Sleep Paralysis - Ghost Captured On Video

[Brian Topp 3,824]

He obviously hasn't read all the other post we have debunked.

I always aware that people tend to only read the first page or just the first post before replying. My favorite was when a kid posted a video of books flying off the shelf, I went and download and brighten the video and notice strings and posted saying so. He confessed it was fake and then said he could not pull a fast one over us. We then had a self declared expert on paranormal and she replied from the OPs first post and had declared that it was legitimate with out a doubt since she knows all these things. Another member pointed that it was already been proven a hoax. Well the self declared expert on paranormal faded away (also she was constantly pitching her paranormal website and got in trouble for it).

[nik-h 23]

'It is easier to claim it is paranormal than taking the hard route and find out what really happened.'

Even easier dismissing ALL anomalous phenomena as a lazy, disinclination to discover what 'really' happened, in the 'real' world where such things don't 'really' occur.

How scientifically rigorous and open minded of you.

Nicely illustrated by an instance of some idiot faking it. Now 'Scientists' - those uncorruptable paragons of virtuous logic - they don't go in for any of that now, do they..?

Edited July 28, 2014 by nik-h

[Brian Topp 3,824]

'It is easier to claim it is paranormal than taking the hard route and find out what really happened.'

Even easier dismissing ALL anomalous phenomena as a lazy, disinclination to discover what 'really' happened, in the 'real' world where such things don't 'really' occur.

How scientifically rigorous and open minded of you.

Nicely illustrated by an instance of some idiot faking it. Now 'Scientists' - those uncorruptable paragons of virtuous logic - they don't go in for any of that now, do they..?

clearly you do not read my posts since I actually do research, replicate the evidence and take time to explain. I hope your 11 other posts are not negative and against people who refuse to blindly accept anonymous peoples stories and in this thread, faked video.

Edit to add

Well your story is your own, I believe that you believe what happened but to every one else, it's a story, words. I suffer from hypnagogia and sleep paralysis. I have seen things in the dark, monsters, shadows, faces, etc. I see these things on a weekly basis and i don't even watch horror movies hardly much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnagogia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_paralysis

Edited July 29, 2014 by Brian Topp

[nik-h 23]

Well your story is your own, I believe that you believe what happened but to every one else, it's a story, words. I suffer from hypnagogia and sleep paralysis. I have seen things in the dark, monsters, shadows, faces, etc. I see these things on a weekly basis and i don't even watch horror movies hardly much.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Hypnagogia

http://en.wikipedia....Sleep_paralysis

And your story's your own which I too have no means of verifying other than your assertion of its 'truth'. Everything's 'a story, words' that's how humans interpret & communicate even in the absence of words. The 'memory' is linguistic and cannot function without language. This is why no one can remember being a very young child.

Neither I, nor my ex-partner suffer from any of the above sleep disorders, or watch horror films.

I have at no stage said the video is authentic - I don't believe it is. (You obviously DON'T read my postings haha!)

My story was to illustrate the circumstances of my experience which would not endorse this particular clip as being 'authentic'.

It's amazing isn't it how people project their own personality traits onto others. I'm 'negative' & 'don't read' the posts hahaha!

Every post I've read by you just completely rubbishes the topic as being misconstrued nonsense by uninformed idiots or just plain hoaxes. If you think ALL potentially 'paranormal' phenomena is garbage - what are you doing on here?

Presumably it's your mission to illuminate us all with the 'REAL' explanation of what's taking place - despite having not being present or having any direct experience of the personal accounts being related.

YOUR story is YOUR OWN - it's not definitive or conclusive & neither explains nor invalidates anyone else's experience.

Just because you invoke elements of mainstream 'rational' & 'scientific' discourse doesn't mean your opinions are more valid than anyone else's. It's just another self-validated 'story'.

Check out the computer generated gibberish accepted & published as 'valid' scientific studies in 'Nature' here: http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763

And then have a look at this Economist article on the 'alarming' number of accepted published papers, going back decades, which when repeated are found to have no validity. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble

Oh and the 'monstrous and unprecedented fraud perpetrated by the University of Toronto' http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/

Never let the evidence get in the way of a good theory!

You apparently 'see things' on a regular basis which you explain in terms of hypnagogic imagery whilst in sleep paralysis. I don't regularly SEE things that aren't there & have experienced nothing like the 'shadow' phenomena either before or since.

