The event is what is real. I stated that the reference made no reference to any ghost or "real" ghost. The event that triggers a ghostly sighting and that is real. In scenario 2 as quoted from the article, the event is not real within the environment. One could argue that the chemical processes within the brain that causes hallucinations are real. Please don't. That is not my point. What is perceived in the hallucination is not real. The perception of a cloud of dust is real. I could continue and define "event", "internal vs external environment" or "hallucination", but I won't. This is not a thesis

