Strange creatures caught on tape

Magical Realist

Magical Realist

Valued Senior Member
Be afraid. Be VERY afraid!


Weird ass stick figure caught on news report:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVKYgarUTQM


Elongated sea creature at the beach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMEQAMJrmqY

Emaciated white humanoid caught on Louisiana game cam:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ekl-6D0URoE


Various photos of questionable entities. LOL @ Bigfoot riding Nessy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvEhRCyQlTc

Alien or ghost?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG4n7M0BJ1A

Strange walking stick figures near Fresno:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHsEr_9IIVM


Fresno nightcrawler again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMv85lRAmuk

That emaciated white humanoid again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln59TvJxj3g

And again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1kUeoTwnfo
 
Last edited:
Enmos said:
...

Are you having a laugh, MR?
Click to expand...
This is the UFOs, ghosts and monsters sub-forum, bear in mind.
And to his credit he hasn't yet stated that he believes any of these to be evidence of the paranormal or supernatural etc.
So just accept them for what they are.... a selection of videos from YouTube on the subject matter.
 
The reason I bring things like this to other's attention is quite simple. Unquestionably some of these could be hoaxed/cgi. But let's say there's a slight possibility that any one of these, even just a slim 5% chance, is indeed true. That fact alone would be so extraordinary as to have a major influence on how we view the world. So important and revolutionary would the sighting of a unknown humanoid creature be to our worldview that the merest chance it might be true is enough for me to at least look into it.

Now there are many who insist that such beings cannot in principle exist. I'm not so sure. Do we really know everything there is to know about the universe? Have we plumbed the full depths of all that is ontically possible? I have my doubts. And ofcourse, being a believer in the paranormal, taken in its broadest sense of any phenomena that transcends nature as we know it, I am somewhat more open to the reality of other beings/dimensions than your average joe.

Personally I suspect that in every epoch humans generally experience the universe thru the filter of a historically-evolved consensus-built cosmic paradigm. Reality as it is in itself, assuming such even exists, extends far beyond this construct. Today we experience the cosmos thru the filter of naturalistic science. We thus tend to screen out, even at the unconscious level, the possibility of lots of phenomena that wouldn't fit into that paradigm. But no filter is perfect. What we see here may be brief glimpses of a truly transnatural noumenal reality poking thru our physicalist sensory-based bubble.

“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
― Albert Einstein

“I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say that dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now?”
― John Lennon

“Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic.”
― Frank Herbert, Dune
 
Last edited:
I don't dispute your sentiment, rather any stock you may put in videos on YouTube being convincing "evidence".
Given the availability and cheapness (I.e. free) of surprisingly powerful tools for cgi and video editing, and the widespread use to which amateurs put it to, it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff with regard what might be more convincing videos.
When cgi becomes (if it has not already) so good that one can create videos that are indistinguishable from reality for all but the most learned expert, one can not help but discount all videos from being considered convincing.

I'm not sure we are quite at that point yet but I, for one, (consider it due to irrational bias or not) would consider it more likely that even the most convincing of videos is cgi than actual footage of anything supernatural / paranormal.
That's not to say it is not out there, but I don't think YouTube videos and their ilk offer anything convincing.
 
Sarkus said:
I don't dispute your sentiment, rather any stock you may put in videos on YouTube being convincing "evidence".
Given the availability and cheapness (I.e. free) of surprisingly powerful tools for cgi and video editing, and the widespread use to which amateurs put it to, it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff with regard what might be more convincing videos.
When cgi becomes (if it has not already) so good that one can create videos that are indistinguishable from reality for all but the most learned expert, one can not help but discount all videos from being considered convincing.

I'm not sure we are quite at that point yet but I, for one, (consider it due to irrational bias or not) would consider it more likely that even the most convincing of videos is cgi than actual footage of anything supernatural / paranormal.
That's not to say it is not out there, but I don't think YouTube videos and their ilk offer anything convincing.
Click to expand...

This is more a symptom of our own uncertain postmodern age than a cause of it. We now live in a world that can be technologically simulated to such a degree that it CAN stand in for reality. Indeed it does so on an ongoing basis thru TV and the news media. Where does the fringe between objective reality and subjective experience lie? What can we actually know when we are so used to receiving all our experiences of the world thru electronic screens? Has objective reality EVER really been very certain ever since the advent of quantum indeterminacy and relativity? We are living in uncertain times that is requiring us to go back to our own firsthand experience to root ourselves in any kind of epistemic certitude. The decision of what is real and unreal, and the kind of world we will consequentially live in, is increasingly becoming something we each must decide for ourselves. No longer can we rely solely on what experts have told us. It can guide us for sure, but even the experts in science can't agree on what kind of reality we are living in. See article below for options:

"What happened to old objective reality, the stronghold we all used to trust? It's dramatic! Many ingenious scientists continue to investigate its disappearance.

Most scientists think the quantum mysteries have only one explanation – theirs – and refuse even to discuss deviant opinions. The problem is the many parties existing in this quantum politics; all of them think to be right and there's no agreement on most points. Even the most impartial critics, such as Nick Herbert, consider as incompatible some views I don't see as contradictory.

