why we need ghosts

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by birch, Feb 27, 2016.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    Far more often and on a routine everyday basis, people hear what is actually there.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Couple of inconsistencies here:
    1. The rescue workers swear they heard 'someone saying "help" ', yet you believe you hear "Why can't someone help me?".
      a] Two people can hear two different things (as you just demonstrated). People can be wrong about what their senses tell them.
      b] People interpret and embellish, as you have done (though I grant you are sincere, you still embellished with your own interpretation).
    2. The video clearly says "No one knows where the voice came from." So, no one knows.
    3. Babies are certainly talking by 18 months. Here's an 18-month old baby talking in full sentences. One word: 'help' is ... well ... child's play.
    4. It doesn't actually say or show how long after the video they got into the car. The baby may have been unconscious by the time they got it out, but that doesn't mean it was unconscious when they were trying to get in. In fact, it's pretty apparent that the baby was conscious, as witnessed by the fact that we apparently hear it cry for help from within the car!
    This is not a routine or everyday event. While you might be correct; it certainly does not apply here.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



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

    Messages:
    16,600
    Yeah...that unconscious baby was crying for help. That explains the fake memory all four rescue workers misheard on that momentous occasion.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





    Far more often people are right about what their senses tell them, especially when 3 other people and a body cam confirm hearing the same thing.

    You realize don't you that "help me" is literally part of the sentence
    "Why can't someone help me?" Plus there could have been several calls for help beyond just that one audio clip.

    It is for rescue workers, who are trained to heighten their senses of hearing and seeing in a rescue situation.
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I am suggesting that you are describing some form of "deja vue" by all present based on a single recording of sounds that were present at the scene, not from individual recollection.

    If you have watched the Anil Seth clip, he demonstrates the exact scene you are describing.
     
  9. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    Ah yes. A quadrupal instance of group deja vue. That explains everything!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Except for the fact that they all heard it on scene which is why they suddenly hurried to lift the car on its side it might even be true.
     
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I bet they only heard sounds on the recorder long after the event. And if they did during the event it must have been before all inhabitants died and they were standing around doing nothing until they heard the noise on the recorder and what appeared to sound like a voice "help me". Then they scrambled to lift the car. A little late if you ask me....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    "Off with their heads"
     
  11. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,329
    MR, you say ''Clearly it is saying'' . Do you consider the audio was that good?
    And, according to the text on screen the four officers says they heard ''help''. Have you seen another report about the incident which says different?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    If this audio is so clear, why can't people on this thread agree about hearing any voice, let alone what was said?
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
  12. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,329
  13. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    How do you know the baby was unconscious when they were approaching the car?
    Well, if they were all lying as you claim, then why would you still take them seriously?
    Yes, people are very often right; say 90% of the time. Then there is that 10% of the time that makes headlines.
    I'm a certified rescue diver. We were never trained to "heighten our senses of hearing and seeing." Most of our training was in getting people out of difficult situations without risking our own lives in the process. Are you making things up again?
     
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    As pointed out, it is plausible the toddler was conscious, and my notes did not mention fake memory. So I assume your are being deliberately obtuse here. This is called "Kettle logic" fallacy.

    This is not a typical situation.
    As you have demonstrated, you have no interest in boning up on cognitive perception. You are entitled to your opinion, but the evidence shows that perception is a tricky thing.

    Note that you yourself have provided an extant demonstration of a discrepancy in interpretation of senses - right here in this thread. You heard something different than what the rescue workers swore they heard.


    Nothing in my points suggests they did not hear what they say they heard, so I'm not sure what you're arguing here.


    What they heard and what you heard are not the same. See how people report the same event differently?


    Someone "coulda" recited Dickens. If it's not in-evidence, then why are you postulating unknown events?
    If the video itself is insufficient to make your case, straw men are not a valid substitute.

    None of the points I raised suggest the rescue workers did not hear what they said they heard, so I'm not sure what you're arguing here. I suspect you're simply being contrariwise.
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    The rescue workers say they heard cries for help consistent with what was heard on the body cam. I'm going to trust that there were many cries for help beyond just that one plea caught on the body cam. The workers were there. They should know..The fact that you would nitpick this one detail tells me you have no good explanation left.

    Note how the rescue worker describes what the voice was saying at the 1:14 mark:



    "Help me. Help me now. That kind of stuff."
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    Ah. So a toddler saying "help" or "help me" would qualify as "that kind of stuff."

    See - a simple explanation.
     
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    No..they said it was a woman's voice, and besides the baby was unconscious.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Yes, they were there. And we are told what their sworn testimony is.

    For some reason, that's not enough for you. You still have to embellish - what they said, when they said it, how many times they said it. Every time you recount the event, you add some bit that seems more convincing. If you were of a mind to write that down and make a video of it, well - we'd have exactly what you linked to - an interpretation of an interpretation - with an agenda to convince.

    You have very effectively made the skeptic's case for them, by providing a textbook example of how and why people embellish ghost stories. The story, as-is, is not convincing enough - so you're adding your own flavour to the story.

    People do embellish stories, adding details as they recount it multiple times.

    What we have there is a story wrapped around some video footage.
     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    Nothing has changed. I was going by what the body cam recorded and by what the rescue worker responded to in real time, as well as by what all four workers said about the incident after the fact. The story is the same. The workers heard a woman's voice crying for help coming from the overturned car. One worker described it "clear as day." Nothing has been added to this narrative. It is exactly what happened based on the evidence given. There is no exaggeration or embellishment. Believe or doubt it. I choose to believe in the evidence.
     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    Yep. Very young children have high pitched voices.
    How do you know that?

    I think it's what you WANT to believe, rather than anything that's in evidence.
     
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    LOL! A baby's voice sounds nothing like a woman's voice.

    It's what the rescue workers said. The baby was unconscious when they found it. It's in the video posted in post #512 starting at mark 1:35.
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    It is more* plausible that a toddler sounds like a woman than that a ghost was in the car calling for help.


    Yes. Which is after the time they were still trying to get into the car. And we do not know how how that was.

    It is more* plausible that the toddler cried out for help and then slipped into unconsciousness from dehydration than that a ghost was in the car calling for help.

    *understatement of the year.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,634
    Correct. They do NOT know if the toddler was conscious when they heard the cries for help. Your assumption that it was is unfounded.
     

Share This Page