Weird things poltergeists do and the noises they make

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, May 7, 2018.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    Nevermind if you can't see it.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,310
    Oh the rougue spell checker put "and" instead of "are", I missed and didums couldn't work it out

    Moving back a bit in a effort to go forward

    What about

    and

    which is about

    What do you think about this?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,952
    I can see her clearly now and I am worried that she may catch a chill...I would love to tell you what she just said to me but I must respect her privacy.
    alex
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,310
    Casper if you can read this don't spike his drinks anymore

    Strong coffee only from now on

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    This is a compelling case of a poltergeist haunting that occurred in San Pedro California in the 1990's. It involved a young woman named Jackie Hernandez and over time several of her friends as well as a parapychologist. This case stands out among other poltergeist cases because it was so persistent and long lasting and hence well-documented. The full range of typical poltergeist activities were manifested: appearance of apparitions, footsteps in an empty attic, glowing lights and orbs, objects moving by themselves, human blood dripping from things, mists or smoke, fires igniting, shoving, red marks on skin, writing on the wall, spirit attachment, coins being thrown, being held down in bed, whispers, voices, draining of camera batteries, electrical quirks, etc. See what you think.

    https://www.thinkanomalous.com/jackie-hernandez.html
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2020
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,310
    Crap

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,952
    I had one, knocking stuff over but it left after I put out the ratsak.
    Alex
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  11. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    You need to invest in a big cat.
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,647
    Thanks muchly MR for all these "compelling" cases of UFO's, Poltergeists, Big foots, and any number of cases of the supernatural and/or paranormal. We are all indebted to you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,952


    Alex
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    This is a really weak case. Totally unconvincing. If this is "well documented", I'd hate to see a poorly documented case.

    I worked through the video. It's 20 minutes long. Most of it is anecdotal or "reconstructed", so I ignored all that and looked only at the objective evidence (photos etc.). There are lots of reports of people seeing things, hearing things and being pushed by ghostly hands, but all of that is anecdotal and susceptible to many types of mundane explanation.

    The paranormal investigators all seem to be incompetent and willing believers in just about anything. The woman involved seems like somebody down on her luck, struggling to make ends meet and living below the poverty line. By the time the "investigators" are done with her, she's a nervous wreck, poor thing.

    Comments on the physical evidence:

    6:05 some knocking sounds are heard. Source impossible to identify. Could be rats in the roof, for all we know.
    6:20 light in photograph is obvious lensflare. This explanation is not considered or discussed in the video.
    6:32 gate is shown opening "by itself". Wind seems likely, or else the gate is hung at a slight angle (the house is old). There appears to be a bug flying across the frame, described as another "mysterious light". It looks like a dragonfly.
    7:14 photos of "balls of light" on a ceiling. These remind me of the kinds of reflections you get from glass watch faces. The video describes them as "glowing clouds of light" and "orbs" (of course).
    7:21 "viscous orange liquid" drops on ceiling. It looks a bit like honey. Source can't be confirmed.
    10:25 some more photographs of lights on walls and ceilings. This time they look like reflections from water, perhaps in a saucepan or something. It's impossible to say what the source is. In the video they are, of course, described as "bizarre ectoplasm-like materialzations" in a "haunted trailer".
    10:34 a burnmark on a bedspread, but the explanation is given! A hot light had fallen onto the bed. The video describes the bedspread as having "mysteriously caught fire". I guess nobody thought of what putting a hot light bulb on a bedspread could cause. The pattern of random burnmarks is described as looking "like a horned face". Ooh err!
    11:41 Enter the "expert" Ouija board users, who magically determine that there are no less than FIVE "entitites" in her trailer home!
    12:03 In preparation for telling us the story of how people levitated and were flung around the room by the spirits during the Ouija session, we are informed that, for mysterious reasons, none of the video cameras would switch on, so of course none of it was captured on video. Ho hum.
    14:11 More photos of "orbs of light" on walls. One clearly shows a bright light source is nearby (most probably a curtained window letting sunlight into a dark room). Again, the "orbs" look like reflections of sunlight from one or more objects that aren't in the photos.
    14:38 random video of something (an envelope) burning on a gas stove. No apparent relationship to any unusual activity, other than the breathless voiceover. This one looks contrived. We're told that the stove mysteriously turned itself on, and I guess the envelope or whatever it was magically flew onto the stove, or at least, that's the story we're asked to swallow. The simpler explanation is that somebody turned the stove on, put the envelope on it and filmed it burning. But that couldn't happen, could it?
    14:43 video of scissors on a bed! Ooh. Scary!
    14:47 some broken glass on a typewriter. Ooh, that looks sharp! Somebody could hurt themselves if they aren't careful!
    15:31 we see some video of the burnt remains of something on the same stove. This is supposed to be days later, or something, but it looks suspiciously like the remains of the burnt envelope we saw just a minute ago.
    16:18 We discover that several years later the same paranormal "investigators" are selling their story to a TV station. They apparently don't find anything video-worthy.
    16:59 we learn that FIFTY TV shows have covered this nonsense!
    17:11 The investigators continue to milk their story by making and selling a documentary about it. One of them also publishes a book about it. The money keeps rolling in, apparently.
    17:44 we're told that this is an "exceptional" case. Supposed to be exceptionally good, I guess. No idea why.
    18:08 the photos of the "light orbs" are found not to be altered or "faked". Of course, there was no need for camera trickery with these.
    18:15 one supposedly "expert" witness (unidentified) claimed these orb images would be "hard to duplicate, even in a laboratory setting". You just have to laugh. No wonder the guy didn't want to put his name to this silly claim.
    18:30 Somebody found an old newspaper article that does not relate to the case in any obvious way.
    19:11 We are treated to some useless speculation about what "poltergeists" are.

