| User | Post |
|
11:15 am
April 29, 2011
|
Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2954 |
|
|
Revenant said:
Anyway…if any are interested in furthering this aspect of the conversation, then perhaps someone should create a new topic in either the General Paranormal section (What is Paranormal?) or the Cryptozoological section (What is a Cryptid?). Although it's been fun…we're really straying from the nonsense that is FoF. 
Agree: http://www.skepticalviewer.com…..aranormal/
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
1:43 pm
April 30, 2011
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Oh, this should be interesting. I visited Whaley House last year and have been planning to do some historical research. I'll report back after I watch the episode.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
4:56 pm
April 30, 2011
|
hyacinth
| | |
| Investigator | posts 122 |
|
|
Post edited 5:53 pm – May 2, 2011 by hyacinth
|
|
|
3:05 pm
May 4, 2011
|
Buffy
| | |
| Investigator | posts 92 |
|
|
Spring was in the air folks with mating of the manatees! You would think that living in that area the people would think of that first before thinking it's a monster. As for the Whaley House, hey Regis Philbin saw a ghost there so it must be haunted!  I'm glad they were even skeptical of pictures that were taken in rooms that had plexiglass. I still didn't really see a "face" in that photo that they tried to recreate. When I saw the courtroom photo, I too thought of a reflection off a crystal of sorts. I didn't like how they replicated it though because the original photo had a streak to it and their replication didn't. Also, the lighting didn't really match either. To me, it look like something went wrong in the processing of the film or something was spilled on the photo. I would think their photo expert would have tested that to make sure that wasn't the case either.
|
|
|
4:06 pm
May 4, 2011
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Post edited 4:08 pm – May 4, 2011 by Stephen
I originally agreed with you about the light looking like a processing artifact, but it casts a reflection in the glass of the picture on the right, and a diffuse reflection on the ceiling. So I'm actually pretty sure they're right about the cause, although they didn't make the reproduction look very convincing.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
9:56 pm
May 5, 2011
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Posted my thoughts on Whaley here.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
Login 
Register 
The Forum [is where Ancient Roman skeptics hang out.]
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
