Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

535 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

ChrLzs

OK, I have a few minutes to offer some initial observations. First up, thanks for almost completely debunking yourself, Simon... I may not need to do a rebuttal video if you keep that up!

Before talking specifics, that's a very low-resolution video. Detecting whether you might have blown thru your mouth, for instance, is very difficult at that quality.

As for the demo..

1. The candle is very close to a wall, so you have created a perfect spot for 'back-pressure' to add to the blow-out effect - you can see this back-front air motion in every blow-out as the candle goes back then forward.

2. The scene is very poorly lit and at that resolution, as I said, it makes it difficult to see what you are doing.

3. The camera is not panned around either before, during or immediately after the blow-outs to check if someone or something is behind you to help (plus the camera operator is near enough to be up to something, too)..

But most importantly, you demonstrate how easy it is to blow that candle out. When you wave your hands (which you do slower than when you 'punch' at it), the candle goes out (seemingly to your surprise..). But what was particularly interesting about that is:

1. Your fingers were widespread when you waved - that will *reduce* the effect.

2. Your fist was at almost the exact same distance to the candle as the palm of your hand was, when *that* blew it out..

Here, I have taken the nearest frames to the moment of extinguishment - one when you waved your hands (non-telekinesis) and the other when you punched at it (supposedly telekinesis). Clearly, your clenched fist is at almost exactly the same distance to the candle as your palm, and only the fingers are a bit closer.. When you add that to the spread fingers and the faster speed when punching... This looks pretty much as I would expect to happen using those two methods. No claims of special powers required.

gallery_95887_14_301058.gif

I've cropped your face out, and adjusted the enlargement of one of the frames so that the candle is exactly the same size (your camera person moved so the images were obviously shot at different distances....). Other than that the images are untouched and can be easily verified to the original.

(If that image slows this page down too much, let me know and I'll change it to a link..)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
taniwha

it's plainly evident there is air movement that makes the flame extinguish.

if you can do this without moving your body and having no one else in the room that may intentionally or inadvertently create air movement then i would be more interested. as it is, there are too many ways that air could be moved in your video without the viewer knowing or seeing the source.

Great observation J Girl, now I have watched it more than twice I agree that the bending flame is due to air movement. I think any real telekinesis might extinguish the flame without an obvious blowing effect.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

So after watching the ten minutes....(which is way too damn long to show you blowing out a candle w/ brain power but whatever), I stand by my initial claims.

If it's as you say and the candle is being put out by this sudden energy being pushed from your fist, then it stands to reason the candle would move due to the way energy works,

Chrlz pretty much summed up my feelings, and also I would add the possibility of a fan off camera or something of that nature.

Also, the possibility of a fake candle is still possible because due to the lighting of the camera, its not possible to see any details of that camera when you're showing it up close.

I'm still of the mind you're an illusionist, and not someone who actually believes that what they're doing is real, and I'm doing that because I am able to respect a trickster more than I can someone who's wrong. So, don't take me trying to figure your trick out as an insult

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

Simon.John, while I am a little underwhelmed (for reasons I will outline later), I'd like to first offer you a bit of kudos for doing that..

It's a brave guy who not only posts such a video after all the naysayers said their piece (and I'm afraid I'm *still* a naysayer) but you also included your face...!?

Also, while they were rather longwinded (that's a little joke..) your attempts to offer *some* techniques to show it might be genuine were at least a start..

Anyway, I will have some more comments later and maybe a rebuttal video, but for now, take the compliments - I can assure you they won't last...!

Do or say whatever you want... remain a naysaer... mabe it's your job to do that.... I don't mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

So after watching the ten minutes....(which is way too damn long to show you blowing out a candle w/ brain power but whatever), I stand by my initial claims.

If it's as you say and the candle is being put out by this sudden energy being pushed from your fist, then it stands to reason the candle would move due to the way energy works,

Chrlz pretty much summed up my feelings, and also I would add the possibility of a fan off camera or something of that nature.

Also, the possibility of a fake candle is still possible because due to the lighting of the camera, its not possible to see any details of that camera when you're showing it up close.

I'm still of the mind you're an illusionist, and not someone who actually believes that what they're doing is real, and I'm doing that because I am able to respect a trickster more than I can someone who's wrong. So, don't take me trying to figure your trick out as an insult

Edited by simon.john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Never mind. Say what you want... I just proved why some people will not believe.... I wish you best anyway.

I dunno; seems to me the least you could do is respond to their criticisms. They sounded pretty valid to me.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

OK, I have a few minutes to offer some initial observations. First up, thanks for almost completely debunking yourself, Simon... I may not need to do a rebuttal video if you keep that up!

