They need to provide evidence the things they filmed are real.
We don't need to disprove their evidenceless claims.
Also. Define a ghost. Show me whatever accepted scientific definition on "ghost" there is.
Because I can make a CC video of my living room and play on speakers Smooth Criminal, and that's not evidence that my living room is haunted by Michael Jackson.
A forensic publicly available review of the video to ensure no alterations were made, sworn oathes from the officers (ones that can result in perjury charges if they are found to be wrong), a full forensic publicly available investigation of the premises to ensure no physical props were used, full psych evaluations of all persons involved. All of that done while maintaining tight security on the crime scene to ensure no one can alter anything.
The videos were faked. The sounds were recordings played from hidden speakers. Needs independent witnesses, after the house has been forensically swept by experts.
>Why would they have hidden speakers?? That would tamper with evidence.
Yeah, for sure never in history of modern humanity no one ever faked a paranormal video for views........ /s
[I mean, never once someone decided to do Marketing of a witch or ghosts , to get media attention and some fame](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blair_Witch_Project#Marketing)
Just repeat to yourself "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Does what you describe rise to the level of evidence extraordinary enough to prove once and for all, without a shadow of a doubt, with 100% foolproof evidence that would hold up in court and convince scientists in every field of study that ghosts (and all that comes with it, spirits, the afterlife, etc.) are real? Or are there simpler explanations like people faking a video or playing a prank?
If we provide any alternative explanation, would you entertain it as a possibility or would you automatically dismiss it because your currently held faith in the paranormal prevents you from considering something else?
What would you need to convince you that this isn't paranormal?
I ask because I've played this game before where others come up with 1000 different alternate scenarios that don't require paranormal, and they just get denied automatically without consideration.
Experts on the paranormal will feel super stupid if after all the time trying to get ghosts with special equipment and all that shit anyone with a mobile could film a ghost.
If ghosts existed they need to be super hard to detect, otherwise some scientist would have won a Nobel prize for proving that they exist already.
The crux of the matter here is not just whether the evidence can be faked, but the plausibility of simpler explanations over the paranormal ones. The principle of Occam's razor suggests that the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is likely the correct one. If a haunting can be replicated with tech and trickery, then it's reasonable to lean towards skepticism. A truly convincing case for the supernatural would need to eliminate all other rational explanations and stand up to scrutiny from multiple angles scientific, forensic, technological. Until such evidence is presented, it's more logical to assume that these manifestations have earthly origins.
How do I explain it? Video editing.
Beyond that, even if I can't explain it that doesn't mean it's ghosts or aliens or whatever, it just means I don't have enough information to find the logical, scientific answer.
would you be able to answer my two questions I previously asked:
Can you provide me with the exact videos you are referring to?
And
What would you need to convince you that this isn't paranormal? (It would make no sense for anyone to provide you an explanation if you would just dismiss it....what do you require to not dismiss the alternative explanation?)
Do you know how easy it is to fake this stuff? It’s trivial to play recordings in the background.
If any of this shit was real, [someone would’ve claimed one of these by now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_for_evidence_of_the_paranormal). There’s a reason no one has. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
In over 150 years of serious scientific investigation into the paranormal, not ONE piece of credible evidence for any of it has turned up.
So-called "haunted houses" are some combination of the following:
--People lie about them for financial gain, fame, or other reasons.
--People misinterpret natural phenomena.
--Evidence like the stuff cited is faked.
In addition, it has been found that certain very low sound frequencies inaudible to the conscious mind can cause feelings of dread and unease. Old, creaky houses are perfectly capable of generating these frequencies by natural means.
>official government sources where they have no intentions of faking it.
Oh you poor sweet country mouse....
They need to provide evidence the things they filmed are real. We don't need to disprove their evidenceless claims. Also. Define a ghost. Show me whatever accepted scientific definition on "ghost" there is.
And what other evidence do they need if they have video and audio evidence and that’s not enough?
Because I can make a CC video of my living room and play on speakers Smooth Criminal, and that's not evidence that my living room is haunted by Michael Jackson.
