|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 1, 2006 20:50:34 GMT -5
heh.. Blues Brothers 2000.... don`t waste your time... Aykroyd " over acts" elwood... y'know in the first one.. Elwood was funny... but seemed real... in 2000 the chicago accent is gone... and you can almost see him strain to say his legendary " Chick-ah-go" and other various words..... but.. i'm drifting here.....its always good to know that you`ve helped someone find info.... glad I piqued your intrest there pitfall.... one of these days i`ll ahve to share " sally" with you guys..
|
|
|
Post by indianatone on Sept 2, 2006 0:23:22 GMT -5
Actually, CJ. Voodoo Island doesn't exist. That's a PS pic. (Didn't want to leave that hanging as fact.) Here's the pic.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 2, 2006 0:41:01 GMT -5
Wow, you did a great job of using that face and blending it into the cliff. By the way I think Voodoo Island does exsist. I think my wife and I had our honeymoon there because ever since then my life has been cursed! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kt. Templar on Sept 2, 2006 3:56:03 GMT -5
Actually, CJ. Voodoo Island doesn't exist. That's a PS pic. (Didn't want to leave that hanging as fact.) Here's the pic. Naughty boy! But didn't Scooby and the gang go there once?
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 2, 2006 8:04:10 GMT -5
D'oh.... seeee... it was in scooby doo... knew i`d seen that somewhere...
|
|
|
Post by indianatone on Sept 2, 2006 12:00:07 GMT -5
And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those medding Indyfolk.......... Was it in a Scooby Doo episode? I'm just saying that with PS available, it's harder to tell what is real and what is worked on. The aesthetics of that picture were made on the fly to show a point. Someone with too much time devoted on a hoax could make all kinds of "ghostly" type "I'm not sure what it is but just LOOK!" stuff.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 2, 2006 13:18:59 GMT -5
Theres a website I visit on a daily basis that always has photos sent in by the listners and I sware the majority of them look like either camera glitches or someone photoshoped the "thing" into the pic.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 2, 2006 22:10:16 GMT -5
Cj, if you haven't heard about this one yet then your going to love it. Here's the link. www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7MjM0v7vsEIf this is faked it's on a ILM level as far as FX goes....
|
|
|
Post by indianatone on Sept 2, 2006 22:30:36 GMT -5
Interesting find, PH. I have to speculate in disbelief first. The bottom of the thing sways left and right, swaying pendulously loose while the top remains stiff. Looks like something that was supported from the top while the bottom was free to sway.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 2, 2006 22:47:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I noticed that. Like something attached at the top by a string and it's being swung back and forth.
The problem is the kid would have to be an FX expert to pull something like that off with and I doubt he's got the equipment to do it either.
Plus, if he wanted to fake a ghost video he could have done it without using the trip footage and just shot something at home.
Unless you want to say this hoax had a theme and they decided to pick that footage to use.
I don't get the impression from the interview with the kid that he was looking for any attention to begin with and he even said himself that he was basically a skeptic about stuff like this.
There were a lot of other people there taking pics. What would really be interesting is if anyone else captured this on their camera's as well. If more people that were there that day end up coming forward with more photos of the same image then I'd say we've got a ourselves a real ghost.
I think this one and the "ghost car" are legit. I have my doubts about the "ghost girl" video......even though it is creepy.
|
|
|
Post by indianatone on Sept 2, 2006 23:15:25 GMT -5
Well, the kid probably doesn't know what it is; didn't see it when taping (though you have to ask why was the camera pointed in that direction at that moment. What was he taping then - in that particular direction? At that hour? A bad angle of the walkway and the building?) Odd choice to be shooting and just happen to catch that. Even if he's not in on it, it may have been someone else. Now what would be interesting is another person from the same time and roughly the same angle with no evidence at all on their camera of it. Now that would be freaky.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 3, 2006 2:03:00 GMT -5
The kid says in the video he was taking shots of the tomb so that's why he's focused on that area. The "Ghost" is floating above the tomb.
It doesn't appear to have "feet" as the kid calls them. It looks like the bottom of a robe. The "arms" are also moving....actually I should say flowing because it looks like the wind is moving it.
The "ghost" also shows some depth to it and seems rather solid. It also has a strange color or hue to it. Most if not all of the pics and videos of ghosts I've seen usually are a white vapor of some kind or translucent.
I don't see how if this is a hoax the kid wouldn't be in on it. It was his video and camera. It couldn't have been pulled off in public because other people were present. The kid didn't see the "ghost" until he viewed on TV. That's pretty impressive if someone got a hold of his tape and added that without him knowing.
