromised.

Now due me a Favor... TAKE THIS CONSPIRACY SH [at] # SOMEWHERE ELSE!

Rook

That's all I have to say on this... Take it else where please. 😐
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Conspiracy that word is used every time someone disagrees with the official story on something. I see it as a person thinking for themselves specially when the official story doesn't make sense.

But since I'm going against the masses it must be a conspiracy theory. Even if the official story doesn't explain everything. Fine so be it but I know better than to believe what my government tells me simply because they did so

When they have a history of hiding the truth
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-2
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
[at] Granny

I would have sided with it being paranormal in nature until it was proven to be otherwise. This answer is late I'm aware but because I have epilepsy and was suffering from a migraine. I did not spend much time online as the sensitivity to light and sound was causing me intense pain.
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
I'm with you granny. When you put the cart before the horse every time it just means you have taken that u-turn into dippitty doo dah land. No one makes any sense in that place.

Jav

Hey granny,
About 'Dippitty do'...
Do they still make that stuff? 😆
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Bbrave: I think yah got it backasswards:
"The claim itself is proof of the paranormal. Until someone can prove otherwise beyond a doubt"

So if I tell the police, "Bbrave came to my house and raped me then murdered my husband", they will arrest you just because I said so?...No, they would gather evidence to prove or DISPROVE my claim... The burden of PROOF lies with the claiment *sigh*

You know what?...I'm done... Keep on keepin'on 😊
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
Excuse me for butting in here boys, but you do know that conspiracy theories are frowned upon on this site, don't you? So why don't you take this silliness somewhere that specializes in just that?

Starting this up on rooks page... What, are you nuts?

Jav
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm

I suggest everyone read this though I'm sure some of you have come across this site before.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
[at] Pjod

I make no claim to have a phd in physics. But one in this case is not needed. It's simple if a batter in a baseball game hits a homerun the ball doesn't pause in midair for an hour before zooming out of the park!

It only stops long enough for it's forward motion to be overcome and redirected by the impact with and the forward motion of the bat being swung!

Now if the impact of those planes caused the collapse of the towers then why did they not fall immediately?
Even if I assume the collapses were caused by those aircraft explain why the buildings collapsed neatly in place.

See no one who believes the official story can explain that. The burning jet fuel theory is debatable since it's meant to explain the collapses. Or am I missing something?

I'm sure everyone would agree that a given explanation has to be able to account for all the details in any given situation before being considered to be the case.

In the 9/11 case the given explanation doesn't account for the anomalies in the scenario. So it can not be believed to be the cause.

Then there's the fact that after the fall of Saddam. Oil and subsequently gas prices began to rise and the president's family at the time just happened to own a OIL COMPANY.

Oh I drew said parallel because the way the police investigate a suspected crime is because the burden of proof is on them.

Just as it would be on anyone who investigates claims of the paranormal. Since they only have the claimants report to go on until evidence to the contrary comes to light.

The claim itself is proof of the paranormal. Until someone can prove otherwise beyond a doubt

Now back to the bull crap official 9/11 story.
The jet fuel being flammable does equal an explosion. If you ignite a flammable material like jet fuel in a enclosed area like a fuel tank.

The energy released by the burning fuel has no where to go so it builds up until they can no longer be contained resulting in an explosion.

It's simple science heck if you have ever fired a gun which I believe many of you have. Then you know that's how it works the energy released in the form of gas by the ignition of the gun powder builds up until the pressure becomes sufficient to propel the bullet forward. The only difference is it's a controlled explosion but an explosion none the less

Wake up people the government doesn't give a flying turd about any of us. Unless you happen to be directly related to them. Simply look at what happened during world war II to the Japanese Americans.

Placed in interment camps simply cause they were of Japanese decent. Not because they had done anything to imply they were dangerous.
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
granny - and a great entry in that journal you've been keeping 😆
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+4
10 years ago (2012-07-13)
I guess Bbrave isn't going to answer my question, so I'll give you guys the rundown... Instead of assuming it was my ghosties opening the door every night, I asked my husband if he's been in the room after I go to sleep... His computer in our room makes a horrendous humming noise that works that one nerve in my neck so while I'm home he doesn't use it, he uses his laptop instead... He had been putting it away, and neglected to shut the door...

But maybe I shouldn't have asked him... It would have made for a great story here, no? 😆 😆 😆
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
So actually, the "pancake style collapse" as described by B, as not possible- is exactly what should have occured when the steel gave way to heat.
It may appear to the viewer as a controlled demolishion- but anyone who cares to look beyond the "conspiracy websites" will see the real science to it.
nice post Lou.
LouSlips (10 stories) (979 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
Pjod,
I gather from your comment that you meant to post a link...?
And yeah, fuel is flammable/combustible it is not explosive... In other words, it has to burn. Steel, regardless of size/shape begins to deform pretty quickly when heat is applied, especially when it is in excess of 2000 degrees and has a concrete structure load sitting on top of it... And don't forget 32. 2 ft/second.

Lou
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
I do have to add...
I question B's knowledge of physics concerning the collapse of the Twin Towers. While those buildings were designed to withstand impact... A full tank of fuel was never considered. I'm having trouble following his use of this, as an example towards making his point. The above is that of a "conspiracy theory" -You are free to consider the true source behind the attack itself... That the structure was destablized due to the burning fuel is not debatable.
As far as the question of what exactly tumbled building 7? You would certainly have something to go with there. (footnote) Don't feel like you even have to respond to any of the above- as it's taking away from the discussion at hand.
LouSlips (10 stories) (979 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
Bbrave,

