Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 3 votes

Boy In The Corner


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16    LXC2

LXC2

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts
  • Joined:04 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Why would people need to know. You don't keep scrolling.

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:57 AM

Well, if you think about it that way, please go get the vest I'll hold her down, but if you think of it paranormal (not saying I believe in paranormal crap) ya. Its kind of creepy, haven't heard of a ghost as buddy-buddy as that, and no Casper isn't no freaking ghost.

Edited by LXC2, 05 September 2013 - 12:57 AM.

Posted Image


#17    ZOD

ZOD

    Intern of the Illuminatti

  • Member
  • 5,117 posts
  • Joined:02 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 September 2013 - 01:01 AM

I don't think of things as paranormal.

I'm a doctor Jim, not a mystic

I've seen **** that'll turn you WHITE!


#18    LXC2

LXC2

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts
  • Joined:04 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Why would people need to know. You don't keep scrolling.

Posted 05 September 2013 - 01:09 AM

Well Jim, I believe this women has a head injury, please tend to her.

Posted Image


#19    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:18 PM

View PostLXC2, on 05 September 2013 - 12:31 AM, said:

he never said if he was a girl or a boy,

Actually she did.

Posted Image

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#20    LXC2

LXC2

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts
  • Joined:04 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Why would people need to know. You don't keep scrolling.

Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:01 PM

Lets, just say for my sake, that that was just done. Otherwise I was just stupid enough not to look there. .-.

Posted Image


#21    Avallaine

Avallaine

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 174 posts
  • Joined:07 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 07 September 2013 - 04:25 AM

View PostLeonardo, on 04 September 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:


Remember, if you can see it, it can be photographed. All that "ghosts don't show up on photo's" nonsense is just...well, nonsense.


Those statements seem to be based on a fairly drastic assumption: that ghosts can only "appear" by physically reflecting light, like any normal, corporeal object.  Aren't ghosts generally reported to be non-corporeal things, capable of walking through walls or vanishing in an instant?  Why do you assume a hypothesized non-corporeal entity would interact physically with light and only light?


#22    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,477 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:07 AM

View PostAvallaine, on 07 September 2013 - 04:25 AM, said:

Those statements seem to be based on a fairly drastic assumption: that ghosts can only "appear" by physically reflecting light, like any normal, corporeal object.  Aren't ghosts generally reported to be non-corporeal things, capable of walking through walls or vanishing in an instant?  Why do you assume a hypothesized non-corporeal entity would interact physically with light and only light?

Hello, Avallaine, welcome to UM. :st

Well, if the apparition was non-corporeal and non-reactive to light, we wouldn't be able to see it. Cameras work in exactly the same way our eyes do - they capture light and process that into images.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#23    Avallaine

Avallaine

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 174 posts
  • Joined:07 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 07 September 2013 - 12:17 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 07 September 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

Hello, Avallaine, welcome to UM. :st

Thank you, glad to be here!


Quote

Well, if the apparition was non-corporeal and non-reactive to light, we wouldn't be able to see it. Cameras work in exactly the same way our eyes do - they capture light and process that into images.

Certainly, some ghost reports (and a few rare photos) suggest ghosts can interact with light in a physical way; but other reports--those of ghosts that cast no shadow, those that are of nothing but a shadow, those of images seen by some people present while others beside them see nothing, etc.--seem to indicate that ghosts are not always "seen" by physical means.

I think it would be more accurate to say "If you can see it, you might be able to photograph it."  If ghosts exist as objective phenomena, their very non-corporeal nature means that we have no idea how (or how often) they interact with the physical world; assuming they must or must not always behave one way or the other seems to be making an unwarranted assumption.


#24    ZOD

ZOD

    Intern of the Illuminatti

  • Member
  • 5,117 posts
  • Joined:02 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:55 AM

if something isn't seen by a physical mean, then It's seen by a mental one, such as a hallucination.

To that extend I agree with you.

You can't photograph hallucinations.

I've seen **** that'll turn you WHITE!


#25    Avallaine

Avallaine

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 174 posts
  • Joined:07 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 08 September 2013 - 04:17 AM

Certainly, a hallucination is one example of things "seen" non-physically...dreams are another (and more common) one.

Closer to the issue of ghosts is the idea of "auras"--which, if they exist, are almost never claimed to physically reflect light, but are nevertheless registered in visual terms by percipients.

If non-corporeal spiritual entities exist as reported, then presumably they are sometimes able to physically interact with light (if they can physically move objects or slam doors, I don't doubt they can sometimes bounce photons around), but in other cases--particularly those where only some can "see" them--I imagine they appear in some other, less understood fashion that merely translates as visual information in the mind of the beholder.


#26    LXC2

LXC2

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 42 posts
  • Joined:04 Sep 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Why would people need to know. You don't keep scrolling.

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:40 AM

Well the poster of this was obviously a hit and run, pack it up boys, lets try on the next one.

Posted Image


#27    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,477 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:12 AM

View PostAvallaine, on 07 September 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

Thank you, glad to be here!




Certainly, some ghost reports (and a few rare photos) suggest ghosts can interact with light in a physical way; but other reports--those of ghosts that cast no shadow, those that are of nothing but a shadow, those of images seen by some people present while others beside them see nothing, etc.--seem to indicate that ghosts are not always "seen" by physical means.

I think it would be more accurate to say "If you can see it, you might be able to photograph it."  If ghosts exist as objective phenomena, their very non-corporeal nature means that we have no idea how (or how often) they interact with the physical world; assuming they must or must not always behave one way or the other seems to be making an unwarranted assumption.

***Pedant Alert for the following post***

"Seeing" is the process by which light enters the eye, is converted into an electro-chemical signal and passes from there into the optic nerve and into the brain, where the image is processed. If someone is aware of an image of something and the eyes/optic-nerve pathway are not involved in the producing of that image then, technically, that person has not "seen" anything.

So, the statement I made that "if it can be seen, it can be photographed" is precisely true in this respect.

***Pedant Alert over***

:P

Edited by Leonardo, 08 September 2013 - 11:14 AM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#28    Avallaine

Avallaine

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 174 posts
  • Joined:07 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:14 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 08 September 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:


So, the statement I made that "if it can be seen, it can be photographed" is precisely true in this respect.

***Pedant Alert over***

:P

:rolleyes:

I believe that falls into the the "true, but misleading" category.  But yes, I see perceive your point.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users