I'm nobody's fool but there comes a point when certain things like this pop up where you just have leave it at unexplained.
There are some people out there that overly skeptically about everything and even if God came down from Heaven and tapped them on the shoulder they still wouldn't believe it.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 3, 2006 2:19:54 GMT -5
Cj, Here's something else I just found too and it's in my neck of the woods so to speak. www.libraryghost.com/
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 3, 2006 6:26:23 GMT -5
great pitfall.. more ghost cams to watch!! ;D... if you ever do watch that thing.... be careful not to watch it for too long... everyoen becomes a ghost ;D
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 3, 2006 9:28:55 GMT -5
I've found it last night and I haven't really had the time to sit and watch it. I can imagine after staring at any of these things for a while your mind would start to play tricks on you.
Ever since the ghost subject was brought up by me it's kind of renewed my interest in it and I'm rather stunned at the amount of "hauntings" there have been in my neck of the woods. According to one site Chicago is the one of most haunted cities on the planet.
My brother lives in New Jersey and he's told me there is a ton of "weird" paranormal type of things reported all of the time. He wasn't to surprised when I sent him a link to the police chase.
As far as the "Vatican Ghost" goes it really doesn't surprise me to much someone "caught" something on film there. For some reason in the back of my mind I've always felt that Church's, graveyards, battlefields and locations where a high loss of life occurred in a tragic event would be the mostly likely spots to encounter paranormal activity such as ghosts. Given that I'm probably not the only person that thinks that I wonder if anyone has ever gone down to the site where the World Trade Center was and tried to record an EVP or setup camera's to record stuff. If there was any place ripe for a haunting I would think that place would be it considering the horrible event that occurred there.
Maybe one of you guys here can explain to me how it seems in most of these cases, especially with the video ones, the person shooting the picture doesn't see the image until after they go back and view the film? I don't know much about cameras and how the function differently than a human eyes. Is it the frame rate the cameras are functioning at?
|
|
|
Post by indianatone on Sept 3, 2006 10:51:22 GMT -5
No, that's not really the issue. The fact goes back to fragmented information. Usually - well, in these cases, EVERY time there is a 100% inexplicable ghost picture or video, there is only a snapshot, or a segment on a tape that is blurbed, fuzzes up at an inopportune time, etc. Since they aren't the norm of everyday life, it is more realistic to look at existing phenomena that may account for it first. Since we don't have access to the location, the film, the picture, and the tools to dissect it further, we can only go on a story based as fact from someone we don't know. I've learned enough to know a good deal of people base their principles on money, fame, mishchief, and deceipt (in any amount it's still there) to trust what they shove in front of me as fact. I just won't jump in on the "look to see a ghost first" because I'm told that's what it is bandwagon. I don't think it's overly skeptical. The last two examples: Ghost car and floating "orange robe thing" (similarly reflective of the light behind it) haven't been disproved yet for me to believe something else. Ghost car? Where's the follow up for the questions I'm sure more than just this forum are asking? It's not there. The "ghost" story (if it were so important to the research of the existence of ghosts) has had no further investigation to answer certain questions. That's not thorough. And if I'm supposed to believe a police officer's word solely because he's a police officer and says this is what happened, I'm looking at the world through filtered lenses. Either way, where's the furthering evidence to rule out my questions so that I can be steered toward believing that it was a ghost car? They're not there. Left for interpretation and our own brains to fill in the gaps.