Before talking specifics, that's a very low-resolution video. Detecting whether you might have blown thru your mouth, for instance, is very difficult at that quality.

As for the demo..

1. The candle is very close to a wall, so you have created a perfect spot for 'back-pressure' to add to the blow-out effect - you can see this back-front air motion in every blow-out as the candle goes back then forward.

2. The scene is very poorly lit and at that resolution, as I said, it makes it difficult to see what you are doing.

3. The camera is not panned around either before, during or immediately after the blow-outs to check if someone or something is behind you to help (plus the camera operator is near enough to be up to something, too)..

But most importantly, you demonstrate how easy it is to blow that candle out. When you wave your hands (which you do slower than when you 'punch' at it), the candle goes out (seemingly to your surprise..). But what was particularly interesting about that is:

1. Your fingers were widespread when you waved - that will *reduce* the effect.

2. Your fist was at almost the exact same distance to the candle as the palm of your hand was, when *that* blew it out..

Here, I have taken the nearest frames to the moment of extinguishment - one when you waved your hands (non-telekinesis) and the other when you punched at it (supposedly telekinesis). Clearly, your clenched fist is at almost exactly the same distance to the candle as your palm, and only the fingers are a bit closer.. When you add that to the spread fingers and the faster speed when punching... This looks pretty much as I would expect to happen using those two methods. No claims of special powers required.

gallery_95887_14_301058.gif

I've cropped your face out, and adjusted the enlargement of one of the frames so that the candle is exactly the same size (your camera person moved so the images were obviously shot at different distances....). Other than that the images are untouched and can be easily verified to the original.

(If that image slows this page down too much, let me know and I'll change it to a link..)

Give me a break fella.... Ijust proved why some people will not believe anyway.... "those fingers" is my fist when I am retrieving it. Okay, than do it yourself and do as you see in my video... do like that with the fist and when reaching the candle open your fist and extinguish the candle flame... you'll not succed. It seems only when I will have "a controled enviroment" with witnesses (doctors, scientists, you name it) probably you will believe. But I don't think so, you'll not believe it anyway eaven if I'll do that. But I will do. Edited by simon.john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

I think more correct would be that you proved people aren't as gullible as would be helpful.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Whether the film is real or not cannot be known for sure, but the fact that all sorts of holes in the presentation are obvious makes it unreliable unless those criticisms are honestly and adequately answered. Evasion and cries for pity just don't persuade.

Can you imagine a scientific demonstration where the demonstrator behaved like that? "Give me a break," and "This just shows people will not believe."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

Whether the film is real or not cannot be known for sure, but the fact that all sorts of holes in the presentation are obvious makes it unreliable unless those criticisms are honestly and adequately answered. Evasion and cries for pity just don't persuade.

Can you imagine a scientific demonstration where the demonstrator behaved like that? "Give me a break," and "This just shows people will not believe."

I just gave you a video, and you can see it is genuine video... no tricks used.... what it will take you.... never mind. Have it your way... say what you want... but first you try and do that okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

Whether the film is real or not cannot be known for sure, but the fact that all sorts of holes in the presentation are obvious makes it unreliable unless those criticisms are honestly and adequately answered. Evasion and cries for pity just don't persuade.

Can you imagine a scientific demonstration where the demonstrator behaved like that? "Give me a break," and "This just shows people will not believe."

That video is very real... my wife filmed me last night at 11:54 pm Romania time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

It is no use, trying to prove to you, no mater what I do. I think eaven in person If I was to go to you and show you directly, you would STILL not believe! Have it your ways folks. I am tired for real and done to prove something to you. I wish you only the best anyway to all of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Controlled environment, objective responses to holes in presentation, better camera angle showing your set up to not be trickery, better image resolution, There have been suggestions made to you earlier about how to do this properly and you ignored those.

Now you're pouting that you're still not believed, and expecting us to care who filmed it? The fact its your wife makes it more likely you're just doing an illusion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

And let's take it that you are indeed doing this with your mind... Given that you could blow it out with far, far less trouble, I'd have to observe that you have ...

...a very mild superpower...

Perhaps come back when it is refined and can actually do something that could be used..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

Controlled environment, objective responses to holes in presentation, better camera angle showing your set up to not be trickery, better image resolution, There have been suggestions made to you earlier about how to do this properly and you ignored those.

Now you're pouting that you're still not believed, and expecting us to care who filmed it? The fact its your wife makes it more likely you're just doing an illusion.