No one is accusing posters who have legitimate claims and concerns on this site, or anywhere else, of lying. So the parallel you attempted to draw connecting paranormal claims to a court of law is pointless. When we are investigating the paranormal, the burden of proof IS with the potential spirit activity.
Many people claim they feel cold drafts when they are feeling watched...I've felt them, I am sure you have yourself, everyone has. That is because drafts and inconsistent airflow are part of our everyday environment. Since it is such commonplace for drafts to occur, it is not up to an investigator to prove a draft exists... It is up to the investigator to the best of their ability, to decipher if it could have possibly been a draft. When no draft can be detected and no displaced airflow can be determined, then the investigator may use this information to corroborate addional activity... As supporting material, so to speak... But never base a haunting on a draft, just because they want to find a ghost. Especially when the draft has been reported by someone who has heightened their sensitivity to their physical environment; as people naturally do when they are scared.
Open mindedness is great. If you choose not to be skeptical just because everyone else approaches this field that way, that is your choice and you are welcome to it.
You don't have to go far into my profile and stories to see what I believe in, but paranormal activity for the average person is not a daily occurrence. Well, actually, it is... They just cannot sense it. So every report, now induced by popularity and Hollywood, that would have otherwise been ignored that are now publicized because of this newly perceived social acceptance, are not all true, not 50%, not even close. It is now cool to see ghosts... Fifty years ago we would have been locked up for saying that... And people wanting to be like the people on TV has induced a lot of non-paranormal events to be reported as such... Because that is what the reporter wants to happen.
By your realm of reasoning, you could choose any scenario and claim it to be true... If you choose to live that way, it is your choice... But claiming to be original for the sake of standing out is not being a freethinker, it is being an outcast... And quite frankly, regardless of our previous discussions, you deserve better for yourself.

Lou
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
Bbrave: My intention isn't to argue with you... But let me give you an example: for the past three days when I wake up in the morning, the door to our guest room has been open... We rarely use this room and keep the door shut, 'specially since it's hot here and we need the cool air elsewhere in house (the vent in this room is closed)...I do have house guests of the ghostie persuasion... What is your immediate assessment/impression of this situation?
GladysJ8 (2 stories) (5 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
Weird things always happen in most old buidings. Whether it can be debunked or not, be always on your guard. 😉
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
Bbrave,

I think what is happening here is that the majority of us here, when we encounter something STRANGE, do not assume it's Paranormal... We place it in the 'UNEXPLAINED' category and then attempt to find an explanation and when the STRANGE event defies all natural explanations we then place it into the PARANORMAL CATEGORY.

You simply work it backwards... But your willingness to accept events as paranormal because the person relating their experience does not have an explanation does not give you the right to blast those of us who offer our opinions as to what 'natural causes' may have contributed to the experience in question.

You have stated this...

"It was said my way of thinking is holding this field of research back. I disagree I mean how do you scientifically run tests on something we know little about?"

We do it the same way Edison worked on the light bulb... Or any of the other great inventors or scientist go about researching and proving a theory... By applying the scientific method and 'test, test, test...research, research, research and present the best evidence we can find that defies 'normal' explanations so that we can call it Paranormal.

Respectfully,

Rook
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-1
10 years ago (2012-07-12)
My last attempted at making my thought process clear to people. After this knock yourselves out with your beliefs about me. All I have been saying is until natural causes can be PROVEN. The situation has to be Viewed as what it is claimed to be PARANORMAL.

Doesn't mean you have to believe it or stop looking for other explanations. It's just the point were I start from like a race I work to get from point a to point b. And if point b is natural causes then it is if not then it's not. But point a in my opinion must be the paranormal until I can say for sure it is not

It was said my way of thinking is holding this field of research back. I disagree I mean how do you scientifically run tests on something we know little about?

The conventional method of proving something does not apply to the unknown because it simply does not work!
To properly investigate that world takes science at the quantum level.

What holds back this field of research is the demanding of proof first by main stream scientists. Though it already exists and more is found when any paranormal researcher eliminates all possibilities but the paranormal.

Don't fight with me cause I don't follow the set method of investigating something. I am not the enemy
I don't demand you have proof first. Mainstream scientists who deny something because they can't test it in a lab are the enemies
PurplePanda (18 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
I, for one, appreciate this kind of debunking. A scientist comes up with a theand I meanory. He or she will then do everything possible to *disprove* the theory. If the theory can't be disproved, the theory is correct.

The same thing should apply to the paranormal. Eliminate the natural, the "rational," and what you have left is the paranormal.

I call myself a skeptical mystic (or should that be a mystical skeptic?). I strongly believe in the supernatural and the paranormal. In my younger years I was involved with a dogmatic religion. We were told some things that were absolutely true, no question about it. And I do mean NO question. I lost all faith after discovering the untruths. I've regained faith, but am not so quick to believe everything I'm told, nor even my own experiences. And I never believe politicians.
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+4
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
*sigh* see what I miss when I have to work? 😆...

Bbrave: One of the things I think you may be missing when some of us attempt to "debunk" an experience is that our opinions are presented as opinions... Usually we ask a series of questions if the information given seems incomplete or needs clarification... None of us have stated matter-factly, "the moaning you hear is the pipes in your basement. Don't bother to check it out with a plumber because I know for certain that's the cause"...We ask questions and offer explanations according to our own experiences and investigation of occurrances... Like this: "Well, I had that happen to me once, but after calling a plumber as suggested by another poster, it turned out to be the pipes in the basement. Maybe you should check your pipes"...The normal, mundane stuff should be the first thing anyone thinks of before placing the "paranormal" label on it... You seem to think that everyone should jump to the conclusion of ghost primarily, then look at the pipes...It's your thought process that is holdng back the field of paranormal investigation/research...

We can't allow those who believe in the paranormal to continue to be considered stupid people... Because THAT is the opinion of those who don't believe US... We have to look at things logically, or continue to be laughing stocks...Personally, I'm at a point in my life where I don't give a flying goose turd who believes me or not😆...

Please don't discourage people from looking at things logically, intelligently, and with an OPEN mind...
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Wow...Oh Wow... Look at this...

First I'd like to thank Lou, Pjod, Jav and brat (😉) for their contributions. I think however this was summed up quite nicely by Bbrave himself, but once again he does not realize what he has said, so here's the quote from Bbrave...