By your admission, I'd say you're potentially the more unreliable witness on such things as to you, such visions are apparently 'common occurrences'. As I've said - I personally have had no similar experience either before or since. Ho hum.

[Brian Topp 3,824]

And your story's your own which I too have no means of verifying other than your assertion of its 'truth'. Everything's 'a story, words' that's how humans interpret & communicate even in the absence of words. The 'memory' is linguistic and cannot function without language. This is why no one can remember being a very young child.

Major difference is i have science and research and explains what happening to me.

Neither I, nor my ex-partner suffer from any of the above sleep disorders, or watch horror films.

You do not need to have a disorder like i have, My point is people can still have sleep paralysis or hypnagogia from the triggers from my previous post.

I have at no stage said the video is authentic - I don't believe it is. (You obviously DON'T read my postings haha!)

My story was to illustrate the circumstances of my experience which would not endorse this particular clip as being 'authentic'.

Why post your story on a video that is clearly faked?

It's amazing isn't it how people project their own personality traits onto others. I'm 'negative' & 'don't read' the posts hahaha!

I read your other posts, you come off aggressive-my-way-or-the-high-way

Every post I've read by you just completely rubbishes the topic as being misconstrued nonsense by uninformed idiots or just plain hoaxes. If you think ALL potentially 'paranormal' phenomena is garbage - what are you doing on here?

If you actually read my posts i normally have to explain why once every week. Let me explain this again. I believe in ghosts and things but the evidence people present are explained and resolved. just because I believe in something, does not mean i have to accept things blindly. I have degree in video and photography, which means i know the methods people do to make mistakes and hoaxes. I rely on science, research and above all common sense.

Presumably it's your mission to illuminate us all with the 'REAL' explanation of what's taking place - despite having not being present or having any direct experience of the personal accounts being related.

This is a discussion forum, meaning skeptics and believers are allowed to discuss their views. My mission is to find true evidence, something that can not be easily discounted. The truth is out there, so is a lot of crap.

YOUR story is YOUR OWN - it's not definitive or conclusive & neither explains nor invalidates anyone else's experience.

Just because you invoke elements of mainstream 'rational' & 'scientific' discourse doesn't mean your opinions are more valid than anyone else's. It's just another self-validated 'story'.

This is pretty funny, I am explaining things that can be replicated, things that can be explained if you want to "ignore" science then good for you.

Check out the computer generated gibberish accepted & published as 'valid' scientific studies in 'Nature' here: http://www.nature.co...-papers-1.14763

Ok, Let me present this to you. People post stupid articles every time, how many times you heard "studies show you can lose weight by such and such" which always varies or even contradict each other. Studies are not the foundation of science, studies are surveys or people who want to push some product or their own views. You seem to blur the line between science and pseudoscience.

And then have a look at this Economist article on the 'alarming' number of accepted published papers, going back decades, which when repeated are found to have no validity. http://www.economist...-it-not-trouble

Oh and the 'monstrous and unprecedented fraud perpetrated by the University of Toronto' http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/

So with these claims, gravity is made up? What you want me to say, science is golden, the perfect thing in the world? Well it isn't and clumping every thing in one category is pretty shoddy. That like putting people who have cancer, aids and a guy who has cut finger in the same category as "sick". What you do not understand that there are people out there who pretend they are doing science but just want their name in the book or want some sort of fame. You seem to not under stand the differences between science and pseudoscience.

Never let the evidence get in the way of a good theory!

You apparently 'see things' on a regular basis which you explain in terms of hypnagogic imagery whilst in sleep paralysis. I don't regularly SEE things that aren't there & have experienced nothing like the 'shadow' phenomena either before or since.

Again, People can have effects from Hypnagogia or sleep paralysis, people do have bad dreams and people can have it, it not like my case where i do experience it weekly.

By your admission, I'd say you're potentially the more unreliable witness on such things as to you, such visions are apparently 'common occurrences'. As I've said - I personally have had no similar experience either before or since. Ho hum.

again, Read above. People are not like me who experience it weekly BUT they can experience once in a while. So, your story of this one off shadow man experience is real because you just wrote down a story? You know how many stories get posted here and have more plot holes than swiss cheese?

If you and went to court and the judge asked you for evidence of shadow men being real and then they ask me to present how it isn't real, guess who would win the court case? I would, I would bring in doctors who specialized in sleeping disorders, who actually have documented sleeping behaviors. While you, You could only present anecdote

stories and online forum discussions.