In his 1985 book “Quantum Reality”, Nick Herbert lists several parties in the quantum politics scene. He regards them as mutually discordant, and assigns to us the responsibility to decide which one is the correct interpretation. Let's see a brief description of each party's approach, who are their leaders and most distinguished members.


REALITY 1 THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION
Leader: Niels Bohr.
Doctrine: 1. There's no reality in the absence of an observation. 2. The act of observation creates reality.
Leading members: Heisenberg; Fred Alan Wolf; David Mermin; Sir Rudolf Peierls; John Wheeler.
Comments: This is the majority party in the scientific community. It has two factions: those who think only microreality is created by the observing act and those who affirm this extends to macroreality, in everyday life. In his book, Nick Herbert considers these two groups as separate parties.


REALITY 2 THE HOLISTS
Leader: Walter Heitler.
Doctrine: 1. Reality is an indivisible whole. 2. Subject and object are undivided parts of each other.
Leading members: David Bohm; Fritjof Capra.
Comments: A broad and liberal group especially to its members, who sometimes support other parties without renouncing their doctrine.
It's said that holism has concealed sympathizers inside other parties, who don't uncover because they're afraid of being labeled mystics.


REALITY 3 THE GARDEN OF SPLITTING PATHS
Leader: Hugh Everett III.
Doctrine: 1. Reality consists in a multiplying number of parallel universes created in each act of observation or measuring. 2. In each situation where numerous results are possible, all of them actualize, each in its own universe.
Leading members: Paul Davies, David Deutsch, Bryce DeWitt.
Comments: Proposed by Hugh Everett in 1957, it replaces the concept of universe with the idea of a multiverse. When the wave function collapses, it does it in all possible options, each of them generating a new copy of the universe, which multiplies in fantastic proportions. However, according to the doctrine "we're only aware of one of these copies". In spite of its shocking character, unacceptable to our poor common sense, it's the most direct and contradiction free interpretation of quantum theory.


REALITY 4 A NEW LOGIC
Leader: John von Neumann.
Doctrine: 1. Quantum world obeys a non-human form of rationality. 2. It's necessary to learn how to think quantum-logically.
Leading members: Garrett Birkhoff (charter member); David Finkelstein.
Comments: Common objects of daily life obey a rational logic acceptable to our common sense put forward by George Boole in 19th century. Von Neumann and Birkhoff suggested, in 1936, that an understanding of quantum phenomena would require boolean logic to be discarded. This party's body of electors is meager, since it demands a non-human intelligence.


REALITY 5 THE NEO-REALISTS
Leader: Albert Einstein (honorary).
Doctrine: 1. The world is made of common objects, also made of common micro-objects. 2. There's something missing in quantum theory to convert it from probabilistic into causal.
Leading members: Max Planck; Erwin Schrödinger; Louis de Broglie (in the beginning and end of his career, but he spent twenty years affiliated to Reality 1); David Bohm (also connected to holistic party).
Comments: Conservative citadel of the nonconformist followers of Newtonian-Cartesian physics, concedes a honorific distinction to Albert Einstein who as we have seen repudiated his daughter and, maybe due to that attitude, is still in pains at the purgatory, despite being such a virtuous soul. To be a neo-realist, to believe the world is made of common objects easily acceptable by common sense, is the most ominously dark heresy according to Nick Herbert's view. All distinguished members of Reality 5 have already passed away.


REALITY 6 CREATIVE CONSCIOUSNESS
Leader: Eugene Wigner.
Doctrine: 1. Reality is created by consciousness. 2. Physical objects have no attributes if a conscious observer is not looking at.
Leading members: Von Neumann (he also leads Reality 4, but his heart belongs to Reality 6): Walter Heitler (another who plays in two teams): Fritz London: Henri Pierce Stapp.
Comments: If the electorate we're considering also included non-scientists this would be the largest of all parties. A large number of those who aren't afraid of being insulted as “mystics”, easily adhere to that interpretation of the world. Nonetheless I can see Reality 6 party thriving in this beginning of century and millennium as far as experiments, theorems and the feelings of scientists (yes, indeed we have feelings!) point in that direction.


REALITY 7 THE DOUBLE WORLD POTENTIAL/ACTUAL
Leader: Werner Heisenberg.
Doctrine: 1. The world has two aspects, one potential other tangible, real. 2. Tangible reality emerges from a former potential condition, a new kind of physical existence.
Leading members: ?
Comments: The revival of the Aristotelian concept of a potential existence as a distinct state of being, by Heisenberg, recognizes the dual polarity of existing/non-existing as too crude to grasp all nuances of being. The notion of a potential existence is related to the state of quantum entities prior to the wave function collapse. This view has no overt followers, since as a matter of fact it isn't a party or faction, but rather a conception underlying the doctrine of several quantum parties."---http://www.newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v399/__show_article/_a000399-000012.htm
 
Magical Realist said:
Has objective reality EVER really been very certain...?
Click to expand...
No - and quantum indeterminacy and relativity have nothing to do with it.

Objectivity is not about certainty. It's about looking at something from every possible viewpoint and making observations that we can have confidence in and use confidently. If we can send men to the moon and back, it doesn't make any difference if "real reality" is an illusion.
 
