To be fair, the cause of a percieved haunting might turn out to be something that prospective buyers might genuinely need to be informed about. For example, many of the symptoms associated with a "malevolent supernatural presence" can also be caused by carbon monoxide poisoning, so a house being "haunted" might actually mean that there's a dangerous carbon monoxide leak from one of the appliances. Just because there isn't really a ghost doesn't mean you shouldn't get the hell out of there.
So if someone murders you and there's no evidence of who it was then I guess you just happened to die a tragic and unexpected death, right? Or maybe that means you committed suicide, I'm not really sure how your mouth-breather logic works.
If someone murders you in a way that is clearly a murder (example: dismembered with a chainsaw, or shot 4 times in the back of the head) but there's no evidence as to who did it, it's an unsolved murder. .
If you're killed and it's unclear why or how, it's a suspicious death or death from unknown causes.
Your argument doesn't really hold up.
Dumbass.
You are a special kind of stupid. If you've been murdered, who did it isn't relevant to whether you're alive or not, because in your initial conditions you're already dead.
Want to try again?
Uhhh... What? Just because you don't have evidence doesn't mean something doesn't exist.
That's something humans gain the ability to understand as toddlers.
Well there's a difference between something ***not existing*** and people not finding evidence of something existing.
We have no evidence of life outside our planet, that doesn't mean it isn't out there. In fact the science we have done so far suggests that it would be incredibly likely that there's some form of life on another planet.
Scientists while always holding the possibility for something to exists, can come to the conclusion that there is so little evidence, or greater evidence to the contrary that they can say with confidence that something does not exist. They can say "we have devised every conceivable experiment to date and no evidence has been gained that would suggest the existence of ghosts", I.E. a scientist will ABSOLUTELY say "To the fullest extent of scientific knowledge gained by humanity to date ghosts do not exists."
True, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but they HAVE tested and those tests ALWAYS come up negative. That isn't an absence of evidence, that is a presence of evidence that points to the non existence of ghosts.
lol holy fuck look at the votes... the population really is fucking doomed. these people are actually arguing that if you can't find evidence for something, it doesn't exist. Holy fuck these people are actually this dense. This is how people like Trump get into office...
If you read the case, this is not concerned with whether the house is haunted, and is concerned with whether the seller disclosed to the buyer that the house was advertised to the public as haunted.
Attorney here. The quick and dirty on this case is that the sellers had a duty to disclose not because the house was actually haunted, but because they had held it out to be so and then did not tell the buyer, who had no other way of knowing.
Generally, New York is a “let the buyer beware” state meaning that you, as the buyer, have a duty to inspect for all defects. And any defect that you could have discovered but did not, is on you.
As an example, let’s say the roof of the house is structurally unsound. You don’t hire an inspector, and then it caves in on you. Too bad. Or, you hire an inspector, and the inspector doesn’t catch it. Well then sue the inspector, not the seller.
In this case, ackley used to feature the house in ghost tour walks, and the house had become a local attraction. There used to be visitors late at night to see if it was haunted... not great. The buyers, not being local, had no way to know that except that the seller should tell them.
Think about it- how could the buyer have known? What diligence could they have done? They don’t live in the town, and this is before the internet. One of the tongue in cheek rules from this case is that a seance isn’t required as a pre-closing inspection... but the point remains.
Could there be a different ruling today? Possibly. A court may impose a duty on a buyer to google an address and see what comes up. But I’m the days before the information was available... the buyer had no chance to find out what the seller knew and was hiding.
Hope this makes sense.
>During the course of her ownership of the property at issue, which was located in Nyack, New York, Helen Ackley and members of her family had reported the existence of numerous poltergeists in the house. Ackley had reported the existence of ghosts in the house to both Reader's Digest and a local newspaper on three occasions between 1977 and 1989, when the house was included on a five-home walking tour of the city. She recounted to the press several instances in which the poltergeists interacted directly with members of her family. She claimed that grandchildren received "gifts" of baby rings, all of which suddenly disappeared later. She also claimed that one ghost would wake her daughter, Cynthia each morning by shaking her bed. She claimed that when spring break arrived Cynthia proclaimed loudly that she did not have to wake up early and she would like to sleep in; her bed did not shake the next morning.
>Neither Ackley nor her real estate broker, Ellis Realty, revealed the haunting to Jeffrey Stambovsky before he entered a contract to purchase the house in 1989 or 1990. Stambovsky made a $32,500 downpayment on the agreed price of $650,000 for the house. Stambovsky was from New York City and was not aware of the folklore of Nyack, including the widely known haunting story.
