Ghost pics, anyone?

by Pleasuredome 36 Replies latest members adult

• 

  Pleasuredome

  i remember watching an Arthur C. Clarke (writer of 2001 - A.S.O.) programme a few years ago which investigated paranormal events. this pic was one of a number of ghost pics that were analysed, most were proven to be fakes or inconclusive for various reasons, but this particular on they couldnt find fault with at all.

  Newby Church Monk
  It was taken by Reverand Kenneth Lord in 1963. He was alone in the church at Newby, North Yorkshire. He took a photograph of the altar for a local magazine. When it was developed a haunting hooded figure was clearly visible. This picture has been examined by a British Government Home Office laboratory and has stood up to all computer analysis.

  has anyone seen or taken any pics that are very good and arent dubious?
• 

  gumby

  Here some I found trying to find this kenneth lord.. http://www.dhodrien.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Ghosts/ghosts.html
• 

  SixofNine

  I could fake that image, no problem. It's a simple double exposure.
• 

  Pleasuredome

  This picture has been examined by a British Government Home Office laboratory and has stood up to all computer analysis.

  of course you could 6of9, but if you sent it to the a lab for tests it would be found to be a double exposure
• 

  SixofNine

  And just how was this proven to not be a double exposure? That would be fascinating.

  The good reverend: "nope, I only clicked once, I swear it. I was all by myself."

  It's a double exposure fake. Double exposures happen to affect film, in circumstances like this one, exactly as most people would imagine a "ghost" to affect film.

  Notice the nice square-on, centered up angle of a man who is using tripod; the better to fool you with, my dear.
• 

  Mulan

  Princess has one, taken at home. There is a face that shows in the entire screen of the TV, and it was not turned on. No one can identify the face.
• 

  Pleasuredome

  6of9

  write to the British Government Home Office laboratory and ask them how they couldnt prove it was a fake, i'd be interested to know too. it was that long ago since i saw the programme that i cant remember what they said. even Arthur C Clarke who's a major skeptic didnt know what to make of it, because after lab tests there was no evidence of double exposure or tampering with the film, but went onto say that ghosts are a figment of peoples imagination.

  Edited by - pleasuredome on 30 January 2003 11:30:11
• 

  funkyderek

  Why is it that when most photos of ghosts, UFOs etc. are proven to be fakes, it's assumed that the tiny minority that aren't proven fakes must be genuine? Surely it makes more sense to assume that they're just better fakes?
• 

  Pleasuredome

  funky

  i dont know, i havent seen the majority of the worlds ghost pics, have you? i'd say UFO pics is another subject.

  yes it does make sense to say they are all fakes if you dont believe they exist. for people who do believe they exist some are fakes, some arent.
• 

  nilfun

  

  Freddy JacksonThis intriguing photo, taken in 1919, was first published in 1975 by Sir Victor Goddard, a retired R.A.F. officer. The photo is a group portrait of Goddard's squadron, which had served in World War I aboard the HMS Daedalus. An extra ghostly face appears in the photo. In back of the airman positioned on the top row, fourth from the left, can clearly be seen the face of another man. It is said to be the face of Freddy Jackson, an air mechanic who had been accidentally killed by an airplane propeller two days earlier. His funeral had taken place on the day this photograph was snapped. Members of the squadron easily recognized the face as Jackson's. It has been suggested that Jackson, unaware of his death, decided to show up for the group photo.