[nik-h 23]

Ok here we go...

'Major difference is i have science and research and explains what happening to me.'

Well you don't personally 'have' science do you? Science is just another cultural narrative (albeit the dominant one of our age) and is merely the set of currently accepted theoretical models posited and verified by & within an elite, peer group of individuals (almost wholly male). These narratives are then handed down to us mere mortals to accept at face value as 'THE TRUTH' without the expertise or technical means of proving or disproving them.

Anyone disagreeing with this High Priesthood is deemed either an 'idiot' incapable of comprehending such concepts or a 'heretic' such as former Astronomer Royal (and coiner of the originally derogatory & dismissive term 'Big Bang Theory') the late Sir Fred Hoyle, his colleague Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe or Dr. Rupert Sheldrake - all eminent men from the same scientific tradition, ostracised & pilloried for disagreeing with the dominant theories of the day.

Some of Hoyle & Wickramasinghe's ridiculed theories of 'panspermia' are about to be tested by the Rosetta Space Mission, whilst some of their alternatives to the simplistic & problematic 'Big Bang' (allegedly resulting in Hoyle being denied a Nobel Prize) are now the 'next big thing' in cutting edge physics.

I remember a kid on a TV science programme once being condescended to when he asked 'What happened before the Big Bang?' The typically bearded, cliched scientist replied; 'Ha ha! Well, that's a common misconception. You see - there was nothing before the 'Big Bang'...'

Lo and behold - top astrophysicists now officially deem the 'Big Bang' as rubbish - we can say this now 'cos 'Proper' Scientists who know 'The Truth' have given us permission to think and speak of this. In the 70s & 80s you had NO chance - even if, like Hoyle & Wickramasinghe, you actually were renowned physicists!

You are perfectly at liberty to unquestioningly accept these narratives as plausible 'explanations' of what's happening to YOU.

You cannot however, then legitimately extrapolate your singular, individual experience to encompass all anomalous sightings of shadowy/ghostly figures, claiming it's a more valid explanation than any other theory simply because it's currently endorsed by mainstream science. As Jung noted - unique, personal anomalous experiences by definition cannot be replicated in a lab.

This does not mean things impossible to replicated in a lab do not therefore exist.

'You do not need to have a disorder like i have, My point is people can still have sleep paralysis or hypnagogia from the triggers from my previous post.'

Yes but it doesn't mean THEY DO & that thus all similar experiences can be subjected to some sort of blanket dismissal.

'Why post your story on a video that is clearly faked?'

Because it related to a personal 'Unexplained' & 'Mysterious' experience relevant to the subject matter and in which I thought people might have an interest - that is THE point of the site isn't it?

'I read your other posts, you come off aggressive-my-way-or-the-high-way - '

Haha - anything but! Firstly - it takes one to know one & secondly - do feel free to demonstrate this by quoting the source material, explaining why you hold this subjective (and thus presumably unscientific & invalid) personal viewpoint.*

(*Do remember - if we can't replicate under lab conditions your subjective, interpretative response in a carefully selected test group, demonstrating statistically significant and repeatable experimental data - it doesn't and never did exist.)

I'm attempting to demonstrate there are many ways of interpreting and understanding 'reality' - western mainstream 'science' is just the current dominant cultural narrative. Its social, political & economic power also delineates what 'is' & 'isn't' 'Science'. (Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, Dr. Robert Jahn, Professor Fred Hoyle etc. trained in the same tradition, qualified & published in peer reviewed journals all deemed 'heretics', their research deemed 'unscientific' by Science's 'powers that be' at various junctures.)

'If you actually read my posts i normally have to explain why once every week. Let me explain this again. I believe in ghosts and things but the evidence people present are explained and resolved. just because I believe in something, does not mean i have to accept things blindly. I have degree in video and photography, which means i know the methods people do to make mistakes and hoaxes. I rely on science, research and above all common sense.'

Yes, I'm fully aware people 'make mistakes' & perpetrate hoaxes - so do 'scientists' as the brief selection of links/references I cited demonstrates. (And there's lots more where that came from...)

Also, just so you know (via a quick diversion into cultural theory for a moment) using the term 'common sense' is a classic right-wing alibi, generally employed to invalidate and close down any discourse or differing viewpoint as being extreme or unreasonable 'non-sense'.

It's often used in phrases such as:

'Well as soon as the rioters turned up, it was only 'common sense' to call in the Riot Police.'