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 3, 2006 12:05:38 GMT -5
No, that's not really the issue. The fact goes back to fragmented information. Usually - well, in these cases, EVERY time there is a 100% inexplicable ghost picture or video, there is only a snapshot, or a segment on a tape that is blurbed, fuzzes up at an inopportune time, etc. Since they aren't the norm of everyday life, it is more realistic to look at existing phenomena that may account for it first. Since we don't have access to the location, the film, the picture, and the tools to dissect it further, we can only go on a story based as fact from someone we don't know. I've learned enough to know a good deal of people base their principles on money, fame, mishchief, and deceipt (in any amount it's still there) to trust what they shove in front of me as fact. I just won't jump in on the "look to see a ghost first" because I'm told that's what it is bandwagon. I don't think it's overly skeptical. The last two examples: Ghost car and floating "orange robe thing" (similarly reflective of the light behind it) haven't been disproved yet for me to believe something else. Ghost car? Where's the follow up for the questions I'm sure more than just this forum are asking? It's not there. The "ghost" story (if it were so important to the research of the existence of ghosts) has had no further investigation to answer certain questions. That's not thorough. And if I'm supposed to believe a police officer's word solely because he's a police officer and says this is what happened, I'm looking at the world through filtered lenses. Either way, where's the furthering evidence to rule out my questions so that I can be steered toward believing that it was a ghost car? They're not there. Left for interpretation and our own brains to fill in the gaps. Tone I agree with the majority of what you've said and I'd like to see both of these things followed up. Like I said before I've always had more than a passing interest in all of these types of things. The problem is the way the media treats these type of stories in general. Most of the time there the last thing in the news cast and are thrown in to fill time or around a holiday like Halloween. The report itself is usually pretty serious until the reporter doing the news cast turns around and makes some goofy remark about it afterwords. So what is the average viewer watching that supposed to think? I'm with you when it comes to wanting to see more and have more information given....especially with something like the cop chase. What more do you need to see with the "Vatican Ghost" video though? I don't want to sit through an hour of some kids vacation video just to get to the point where the "Ghost" pops up. There wouldn't have been any type of reaction or otherwise with that one afterward because even he didn't see it until he watched the video at home. With the whole "Ghost Car" thing I'm well aware that cops are human like the rest of us and are very capable of lying. In this case though I don't think it's a question of someone lying there's just a lack of information as to what they did afterward as far as investigating goes. I'm not naive. I don't see the world through rose colored glasses I'm well aware of what kind of weird and twisted things people are capable of. I know there are people that seek attention and it doesn't matter if it's good or bad they just want to be noticed. There also people out there that like to get involved with creating hoaxes just to discredit the real phenomena be it ghosts, UFO's or Bigfoot type creatures. The real sad part is though there is probably a lot more stuff out there that has been witnessed that will never be reported because the person is afraid to come forward for fear of being ridiculed and laughed at. So they keep it to themselves or maybe tell some family and close friends. Most of the time anything like this hits the net or TV the first words out of most peoples mouths are "That's fake" "It's a hoax"...blah...blah.....judging the person and evidence before even giving it a chance. I would never suggest that anyone take these things at face value but I'd also say don't jump the gun and dismiss it right away either. I'm not saying your doing that about any of this I'm just speaking in general terms when it comes to the public.
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 3, 2006 21:25:32 GMT -5
ok.. not to interrupt you guys... but if you want to hear more paranormal anecdotes... try watching the Montel Williams show on wednesdays... he has Psychic sylvia brown on... some of the " special guests" have very entertaining.. and sometimes frightening tales.... and sylvia often fires back.. blunt... concise instructions.... and often debunks things... for example!!
on the show two weeks ago... a man came on and was asking about his house.. claimed his wife was terrified of it... she won`t sleep in it and etc... claimed to see a ghost watching her..... sylvia simply replied... " sir... your wife is a vindictive woman... tell her to get over it... she didn`t get her house... oh well.... stop frightening you and your children..over something this stupid"
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 3, 2006 22:13:46 GMT -5
Montel is still on? Even though I'm home I don't watch much daytime TV. I'm surprised he's doing shows with psychics though. He always seemed more into family type of topics. I know this may sound odd but I have a easier time believing a video of a ghost maybe real over something a psychic says. Maybe it's because it's easier to fake being "psychic" over trying to make a believable ghost or UFO video/pic. That's not to say I don't think there aren't real ones out there though. So Cj what did you think of the "Vatican Ghost" video? Pretty cool isn't it. Someone on another site pointed out that it could have been done with Photoshop. Of course then someone came in who claimed he was a digital artist and said that couldn't have been done by just going in and painting the ghost in frame by frame.
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 4, 2006 14:22:56 GMT -5
yes montel is still on ;D ;D
as for the vatican ghost...looks real... do i think its real.. i don`t know.... fun video to watch though...
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 4, 2006 15:58:13 GMT -5
If I find anymore ghost videos that I think are pretty good I'll post the links in here.
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 6, 2006 15:49:47 GMT -5
well i did some EVP work in my own house again.. with a new digital recorder.... and nothing... so what i`ve done is programmed the timer on the recorder through my computer... set it like two months ahead... and we shall see... My reasoning is.." maybe I caught nothing at all because i was expecting it" ...If i get any results.. i`ll post em here
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 7, 2006 12:23:18 GMT -5
Ok!.. SOrry for the double post... but I HAD to post this...... supposedly.. this person who took the pic... see's a NURSE in the window
|
|
|
Post by pitfallharry on Sept 7, 2006 12:29:59 GMT -5
Cj, is there supposed to be a link or pic included with your last post?
|
|
|
Post by Connecticut Jones on Sept 7, 2006 12:35:21 GMT -5
err... yea... oops... wonder why it didn`t show up..
|
|