ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 IIt is obviously something rare that doesn't exist in the other places I take pictures. why are you assuming that it is rare?Most of the people here are more scientific than me, so I thought somebody would be able to explain. they have and you ignored it.This would be like you going on vacation and taking a walk. You see some animal that looks very strange. It is unlike anything you ever saw before. You take a picture, and show it to some people that know a lot about animals. They tell you that it is a dog. You explain that you know what a dog looks like, and your picture is obviously something else. Now, they tell you to go back and try some experiments to prove that it isn't a dog. obviously you didn't know every species of dog.
herme3 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Posted July 25, 2005 ask yourself this' date=' if they ARE Ghosts, what the hell are they trying to do?I mean bobbing up and down all night doing nothing in particular seems a bit lame for a disembodied consciousness doesn`t it? secondly, what parameters define a Ghost from something else for instance? what qualitative or even quantitative criteria need to be met in order to confim that something`s a Ghost?[/quote'] I'm not saying they are ghosts. I'm looking for an explanation that makes sense. So far, "ghosts" seems to be what most people believe that aren't in these forums. why are you assuming that it is rare? Almost every picture I took in Gettysburg has something strange in it. These "ghost-like" figures are not in the pictures I take in other places. obviously you didn't know every species of dog. Yes, but if somebody saw something that looked really weird, they would know it isn't a dog.
ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 I'm not saying they are ghosts. I'm looking for an explanation that makes sense. So far, "ghosts" seems to be what most people believe that aren't in these forums.you have been given explainations that make sense, and you ignored them.Almost every picture I took in Gettysburg has something strange in it. These "ghost-like" figures are not in the pictures I take in other places. that doesn't make it rare. Yes, but if somebody saw something that looked really weird, they would know it isn't a dog. if you saw a platypus for the first time, i bet you'd think it were an alien.
herme3 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Posted July 25, 2005 that doesn't make it rare. It does mean that it isn't something that exists where I live. All of the explanations I've heard exist where I live.
herme3 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Posted July 25, 2005 yet you haven't tried to test them... What do you mean? I've taken other pictures before, and the only place I see "ghost-like" figures is Gettysburg.
ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 omfg, that is not a test! rtft, it has examples of experiments you could do.
herme3 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Posted July 25, 2005 I already explained why I haven't done those experiments. I don't know when or if I'll go back to Gettysburg: I'm not a professional "ghost hunter". I have no idea when I'll be able to go back to Gettysburg. That's why I came here looking for an explanation that I can agree with. It is obviously something rare that doesn't exist in the other places I take pictures. I've never taken any "ghost-like" pictures anywhere else' date=' but they are in almost every Gettysburg picture. Most of the people here are more scientific than me, so I thought somebody would be able to explain. This would be like you going on vacation and taking a walk. You see some animal that looks very strange. It is unlike anything you ever saw before. You take a picture, and show it to some people that know a lot about animals. They tell you that it is a dog. You explain that you know what a dog looks like, and your picture is obviously something else. Now, they tell you to go back and try some experiments to prove that it isn't a dog.[/quote'] So by telling me that I need to do experiments at Gettysburg, are you finally agreeing that there is something in that battlefield that isn't in my own yard?
swansont Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 I'm not saying they are ghosts. I'm looking for an explanation that makes sense. So far' date=' "ghosts" seems to be what most people believe that aren't in these forums.[/quote'] Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy. It doesn't constitute a valid argument.
ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 So by telling me that I need to do experiments at Gettysburg, are you finally agreeing that there is something in that battlefield that isn't in my own yard?how the hell did you infer that from what i said?
swansont Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 I already explained why I haven't done those experiments. I don't know when or if I'll go back to Gettysburg: So by telling me that I need to do experiments at Gettysburg' date=' are you finally agreeing that there is something in that battlefield that isn't in my own yard?[/quote'] Other people have posted pictures, from places other than Gettysburg, that have orbs in them. Why don't you accept those as data (other than it disagrees with your preconceived notion)?
YT2095 Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 I consider myself reasonably patient, but I`m quickly coming to the conclusion that this thread needs closing soon, we`re doing loops here and nothing`s been acheived for a long time, I don`t like time wasting, it`s a waste of time! last words/closing thoughts anyone?
ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 as a minister, i can tell you that ghosts don't exist. end of story.
Ophiolite Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 Perhaps this is the root of the problem Herme3: That's why I came here looking for an explanation that I can agree with.You weren't looking for an explanation, but an explanation you could agree with. Several people offered a suite of plausible explanations, but these did not match what you were looking for. You appear to believe you have found something strange. The rest of us think you have found something mundane. As YT suggests there is little point in continuing the discussion.
herme3 Posted July 25, 2005 Author Posted July 25, 2005 Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy. It doesn't constitute a valid argument. You are right. I really have no reason to call them ghosts. I would just like to know what they are because they seem so strange. Other people have posted pictures, from places other than Gettysburg, that have orbs in them. Why don't you accept those as data (other than it disagrees with your preconceived notion)? I would like to know why I've never taken these types of pictures with my own camera outside of Gettysburg. I'm not saying this mystery only exists in Gettysburg. Whatever created the orbs in my pictures may have created the orbs in the pictures from other people. However, what is different about these orb pictures and the pictures I take around my home that never have orbs? I consider myself reasonably patient' date=' but I`m quickly coming to the conclusion that this thread needs closing soon, we`re doing loops here and nothing`s been acheived for a long time, I don`t like time wasting, it`s a waste of time! last words/closing thoughts anyone?[/quote'] Nothing has been solved yet. The thread shouldn't be closed until we find an explanation that makes sense to everyone. Just because the majority of the people in here agree with something, doesn't make it true. That is what Swansont just explained. If I got some ghost hunters in this thread, they would probably all disagree with these explanations. They will also probably be able to provide evidence that I can't. We should also leave the thread open in case anybody else takes similar pictures. That might be able to prove that your explanations are incorrect.
Clara Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 The orb pictures could be anything that some of you suggested. What do you all think about herme3's first picture? That's the one I think is interesting:
ydoaPs Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 Just because the majority of the people in here agree with something, doesn't make it true. That is what Swansont just explained.you don't count if you ignore evidence.
Hellbender Posted July 25, 2005 Posted July 25, 2005 That's why I came here looking for an explanation that I can agree with[/i']. AH ha! Did everyone see this? Our pal herme3 here isn't looking for just any explanation; he wants one that he agrees with. Sorry, a forum of science buffs and otherwise rational people aren't susceptable to the sort of leaps in logic that you are making. Take your lense flares.. I mean ghosts whoooooooooo, somewhere else, where minds are more pliant kid.
Sayonara Posted July 26, 2005 Posted July 26, 2005 Nothing has been solved yet. The thread shouldn't be closed until we find an explanation that makes sense to everyone. Rubbish. If we waited until everyone understood everything nothing would ever get done. We should also leave the thread open in case anybody else takes similar pictures. That might be able to prove that your explanations are incorrect. Bollocks to that - you need to go right back to the beginning and learn how scientific method works.
Recommended Posts