Presumably, a group of people arrived in an area. These people were deemed by some to be 'rioters', engaged in a 'riot' so it was 'common sense' the 'Riot Police' were called. What exactly defines a group of people as 'rioters' creating a 'riot'. Noise? Damage to Property? Threats of Violence?

Such questions are side-stepped by claiming it was obviously 'common-sense' to call the 'Riot Police' to deal with such 'Rioters'. Anyone querying exactly how these people were 'rioters' engaged in 'rioting' is, by use of the term 'common-sense', made to look foolish or seem unreasonable in asking such. Armed Riot Police were called to deal with the rioters, 'surely anyone with 'common sense' can see that?'

Use of the term 'common sense' in this context, establishes a closed, right-wing viewpoint, advocating violent action towards what (in the UK) would almost certainly be an unarmed group of young people. Anyone disagreeing with such 'common sense' sentiments are immediately characterised as being outside the common, popular moral consensus, their differing but valid viewpoint now seen as extreme or unrealistic, i.e. not 'common sense'.

If you've got a valid argument - don't use 'common sense'. It implies your views alone are rational & reasonable (irrespective of any factual validity) and all dissenting voices & opinions are not.

Anyway, back to the way, the truth & the light...

Science displays as many fakers & errors of judgment as any other field of human endeavour. Scientists should NOT be regarded as 'higher' beings of unquestionable infallibility and neither should their subject.

'This is a discussion forum, meaning skeptics and believers are allowed to discuss their views. My mission is to find true evidence, something that can not be easily discounted. The truth is out there, so is a lot of crap.'

Yes but you're not going to discern this 'truth' simply by dismissing personal accounts on a forum. You've no means of verifiying or disproving them yet you're certain which are truth & which are lies. There's that old scientific 'open mindedness' again!

Dismissing 'obviously fake' images/videos isn't a straightforward process either since what would appear to be some of the most unconvincing ghost/ufo images and footage can't, on closer analysis, be dismissed as such - see supposed 'faked, tossed-hubcap' UFO which flew over Trent family farm in McMinnville, Oregon in 1950. 17 years of photographic & negative analysis confirmed both object & family's unwavering testimony most likely 'true'. http://www.ufoeviden...ses/case258.htm

Similarly the infamous 'pantomime phantom' photographed by Rev. K.F. Lord in Newby Church in the 1960s. The site link claims a 'BBC programme' (actually ITV's 80s paranormal series Arthur C. Clarke's 'Mysterious World') after computer photographic analysis of some of the most famous & 'authentic' ghost pics of all time, that most could be explained as probable artifacts/effects of the photographic process. Rev. Lord's however could not. Computer photo analyst, Karl Denchly, maintains continued insistence the photo is an 'obvious fake', often without the benefit of the full image or his expert analysis of the evidence, 'do the photograph a disservice.'

http://www.castleofs...s/hoodmonk.html

'This is pretty funny, I am explaining things that can be replicated, things that can be explained if you want to "ignore" science then good for you.'

Not everything in existence can be scientifically replicated in a lab and those that can't aren't therefore untrue. French peasants told Voltaire that large rocks in a field had 'fallen from the sky'. The eminent, Enlightenment thinker instantly dismissed the , idiotic ramblings of his uneducated inferiors stating 'We all KNOW Rocks DO NOT fall from the sky...' [scientific Rationalism: 1 - The 'Truth': Nil]

'Ok, Let me present this to you. People post stupid articles every time, how many times you heard "studies show you can lose weight by such and such" which always varies or even contradict each other. Studies are not the foundation of science, studies are surveys or people who want to push some product or their own views. You seem to blur the line between science and pseudoscience.'

Pointing out that 'people post stupid articles' based on the groundless rubbish that passes for tabloid journalism doesn't strengthen your case. I don't post stuff like that.

Ironically vast swathes of what purports to be 'Science' (mainly theoretical physics) doesn't conform to its own (and your) definition of what constitutes 'science' - Big Bang Theory, Superstrings, Black Holes etc.- all these 'theories', later accepted as 'true' and taught in classrooms, are now being called into question since no dispassionate, unbiased analysis of the 'evidence' or even repeatable experimental findings exist because:

a: There is no 'evidence' to examine (other than self-validating mathematical equations) &

b: Experiments to determine the existence or functioning of postulated 'other dimensions' or 'event horizons' are by definition, impossible.

