Reality or defect Film? The Most Famous Photos of Ghosts
Many of us are Skeptical and do not Believe That Ghosts really exist, or even more May Appear in Photographs. But the Stories are A few Cases When the Photographs from Different years appeared Vague outlines of Faces and figures of people.
Many of Them Were Seen in the first half of the Twentieth century, when no template existed. So what WAS it really? Fans of Esoterica sure That Spirits of the Dead, and rationalists Argue That this is Just A reflection of the Light. But better make up their minds about these strange phenomena: here a selection of the most famous photographs from “ghosts.”
One of the most popular photos with “ghost” was made in 1919. On A Group Photo of the Crew of the ship “Daedalus” for one of the men is Seen face. Claimed That this person Mechanics Freddie, WHO died A few days before , Fell Under the propeller blades. In the day When Photo WAS taken, Were Buried Freddie. THUS Man allegedly wanted to Say goodbye to friends and colleagues His.
In 1959, Mabel Chinnery WAS returning from the cemetery, WHERE He visited His Mother’s Grave. She Decided to Take A picture of her husband, WHO WAS Waiting for her in the car.The photograph Clearly Shows That in the backseat someone is. Mabel Easily IDENTIFIED in an Unknown Figure, His Mother A WHO died few years ago. Experts have studied the Long Photo and concluded That there WAS no manipulation of it WAS Carried out.
This photo dates from 1966 When A Man Decided to Capture the beautiful spiral Staircase Museum of Greenwich in the UK. When development on the photos appeared Silhouette of A Man Climbing the Stairs. About Maritime Museum Greenwich Often Say That there is wandering Evil Spirits. Many visitors hear strange sounds and see the transparent human figures.
In November 1995, DURING A Major Fire Burned Building Town Hall Vem in one of the counties of Great Britain. While the House WAS burning, none of the firefighters did not See the little Girl WHO then appeared on the developed Film. Skeptics Claim That the image Could BE Obtained in this Because of the smoke, and the scattered Light. But such Would A person Could Get A Girl Just Because of the smoke? It Turned out That in 1677 the building has burned, with fire culprit was fourteen Jane, who WAS Among the Dead. Perhaps her ghost wanders the Native Still places, scaring the locals.
I am a
global warming climate change climate disruption skeptic. I catch a lot of heat (pun intended) for my skepticism.
But i have my reasons and this video does a very level-headed job of explaining where skeptics are coming from in the
global warming climate change climate disruption debate.
If you’re a
global warming climate change climate disruption believer and you wish to understand the skeptic’s perspective, i ask you to watch just the first 2 minutes.
The first 2 minutes of this video does an excellent job of spelling out the very thin line between believers and skeptics. So close, yet so far.
This video appears to be based on an article written by Dr. David M.W. Evans called The Skeptic’s Case. As such, you might find the video easier to understand if you read along with the original text (The Skeptic’s Case) or download the PDF here.
Actually, the PDF text version is worth downloading as a standalone resource for those times when people ask why you’re a
global warming climate change climate disruption skeptic.
Mason I. Bilderberg
By Dr. David M.W. Evans via YouTube
As suggested by a friend, I’m following up my Top Ten bad global warming arguments list with a Top Ten good arguments list. These are in no particular order, and I might have missed something important.
These ten were just off the top of my head….there’s no telling what might be lingering deeper in my brain.
I have avoided specific alternative causal mechanisms of natural climate change, because I view them individually as speculative. But taken as a whole, they represent a class of unknowns that can’t be just swept under the rug just because we don’t understand them.
For some reason, all of these ended up being phrased as questions, rather than statements.
1 • No Recent Warming. If global warming science is so “settled”, why did global warming stop over 15 years ago (in most temperature datasets), contrary to all “consensus” predictions?
2 • Natural or Manmade? If we don’t know how much of the warming in the longer term (say last 50 years) is natural, then how can we know how much is manmade?
3 • IPCC Politics and Beliefs. Why does it take a political body (the IPCC) to tell us what scientists “believe”? And when did scientists’ “beliefs” translate into proof? And when was scientific truth determined by a vote…especially when those allowed to vote are from the Global Warming Believers Party?
4 • Climate Models Can’t Even Hindcast How did climate modelers, who already knew the answer, still fail to explain the lack of a significant temperature rise over the last 30+ years? In other words, how do you botch a hindcast?
5 • …But We Should Believe Model Forecasts? Why should we believe model predictions of the future, when they can’t even explain the past?
6 • Modelers Lie About Their “Physics”. Why do modelers insist their models are based upon established physics, but then hide the fact that the strong warming their models produce is actually based upon very uncertain “fudge factor” tuning?