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 -
UM-Bot

Woman photographs 'ghost' in her front yard

88 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

seanjo
37 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

So far from the ‘obviously’ crowd I’ve heard man from bushes, photoshopped and paredolia. 

The only thing I see obvious is an emotional anti-paranormal bent in some.

Anti-Non science is more correct...the emotion comes from the pseudo scientists that believe in this tripe.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Stiff said:

 

Smell fishy yet papa? 

Well, everything is information to consider. I see no obvious conclusion jumping out. This photo is not from that church but her yard we are told. Could real activity be why people have interest in the area? Do we just assume dishonesty because it’s the paranormal?

I’ll hold to my uncertain position as I have expressed it at this point.

Edited by papageorge1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
47 minutes ago, seanjo said:

Anti-Non science is more correct...the emotion comes from the pseudo scientists that believe in this tripe.

It is not anti-science to consider that there is more to reality than meets the senses and consider all evidence. Denying the existence of things that can not be proved or disproved by science is actually a non-scientific attitude to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seanjo
8 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

It is not anti-science to consider that there is more to reality than meets the senses and consider all evidence. Denying the existence of things that can not be proved or disproved by science is actually a non-scientific attitude to me.

There is no evidence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A rather obscure Bassoon

just your normal bad game camera poor pixelation, nothing to be seen here.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stiff
17 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, everything is information to be consider. I see no obvious conclusion jumping out. This photo is not from that church but her yard we are told. Could real activity be why people have interest in the area? Do we just assume dishonesty because it’s the paranormal?

I’ll hold to my uncertain position as I have expressed it at this point.

 

10 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

It is not anti-science to consider that there is more to reality than meets the senses and consider all evidence. Denying the existence of things that can not be proved or disproved by science is actually a non-scientific attitude to me.

tenor.gif?itemid=4729062

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, everything is information to consider. I see no obvious conclusion jumping out. This photo is not from that church but her yard we are told. Could real activity be why people have interest in the area? Do we just assume dishonesty because it’s the paranormal?

I’ll hold to my uncertain position as I have expressed it at this point.

You have too much faith in people’s honesty when it comes to this stuff.

They could well believe it’s something, but that doesn’t make it something believable.

Having said that, it’s far more likely they’re being dishonest than have captured a photo of a ghost.

Just to be clear, they probably believe what they’re claiming, but next in line would be dishonesty and a bunch of other explanations. A ‘real’ ghost would be near the very end of a long list. 

Edit: Has that restaurant reopened yet? The one which closed to protect the public after a ghost knocked over that barrier?

Edited by Timothy
Edit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
5 minutes ago, seanjo said:

There is no evidence.

Even eyewitness evidence is evidence but of course not proof. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
5 minutes ago, Timothy said:

You have too much faith in people’s honesty when it comes to this stuff.

How do we determine if it’s not you being too distrustful again and again? I typically claim uncertainty which I think is the reasonable approach.

The real issue is that some people are bothered by any serious suggestion of the paranormal.

7 minutes ago, Timothy said:

 

Edit: Has that restaurant reopened yet? The one which closed to protect the public after a ghost knocked over that barrier?

As I remember they are only closing for one day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seanjo
9 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Even eyewitness evidence is evidence but of course not proof. 

No, it's hearsay, not evidence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
1 minute ago, seanjo said:

No, it's hearsay, not evidence.

There is eyewitness evidence and we are now playing semantically games that aren’t important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seanjo
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

There is eyewitness evidence and we are now playing semantically games that aren’t important.

Have you any REAL evidence that what you believe in is so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
3 minutes ago, seanjo said:

Have you any REAL evidence that what you believe in is so?

I definately think so, but you will have to define what you consider  ‘REAL evidence’ and how that differs from physical proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

How do we determine if it’s not you being too distrustful again and again? I typically claim uncertainty which I think is the reasonable approach.

The real issue is that some people are bothered by any serious suggestion of the paranormal.

As I remember they are only closing for one day.

Me being distrustful? C’mon now!

It’s one blurry photo which can be reasonably explained. The only thing that bothers me is that it’s always the same story. 

I never saw it mentioned that they were closing for one day? Anyways, I just posted an update, seems they closed due to a health and safety issue and reopened after ~5 days. Possible dishonesty, avert your gaze! 

 

Edited by Timothy
Linked to post rather than topic.
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DragonFire22
7 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

It is not anti-science to consider that there is more to reality than meets the senses and consider all evidence. Denying the existence of things that can not be proved or disproved by science is actually a non-scientific attitude to me.

I AGREE!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flabbins

Darn autotext again.. I'm sure she was meant to type Geezer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare

Just realized that you don't see any boots. Typically you blouse your boot in the military. Would expect monocolor boots (whether black leather or desert tan) would stand out rather starkly from the uniform  pants between the ankle & calf or so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paperdyer
21 hours ago, Matt221 said:

Looks like either a bloke with a koala on his back, but only enough it look like a distant pic of Nigel our postman

I've seen the local "homeless" people in Charlotte walking around with these one.  Could just be one of those, looking around.  Of course the late at night, or so we're told, portion is spooky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moonman
Posted (edited)

Easily explained photo of a person. No mystery here, except to those with their heads you-know-where.

These "ghost captures" get weaker and weaker.

Edited by moonman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
Posted (edited)

Very telling that they never post a side by side image of the area from the same perspective but during the day. Without that any further evaluation is useless.

Edited by Merc14
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
1 hour ago, Merc14 said:

Very telling that they never post a side by side image of the area from the same perspective but during the day. Without that any further evaluation is useless.

Yep, even a very basic application of the scientific method would probably explain >90% of these ‘paranormal’ photos. 

It’s annoying that in most cases like this, there’s one photo, and no way to query the person who took it. 

At least when someone posts something directly to the forums, we can get a bit of the ol’ scientific method going up in ‘ere!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NightScreams

I would like for Kodak to analyze the photo first. As it is, there isn't much to look at, some fuzzy grey patterns on black. To make the shape human form, you have to certainly stretch the imagination with the back pack, etc ideas considering the entire shape requires you to use your imagination to have the shape make sense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
1 hour ago, NightScreams said:

I would like for Kodak to analyze the photo first. As it is, there isn't much to look at, some fuzzy grey patterns on black. To make the shape human form, you have to certainly stretch the imagination with the back pack, etc ideas considering the entire shape requires you to use your imagination to have the shape make sense.  

It is a digital image taken by a low quality trailcam, (IR light source). No film to study which is what Kodak did 30 years ago.  It likely isn't Photoshopped but simply an anomaly from a cheap camera.  Not an insult, why buy an expensive camera just to see if deer are feeding or a fox is killing your chickens

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mysticwerewolf
Posted (edited)

I don't see how any of you can tell details(what is what) in that picture.my computer  sure can't give details. way to grainy and out of focus. and the blowup picture was even worse than the original. (that first picture was the original I hope.)

Edited by mysticwerewolf
i had to fix spelling mistakes
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moonman
10 hours ago, mysticwerewolf said:

I don't see how any of you can tell details(what is what) in that picture.my computer  sure can't give details. way to grainy and out of focus. and the blowup picture was even worse than the original. (that first picture was the original I hope.)

That's because there are no details, just imagination running wild.

  • Like 1

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.