Here as a guest? Welcome! If you found a topic or discussion you like, we hope you'll register. Besides getting privileges to reply and start your own topics, you'll receive access to expanded content and entire boards unavailable to the general public. Sign up now! It's simple and fast.

Main Menu

Ghost Animals - pets (my musings)

Started by adminsandiegohaunted, January 12, 2012, 10:11:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


The notion that animals can return as ghosts is intriguing. Here is a common list of possible reasons human ghosts exist.

The dead; doesn?t realize that it is dead.
The dead; has unfinished business in this world.
The dead; feels it needs to say goodbye.
The dead; wants to offer guidance to a loved one.
The dead; are unable (by unknown means) to go elsewhere.

The first four common possibilities require a Sentient being.

Horace S. Solliday, Tustin, CA, 6-16-10
A sentient being is one who is self conscious in the sense of being aware of yourself, aware of your thinking process, aware of your individual personality apart from others, aware of your free will to choose for yourself, aware of your reasoning power, aware of your responsibilities of decisions your make, aware of your feelings and emotions, but that they are not you. However, it is also an awareness that you did not make yourself and that you had to be made by someone of much greater power, knowledge, and wisdom than you. This brings the thought that part of your responsibilities are to Him.

The last possibility only maintains two requirements, life and death. The clear problem is what about insects?, plants, and all other "living biologic's." Have you ever experienced a swarm of ghost bees' or a ghostly ant hive? In the absence of prevailing examples it would seem clear that even this 5th possibility requires a capable life form of higher sentience.  So the two prevailing prerequisites for ghosts, are 1. To have been alive, and subsequently died. 2. To have been "capable" of being significantly sentient prior to death. This narrows the range of animals species, removes flora and microorganisms. This filter still doesn't narrow the range of animals enough. Here is the current list of 10 smartest animals.
1. Chimpanzees 2. Parrots 3. Dogs 4. Octopuses 5. Rats 6. Elephants 7. Cats 8. Bottle-nose Dolphins
9. pigs 10. Horses

It is interesting as The three most commonly reported animal ghosts; Dogs, Cats, and Horses, are all on the list. Here are a few more famous Ghost Animals

Demon Cat of Washington D.C.
Ghost Bear of Tower of London January, 1816
Horses at Gettysburg
Rudolph Valentino's Great Dan L.A. pet cemetery
Stampeeding Cattle of 1880s Blanco Canyon Resevoir Texas
Horses, pony express station Kansas
Dog of Lady Howard of Dartmoor
The Whaley family Dog

Based on the sheer number of claims it seems clear to shift focus to tangible subjects such as  Dogs, Cats, and Horses. So Are these animals capable of being sentient? Many pet owners would argue yes but would you believe even major government entities like the European  Union, and The Law Commission of Sri Lanka, have passed laws about animal sentience? Dogs are recognized as sentient beings by the European Union. In Sri Lanka, "Animals as sentient beings are deserving of both State protection and reasonable level of State Responsibility. The traditional jurisprudential position of treating an animal as a mere chattel is no longer tenable. The Animal Welfare Bill reflects this change of attitude." So Ghost animals are possible, right? I wouldn't contact Animal Planets' T.V. show THE HAUNTED just yet.

This is a fair amount of assumption to come to any conclusive point.  Indeed, for the purposes of this discussion, we are just throwing ideas out there. Are ghost animals real? Do some types of animals have a spirit. Is there an animal after life?

additional reading,2863,0,0,1,0

PPI Jason

This is a fascinating way to look at this topic. The theory, then, seems to establish intelligence and self-awareness as a pre-requisite to becoming a ghost. I think it makes a lot of assumptions (for example, the idea that spirits have "unfinished business"). But if we assume that this is one possible motivation for a spirit to become active then we realize that for something to become a ghost it has to have had "business" while it was alive. Very existential... I like it.  :)

But, just to play devil's advocate, let's say that "less intelligent" living creatures do exist as ghosts and spirits. If they were to manifest themselves, it would likely be in a form that would be difficult to recognize. For example, let's say rats come back as ghosts. This is making a big assumption, but I would assume they would manifest themselves by making rat noises. I remember one investigation where the client reported strange tapping sounds. During our investigation it was clear that the sounds were rats running on the roof. But, technically, I never saw any rats. How do we know those weren't rat ghosts?

And what about a ghost octopus? If logic applies (and, again, I can't say that logic continues to be applicable in the spirit world in the same way it applies here) then we would assume they would likely hang out in the ocean. I've never done an EVP session in the ocean. But I imagine it would be very difficult to "hear" the spirit of an animal that isn't really known for making sounds and certainly would be difficult to see as an apparition (given the constant light refraction or lack of light).

And what about bees? No one has ever reported seeing "ghost bees in the sky." But then again, can we say that a strange buzzing sound on an EVP isn't a swarm of bees? And what about a strange stinging sensation? I get a feeling of a phantom sting whenever I get a shot of adrenaline. But could it sometimes be a ghost bee getting revenge for having its wings plucked by a miscreant in his youth?

I offer, then, the possibility that maybe intelligence isn't a prerequisite to exist as a ghost. But maybe it indicates that intelligent spirits are the ones most likely to manifest themselves in a way that we can easily recognize. I'm not saying this is the case. But I just offer it for consideration.

Thank you for sharing this very interesting topic.  :)
Probably the earliest flyswatters were nothing more than some sort of striking surface attached to the end of a long stick.
-Jack Handey