"I'll say it again to a scared homeowner who has a maintenance problem with his/her pipes or furnace. But doesn't know it and mistakes that noise to be terrible moaning coming from the basement. That noise will forever be that until a professional tells them otherwise..."

Well once again there is some truth in the 'statement' but you, Bbrave, seem to be make a better case 'against' yourself...

That 'terrible moaning' will still be 'terrible moaning' after the plumber (expert) leaves the home, it will remain terrible moaning until the 'issue' is fixed. It now has an explanation... An explanation that can be offered for free from someone who has experienced a similar situation.

So having said that...

Bbrave,

My issue is with you yourself and how you word things and then attempt to say 'I didn't say that' or I didn't mean it that way... You completely restated something... Totally changed the meaning of what you said and that irritates the HE# [at] out of me...

Here's an example of what I'm talking about...

Your original statement... The one that had me up 'past my bed time...

Oh and Rook you may not mean anything by it but by trying to debunk the footsteps those security officers reported hearing following them as echoes or someone else walking around in another part of the building.

It's insulting the intelligence of those security officers. Actually debunking is a insulting practice because it says that you the debunker knows what the claimant has seen or heard better than they themselves.

You may not mean to say that yourself but that's what comes across to the claimant. As far as your echo theory goes even you yourself aren't sure so you can't say that's not a valid claim can you?

Personally I think debunkers have more to prove than someone who has claimed to experience the paranormal or something else unexplained"

You have come back and stated you should have stated this...

"[at] Rook

I've reread my comment and I see where a mistake was made that has you thinking I said you insulted their intelligence. So let me clear that up right now.

You may not mean anything by attempting to debunk these experiences. But the practice of debunking is in my opinion an insulting one. The debunker himself may not mean to insult anyone.

However by attempting to explain the situation by saying the people had mistaken either echoes or the sound of someone else walking in another part of the building.

As the cause of them hearing footsteps following them makes it seem like the people claiming to have heard those footsteps aren't intelligent enough to differentiate between footsteps following them, echoes, and someone else walking around in a different part of the building.

Rook you may not think that yourself but that's how it can and most often does to the claimant. There hope all is clear now..."

The meaning of your original statement has nearly been completely changed... If an effort to placate me. Man I don't need to be pacified. So please do not try. Your MISSTATEMENTS and 'veiled' attempts at presenting possible explanations... Based on others ideas... Is getting very irritating. While I respect everyone's right to their own opinion I do not hold any respect for someone who says one thing and then attempts to 'wiggle' out of it by saying...'Oh that should have read...' Or 'What I meant to say was...' I choose my words carefully, I try to be clear in what I mean in an effort to avoid 'misunderstandings' such as this (though I have my doubts this is truly a misunderstanding). So Let's put an end to it. Let's just go our separate ways, contribute to others experiences in our own manner, with OUR OWN IDEAS AND ADVICE, and I think we will get along well.

Respectfully,

Rook
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Sorry Rook it was the way I worded that one comment that caused that misunderstanding. I saw that and hope you read the comment I posted in which I realized and admitted it.

As far as all this back and forth nonsense goes I apologize for my involvement. But understand this I was not the only party and will not be taking responsibility for the actions of the people who initiated it.

In the end I simply stated my beliefs as I have a right to. After that no one put a gun to anyone's head
They choose to start the bs for their own reasons
bratslovergirl2011 (1 stories) (26 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Bbrave

Seems like your pride is hurt because you have been called out by Jav. You have been discovered as someone who steals credit from others. You have shown no respect. You say you are entitled to your opinion, and yet you still childishly continue to persue this arguement. I haven't been on here for long, yet I know Rook is respectful and helpful. Learn some respect for the people on here. 😉
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Jav You are down right crazy followed Rook?
You're wrong in so many ways. Since he's been a member longer than I it's to be expected he commented on many of the stories I have. Where you got that absurd ideas I don know or care in all honesty.

As far as being down right rude of I guess it's ok people were rude to me as well huh? You hypocrite and for your information I was not rude. I simply pointed out when I made valid points no one said anything about them cause they could not and knew it.

You and others have been on my case simple cause I disagreed with you when I made my first comment. There's no other reason period and whenever I made valid points you all would try some other bs to get to me.

In the end I've not been rude or treated any of those who disagreed with me with the same hostility they deserved. No I respected their right to disagree in the end I am not the one who's priorities are out of whack.

My priorities are in order as they should be. My fault here is being naive enough to believe I'd get the same respect I've shown
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Jav

No and for your information I was refering to EVERYTHING. I have seen so many people who instead of thinking for themselves let others do it for them.
For example and I hate to bring this up and if anyone lost a loved one due to the tragedy my condolences.

The 9/11 tragedy the official story was terrorists hijacked and crashed planes into the two towers causing them to fall. However the towers were designed to withstand the impact of planes and did for an hour afterward. Not only that some absurd explanation was given for the collapse of the towers.

Burning jet fuel weakened the supports enough to cause a collapse. That right there is bs the majority of the fuel burned up when the planes exploded upon impact.
There's still more when the towers did fall the fell nice and neat in the very place they stood. Finally there's the physics if the impact of those planes caused the collapse why didn't they take place immediately after the initial impact?

The official story is total bs yet widely accepted as truth to the point people will fight over it! Why is that cause our government says that's what happened.

Something that wasn't televised is rescue workers reported hearing what sounded like demolition charges going off! Which would explain the pancake style collapse of those two structures.

