Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Mar 24, 2016.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Do you think that video is any better than the "good" ones you claim to have posted?
Ask me if I care what you consider "good."
No, I care what YOU consider good.
Why do you think they're good? What criteria do you use to determine the quality of a ghost/bigfoot/flying saucer video?
I don't care what you want or think about the evidence. The evidence is all there for anyone to see with their own eyes. I can't make you see what you refuse to see.
I'll take that to mean that you don't actually have any standards about what you consider to be "good" evidence. Well, that's not a surprise.
LOL! You can take it to mean I don't care what you consider "good" evidence. I don't jump thru higher and higher hoops here. The evidence is compelling and clear for anyone objective enough to consider it.
I'm not talking about what I consider good evidence. I'm talking about what YOU consider good evidence.
It doesn't matter what I think. The evidence speaks for itself. If you can't see that, I don't care. Got it?
That's definitely true. Your so-called "evidence" is worthless, whatever you think.
LOL! And once again, I don't care what you think about the evidence. I thought I was clear on that. Nothing could ever be good enough for someone who has already made up their own mind. It's all just a vast conspiracy of ghost hunters faking evidence at 3AM in empty old buildings, right? Ofcourse it is.
Correct. Try learning something about photography, such as shutter speed, aperture, and focus. If the camera is not properly adjusted for these essential preparations to compensate for amount of light available, you may get a picture of a blurry object, but a blurry object is NOT proof of a ghost, it is just a blur of a moving object.
Ever heard the expression *panning*? if not, look it up.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Is this a ghost or just a bad picture by an incompetent photographer?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A blurry object speeding across a hallway is still an object speeding across a hallway, which is exactly what the camera caught. Cameras don't make up images of things that aren't there.
That's true, but people can and do. I once submitted an overlay of two slides, one showing a beautiful coastal scene, but no living thing. So I overlayed the slide with a slide of a single flying seagull with only the blue sky as background. The effect was really good and it received a special mention from our photography teacher.
But you assert that blurry pictures of a 12-14" moving object is proof of ghosts. I just showed you a picture of a blurry picture of a moving life sized person (woman). Was that a ghost or a badly taken picture of a moving person? Tell me the difference.
Right..pictures of fast moving shadows and lights and apparitions in haunted locations is one of the proofs of ghosts. So spare me the redundant photography lecture. You have no idea what goes on during paranormal investigations do you?
Apparently you have no idea what goes on in a real scientifically controlled investigation. But apparently real scientists do not even see the necessity of a real investigation, with dozens of different measuring devices, which also don't lie. Apparently there is absolutely no interest by the scientific community (even in meta-physics) to do a real and thorough investigation , based on the presentation of a few blurry pictures and eerie noises. Why do you think that is? Critical thinking perhaps?
And for that matter, spare me from any more redundant blurry pictures of moving objects. You have made your case, but apparently you have not convinced anyone here that they are acceptable proof of the existence of ghosts, other than what is already known about ghosting phenomena.
Right..you're totally ignorant about how paranormal investigations are conducted, all the electronic devices they use, the compelling evidence they obtain, and the scientific measures they take to debunk mundane explanations. Why don't you stick to telling me things you know about? You'd look alot less foolish.
And all this sophisticated equipment has yielded the pictures you psented as examples of scientific proof of the existence of ghosts?
Any peer reviewed published results? Nada. And it gives me no pleasure to say that it is you who is looking foolish.
OTOH, in the mean time we have proved the existence of the Higgs boson, which until recently was merely a hypothesis.
I wouldn't trust a career-obsessed scientist as far as I could spit. Instead, we rely on the experts who have actually researched this field in hundreds of investigations in hundreds of haunted locations and documented compelling evidence for the paranormal. Nobody reads those boring ass science journals anyway. Have you ever read one? Didn't think so.
Give me a link to a reliable scientific site on paranormal phenomena and I promise to read it with an *open mind*.
And a suggestion: If you want to generate real interest in this area, stop insulting scientists. Your ability to communicate and even send pictures over long distances is not the result of paranormal investigations and skulking around in old abandoned buildings (with a hearsay history).
That is the result of real science. If you despise scientists so much, why don't you dump your computer in the trashcan?
Separate names with a comma.