Ghosts....?

[Beowulf]

Found a picture of the kitchen I took either just before or just after the one with the shadow in it:

[Futzbucket]

Found a picture of the kitchen I took either just before or just after the one with the shadow in it:

What I find interesting with this picture is how the candle doesn't seem to effect the shadow at all. I don't think it's possible to recreate this effect using two light sources (one light behind the person casting the shadow over top of the illumination from the candle). That tells me that this isn't a shadow.

If it's not a shadow, then what is it? Well, in the world of the supernatural, this is classified as a "shadow person", and has been witnessed and documented by countless people for as long as people have been witnessing and documenting. This is your most typical ghost sighting.

It's commonly believed that a "shadow person" is the spiritual energy of a person that has passed on, and still clings to some sort of negative energy. Basically, they are unwilling to fully pass on, because they can't forgive something.

They're mostly harmless, though they can effect how the more empathetic people generally feel with them around. For example; a trusting lover may slowly begin to mistrust their partner after moving into a place invested with such a spirit.

The most important thing to keep in mind is this kind of entity will not attempt to communicate with you. You basically don't exist to this spirit. If it does react to you, it's not really "you" it's reacting to; it's your energy. The only reason why you're aware of it, is because you're empathetic to energy.

It doesn't surprise me at all that it appeared before the place-setting, being it's a negative spirit, it was pulled close to the positive energy created from putting together a meal prepared with love.

If it attempts to communicate, then you're not dealing with a spirit. You're dealing with a demon.

Your place isn't haunted. You are. These spirits are literally everywhere, and while some do associate themselves to specific areas, they are only witnessed by someone who is sensitive to spiritual energies. The reason why you only see them in that particular area (your home), is simply because this is where you spend most of your time, and you've been spending this time creating positive energies, which is causing the negative spirits that also frequent that area to react.

What I'm saying is even if you move, chances are it's only a matter of time before some other negative spirit in your new home will begin reacting the same, which will give you the impression that the old spirit had followed you. Then, if you speak to the new residents of your old place if they experienced anything like you did, they will say they experienced nothing, because they are either not as sensitive as you (most common) or they simply aren't creating as much positive energy as you did.

Here's something I'd like for you to try. Take a moment and write down how much you love your partner. Write a poem, a song, or just write, "love" on a piece of paper. Then hold that paper in your hands and concentrate on how much you love and accept this other person. Nothing but possitive thoughts. Then roll that piece of paper up and seal it in the bottle you use to hold the candle.

Betcha a candy bar you'll never see another spirit again around that bottle.

[Beowulf]

Have to admit you've impressed me. I have never considered much of what you have said.

Yes, the candle being so strong in the middle of the shadow kind of set off a bell with me, it seemed strange.

These pictures are real. I really cannot account for that shadow. I can easily imagine someone thinking, yeah, right, she made that shadow and is trying to pull one over on us.

But I'm desperate to understand it, because it is really there. I have no idea how that thing was made.

A shadow person. Interesting. No, it has not tried to communicate with me.

I will try the bottle thing. Very nice idea, a project

Thank you for your input

[Futzbucket]

Have to admit you've impressed me. I have never considered much of what you have said.

Yes, the candle being so strong in the middle of the shadow kind of set off a bell with me, it seemed strange.

These pictures are real. I really cannot account for that shadow. I can easily imagine someone thinking, yeah, right, she made that shadow and is trying to pull one over on us.

But I'm desperate to understand it, because it is really there. I have no idea how that thing was made.

A shadow person. Interesting. No, it has not tried to communicate with me.

I will try the bottle thing. Very nice idea, a project

Thank you for your input

The best way I can describe this, is it's an echo. Yes, it originated from a person, but it is not conscious. Instead of reacting to obstacles like walls, it reacts to other forms of energy. The type of energies it reacts to and the type of reaction is dependent upon the type of echo.

There are positive echos (typically seen as a reddish shadow), though these are rare, but when they are created, they tend to be the most seen, as they are usually created by someone who honestly loved people, so they tend to react to people simply being around.

White echos are interesting. The only way I can describe them is they tend to be playful. They just come and go as they please.

One of the most misunderstood is gold. It's typically seen as an angelic spirit, but that isn't true. Gold represents a connection to the viewer. It's most commonly viewed as a spirit with a gold crown or a golden halo. These are also the most potentially dangerous, being they are directly tied to the viewer.