When I say thinking freely I mean about everything. Because letting others think for them is getting a lot of people nothing but problems
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Bbrave,
Your priorities are out of whack. You come to a web site where the majority of the membership believe. Then you have the nerve to tell us:
"But what I would like to see is people to step out of the expected norm and think freely for a change"
Look around you. You are preaching to the choir here. Are you that egotistical that you are under the impression you are the sole purveyor of all things paranormal? Nobody is as backward in thought and deed when it comes to investigating than you. I have watched you walk into comment threads and take ownership of the advice and suggestions made by others and reworded them as if they had sprung from your mouth first. You are fooling no one with these tactics. You have been outright rude in your statements. You have followed Rook around and repeated his suggestions on the same thread, as if they were your own. And you have the nerve to get all up in his face about his style of investigating. He is, bar none, one of the most courteous and respectful people you will ever find. We have watched as you berate and argue over nothing. You just want your way, that is all you are about. Purposefully coming here to cause disruption and stomp around as if you are entitled.
My thoughts about why you are here are simple. You obviously have an axe to grind with some of us for some perceived wrong you feel was done to you. Maybe we debunked your story, or your comments last time you were here? You left angry perhaps? Now you want to do whatever it takes to bait a lot of good people into some huge debate, whereby you never accept that you may be mistaken or just plain wrong in your assertions. You want to think freely? Go ahead. But keep in mind all that you have done to these good people in the short amount of time you have been here is all being recorded onto these pages for referencing later on. You can talk in circles all day. But in the end, you have shown yourself as a non original thinker. Nothing that you have suggested has come from your own ideas. All of it can be traced to another persons comment, which you have essentially stolen. You will see all through these comment threads where others will start off by saying they agree with a previous poster and they may even elaborate on it, but they don't try and take credit for someone else's ideas. The people that do that are few, yet already well known. You are just louder and more determined to steal from others right under their noses. A thief is still a thief, whether it be material or intellectual property.
And with that I leave you. I won't be sticking around for any response from you. I don't really care what you have to say about anything. None of it would have come from original thought anyway. It would simply be your regurgitation of what someone else said.

Jav

This little dog and pony show of yours is not new. We have seen this act before and we are not impressed.
Get over yourself. It's not all about you.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Pjod

Maybe I did however the practice of debunk was initially used to discredit people who claim to have experienced the supernatural or have information concerning wrong doings by certain organizations in the world.

By providing a more mundane explanation or out right deny that said wrong doings even took place. Which is why I believe debunking is an initially rude practice.

However and this is the important part I never once said the debunker him/herself is rude! Just that the practice of debunking is. Even I am skeptical of somethings claimed to be paranormal in nature.

But realize that until I can prove otherwise I must accept the claim at face value
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Over my head nope not a bit. I just choose to believe that not everything can be explained by the mundane. Because not everything can and that is a fact
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Well, there is a difference between thinking freely, and assuming every "bumb in the night" reported must be paranormal. My disagreement started when you stated the practice of "debunking" is an insult to those who have an experience they can't explain.
You assumed, when reading the story above, that the word "debunk" was being used to just outright dismiss the footsteps in question- when it was being used to describe a "possible" explanation to the sounds being heard. It appears we are not on the same page here, so I will sign off- as not to clutter this thread any longer.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Pjod

Okay you got me there maybe I should not have said forever. In the end though if no one tells the homeowner what the cause is to he/she it will be a moan. That's the point I was making.

Having knowledge of a subject helps but for those who have none and are scared expecting to think rationally about the subject is a stretch
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
You're right I like all humans have an ego though I am a bit ashamed to admit so. However it has nothing to do with my unwillingness to back down.

That is due to many of the points I have made not being refuted with anything that would cause me to do so. If I can make a valid point I do so.

Rook once asked if I need there to be a paranormal cause to everything the answer is no. But what I would like to see is people to step out of the expected norm and think freely for a change
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
"That noise will forever be that until a professional tells them otherwise"
So you're saying, a seasoned investigator, can't offer that possible explanation- it HAS to be a plumber. The homeowner could never be able to, after hearing a possible cause from another person, go down and check for loose/rattling pipes? It will forever be a haunting until roto-rooter tells them otherwise?
That sounds rediculous, and does not/or should not- follow as such in real life situations.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Pjod

Ok and where did this come from? I never asked for you to tell me something I already know. Anyway you have not once attempted to refute the points I have made.

I'll say it again to a scared homeowner who has a maintenance problem with his/her pipes or furnace. But doesn't know it and mistakes that noise to be terrible moaning coming from the basement. That noise will forever be that until a professional tells them otherwise
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Lou,
I'm starting to see how paranormal activity, and all things supernatural, have gotten so bent out of shape. With movies under the same name, and shows like "paranormal state" -It's no wonder why so many like to yell fire in a crowded building, after a lit match (if I can use that)
I think Bbrave may have just gotten a little bit over his head- and the ego does not let one back down easy.
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
I never said the sceptic assumes the problem is faulty plumbing. The sceptic offers his/her own experience with similiar incidents that have turned out to be such. The sceptic is looking for a natural explanation, and helping the homewowner in the process. The debunker insists on a natural explanation, after one is not found. The sceptic looks for one before declaring unnatural. There is a difference.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Yes you should but assuming the homeowner who is scared at this point to know as well is the wrong thing to do.

Fear makes people think differently than when they aren't afraid.
So if some one who knows nothing about plumbing hears the sound of pipes rattling for what ever reason. But doesn't know why and is scared assuming them to go it's a plumbing problem is a stretch.

They might think it's a possibility but being scared they'll consider others as well until you the plumber comes out and goes you have loose pipes. Not saying you're a plumber since I don't know
LouSlips (10 stories) (979 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Pjod,

Don't you know that ghosts are more believable then loose pipes and old water heaters? Good God, man... Why would you alarm a homeowner into thinking they have a maintenace issue, when it could simply be an entity from beyond the grave?

Did you skip that sensitivity training at work again?

;) Lou
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
So, If I'm familiar with sounds that water pipes make when rattling against something, simply because they are not tight- I should not offer that possible cause to a scared homeowner? Just go along with the angry ghost thing?
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Pjod

Look here's what you are missing and what I'm saying. Until proven otherwise it can't be said for certain that the terrible moaning in your example was not exactly that!