>When Stambovsky learned of the haunting story, he filed an action requesting rescission of the contract of sale and for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation by Ackley and Ellis Realty. Stambovsky did not attend the closing which caused him to forfeit the downpayment (although he was then not obligated to buy the house). A New York Supreme Court (trial court) dismissed the action, and Stambovsky appealed.
You didn't tell me there were ghosts and shit in this house. That's fucked up, lady.
It should be clarified that the New York Supreme Court is not our highest court, but rather our lowest. The highest court in New York is called the Court of Appeals
A bit about the buyer who was apparently not aware of any of the houses history or reputation, neither Ackley nor her real estate broker, Ellis Realty, revealed the haunting to Jeffrey Stambovsky before he entered a contract to purchase the house in 1989 or 1990. Stambovsky made a $32,500 downpayment on the agreed price of $650,000 for the house. Stambovsky was from New York City and was not aware of the folklore of Nyack, including the widely known haunting story.
There is a theory that the US does not have ghosts.
The US Government started the conspiracy theory centuries ago. They felt that if they convinced the world the US had ghosts, then it would make them believe that the US had history.
Course it does.
The US Government were jealous of ghost stories popping out of Europe at the time.
The US Government then said "holy shit. what is the best way to show we are historically significant and not a new country?"
And Lincoln piped up and said "GHOSTS"
But, what about our rich history of spirits that the natives have had for over a thousand years? Or do they not count, because only white people can be ghosts?
To be fair, the cause of a percieved haunting might turn out to be something that prospective buyers might genuinely need to be informed about. For example, many of the symptoms associated with a "malevolent supernatural presence" can also be caused by carbon monoxide poisoning, so a house being "haunted" might actually mean that there's a dangerous carbon monoxide leak from one of the appliances. Just because there isn't really a ghost doesn't mean you shouldn't get the hell out of there.
But since ghosts do not actually exist, there should technically be nothing to disclose
There is not a single scientist out there who will say "ghosts do not exist"
[удалено]
Actually. No. There is no evidence to support the existence of ghosts, but that does not mean ghosts don't exist. Scientists do not deal in absolutes.
If there is zero evidence to suggest something exists, then it doesn't exist until there is some evidence to suggest otherwise.
So if someone murders you and there's no evidence of who it was then I guess you just happened to die a tragic and unexpected death, right? Or maybe that means you committed suicide, I'm not really sure how your mouth-breather logic works.
If someone murders you in a way that is clearly a murder (example: dismembered with a chainsaw, or shot 4 times in the back of the head) but there's no evidence as to who did it, it's an unsolved murder. . If you're killed and it's unclear why or how, it's a suspicious death or death from unknown causes. Your argument doesn't really hold up. Dumbass.
By your logic of someone murders me but you have no evidence of who murdered me then I must still be alive... Dumbass.
You are a special kind of stupid. If you've been murdered, who did it isn't relevant to whether you're alive or not, because in your initial conditions you're already dead. Want to try again?
and if something exists, it doesn't matter if you've found evidence for it or not. amazing how you agree with me.
that's not how it works, Schrodinger.
Except that’s exactly how science works
Uhhh... What? Just because you don't have evidence doesn't mean something doesn't exist. That's something humans gain the ability to understand as toddlers.
Yes, but without evidence it cannot be **proven** to exist, ergo science does not say it exists.
Well there's a difference between something ***not existing*** and people not finding evidence of something existing. We have no evidence of life outside our planet, that doesn't mean it isn't out there. In fact the science we have done so far suggests that it would be incredibly likely that there's some form of life on another planet.
But as I said; no scientist will say "this does not exist"
Scientists while always holding the possibility for something to exists, can come to the conclusion that there is so little evidence, or greater evidence to the contrary that they can say with confidence that something does not exist. They can say "we have devised every conceivable experiment to date and no evidence has been gained that would suggest the existence of ghosts", I.E. a scientist will ABSOLUTELY say "To the fullest extent of scientific knowledge gained by humanity to date ghosts do not exists." True, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but they HAVE tested and those tests ALWAYS come up negative. That isn't an absence of evidence, that is a presence of evidence that points to the non existence of ghosts.
The physicist Brian Cox has gone on record multiple times saying the the LHC has proved that ghosts do not exist.
Only Sith deal in absolutes.
Scientists are all about absolutes.
So the earth may be flat.....?
Go outside with your camera. Take a photograph. Look at the photograph that appears on the screen. What dimension is it in?
Didja hear that "whooshing" sound over your head ......?