As some physicists (and yourself) have noted, 'science' that can't be tested, repeated and experimentally verified isn't 'science' - it's an unprovable BELIEF and the supposed 'rational', scientific discourse you advocate is full of them.

Some of the KEY SCIENTIFIC 'TRUTHS' that form the basis of the accepted version of 'reality' and which are published & taught as 'science' in schools, colleges & universities are no less the products of human imagination than art, literature & bad soap operas.

'So with these claims, gravity is made up? What you want me to say, science is golden, the perfect thing in the world? Well it isn't and clumping every thing in one category is pretty shoddy. That like putting people who have cancer, aids and a guy who has cut finger in the same category as "sick". What you do not understand that there are people out there who pretend they are doing science but just want their name in the book or want some sort of fame. You seem to not under stand the differences between science and pseudoscience.'

No, what we term 'gravity' is obviously a real force but if you know anything about the field - no one understands how it functions. It apparently keeps vast astronomical bodies in place & prevents atoms from collapsing & thus the entire fabric of 'reality', yet can be overcome by a cheap magnetic toy from a kid's goodie bag. (Don't get me started on n=4 or 8 or even 35 'supergravity' haha!)

Never let the evidence get in the way of a good theory!

'Again, People can have effects from Hypnagogia or sleep paralysis, people do have bad dreams and people can have it, it not like my case where i do experience it weekly.

again, Read above. People are not like me who experience it weekly BUT they can experience once in a while. So, your story of this one off shadow man experience is real because you just wrote down a story? You know how many stories get posted here and have more than swiss cheese?'

Yes but your dismissal of an event, at which you were not present, corroborated by two separate witnesses, similarly displays more 'plot holes' than the proverbial cheese. The 2 people present, independently witnessed (and 1 physically and audibly reacted to) something both observed at close quarters, the descriptions of which later confirmed & verified what the other had seen.

Presumably you would claim we were both simultaneously having the same physiological/hallucinatory experience, with identical visual imagery, neither subject having had any similar experience since and with no prior history of such beforehand? That's even more unbelievable & unlikely than accepting there was some sort of shadowy figure there, however inconsistent with the 'Laws' of Physics this may be.

(Then again, now you mention it, I think there had been reports of excessive clouds of marsh gas and if i'm not mistaken, a Russian satellite did pass overhead that night - a night on which the planet Venus had been noiceably brighter than usual...) #CaseClosed

'If you and went to court and the judge asked you for evidence of shadow men being real and then they ask me to present how it isn't real, guess who would win the court case? I would, I would bring in doctors who specialized in sleeping disorders, who actually have documented sleeping behaviors. While you, You could only present anecdote

stories and online forum discussions.'

I'm afraid 'anecdotal' evidence is regularly accepted & has recently been used several times to convict a number of UK defendants of murder in the absence of either physical evidence or even a body. Testimony is assessed based on the 'reliability' & 'good character' of the witness, their mental competence and in-depth knowledge of the activity & behaviour of the witness over a prolonged period. Here's a review of some (unsurprisingly) unsavoury examples:http://www.bbc.co.uk...-wales-21506482

Strange how similar testimony of personal, anomalous experiences (from reliable, professional and sometimes 'expert' witnesses) is neither given the same legal recognition as a 'statement of truth' or regarded as 'credible' despite the often impeccable credentials of the individuals concerned. (Lengthy, multiple witness sightings of ufos by military & civilian pilots for example.)

You can't claim to 'know' what took place at an event you weren't present at, yet still give the classic skeptic 'one explanation fits all' dismissal. The term 'Skeptic' (spelt the US way with a 'k') is employed in UK journals to denote individuals who refuse to accept evidence that suggests explanations other than those proffered by established, mainstream scientific thought.

Thankfully genuine, radical thinkers like Bohr, Tesla, Heisenberg & Einstein (not to mention Hoyle, Wickramasinghe and Sheldrake) bravely ignore such rigid 'scientific' orthodoxy, often in the face of potentially reputation destroying villification.

Rigidly insisting (on neither evidence nor observation) that all instances of a phenomena can be explained by some wholly unsatisfactory existing theory is an attitude that is (ironically) completely UNSCIENTIFIC & is the same attitude responsible for suppressing counter-intuitive theories that could have advanced physics some 20 years further on if Hoyle, Tesla et al weren't so arrogantly and definitively dismissed as 'wrong' by 'Skeptics' who 'knew better'.

