Ghost photobombs

Please post a high-res version of the original image, Magical Realist.

 

What? Where's this "vouching" you talk about? The linked article doesn't even claim to have the original photo, but instead quotes another source - a site that appears to be closed down.

Also, is this the best you have on this photo? No high-res scan of the original photo? The highest resolution on that page is less than 500 x 500 pixels.

 

First, I don't know what claim of mine you're referring to. As I recall, I claimed the opposite - that the photo is not necessarily tampered with.

Second, what exactly do you think is sufficient to show it isn't faked? The existence of a 500 x 500 pixelated image on the internet?

What do you mean by the "real deal"? Do you mean you think it actually shows a ghost, rather than, say, a girl in a white dress standing behind a tree? How do you reach that conclusion? What do you have, other than a 500x500 pixelated image?

What other information are you relying on?

 

Magical Realist:

No, of course not. But there's no claim in that from me that the photo is faked.

Is that what we're looking at there? A 500x500 pixel photo has been repeatedly magnified, so that the last photo in the series of 5 has a similar pixel count the first in the series, and yet it seems to lack the pixelation that should be there if it was a simple magnification. (compare Kittamaru's post #640). I therefore dispute your claim that a simple magnification has occurred. There must be interpolation. Or else, perhaps a higher-resolution version of the original photo (i.e. more than 500x500 pixels) was magnified repeatedly. If that's the case, I want to see the original source photograph.

Not yet, since it is obvious that the photos are not a series of magnifications of the first image. There has either been additional manipulation, or the source was a different photo.

I see. So you're saying you're prone to jumping to the conclusion that anybody you see in a photo is a ghost, unless there's some hint that they are not. Probably you're even more likely to draw that conclusion if somebody primes you in advance to see a ghost rather than real person (e.g. by posting the photo on a website dedicated to ghosts and putting it in an article claiming there is a ghost in the photo).

I also don't believe you have ever managed to establish, even on a balance of probabilities, that any ghost has ever shown up in any photograph, so your claim that ghosts often show up in photos seems quite spurious. An assumption rather than an observation.

I don't know. What should a ghost look like? It sounds like you have some pre-conceived ideas.

It looks like a girl standing behind a a tree, to me (on one leg, perhaps). At any rate, she appears to be standing on the ground behind the small tree.

You've identified her clothing as a nightgown, have you? What's your evidence for that? Ghosts usually wear nightgowns in photos? (LOL.) This is a wedding photograph, right? How did you establish that she wasn't dressed up for the wedding?

----
Of course, I hold no expectation that you have any answers to my questions better than "It looks like a ghost to me". I suspect that you know no less about this photograph than I do by now, as usual, and you're just making an assumption consistent with your self-identity as a gullible woo-believer.

 

But I added a number of new questions that you haven't responded to. See post #656.

I assure you, I'm not at all confused, except about how you managed to reach the firm conclusion that this photograph shows a ghost and is the "real deal". Well, to tell the truth, I don't think there's much confusion about that, given your history on this forum. It safe to assume that your conclusion was formed spontaneously as soon as you became aware of the existence of the photo (probably when you were browsing the ghost forums or other woo sites). Your conclusion, as usual, has nothing to do with evidence and everything to do with what you so desperately want/need to believe.

Are we done with this photo, then?

Were you hoping this would be another drive-by post by you that you could slink away from when you got bored of it, to devote your oh-so-short attention span to the next shiny shell?

It's quite amazing that you're so consistent and dogged in posting such flimsy nothings in support of your beliefs. I am in awe at what must have happened in your life for you to end up like this. I'd honestly love to know.