    And that's it.

    What a waste of time.
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    Actually there is no evidence the investigators were "incompetent and willing believers in just about anything". There's only the accounts given by multiple eyewitnesses over a period of time along with photographic and video evidence. And then there's your account, who wasn't there and is making assumptions about events based on your own disbelief in paranormal phenomena. So whose account can we trust: those who were there and show no signs of hoaxing or of mistaking mundane events for paranormal events, or you who was not there and only has an agenda to debunk all paranormal accounts as mundane events or hoaxes? I think the answer is obvious.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2020
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    Sure there is. I posted some.

    What I am saying is what I always end up saying when looking at the shoddy evidence you put up so breathlessly: the evidence doesn't come anywhere near confirming what you claim it confirms - in this case the existence of ghostly poltergeists who haunt trailer parks.

    That's your problem right there. You think it's a matter of who you trust - who you want to believe. You'll never get anywhere until you start looking at the evidence like an objective investigator.
     
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    The evidence confirms what is documented in dozens of other cases of poltergeist hauntings with multiple eyewitness accounts and photos and video. It's the same phenomena over and over again: moving objects, fires starting, voices, bangs and thumping footsteps, writing on the wall, coins thrown from nowhere, floating lights, apparitions, red marks on the skin, etc. It's highly unlikely that they are mistaking mundane events for paranormal events since the events all together form the same pattern of typical poltergeist activity we've seen in dozens of other poltergeist cases.

    As for it all being a hoax, we have no basis to assume that. The hoax would have to be cleverly perpetrated by numerous conspiring people over a long period of time at multiple locations, even including the young woman herself, which is highly unlikely, and then continued to be covered up over all the years since then.

    You do the same thing, cherry-picking the incidents you can handwave away as mundane events and then dismissing the rest as unreliable anecdotes of either incompetent or deceptive investigators. You obviously have no interest in really knowing what was going on like a true science-minded investigator would, driven only to make up totally contrived excuses for not believing what was reported by eyewitnesses or shown in photos and videos. IOW you seek to establish what you already conclude, assuming that the whole series of incidents were not paranormally caused even though you have no evidence of such. Your usual cognitive bias is obvious for all to see.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2020
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    No. Look, this is basic stuff. I'll walk you through it.

    Even if all those unrelated cases you refer to showed genuine poltergeist activity, none of that evidence would show that there was a poltergeist in this case. Conversely, if you somehow managed to show there was a genuine poltergeist in this case, it would do nothing to prove that other cases had poltergeists.