Sarkus said:
This is the UFOs, ghosts and monsters sub-forum, bear in mind.
And to his credit he hasn't yet stated that he believes any of these to be evidence of the paranormal or supernatural etc.
So just accept them for what they are.... a selection of videos from YouTube on the subject matter.
Click to expand...

He implied it with the title.
Besides, if he's not claiming they are real then he must be having a laugh, right? :p Not that there's anything wrong with that per se.

These videos are obviously either faked or depicting mundane events.
 
There is a game, its called bullshit.
I say bullshit!
Those are all a hoax. 100%
I do believe in many things. And I believe those are fake.
---------------
Side note
Don't throw "big foot, and yeti" as a full hoax yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Magical Realist said:
This is more a symptom of our own uncertain postmodern age than a cause of it.
Click to expand...
Possibly - but then you seem to suggest "ignorance is bliss" in this regard.
In previous ages, if we saw what looked like magic then we might actually believe and accept that it is magic.
This doesn't mean it is magic.
Our modern age has enabled us to question things in more detail. Whether we are any closer to establishing what objective reality is, or indeed whether it even is possible to establish, is neither here nor there, only that we now more aware of what can be illusion. And hopefully, from that, we learn not to be fooled by such.
 
Don't throw "big foot, and yeti" as a full hoax yet
Click to expand...

As usual I don't tell people what to think about these things. I only present the evidence, along with the claims, and let each person decide for themselves. Bigfoot will get a thread all to himself later on.
 
Last edited:
Magical Realist said:
As usual I don't tell people what to think about these things. I only present the evidence, along with the claims, and let each person decide for themselves. Bigfoot will get a thread all to himself later on.
Click to expand...

Mr. Magical Realist, you are not presenting evidence - you are posting youtube videos.
Why not let each person decide for themselves if they want to surf youtube?
You do no research on any of these videos - you merely paste links.
If you want to present evidence - show the steps or procedures or tools you used to check for CGI - or research as to where or when they were made and who produced them. Did any other people or cameras witness or capture the "strange creatures" ?
You are parroting and propagating - you are adding nothing to the mix.
You do not even fully read the comments/information sections on the youtube pages you link to - if you did, you would know what most of these are.
I am filled with antici............................................................................................................................pation on the evidence and claims to be presented on your bigfoot thread.
 
Last edited:
dumbest man on earth said:
Mr. Magical Realist, you are not presenting evidence - you are posting youtube videos.
Click to expand...
Which strictly still is evidence... just not necessarily evidence that I consider to rationally point to the existence of the supposed "monster" (other than the "weird" mundane, such as the sloth).
Bear in mind that evidence is evidence, and it should not be confused with the interpretation of that evidence.
I.e. the youtube videos are evidence - even if evidence merely of someone's CGI work.
I am filled with antici..................................................
Click to expand...
(Say it!)
..........................................................................pation on the evidence and claims to be presented on your bigfoot thread.
Click to expand...
Ditto.
 
You know me, I'm open minded. But that first one is absolutely silly. Looks like a photo shopped 'Gumby' shadow on a scooter. haha! :p
 
Sarkus said:
Which strictly still is evidence... just not necessarily evidence that I consider to rationally point to the existence of the supposed "monster" (other than the "weird" mundane, such as the sloth).
Bear in mind that evidence is evidence, and it should not be confused with the interpretation of that evidence.
I.e. the youtube videos are evidence - even if evidence merely of someone's CGI work.
(Say it!)Ditto.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Video is still evidence even if it can be faked. You just have to use your own judgement when looking at it. Many of these videos in fact are security cam video, deer cams, cell phones, and news video. It's unlikely if someone was going to cgi a monster sighting that they'd use such video. The one of the alien in the graveyard DID raise an eyebrow as it is very high quality video. It was suggested in the blog comments that that is typical of CGI videos. I also look for videos of things caught by accident. Videos intentionally looking for a creature are rather suspect imo. Believe me, in my gathering of these I rule out alot of obvious fakes.
 
wegs said:
You know me, I'm open minded. But that first one is absolutely silly. Looks like a photo shopped 'Gumby' shadow on a scooter. haha! :p
Click to expand...

That's what makes it convincing to me. For one thing it is a news video, and surely it can be compared with the original for see if it was photoshopped. Also there is a weirdness aspect to it that suggests it is real. Cuz if someone was goin to CGI something they would certainly create an image of something familiarly monstrous like an alien grey or a ghost or whatever. THIS image defies anything we can identify. Visually it doesn't even make sense. Yet there it is in all of it's raw unexplainable glory. That's what makes it more convincing imo..
 
Weird stick aliens caught in South Texas:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP_hN13o6Xs


Two deer cam shots from Jasper Texas (little ghost girl and that wendigo/rake again..)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz6j-ATPrtE


Bizarre creatures spotted in North Carolina sewer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQmFWYWqTZA

Weird dead creature with stamp of approval?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7IurioYQtc


Gnome caught on tape in Argentina:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EQO0VfBpt4


Weird ass gnome-like creature caught on video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsVrungc8Jc
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top