Even if it turns out to be a plumbing problem in the end until the homeowner has been told by a plumber the sounds will always be terrible moaning
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+2
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
I can't speak for Rook, but nothing seems clear about your statement. If someone hears footsteps, and screams ghost. Would a repairman be insulting the homeowner by explaining to them that a pipe is loose in the basement- rattling against a floor board when the hot water is running? That is basically what you are saying.
Pjod (3 stories) (978 posts)
+3
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Bbrave,
You couldn't be more wrong about debunking. A good sceptic trys to debunk an incident hoping to help the person/experiencer requesting assistance. It's easy for someone to miss something- for example, not everyone understands plumbing/heating. One person hears terrible moaning in the night, where a plumber hears the hot water heater. Someone who understands plumbing- explains the matter to the homeowner. I don't see how the problem solver is doing a disservice. You are using a broad brush- painting all sceptics as debunker. The sceptic looks for ways to debunk, while a true debunker is always in denial. It really is that simple.
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Lol I forgot the word across. Anyway everything should be clear now
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Rook

I've reread my comment and I see where a mistake was made that has you thinking I said you insulted their intelligence. So let me clear that up right now.

You may not mean anything by attempting to debunk these experiences. But the practice of debunking is in my opinion an insulting one. The debunker himself may not mean to insult anyone.

However by attempting to explain the situation by saying the people had mistaken either echoes or the sound of someone else walking in another part of the building.

As the cause of them hearing footsteps following them makes it seem like the people claiming to have heard those footsteps aren't intelligent enough to differentiate between footsteps following them, echoes, and someone else walking around in a different part of the building.

Rook you may not think that yourself but that's how it can and most often does to the claimant. There hope all is clear now
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Rook

Try rereading the whole comment. You did nothing but focus on what you wanted.

Here "Oh and Rook you may not mean anything by it but by trying to debunk the footsteps those security officers reported hearing following them as echoes or someone else walking around in another part of the building.

It's insulting the intelligence of those security officers. Actually debunking is a insulting practice because it says that you the debunker knows what the claimant has seen or heard better than they themselves.

You may not mean to say that yourself but that's what comes across to the claimant. As far as your echo theory goes even you yourself aren't sure so you can't say that's not a valid claim can you?

Personally I think debunkers have more to prove than someone who has claimed to experience the paranormal or something else unexplained"
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Bbrave,

I enjoy a good debate, I really do but I am VERY CAREFUL when I quote people. I do that to avoid as much misunderstanding as possible and I applied the same when it came to Quoting a comment YOU made to Lou on this experience...

Weird Lights

Here let me quote the whole thing...

"at] Lou

You know nothing about me so I could very well be. Oh you still haven't been able to back up your claim.
Gee I wonder why could it be that you simply can't?

Long story short when people like you see that can't prove their claims cause the person they make a claim about is able to prove the lack of substance of said claim.

They look to anger that person hoping they then become stupid as is the case when someone is angry. Because they can't hang with the intellect of their target"

There it is so are you going to deny stating that now?

It's nothing personal, but you have claimed that I...wait...I'LL QUOTE IT...

"It's insulting the intelligence of those security officers. Actually debunking is a insulting practice because it says that you the debunker knows what the claimant has seen or heard better than they themselves."

It does not mean I know what they may have experienced better...It's means that BASED ON MY EXPERIENCES I MAY HAVE A SUGGESTION AS TO WHAT HAPPENED THAT THEY DID NOT CONSIDER!

As far as far as your claim that it's a 50/50 split over 'Natural Causes vs The Paranormal' I have but ONE QUESTION...

With such 'good odds' what haven't GHOSTS BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST? WHY AREN'T THERE BETTER PICTURES OF THEM... BETTER VIDEOS... BETTER EVIDENCE PERIOD?

You know what, I'm a bit spun up...It's way past my 'bed time' *3rd shift sucks) I'll come back when I've had some sleep...Don't go away I'm sure that by the time I sign on later there will be plenty more to address.

ROOK
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Rook

Did you read my comment carefully? I clearly state twice that you might not mean to do so. Were you got the idea I said that I do not know but it could not have been from my comment.

Unless you intentionally decided that
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
[at] Rook

Actually I was unaware you even replied. Otherwise I'd have read it sooner. Though we don't see eye to eye on everything I actually like talking to you
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Yo...folks you don't need to find any other proof...it's right here...

Bbrave you just stated...

"Long story short when people like you see that can't prove their claims cause the person they make a claim about is able to prove the lack of substance of said claim."

That must be why you TOTALLY have ignored this for 3/4 of an hour...

ROOK
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Bbrave,

Do you really need 'everything to have a paranormal cause? Really...I'm 'insulting the intelligence' of the other security guards for finding a natural and reasonable explanation for the sounds they are hearing?

You gotta be Fu# [at] &%# Kidding me!

Let me lay it on the line for you concerning the echoing 'footsteps'. I've heard them as well and it was not something I just rationalized it was something I experienced that led me to that particular 'de-bunk'. While I was conducting rounds of what I thought was the empty (as in no employees present) warehouse I heard footsteps that sounded as if they were behind me... I turned, did not see anybody... But the footsteps continued. I checked the warehouse office, and double checked the log book and saw that no employees were still signed in. I then went to an exit door from the warehouse and entered the Scanning department I asked if someone had just come in from the warehouse and the Supervisor told me he had just been in there. So if I can 'make the mistake' of another persons footsteps sounding like they are following me it's a 'short' train of logic to conclude that the same thing happened to the other guards. There is a pretty good rule to follow when it comes to evidence of the Paranormal and that rule is...

WHEN IN DOUBT, THROW IT OUT! If there is any doubt in your mind, or anybody else can offer a REASONABLE explanation for an experience, picture or video then no matter how badly you want it to be 'PROOF' of the Paranormal you must accept the fact it may not be.

In the case of the echoing / following footsteps goes... As far as I know, I am the only person who asked the few employee's on site if they had been out of their area... Everyone else just took it for granted that they were 'alone' in those parts of the building or warehouse.

I'm done with this... Have a nice day... 😜

Rook
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
-1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
Oh and Rook you may not mean anything by it but by trying to debunk the footsteps those security officers reported hearing following them as echoes or someone else walking around in another part of the building.