Honestly, I don't know how much you can really put into any of this information. There are really only two ways to consider this from a scientific perspective; it doesn't exist or we simply don't know what it is. What I'm saying is there's simply no one that can tell you what exactly this thing is, and anyone that tries to tell you they know what it is, is either delusional or a liar.

The only reason why I've such an interest in it, is because this sort of phenomenon occurs too frequently to dismiss. Also, I've always loved a good ghost story.

One of the most interesting cases I've come across is from a Mr. Donald Decker, aka "the rain man". What makes this case so interesting, is the number of credible witnesses including the town's chief of police. If this case is true, then it's the best documentation of a demon I've ever seen.

"What is a demon?"
The best way I can understand what a demon is, is it's a parasite that survives from host to host, typically in the same blood line. For the most part it lives dormant in it's host, only manifesting itself when doing so benefits. It can compel the host to behave in certain ways to create the type of energy that it feeds upon. In the case of Decker, it seems that this parasite was originally in his grandfather, which prepared Decker to eventually become the new host once the grandfather died, and it prepared Decker by attempting to weaken it's will to accept it's negative energy into his own by compelling the grandfather to abuse Decker as a child. It's probably been doing this in his blood line for generations. When it was discovered, it flipped out, knowing it HAD to have a host soon or it would die. It made every attempt to get people to shun Decker, for the purpose to dominate Decker's will.

This speaks of intelligence. Still, in this particular case, the demon manifested itself in public areas, making other people very aware of it's presence, which ultimately caused it's destruction. This speaks of a lack of understanding.

It's animalistic. It's sort of like a dog that bites strangers, thinking it's protecting itself and it's owner, when really it's causing it's own destruction.

[Phil H]

Why do we have to resort to "demons" as an explanation for "ghosts" and hauntings", when we have not exhausted the more simple and likely explanations - something mechanical, an unexplained 9as yet) natural scientific phenomenon.

I have refrained from responding in regard to Beowulf's picture because I don't feel qualified to comment on photographic evidence. I would not have done in the days of chemical film let alone in today's digital age.

Yet I am aware that many famous so-called "ghostly" photographs were actually easily explained accidents, relating to light, camera, flaws on the film, accidental double exposure etc. Is it not highly likely that Beowulf's photo is the result of some such process? And should we not explore the "mechanical" explanations before getting "spiritual" about all this?

Don't get me wrong - I am not for a moment knocking religion or those with faith (I have one myself) - but mystical and occult explanations, at this stage in C21st, are hardly helpful IMHO.

No one has yet come up with a universally accepted theory about the afterlife, so suggesting and defining "demons" is hardly going to appeal to more than a few. remember, natural phenomena such as lightning, weather and so on were not understood for centuries, but we do now know that there are solid reasons behind what happens - scientific reasons, in the sense that they are repeatable.

Enough from me.

Phil

[kensei]

As most of you probably know, what allegedly happened was a family moved into a house that was the scene of a mass murder, and they claimed to be accosted by ghosts which forced them to abandon the house only 28 days after moving in.

It was the husband, George Lutz. He hypnotized members of his family and planted false memories that would be triggered from certain cues. A recent documentary came out where the son, who is now an adult, has finally came forward to give his testimony. He said that George had books on the occult, satanism, witchcraft, hypnosis, and mind-control. When George went on TV, he was asked if he had any prior interest in the supernatural before the incident, to which he denied having any.

George wasn't the natural father. The mother was married with three children, got a divorce and then she met George in a bar, and then a year later she was not only marrying this man, but pushing to allow George to rename all the children and gain full parental custody over the children.

I suspect George hypnotized the mother, Kathy, to believe she was in love with him, most likely by planting false memories. The youngest two children were too young to be a threat and were easy to hypnosis where he planted false memories of positive feelings to, but the oldest child was 10, and old enough to realize that something was terribly wrong with all this, so George next targeted the boy.

George hypnotized him, planted horrific false memories in the boy, for the purpose to make the boy appear insane and dangerous, so the mother would agree to cast the boy out. What happened later, was George was bragging with his lawyer about what he's doing, the lawyer recommended this could make a good selling book, and realizing that this story could make him money, George escalated his abuse to several of the other family members.

George basically sat there and just watched this poor family he wormed into run around losing their minds, all the time anticipating a big fat paycheck from the book.