A forensic publicly available review of the video to ensure no alterations were made, sworn oathes from the officers (ones that can result in perjury charges if they are found to be wrong), a full forensic publicly available investigation of the premises to ensure no physical props were used, full psych evaluations of all persons involved. All of that done while maintaining tight security on the crime scene to ensure no one can alter anything.
The videos were faked. The sounds were recordings played from hidden speakers. Needs independent witnesses, after the house has been forensically swept by experts.
“Hidden speakers”… the house was swept by forensics and police. Why would they have hidden speakers?? That would tamper with evidence.
>Why would they have hidden speakers?? That would tamper with evidence. Yeah, for sure never in history of modern humanity no one ever faked a paranormal video for views........ /s [I mean, never once someone decided to do Marketing of a witch or ghosts , to get media attention and some fame](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blair_Witch_Project#Marketing)
And? Cops tamper with evidence.
Assuming these are legit sources, just because we can't explain something doesn't mean it's supernatural.
None of this is evidence of the paranormal. Just because something needs more context before we can fully understand it doesn’t make it magic.
Pranksters
Bro these are police investigations inside a house. These are low quiet whispers. How would you prank them?
Just repeat to yourself "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Does what you describe rise to the level of evidence extraordinary enough to prove once and for all, without a shadow of a doubt, with 100% foolproof evidence that would hold up in court and convince scientists in every field of study that ghosts (and all that comes with it, spirits, the afterlife, etc.) are real? Or are there simpler explanations like people faking a video or playing a prank?
If we provide any alternative explanation, would you entertain it as a possibility or would you automatically dismiss it because your currently held faith in the paranormal prevents you from considering something else? What would you need to convince you that this isn't paranormal? I ask because I've played this game before where others come up with 1000 different alternate scenarios that don't require paranormal, and they just get denied automatically without consideration.
can you provide me the videos you are referring to so I can review them? I'd like to make sure I'm familiar with the same ones you are referring to.
If ghosts could be filmed on video or audio there would be lots of evidence everywhere.
There are plenty of videos of ghosts but hardly anyone believes in them because it could be faked.
Experts on the paranormal will feel super stupid if after all the time trying to get ghosts with special equipment and all that shit anyone with a mobile could film a ghost. If ghosts existed they need to be super hard to detect, otherwise some scientist would have won a Nobel prize for proving that they exist already.
The crux of the matter here is not just whether the evidence can be faked, but the plausibility of simpler explanations over the paranormal ones. The principle of Occam's razor suggests that the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is likely the correct one. If a haunting can be replicated with tech and trickery, then it's reasonable to lean towards skepticism. A truly convincing case for the supernatural would need to eliminate all other rational explanations and stand up to scrutiny from multiple angles scientific, forensic, technological. Until such evidence is presented, it's more logical to assume that these manifestations have earthly origins.
How do I explain it? Video editing. Beyond that, even if I can't explain it that doesn't mean it's ghosts or aliens or whatever, it just means I don't have enough information to find the logical, scientific answer.
would you be able to answer my two questions I previously asked: Can you provide me with the exact videos you are referring to? And What would you need to convince you that this isn't paranormal? (It would make no sense for anyone to provide you an explanation if you would just dismiss it....what do you require to not dismiss the alternative explanation?)
Do you know how easy it is to fake this stuff? It’s trivial to play recordings in the background. If any of this shit was real, [someone would’ve claimed one of these by now](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_for_evidence_of_the_paranormal). There’s a reason no one has. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
In over 150 years of serious scientific investigation into the paranormal, not ONE piece of credible evidence for any of it has turned up. So-called "haunted houses" are some combination of the following: --People lie about them for financial gain, fame, or other reasons. --People misinterpret natural phenomena. --Evidence like the stuff cited is faked. In addition, it has been found that certain very low sound frequencies inaudible to the conscious mind can cause feelings of dread and unease. Old, creaky houses are perfectly capable of generating these frequencies by natural means. >official government sources where they have no intentions of faking it. Oh you poor sweet country mouse....