It's insulting the intelligence of those security officers. Actually debunking is a insulting practice because it says that you the debunker knows what the claimant has seen or heard better than they themselves.

You may not mean to say that yourself but that's what comes across to the claimant. As far as your echo theory goes even you yourself aren't sure so you can't say that's not a valid claim can you?

Personally I think debunkers have more to prove than someone who has claimed to experience the paranormal or something else unexplained
Bbrave (1 stories) (131 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
After reading your story I can only say that only two of those experiences could be attributed to causes other than the paranormal

One being the footsteps on the roof because Texas is known for the high temperatures and being subjected to high temperatures that I'm sure reaches 100 degrees and above often would cause the metal to expand

The other being the phantom whistling after all simply swinging the right object through the air can cause a whistling sound.

However when it comes to different individuals all reporting the same thing I'd have to disagree with your echo and someone else walking around in a different part of the building theory.

Because not all of those people can be mistaken. Like someone claiming to see a ufo and then someone 35 miles away seeing the same exact thing. Now it makes no sense for two different people to see the same exact thing and both be mistaking what they are seeing.

As would be the case for different security guards. Working at different times all reporting hearing the same thing. I find it too hard to believe they were all mistaking echoes or someone else walking around in another part of the building. For footsteps following them
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
rook - my hat is off to you 😊 and the cricket of course 😉 Who'da thought? A cricket? Very cool LOL.

Now, you and I both know the next time someone has a commode flushing incident (automatic flusher of course) and it is suggested an insect is responsible, they're going to be like, "No way, dude! It's a ghost!" and not going to believe an insect could activate the sensor.

Out of all the possibilities, I never thought of a cricket though. I still thought the flusher could have been bad, regardless of what the tests showed 😆 Or you had a ghost LOL
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-11)
😲 😲 😲 Lou, yup any and all 'floaters' were accounted for.

Thanks for the comments folks.

I have one last update on this one... It happened about 15 minutes ago and I can positively say this one is...

DEBUNKED!

I arrived for work, went in to use the rest room and the stall flushed again. I quickly checked the stall and this time I caught the culprit...

It was a little Old Cricket bug...

A cricket!?!? These bugs are really bad in this area, there was even a news story about them and how bad they are in the Austin Texas Area.

I opened the stall and saw the damned bug crawling on the sensor... I can only conclude that if this bug caused the sensor to activate it applies to all the experiences people have had with the toilets flushing when no one is around... So this one at least is 'Put to Rest'.

Respectfully,

Rook
LouSlips (10 stories) (979 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
Rook,
I suspect you did a complete scan for paper heel scarfs and rectal-plasm?

:l Lou
clever210 (3 stories) (189 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
Me too! I also felt seriously creeped out when around the high EMF's in that room at Mansfield. 😨
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
+1
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
rook - I understand the EMF paranoia feeling. Up until we went to Mansfield, I'd never experienced it. I had a very bad case of vertigo several months ago and was off work for almost a week. I really think that's what "stirred up" my sensitivity to the EMF. I can completely understand how people feel like someone is watching them or in a room with them when there is no one around. It's a really weird experience.
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
Miracles,

This Journal was easy considering it was my watch log. 😲

We have area's all over this site that I'm sure have very high levels of EMF so I'M Constantly looking over my shoulder even though I know I'm the only person (or nearly the only person) in the building. So I can't say for sure that I felt anything 'odd' before this occurred. Because I sit in a small room filled with electronic equipment... I have the Fire Panel... Three computers, the PA system, the weather alert radio the camera control device and 8 Monitors so that I can watch 42 different cameras for 4 different buildings. So I'm either 'On Edge' or 'Shut Down' at work. I prefer to be 'Shut Down' as I can go home and sleep that way... If I let myself get on edge I'm up for a bit before winding down.

Before someone suggests someone got into the building... All the doors are activated by 'Badge Access' (Monitored by one of the Computers in the Security Office), No Badge, No Access unless you come in at the Entrance and Security issues you some sort of badge... They range from escorted to full un-escorted access. We even have them for employee's who have forgot their badge and we check ID's.
Miracles51031 (39 stories) (4998 posts) mod
 
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
rook - I know you would have said something, but I'll ask anyway. Did you "sense" anything at any time, before or after, this "flushing" incident?

And I hate, absolutely hate, when they make themselves known in the bathroom 😆

From one journaler to another, good work 😉
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-07-10)
I have an update to this one. It seems Journal Format has become the rage so I'll relate this as most of it is recorded in my Watch Log...

Early Wednesday Morning July 4th the Enter office is off for the Holiday and I am the only individual Present on site.

23:30 (11PM 03Jul2012) First Round... All Conditions Normal, return to Guard shack 23:48 (11:48pm 03Jul2012).

01:00 (1am 04Jul2012) Second Round... All Conditions Normal, Return to Guard Shack 01:18 (1:18am)

02:30 (2:30am 04Jul2012) Third Round... All Conditions Normal, Return to GUARD Shack 02:45 (2:45am)

03:20 (3:20am 04Jul2012) Rest Room Break. While in the restroom the first stall flushes by itself. S/O was using the urinal beside first stall. After checking Stall for possible causes S/O will turn in a Maintenance Request as no explanation could be found.

The rest of the night went very smoothly, though I Did check that Rest Room Stall during my last two rounds and it did not seem to be leaking, nor 'auto flushing' due to a timer.

To tell the truth I had just finished my business and had 'zipped up' when the toilet in that stall flushed and I about 'Jumped Out of my Skin'. It's been a full week now and Maintenance has determined that it was not a leaky valve, dying batteries nor a built in timer that flushed the toilet in that stall. I myself checked the possible timing theory for 5 nights... Just by going into the Rest Room and waiting for a few minutes at the time it happened... I can also hear the toilets flush from the Security Desk... It hasn't flushed sense... At least not without being used...

This is one of those times you just have to say...Huh? What was that all about?

Respectfully,

Rook
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-06-15)
ada,

I have 18 others that have been published here on this site. Just 'click' on my name and they are listed on my profile...

