Ghost photobombs

That is not a reflective thingie from doctors

It's a live feed dish back to spirit world

He runs a TV show there trying to prove REAL humans do exist to a very skeptical ghost audience

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

LOL! They whine and bitch when I don't provide background info on the photo, and then they whine and bitch when I do. Methinks someone doth protest too much. Strange that a mere photo of a little old ghost should upset someone so much. I suggest therapy..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Surely you are not implying, without factual evidence to back it up, that another member of the forums is in some manner developmentally, emotionally, or otherwise mentally compromised? After all...

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sciforums-site-rules.142880/

The rules are rather clear there... to use your own words, methinks you doth protest too much.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Suggesting that people who need therapy are "developmentally, emotionally, or mentally compromised" is your insult not mine. I suggest not doing that in the future. It just makes you look bad.

 

Hmm, of course, of course - because someone who is of sound mind, or otherwise has no problems, would need therapy, yes?

Your lies are unbecoming, MR - not unexpected, mind, but unbecoming. That, and I note, you have yet to answer James' questions... I would hazard that is because you are unable to do so, which would be so dreadfully typical.

 

Right..Millions of people "of sound mind", by which you must mean legally sane or lucid enough to make their own decisions, are in therapy. Your disgusting desire to smear a whole class of people based on that alone is noted.

 

Haha, how sad that you are so desperate to lie your way out of your own statement that you must resort to such sad little lies. More of the same ol' Magical Realist I guess. Never change buddy - at least you're predictable.

 

"A similar poll released in May, "Therapy in America 2004," and co-sponsored by Psychology Today magazine and PacifiCare Behavioral Health, found that an estimated 59 million people have received mental health treatment in the past two years, and that 80 percent of them have found it effective."---- https://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/survey.aspx

 

And a red herring now - nice!

Pray tell - how exactly does that help your, ahem, position any?

The fact that you are part of the group stigmatizing mental health issues showcases your true self for all to see; unless, of course, you wish to merely redefine words again?

You seem to take offense to the idea that one who needs therapy is somehow troubled - be it emotionally, developmentally, mentally, or otherwise; why does such a simple, true statement bother you so?

 

You're the one who claimed that people in therapy are developmentally, emotionally, and mentally compromised, whatever that means. And you were the one who claimed people in therapy were not of sound mind. Back up your claims with evidence or STFU..

 

And now you are intentionally misquoting what I said - bad form, not to mention yet another breach of forum rules. Then again, that seems to be your modus operandi.

Here is what I actually said:

You, then, made the statement that admitting one has a need for therapy is somehow smearing "a whole class of people" ...

Which is interesting in itself, since it indicates a very prominent "you vs them" mentality... Heaven forbid you actually associate or empathize with another "class of people", lest it tarnish your stellar reputation!

Hm... Do I need to put the /s after that, or is it evident enough?

I note you STILL haven't provided the information requested of you by James either...

 

Buzz off troll. Reading your disgusting lying manipulative posts nauseates me.

 

Back to personal attacks and vile, unsubstantiated accusations when you find yourself cornered. How droll.

It is amusing though that it took you two edits to add some colorful imagery to your attack - I guess even a token attempt to elicit an emotional response takes more effort than you are willing (or perhaps able?) to put forth.

Do you intend to answer James questions and/or provide analysis of your silly pictures, or are you going to back peddle on that too?

 

Did Scooby Doo and the gang without a doubt ever see a real ghost in the end of their investigations?

 

Nope.. It's not a fake photo. It's a famous photo of a just married couple. Just because your computer can't properly pixelate the zoomed-in image doesn't mean it's fake.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

More unsubstantiated claims...

You will, of course, provide evidence that the issue is with James computer.

EDIT - reposting the same exact picture does not a compelling argument make, btw.

 

...

 

You are aware we can see edits, yes? Though, I will give credit where credit is due - you are showing signs that you are learning; well done on not simply posting pictures with no commentary.

However, lets compare your picture:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

vs if I take the far left image and blow it up 300% (straight 300 percent upsize - no other alterations besides cropping the image)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Fairly obvious that the face was added in after, as well as other alterations to the image.

I'd wager that someone with access to far better tools than what I have available could spend a few hours and force the image to look like a predetermined outcome... but I would love to see some sort of image enhancement run that gets the original to look like the supposed ghost image.

EDIT - hrm, five hours, during which you've been on several times, and nothing... guess you are admitting it's a fake then

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!