Instead of Dawkins et al. insisting 'Science is THE TRUTH!' and teaching hapless undergraduates its 'LAWS' wouldn't it be better (and more accurate), simply to say 'This is our currently incomplete & unverified attempt at understanding something which (as Stephen Hawking admits) may well be too complex & just plain 'weird' for our limited human faculties ever to completely grasp or comprehend.

Such scientifically defined and perhaps perpetually incomprehensible 'weirdness' - officially endorsed by no less a luminary than the successor to Isaac Newton himself (the renowned alchemist, occultist & amateur astronomer) is surely the 'Unexplained' & 'Mysterious' territory this website & forum exists to debate and investigate.

The fact that in the 21st Century, such topics still hold such fascination for us, and are the subject of heated debate, illustrates that if 'great scientific intellects' are incapable of providing comprehensive and irrefutable, evidence-based explanations for such phenomena, why should a simplistic, all-encompassing dismissal of such by a forum member be accepted as such? (Who, with great respect, isn't likely to trouble the pages of PLOS One or Nature any time soon.

'Laws' & 'Theories' that come to define an officially endorsed and academically taught mainstream model of 'reality', which are then disgarded or superceded by other, newly defined ones cannot, by definition, ever have been 'accurate' or 'real' in the first place, thus 'Science' is definitively NOT 'The Truth' as Richard Dawkins asserts. It's an admittedly powerful, overarching 'Grand Narrative' but narratives are ultimately just stories, just words.

If science were the 'truth', then the 'scientific truths' of today would be identical to those of a hundred years ago and plainly, they're not. We're not taught about the 'Luminiferous Ether', 'Maxwell's Demon' or the erroneous 'Evolution of Stars' anymore.

The Big Bang, Black Holes & Superstring Theory are all currently teetering on the Event Horizon of 'truth', perhaps soon to fall down the Gravity Well dustbin once it's decided the 'Event Horizon' doesn't exist either...

Everything is in a constant and multiplicitous state of becoming...

'You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end.

Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative...'

William S. Burroughs, Naked Lunch

Anyway, that's me done...

Edited August 7, 2014 by nik-h

[Brian Topp 3,824]

As much it sounds intellectual, you still missing the point and you clearly have not really done proper research but google things that suit your point of view while skipping or ignoring what I had said

[nik-h 23]

Hahaha! Classic 'skeptic' - I haven't 'skipped' round anything - I've answered EVERY single point you've raised.

Guaranteed easiest way to win an argument - completely ignore everything the other person says.

BTW I have a First Class BA (Hons) in Cultural Studies and an MA in Continental Philosophy but thanks for the 'proper research' tips hahaha!

What 'proper' research have you actually undertaken exactly other than telling us you suffer from a sleep disorder? Presumably you do your 'proper research' in the Bodleian Library with a quill and parchment or is it just that the evidence you cherry pick to back up your argument is 'proper' and no else's is? ('Common sense' really...)

Anyway I won't waste my anymore of my valuable time.

You're right, everyone else is wrong.

Edited August 7, 2014 by nik-h

[antigod 36]

Its quite obviously not a real video,

Sleep paralysis, night terrors or waking hallucinations are nothing more than hiccup's between the conscious and the unconscious during different depths of sleep or during the waking moments, its been suggested that parts of the brain that control sight like the visual cortex and optic lobes come out of their sleep state so we are visually awake but the parts of brain that contol our thoughts and dreams and ability to control our muscles are still in sleep mode,

So we think we are awake due to being able to see but we are paralysed due to technically still being asleep! So naturally panic sets in and because we are spoon fed stories of alien abduction and demonic possession we automatically assume we are in the presence of evil! And the nightmarish thoughts become part of what we see through our eyes!

Its not all evil and scary during sleep paralysis either though! Ive read stories of people seeing passed love ones or even stranger things like seeing there car in the room or grass growing out the walls! But we only seem to pay attention to the stories of black figures or demons!

But what ever the hallucination or experience its all down to our brains not quite operating as they should!

Ive experienced similar things while on strong painkillers, and even when I stopped smoking the nicotine patches gave me horrific nightmares and waking visions! But its all natural and easily explained by chemicals in our bodies!

And I also believe that night terrors, waking hallucinations and chemical induced visions are behind 99% of all paranormal experiences!

The human brain is the only real mystery!

this statement could be used for most of the sighting/experience stories on here!

This is the best explanation I've ever heard,

6.6.6 you should write a book!