Thanks for reading. 😁

Respectfully,

Rook
ada (4 stories) (44 posts)
 
10 years ago (2012-06-14)
If you have another story I am dieing to read it! I have posted 2 more. I hope you get to read them your insight is awesome! Thanks Rook!
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
+1
11 years ago (2012-01-03)
Rook,
This is too weird! A couple of years ago I started hearing a sound like that. Guess where I was when I heard it? (I can't believe I'm going to tell this) On the toilet in the hall bathroom. Shut up, I can hear you laughing from here!
It was very soft and kight the first time I actually paid attention to what I was hearing. But it did almost the same as your notes. One-two-four, then one=two-four-three. Over and over. I tried to get David to listen to it, even made him sit where I had, no dice, he couldn't hear it. But his hearing isn't as good as it used to be because of the years he has spent working as a pressman/printer. Printing presses are LOUD. But he had fun making a big joke out of it. Then Clair moved back from Colorado. And on her second day home she comes out of that same bathroom and wants me to listen because now she hears it. We finally get David to hear it, but cannot find the source. After about a month it was starting to get very annoying. By now I didn't care where it came from, I just wanted it to stop. So I got the phone book and looked up the number for the Noise Pollution offices. They won't tell you what it was when they find it because of privacy issues. BUT, after I hung up, within the hour that sound was no more. And it never has returned.
Weird crap if you ask me, we never did figure it out.
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-03)
Vanessanda,

These are all wonderful questions.

As far as the toilet flushing... I must admit it has been sometime sense I have heard that occur, perhaps it was a maintinence issue after all.

To the other questions you ask... I am not really sure, except for the Flute... The ones I know of... And the one I think I'm hearing are made of Clay.

Respectfully,

Rook
Vanessanda (3 stories) (226 posts)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-03)
Are they any relaton to the instruments the Native South Americans use? Or are they made of wood? That sound can be a bit eerie and ethereal.

Has the toilet stopped flushing? Did maintenance perhaps make it too difficult for it to be flushed or perhaps nobody is paying enough attention to it anymore. Could the flushing ghost have found a new way to make its presence felt or do you think it's a different presence?

Could the woman who had the heart attack have played such instrument or enjoyed listening to it?
Argette (guest)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-02)
I have heard the flute sound at night, in the hallway of an apartment building. It was coming from a large center elevator lobby. I thought it was on an elevator, but none of them were open or passing through when I heard it. So it could have come from an apartment, but it was not muffled. Frankly, I thought my mind was playing tricks on me.
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-02)
Vanessanda,

They are small clay flutes... That have 3 to 5 holes to place your fingers on that form the notes as an individual blows through them. You can find them at Renaissance Faires and Native Americans even have a type of one.

The sound I'm hearing has a very natural sound to it... It does not strike me a being from a piece of electronic equipment... (of which I have to turn hand held inventory scanners off on a regular basis)

Respectfully,

Rook
Vanessanda (3 stories) (226 posts)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-02)
Omega-Star

Where did you come from? In the first place, Rookdygin is definitely not a rookie, here or anywhere else. In the second place, he has never attacked anybody, even those who single him out and attack him! If I'm wrong please correct me and show me a quote. Thirdly, thanks to him "God" HAS definitely saved pupils of his, me being one of them! Fourth, who are you to judge whether or not he is wicked?

Are you somebody from the past who envies him? Say from New Zealand? Just asking.

Rook

What's an Ocarina?
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
 
11 years ago (2012-01-02)
I have an Update...

In the past 10 days I have heard a musical scale being played... At least the first 3 notes of one. This is within the main building where I'm working.

The first time I heard it was 8 days ago in the employee locker area, this is near the restroom that had the toilet that was flushing. The Second was 5 days ago in the Front offices and the third (which happened during my shift last night) was in the Warehouse area and it actually echoed.

I am hearing 3 notes of a musical scale... But there is a 'skip' between the second and third note... So instead of a steady rise in tones of 1...2...3... I'm hearing 1...2...4... What's more it sounds as if the notes are being played on an Ocarina. (I hope my explanation of what I've heard makes sense). Anyway, I have yet to find a way to de-bunk this... Does anyone have any ideas?

Respectfully,

Rook
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-13)
Omega-Star,

When and on which Experience have I commited this 'offence'. I have replied to you once and you accused me of attacking you long before I published my one reply to you. That was on one of my own experiences no less. So please explain to me just where/when this happened and which name you were posting by at that time.

Respectfully (and very confused 😕),

Rook
Omega-Star (3 posts)
-4
11 years ago (2011-12-13)
Mr rookie

You attacked me viciously. Your wicked. You are most definately not a man of god. You claim to hold a priesthood to a church... God save your pupils.
How can you be a man of the cloth yet treat people with ill intent. I know that you are not a good soul, you have shown it.
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+2
11 years ago (2011-12-09)
Thanks for all the great feedback. Having experienced the things I have in my life I just can't automaticly jump on the Paranormal band wagon... I have found that in many situations a Haunting is a Haunting because the indivdual (s) involved 'want' it to be, not because it actually is.

Aya22,

I'm so sorry for your poor bathroom, at least the 'demon toilet' was more water pressure than Spiritual pressure. (LoL) That still would have been a unique experience. Thank you for your service.

Respectfully,

Rook
aya22 (guest)
+2
11 years ago (2011-12-08)
rook,
What a great story and LOVE that you kept an objective mind and sought out debunking some of the things. It's actually quite entertaining to read a story and have debunkation with it! I'm sure it brings peace of mind to you and others working the grave yard shift that not all going bump in the night is out of the ordinary. Oh, and I love the line: "go on laugh, you know you want to..." Because right then I really did start to.