    In superhero movies we see the same phenomena over and over again, too: human beings with superhuman strength, flying around, with various types of magical powers (many of which are shared by different superheros). Nothing in any of that repetition provides evidence that superheros actually exist.

    Out of interest, though, where do these "coins thrown from nowhere" come from? Do they just appear out of thin air? Has anybody documented that? It would be a very interesting violation of the law of conservation of energy, if confirmed.

    In fact, the opposite is true. It is highly likely that they are doing exactly what you claim they aren't doing. Far more likely than ghosts existing.

    I agree. It's a good thing I didn't claim it was a hoax, then, isn't it? You would have caught me out, clever old you!

    You do make me laugh sometimes, Magical Realist.

    This incident was hand picked by you as a supposedly stunning proof of the existence of poltergeists. I didn't choose to examine this. You put it up for examination. I devoted some time to perusing the evidence presented, and I found that the evidence is very weak and unconvincing, for reasons I explained at some length just a few posts above this one.

    Maybe next time you cherry-pick a ghost story, you ought to pick one that makes a more persuasive case than this one.

    In this particular case, there's not much to excite the interest, I agree. It seems most likely that the full explanations would turn out to be boringly mundane. Your problem is that you bought into the narrative being fed to you by the makers of the video, rather than ignoring that and concentrating on the actual objective evidence like I did, as a true science-minded investigator.

    You're very welcome to review my time-stamped discussion of the video you posted and carry out your own investigations to fill in some of the glaring holes in your case. If you take issue with my analysis, go through it yourself and tell me what I got wrong (with appropriate supporting evidence, of course).

    I just told you, though: it's not about trust. It's not about who I believe or don't believe. I looked only at the objective evidence. I was very clear about that in post #31. You ignore the objective evidence because you are desperate to believe the tall tale of the ghost. Your excuse is that you believe lots of other similar tall tales, and this one fits the pattern, so you decided to believe this one too. That's not what a true science-minded investigator does.

    I made no such assumption. I make no such assumption. What I told you - what is obvious from my analysis - is that the objective evidence for a paranormal cause is ludicrously weak for this case.

    You're the one making all the assumptions here, Magical Realist. It's the same assumption you make over and over again, and it's why you're lost in a fantasy world.
     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    This is basic logic. If a phenomenon is displaying the same effects as other ones, then it's logical to infer they are being caused by the same thing. Doctors do this all the time, inferring from similar symptoms a common underlying condition. Auto mechanics and technicians do this too. It's basic common sense.


    You're comparing documented poltergeist events to events in a fictional movie, which repeat themes due to a writer writing it that way. There is no writer behind poltergeist cases.

    They are just thrown out of nowhere. Nobody knows where they come from. They are examples of aported objects which are objects that are teleported across space time.

    There is nothing in reality that makes ghosts unlikely or impossible to exist. The eyewitness accounts of them are beyond counting. While rare, they do occur and present with the same phenomena over and over again

    This case is extraordinarily compelling because of the number of eyewitnesses and documentation with photos and videos. That's why I chose it.

    The only reliable narrative is the one given in the video based on what actually happened according to the eyewitnesses who were there. Your narrative is the one you made up based on nothing but your agenda to disprove all paranormal incidents. Once again, they were there and you weren't. We go by the account of the people who were there.

    I have no need to go thru your made up account and examine it. It holds absolutely no water with me because it is not based on any evidence. It is just more made up shit aimed at explaining away what really happened.

    It's about credibility and whose account is based on fact. You are not credible because you were not there and have an agenda to debunk all paranormal accounts. They're account is credible because they were there and reported exactly what happened.
     
  20. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,434
    Except that they violate some physical laws of nature.
     
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,929
    Quantum entanglement, the Big Bang, black holes, consciousness? What else violates the known laws of nature?
     
  22. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,434
    Sorry, but those don't violate any physical laws.
     
  23. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,172
    My computer keeps turning itself on (from stand-by) in the middle of the night. I have to turn the mouse upside-down to stop the cord from pushing it around the desk. If it is a poltergeist, it followed me when I moved.
     

Share This Page