Grey Lady of Dudley Castle

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Oct 8, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    MR, you must have missed this, since you didn't respond:
    Please respond.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602
    Not at all. It certainly looks like a ghost. So it could be ANY ghost. But the fact that it corresponds exactly to what is commonly reported there, well, then that's what it most likely is.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602
    And yet you're the one who claims to have encountered the ghost of an old lady at night in the woods. So why is this ghost any less probable?



    Yeah..photos of ghosts as evidence of ghosts. Who woulda thunk it? lol!
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I never claimed it to be a ghost - I simply recounted my encounter, including the information (that was learned much, much later) that the lady in question was, supposedly, a ghost, according to other people.
    Plus, my encounter was far more than a meager blurry photograph... I had direct physical contact, as well as a conversation. What it was with, I do not legitimately know.

    This is where you fall apart in the scientific method - you come to the conclusion that it isn't something you can readily explain, so all of a sudden it's a ghost.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Oh, look, it's a photo of a ghost, next to a living person... that means it's proof ghosts exist!

    That, in essence, is what you are doing. You are using a combination of poor logical thinking and circular reasoning: Ergo... it's a photo of a ghost, so ghosts must exist. You cannot prove the object in the photo is a ghost beyond saying it is a photo of a ghost.

    THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE.
     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602
    • Libelous and dishonest attempts at deliberately misrepresenting what another member or moderator has said will not be tolerated
    So now you're saying you didn't see a ghost in the woods that night. Make up your mind.

    I don't need the scientific method to know a photo of a grey lady often seen at a castle looks exactly like that grey lady. Ofcourse people who disingenously try to deny that it looks like that and play all sorts of semantical games to avoid admitting this will always appear dishonest and agenda-laden. As in "I know it's not a ghost because I know there's no such things as ghosts."



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Back to ghost cartoons again? So what are you claiming now, that the figure is CGI'd by the tourist lady who took the picture? Or are you sticking to "a real person dressed as a grey lady" thesis?

    LOL! I don't need a lecture from you about how to use logic. So save your breath.

    Look, I already know ghosts exist. I've posted numerous videos and photos of them here already. So here's how my logic actually runs: ghosts exist, this looks like a photo of a ghost, therefore it is a ghost.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2016
  9. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I'm going to give you one chance here: Either provide a link to where I stated I believed I saw a ghost in the woods, or redact that statement... or I will infract you for libel. Period.

    So because you say so, you don't need proof?

    Sorry, that doesn't fly here.
     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602

    LOL! Looking for more reasons to ban again. How pathetic. So are you saying it wasn't a ghost? It's a simple question. You seem to say you believe it was a ghost based on what other people said as well as based on seeing her photograph. Are you now saying that all this didn't cause you to believe it was a ghost? Why did you tell that story then?

    A photo of a ghost is proof of a ghost. Just like a photo of a zebra, a fire hydrant, or a star is proof of a star. It's really quite simple despite your attempts to convolute it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2014
  11. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    You are so absolute in your incorrigibility that you refuse to see the side-by-side comparison of what you are doing to that picture... pathetic.

    I would lecture you, but I prefer to lecture those that actually have the ability to comprehend what is being said, instead of spasmodically spewing the same tripe over and over.

    You obviously have no way to back this claim... what reason is there to continue this farce?
     
  12. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I stated, quite clearly, that I did not know what I encountered. Your inability to comprehend my simple statement is... well, terrifying actually.

    Really? Well, in that case...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Here's a picture of Twilight Sparkle and Spike the Dragon that was taken outside.

    Here is another one, of her sleeping:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I guess that this means pastel coloured unicorns exist!
     
  13. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602
    In other words, you got nothing but attacks on my character and reputation and baiting me into saying something infractable. And you wonder why I would ignore someone like you?
     
  14. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    In other words, you cannot provide evidence, either of the libelous statement you made OR that this is a ghost...

    Fair enough.
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,602
    Except that we ALL know cartoon horses don't really exist, therefore the photos are fake. We DON'T know that with ghosts.
     
  16. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Except we do know they exist - after all...
    You said it yourself - a photo of it is proof!

    This is why your "logic" fails...
     
  17. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Magic Realist,

    you say that a photo of a ghost is evidence that ghosts exist.
    However, in order to be able to use the photo as evidence of ghosts you must first,
    at the very least, bring forth hard evidence that the 'appearance' in the photo
    could not be something else.
    When you have ruled out all mundane causes then, and only then, you may proceed
    to evidence that the 'appearance' is in fact the spirit of a deceased person
    (or whatever other definition you want to push).
    What you are doing now is, pure and simple, intellectual dishonesty, which falls
    under the heading of trolling.
    Proceed with caution...

    I have spoken.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page