When my husband and I moved into our apartment, I soon figured out our bathroom toilet was evil and 'possessed.' I had just gotten home for the first time since being in the air force, was looking for a job, and so was home much of my time. From the living room I heard our toilet start flushing on its own and so I checked it out... Thought, "okay, hmmm... That's weird." I didn't know anything about plumbing, so I called my husband and let him know about it, and he promised to look at it when he got home. Well... It gets worse! About thirty minutes later I heard a huge BOOM from the bathroom, so I ran to it, and saw a giant fountain coming out of the top of the toilet. The lid had landed on the floor and one of the pipes was jutting out of the top, shooting water onto the ceiling and everywhere else. PANIC! 😨 I ran back and forth, calling my husband (no answer), watching the water just pour out of the bathroom... Then saw the lever behind it and gave it a quick hurried spin... Luckily the water turned off. One of the seals I guess (or something) had come loose and couldn't withstand the pressure anymore. Haha, nothing paranormal about it... But I still think our toilet is 'evil'... If not in the paranormal way. 😉
taz890 (12 stories) (1380 posts)
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-08)
rook great post and interesting too, liked the debunking some people way to happy to say its got to be a haunting without even checking the basics.
As for the self flushing loo that's just strange, working the "graveyard shift" can be spooky enough without things like that happening too!
Good luck with figuring this one out,
Carl
pie1025 (2 stories) (29 posts)
 
11 years ago (2011-12-08)
Very well narrated Rook! Your experience reminds me of the automatic paper towel dispenser at my workplace, the kind that senses the movement. We have witnessed its activity a lot of times after work and over the weekends and a lot of my coworkers are not comfortable working late here. However, we haven't done much research to prove or disprove anything.
zaphiod (10 posts)
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-08)
hey rooky
I like that you've taken the time to try and give an explanation for a lot of the things on your site, it shows you aren't overreacting to to nothing.
As for the flushing well I think dead or alive, when you gotta go... You gotta go!
Thanks for the story I really enjoyed it.

Zaph
Trix (14 stories) (407 posts)
 
11 years ago (2011-12-08)
Hi Rook,
Thanks for sharing your experience. I enjoyed reading it. It took me way back in time when I was working permanent night shift. I must say with me all the paranormal experiences within the hospitals I worked in happened while working at night. Maybe it's because the environment seems to calm down during the night with less people on duty running around and much more quiet most of the time. It would be interesting though to know if this toilet has a routine with timing and if it flushes during the day as well. It's a very interesting experience and it would be nice if you update us on anything new. I don't think it's going to be your last experience in that place. Thanks for sharing and take care Rook. Trix.
Javelina (4 stories) (3749 posts)
 
11 years ago (2011-12-07)
Rook,
This is great! A story about a mystery flusher and debunking as well.
I had a problem somewhat similar to this, but we eventually figured out the source of the self flusher at our house. What it ended up as was a very minute trickle of water was being leaked into the bowl. We never did hear the leak in progress, just the flush. When the water level in the bowl hits a certain high mark, it automatically flushes on it's own. No idea if it's gravity or what, but it is frustrating. Neither could we see the leak on the surface of the water. No movement that would have suggested the source. How we figured it out was we marked a small line where the water level sat after flushing. We used a screwdriver to make the mark on the porcelain because that wouldn't wash away with the water. Then we checked the level every 30 to 45 minutes, and it was rising. We ended up replacing all seals on that toilet. Even the Bee's wax seal. It worked, no more mystery flushes.
The thing is, we never did figure out exactly what part was leaking. But the fix cured it.

Jav 😊
rookdygin (24 stories) (4458 posts)
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-07)
Moongrim,

While I cannot 'vouch' that the EMF fields are actually are measurably higher than that of the normal 'background' I can say for sure that in some of these spaces I feel that 'being watched' / 'creeped out' feeling that is reported when / if people are sensitive to High EMF Fields experience them. Because there is a chance that the 'feelings' can be caused by a High EMF field any 'experiences' must be atributed to a 'natural cause' thus ruleing out the Paranormal.

As far as the Toilet itself goes... This Company is HUGE on being as GREEN as possible (as mentioned at the begining of my experience) and not only have the batteries in the 'auto flush' been replaced but the whole Assembly was switched out due to the the continued flushing of this particular stall.

My best guess is that this may be a case of a 'stress induced' residual haunting... The 'High Level' of emotion and stress got 'captured' by the envioment and it keeps being 'replayed'.

Respectfully,

Rook
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-06)
Moongrim: Electricity and electro-magnetic fields are two entirely different animals... Grounding does nothing for the release of magnetism, grounding insures that the electrical current follows the path of least resistance to the ground since that's where all electrical current created goes eventually...

Here's more info:
Http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index3.html
Moongrim (2 stories) (871 posts)
 
11 years ago (2011-12-06)
So what constitutes a 'high' EMF? Relative to what? Most circuit breaker boxes and like equipment tend to be grounded (NEC codes) to insure that any electrical emissions are shielded against.

When it comes to phantom flushing- has anyone taken the time actually repair/replace the flushing mechanism? High water usage can justify the repair expense of getting a new one.
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
 
11 years ago (2011-12-06)
I also wanted to mention, I know the sound of the corrugated roofs cooling, as it happens here where I live, as all of the carports and porches are covered... It is a freaky sound, but pretty cool, too... 😆 😆
zzsgranny (18 stories) (3327 posts) mod
+1
11 years ago (2011-12-06)
Rook: First of all, kudos for your efforts of "debunkation" 😆...I had the same thoughts as Argette, but I'm pretty sure a good maintenance person would check for a leak first since that's the obvious...

I got a giggle from the high EMF... I know it's very hard for investigators to distinguish whether hauntings occur as a result of the high EMF, or the EMF itself causes false positives...That's one reason for all the equipment they use in such instances, since high EMF readings in and of themselves can't be used as evidence, specially in a place as you described...

Thank you for submitting this... It may give others a lesson in "debunkation" 😆 ❤
Argette (guest)
 
11 years ago (2011-12-06)
Rook, I can't say if this is the source of the flushing, but I do know that things like valve leaks or faulty valves inside the tank can make a toilet flush. But I'm sure that in the process of looking at the toilets, this was considered. Sooo...

Return to the ghost story Flushing Ghost?

Search this site: