Thread: Discuss your thoughts without arguing.

For the pictures...

Talcum Powder, this would give the kind of particle size that would stay afloat in the air and yet could not be seen with the naked eye.

Talcum Powder, this would give the kind of particle size that would stay afloat in the air and yet could not be seen with the naked eye.

That's very inventive. But what is talcum powder doing in the forest for instance. The pictures are taken in a variety of places and conditions.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

That's very inventive. But what is talcum powder doing in the forest for instance. The pictures are taken in a variety of places and conditions.

That is just one example of how you can produce that same result. Dust in the appropriate way could generate the same exact thing.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1015827...7602085834519/

These were all faked too...admittedly and purposefully.

I'm actually intrigued by the videos though, some of them aren't easily explainable =D

here is one of the assumed fake pics.



Here is one of what is suppose to be an orb pic.

pretty similar isn't it. The orb picture seems more defined and integrated and less cut and paste though. When you look closely. It's vastly different. One seems very harsh with not much detail and close to the lense. The other is entirely integrated into the picture with proper contrast that indicates the presence from the spaces proportions in the photo. If that fake picture is the best attempts of reproducing the mistake. Then it does not succeed in duplicating the effect to the full quality of the original orb picture.

The two photos look much the same except for the maximum brightness of the faked ones, which could be because they're at night.

In the fake example all the round circles are white and in front of everything. In the orb photo they show a multitude of degrees of proportion with a much better quality hue in and behind things. While the fake one is fuzzy daggered transparency with no indication of proportion present.

The one presented as real in this photo is most likely just snow. There is snow on the ground. That is not really a credible example because of the conditions in the photo. real or not.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

In the fake example all the round circles are white and in front of everything. In the orb photo they show a multitude of degrees of proportion with a much better quality hue in and behind things. While the fake one is fuzzy daggered transparency with no indication of proportion present.

The one presented as real in this photo is most likely just snow. There is snow on the ground. That is not really a credible example because of the conditions in the photo. real or not.

Dismissing someone else...
NOT ALLOWED!

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

The one presented as real in this photo is most likely just snow. There is snow on the ground. That is not really a credible example because of the conditions in the photo. real or not.

I only picked it because you put it there. I'll not try and use it anymore if you like. But if you'll notice the structure of many of the photos in the gallery, they are structured similiar to most of the pictures in the photos you've presented. In the photos where he made them purposefully faked he probably didn't feel like wasting too much of the time making them "proportioned" accurately in the photo. But if the structure is the same (and by this I mean not only the shape, but what is inside the shape) there is no reason to think that the photos presented as "real" are anything more than particles that are in the correct places vs. faked ones where they put the particles there themselves, or go to a place where they know they will find particles.

For example, the talcum powder photo was the best looking one, why should I assume that there aren't substances outside that can create the same appearance?

Originally Posted by adam has a dream

Dismissing someone else...
NOT ALLOWED!

Even more not allowed she dismissed herself.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

here is one of the assumed fake pics.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2341/...bf9495.jpg?v=0

Here is one of what is suppose to be an orb pic.

http://www.midsouthparanormal.com/EgyptOrbs2.JPG

Known fake...


Presented as real.


They don't look too different, and considering that they are from different places, it doesn't surprise me that since the physical reasons would have to be different they look slightly different. Similarities include, little holes in the circles, and while there are more in the known fake, there are condensed ones and large ones, and ones that are more and are less transparent.

The talcum powder one looked even closer, despite the fact that it was from a different source. (I don't know why the picture wont show up so here is the link http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/ma...9/113ce340.jpg it is lighter though.

As for the movies, the one from the "undisclosed" farm area, I saw a show years ago that made a circle like it, with video producing the same thing, I thought it was mythbusters but apparently not.

If that fake picture is the best attempts of reproducing the mistake.

There is a gallery you know...

"Discuss your thoughts without arguing"? I thought this was one of the rules of the whole subforum.

Of course, I thought wrong, as I look around and see so many people heatedly arguing...I'd even go so far as to call them minor flame-wars.

"this kind of thuggery has no place in our society".

But couldn't the quote be a pledge of awareness? He does not deny that thuggery exists, and says that it does not belong in society. What follows his quote could be anything from more bashing of thuggery to a proposal to increase the efficiency of the police force. It is unsubtle bias to make a full opinion off of a single sentence, especially a slang phrase such as "____ has no place here." Shouldn't one need more than a common phrase to convict a person? I wonder what that politician's voting records were, and what he has concretely done for the people.

And to branch the conviction out to other politicians is also unfair. Politicians are people, varying in ideas, speed of action, boldness, and (as is the evidence you provided) idioms used in speech.

Could generalizations be what is brainwashing the psyche of the masses?

but thuggery doesn't have any place in society o_O its not a denial that it happens, it just means, it has no place in society

does society need thieves? nooo