 | |
|
Sponsor |  Kanookie | Nov 3, 2007 7:29am | | Dust specs. Little particle's of air born dust that refract light is what I saw on that video. |
|
|
Sponsor | | lovingpoet | Nov 3, 2007 8:26am | Some of that may very well have been dust particles refracting light. But the first segment...I would have to disagree. Only on the basis that it seemed to have some purposeful movements, and I did not see a source of light strong enough to cause continuous refraction...though admittedly the vid quality was very bad. I like to find this sort of video, because it is genuine in the respect that the people capturing it are not trying to fool anyone, they honestly believe it is a phenomenon they are capturing...and that in and of it's self lends credence to the videos validity.
Now, is this next one trickery??
youtube.com/watch [youtube.com/watch] |
|
|
Sponsor | | Kanookie | Nov 3, 2007 2:57pm | | How does believing in something lend credibility to the phenomena observed? It either is real or is not, wishing doesn't make it so. That to me is one of the problems with supernatural phenomena, people want to believe so they fool themselves into thinking it is so, where on other matters they tend to apply some skepticism about extraordinary claims. |
|
|
Sponsor | | lovingpoet | Nov 3, 2007 7:50pm | | You misunderstood my statement Kanookie. I was simply saying that sifting through the vast videos online, finding something posted by those that feel it is genuine...is refreshing. Where as finding all those posted by people trying to impress with camera tricks may be entertaining...but disappointing as well. |
|
|
Sponsor | | Kanookie | Nov 4, 2007 3:36am | | Well I can't share those sentiments because we need to prove ghost exist not just feel they exist. So I think anytime you view some supernatural event that falls outside of everyday normal experience you have to bring skepticism to the table until that event is proven otherwise. |
|
|
Sponsor | | lovingpoet | Nov 4, 2007 6:03pm | There are those that refuse to see anything beyond their normal experiences, there for dispelling anything unusual with what logic tells them.
Nothing wrong with that, as long as it does not impede on others ability to express their opinions. That freedom is what I always bring to the table. |
|
|
|  3807889 | Nov 5, 2007 4:19am | Just because it doesn't show on video, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
When we see something, is it really there, or is it our subconscious mind seeing it? |
|
|
Sponsor | | Kanookie | Nov 6, 2007 4:34am | 17: If the supernatural does exist then it is a part of normal experience, i,e, provable. Why would you want it otherwise? And certainly people can believe in anything they want, but that still doesn't make it true.
18: I would say wishful thinking, over active imagination, mistaken conclusions...... and a host of other possibilities.
All I'm trying to say is why do we accept proof that is so silly and vague you could drive a truck through it. Wouldn't it be better to have tangible evidence that is proven, tested, verified, and unmistakably real. By not doing so we give in to the con artists like John Edwards, Sylvia Browne, and a thousand others who only wish to rob of us our money for their personal gain. |
|
|
|  niteraven | Nov 9, 2007 4:24pm | | So basically I think you're saying what I believe.. that the paranormal is just the "unproven' normal? If I could time travel and took an aspirin with me back to the 15th century the pill would be magic and I would be burned as a sorcerer. Its NOT magic, its just unproven science for that time. |
|
|
|
The Unexplained → Discussion