what the skptics say

j2u

hi i was watching this programme about the paranormal yesterday and they brout in two people with a wide knowledge of photography.these two people have been proving some ghost sightings and pictures to be false.they even managed to recreate some.there was one where a camera in a parking lot picked up a transparent body floating across,the guys got an action figure and put it on a string,they then dangled it in front of the camera,i think the focus n the camera was not that good thats why it look so blurry but the point is they had completly proved this fake and this was supposed to be a widely accepted ghost sighting.the second thing they managed to possibly prove fake were the orbs of light ,they say that these are particles of dust cluttered together and they made a load of dust took picture and they did look very similar to what other people call orbs of light,im not saying there are no such thing as ghosts or orbs im just saying these were some interesting reasons for the sightings nonetheless.

6th

j2u wrote:

they even managed to recreate some.there was one where a camera in a parking lot picked up a transparent body floating across,the guys got an action figure and put it on a string,they then dangled it in front of the camera,i think the focus n the camera was not that good thats why it look so blurry but the point is they had completly proved this fake and this was supposed to be a widely accepted ghost sighting.

Wow, you are very easy to convince! I mean seriously, if i recreated the moon landing on my computer and showed it to you would you believe it was all fake?!

You could show me a picture of you standing with your parents, i could then make a picture look like it was me standing there with your folks ... does that mean you were never there with them in the original pictures?

I could go on and on but the fact that you can recreeate something does not take away from the original. Also with the paranormal things have to be dealt with on a case by case.

j2u wrote:

the second thing they managed to possibly prove fake were the orbs of light ,they say that these are particles of dust cluttered together and they made a load of dust took picture and they did look very similar to what other people call orbs of light......

With regards to orbs (always a tricky one ), just because most might be dust does that mean that all are. Also look at it like this: ok so its particles of dust, but if it possible that an unseen force/energy would cause it to act in a particular way? Seeing as dust is small and very light would it not make seen that it could be the easiest thing for a spirit to manipulate?

Now i am not saying that my opinions are right but christ I'm getting sick of people with no strength in the convictions folding at the first challenge from a "skeptic".

Even a real skeptic would not accept such miserable "evidence" and absolute proof that something was faked.

Sangre

6th wrote:

Wow, you are very easy to convince!

Says the guy on the paranormal forum?

Zillah

6th wrote:

You could show me a picture of you standing with your parents, i could then make a picture look like it was me standing there with your folks ... does that mean you were never there with them in the original pictures?

Precisely, the fact that something can be faked doesn't mean it was. It does mean that we shouldn't accept individual photos as proof, but it doesn't mean we outright reject the subject of the photo.

With regards to orbs (always a tricky one ), just because most might be dust does that mean that all are. Also look at it like this: ok so its particles of dust, but if it possible that an unseen force/energy would cause it to act in a particular way? Seeing as dust is small and very light would it not make seen that it could be the easiest thing for a spirit to manipulate?

I think thats stretching it a bit 6th If you are right, its very convenient that dust might just jump around like that anyway without the unseen force...

Personally I've never seen an orb photo/video that required me to think for more than three or four seconds as to its origins. Thats not to say there isn't any, but I havn't seen it.

Sangre wrote:

Says the guy on the paranormal forum?

Says the guy trolling the paranormal forum? Being a questioning voice is fine dude, but at least try and add something to the discussion.

Sangre

I think its a bit rich that he has decided to put down another poster because hes gullible. He needed to be taken down a peg, a whole peg.

Zillah

Sangre wrote:

I think its a bit rich that he has decided to put down another poster because hes gullible. He needed to be taken down a peg, a whole peg.

6th pointed out an internal logical fallacy: Proof that something can be faked is not proof that something was faked.

Bye!

GuanYin

Sangre Banned.

Read the charter lads

j2u

in my defense i did say that i wasnt trying to say that all spirit sightings are fake but i fail to see how any advancement in paranormal investigation can be made witout accepting the fact that some so called sightings could be fake or at least misinterpreted.i think it is very important that we look at all possible reasons for all possible sightings,im not saying every sighting is faked or not a spirit i just think that the topic of a paranormal activity will always be regarded as a fantasy rather than a reality.i merely stated some other possible reasons for some sightings,i know id rather see things for how they really are rather than how i really want them to be

6th

The fact is no matter how genuine something is, it can be faked. Jurrasic Park was not a documentory

Stoner

you having some marriage problems at the moment 6th?