It is not an illusion and I was filmed with a smart phone (Samsung Ace) with resolution 324x256... something like that... that's the best resolution her phone had... I don't have a beter phone or camera either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

Give me a break fella.... Ijust proved why some people will not believe anyway.... "those fingers" is my fist when I am retrieving it. Okay, than do it yourself and do as you see in my video... do like that with the fist and when reaching the candle open your fist and extinguish the candle flame... you'll not succed. It seems only when I will have "a controled enviroment" with witnesses (doctors, scientists, you name it) probably you will believe. But I don't think so, you'll not believe it anyway eaven if I'll do that. But I will do.

You can see that my fist is still closed eaven after you edited my video. This shows you are a novice in editing a video. I can do that myself too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

I can do that myself too.

Oh, well there's another explanation then.

ChrLz didnt do anything to you video to make you look bad. There is simply no need for him to.

also, not sure how fingers can be a fist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhispersInTheAttic

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Has anyone ever been able to do it. It can be real, but there's another side of me saying I shouldn't believe in everything. That I should ask questions just to be sure of it. Is there any proof of it online? Seen a few videos but again I'm not sure if the video has been messed with or edited. So it raises up a bunch of questions for me to believe this or not. On the other hand I'm still curious about it, I won't lie. Just not sure weather to believe if it's entirely real or not. Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Well, personally, I think teh video isn't edited, but that Simon here is an illusionist, slight of hand,like a stage magician.

Ive seen no evidence to truly believe telekinetic powers are possible, but i've seen plenty of people claiming to have it be debunked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeWitz

As you know, simon.john, I have been one of your doubters all along. However, it is not actually your attempted telekinesis via home video which makes me doubt you. What you have committed to videos is, of course, not impressive at all. Something else erodes your credibility.

In one phrase: Why is it so important to you that we, an international but limited and non-authoritative UM forum on psychic phenomena, should be convinced? That's why I asked you, many days ago, "who are you," simon.john? Who are you, as a person, that your ego is so wrapped up with convincing some UMers of your claimed ability?

The frustration, petulance, and aggravation with which you react to those who doubt you is out of proportion to the matter at hand. Why do you crave our validation or approval so much? Why do you resort to the utter rejection and dismissal of those of us who don't see telekinesis in your presentations? Why does it matter so much?

This, to me, is the unexplained mystery here.

Edited by szentgyorgy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon.john

As you know, simon.john, I have been one of your doubters all along. However, it is not actually your attempted telekinesis via home video which makes me doubt you. What you have committed to videos is, of course, not impressive at all. Something else erodes your credibility.

In one phrase: Why is it so important to you that we, an international but limited and non-authoritative UM forum on psychic phenomena, should be convinced? That's why I asked you, many days ago, "who are you," simon.john? Who are you, as a person, that your ego is so wrapped up with convincing some UMers of your claimed ability?

The frustration, petulance, and aggravation with which you react to those who doubt you is out of proportion to the matter at hand. Why do you crave our validation or approval so much? Why do you resort to the utter rejection and dismissal of those of us who don't see telekinesis in your presentations? Why does it matter so much?

This, to me, is the unexplained mystery here.

Never mind. I am nobody. You are right... oh and by the way, I am not frustrated at all nor I ever been so. Eaven if I will tell you why I am doing this, you and many others still won't believe me. Once again, I apologize if I did something wrong to anyone here and I wish you all health and good fortune. Edited by simon.john

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeWitz

Never mind. I am nobody. You are right... oh and by the way, I am not frustrated at all nor I ever been so. Eaven if I will tell you why I am doing this, you and many others still won't believe me. Once again, I apologize if I did something wrong to anyone here and I wish you all health and good fortune.

No, I'm not "right," and I never said you are "nobody." I asked about your motivation and irritation when your presentation is not accepted.

I know it's a rather personal question, but I'm curious.

I wish you and yours well, also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

I have a theory, but it could be seen as a personal attack, and I'd rather not start publicly analyzing people in forums for obvious reasons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

I thought it was much more impressive then the original video. He did a good job of presenting the candle and showing it was not gimmicked in some way. And then showed that he could blow it out and wave at it, and the candle responded normally. Then he showed punching at the candle from a distance that would seem to be far enough away to not create much air movement. Which I thought was pretty good.

Of course there are ways to falisify all of this, but I don't think Mr Simon John is really going to go to extremes to make this video.

I'd like to see a repeat of his first video with the candle flame using a similar situation, and with the camera perpendicular to the candle from him, like in this latest video.

If this WAS telekinetics, it would be affecting such a tiny bit of air (Because it is probably the air being affected, not the actual flame... unless you are claiming to bend energy.), that the candle would be a factor of thousands heavier. So, you'd not expect it to actually move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

He really didnt show that the candle wasn't gimmicked, the light of the camera made it till you couldn't see any close details about the candle

I've got a blue million other things about the video, but I've a feeling we probably won't come to a middle ground on this instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.