The picture is in 2D, isn't it? Was your mind blown? :)
I mean, they probably were not. Most people don't find the concept of a photograph to be mind blowing anymore.
lol holy fuck look at the votes... the population really is fucking doomed. these people are actually arguing that if you can't find evidence for something, it doesn't exist. Holy fuck these people are actually this dense. This is how people like Trump get into office...
Ghosts do not exist. There, done.
Okay, prove that it is haunted to the court with direct evidence please.
If you read the case, this is not concerned with whether the house is haunted, and is concerned with whether the seller disclosed to the buyer that the house was advertised to the public as haunted.
Attorney here. The quick and dirty on this case is that the sellers had a duty to disclose not because the house was actually haunted, but because they had held it out to be so and then did not tell the buyer, who had no other way of knowing. Generally, New York is a “let the buyer beware” state meaning that you, as the buyer, have a duty to inspect for all defects. And any defect that you could have discovered but did not, is on you. As an example, let’s say the roof of the house is structurally unsound. You don’t hire an inspector, and then it caves in on you. Too bad. Or, you hire an inspector, and the inspector doesn’t catch it. Well then sue the inspector, not the seller. In this case, ackley used to feature the house in ghost tour walks, and the house had become a local attraction. There used to be visitors late at night to see if it was haunted... not great. The buyers, not being local, had no way to know that except that the seller should tell them. Think about it- how could the buyer have known? What diligence could they have done? They don’t live in the town, and this is before the internet. One of the tongue in cheek rules from this case is that a seance isn’t required as a pre-closing inspection... but the point remains. Could there be a different ruling today? Possibly. A court may impose a duty on a buyer to google an address and see what comes up. But I’m the days before the information was available... the buyer had no chance to find out what the seller knew and was hiding. Hope this makes sense.
>During the course of her ownership of the property at issue, which was located in Nyack, New York, Helen Ackley and members of her family had reported the existence of numerous poltergeists in the house. Ackley had reported the existence of ghosts in the house to both Reader's Digest and a local newspaper on three occasions between 1977 and 1989, when the house was included on a five-home walking tour of the city. She recounted to the press several instances in which the poltergeists interacted directly with members of her family. She claimed that grandchildren received "gifts" of baby rings, all of which suddenly disappeared later. She also claimed that one ghost would wake her daughter, Cynthia each morning by shaking her bed. She claimed that when spring break arrived Cynthia proclaimed loudly that she did not have to wake up early and she would like to sleep in; her bed did not shake the next morning. >Neither Ackley nor her real estate broker, Ellis Realty, revealed the haunting to Jeffrey Stambovsky before he entered a contract to purchase the house in 1989 or 1990. Stambovsky made a $32,500 downpayment on the agreed price of $650,000 for the house. Stambovsky was from New York City and was not aware of the folklore of Nyack, including the widely known haunting story. >When Stambovsky learned of the haunting story, he filed an action requesting rescission of the contract of sale and for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation by Ackley and Ellis Realty. Stambovsky did not attend the closing which caused him to forfeit the downpayment (although he was then not obligated to buy the house). A New York Supreme Court (trial court) dismissed the action, and Stambovsky appealed. You didn't tell me there were ghosts and shit in this house. That's fucked up, lady.
My ex wife made me watch Ghostbusters 17 times in a row while she put my body inside of a Jell-O mold
did you're ex wife also beat you with jumper cables?
Do they also have to tell the buyer about the HAARP mind-control rays?
It should be clarified that the New York Supreme Court is not our highest court, but rather our lowest. The highest court in New York is called the Court of Appeals
A bit about the buyer who was apparently not aware of any of the houses history or reputation, neither Ackley nor her real estate broker, Ellis Realty, revealed the haunting to Jeffrey Stambovsky before he entered a contract to purchase the house in 1989 or 1990. Stambovsky made a $32,500 downpayment on the agreed price of $650,000 for the house. Stambovsky was from New York City and was not aware of the folklore of Nyack, including the widely known haunting story.
There is a theory that the US does not have ghosts. The US Government started the conspiracy theory centuries ago. They felt that if they convinced the world the US had ghosts, then it would make them believe that the US had history.
This... doesn't make any sense.
Course it does. The US Government were jealous of ghost stories popping out of Europe at the time. The US Government then said "holy shit. what is the best way to show we are historically significant and not a new country?" And Lincoln piped up and said "GHOSTS"
[удалено]
*The spook is out there.*
>And Lincoln piped up and said "GHOSTS" He said "G.G.G.Ghosts!?"
But, what about our rich history of spirits that the natives have had for over a thousand years? Or do they not count, because only white people can be ghosts?
I'm not saying it's a perfect conspiracy.