As bizarre as this sounds, this exact kind of behavior was actually a bit of a problem in America during the 1970's. Complaints of satanic cults started clustering in towns, enough where the FBI actually commissioned a task force who's sole purpose was to investigate and discover if there were actually satanists performing sacrifices, and they only thing they could discover were crack-pot "therapists" that were using hypnosis to plant false memories in people. These cons were all over the place, and still are, but it's not nearly as popular now then it was then. The most common type of this con is someone will say they can help you remember a past life, hypnotize you, and then plant false memories where you remember you were Joan of Arc! They also like to use alien abductions, and yes, even ghosts.

This post of yours' sprang to mind just a few hours ago when I was listening to the nightly radio show "Coast to Coast A.M." which deals primarily with paranormal subjects. They were interviewing a paranormal investigator and demonologist named John Zaffis who is of some stature in the field, and he mentioned how he just recently (past few weeks) had a meeting and a three-hour talk with Chris, one of the now grown children from the Amityville Horror case. He said they talked about all the things that really happened in the house, and how they were so different from how they were portrayed in books and movies. There was no mention whatsoever of George Lutz being behind it all, only that it was a real haunting that got a very bad treatment in media that led to many wrongly believing it to be a hoax. You were rather vague in your mentioning of a "recent documentary" featuring "the son." There were a handful of children in that family if memory serves. Can you provide the title of the documentary and the name of the particular son? Just curious as your post is a bit at odds with what I heard on the radio tonight.

[Futzbucket]

Why do we have to resort to "demons" as an explanation for "ghosts" and hauntings", when we have not exhausted the more simple and likely explanations - something mechanical, an unexplained 9as yet) natural scientific phenomenon.

I have refrained from responding in regard to Beowulf's picture because I don't feel qualified to comment on photographic evidence. I would not have done in the days of chemical film let alone in today's digital age.

Yet I am aware that many famous so-called "ghostly" photographs were actually easily explained accidents, relating to light, camera, flaws on the film, accidental double exposure etc. Is it not highly likely that Beowulf's photo is the result of some such process? And should we not explore the "mechanical" explanations before getting "spiritual" about all this?

Don't get me wrong - I am not for a moment knocking religion or those with faith (I have one myself) - but mystical and occult explanations, at this stage in C21st, are hardly helpful IMHO.

No one has yet come up with a universally accepted theory about the afterlife, so suggesting and defining "demons" is hardly going to appeal to more than a few. remember, natural phenomena such as lightning, weather and so on were not understood for centuries, but we do now know that there are solid reasons behind what happens - scientific reasons, in the sense that they are repeatable.

Enough from me.

Phil

Of course that makes more sense, but it's not fun to discuss.

[Futzbucket]

This post of yours' sprang to mind just a few hours ago when I was listening to the nightly radio show "Coast to Coast A.M." which deals primarily with paranormal subjects. They were interviewing a paranormal investigator and demonologist named John Zaffis who is of some stature in the field, and he mentioned how he just recently (past few weeks) had a meeting and a three-hour talk with Chris, one of the now grown children from the Amityville Horror case. He said they talked about all the things that really happened in the house, and how they were so different from how they were portrayed in books and movies. There was no mention whatsoever of George Lutz being behind it all, only that it was a real haunting that got a very bad treatment in media that led to many wrongly believing it to be a hoax. You were rather vague in your mentioning of a "recent documentary" featuring "the son." There were a handful of children in that family if memory serves. Can you provide the title of the documentary and the name of the particular son? Just curious as your post is a bit at odds with what I heard on the radio tonight.

It was called "My Amityville Horror", and it's from the perspective of Danny, the oldest son (there were 3 children; two sons and a daughter). Danny is convinced that he experienced a haunting, and while he admits he has no clue as to how and/or why, he does know that it was somehow directly connected to George.

My concept that George was using hypnosis is not what Danny thinks what happened, but the evidence is shown in this documentary. Danny was conditioned to be very sensitive to suggestion, which is actually shown in the movie.

For example; Danny goes to visit Lorrane Warren, the medium that was originally part of the initial investigation. Lorrane tested Danny to see if he was still conditioned by showing him two completely different roosters (a white one and a red one, obviously not related in any way), and she said to him, "These are identical twin roosters". To which, Danny replies, "Oh! Yeah!", completely accepting this.

It's like if I showed you a watermelon and an orange and said, "these are both apples".

[Phil H]

Of course that makes more sense, but it's not fun to discuss.

[Beowulf]

Btw, that picture is from a digital camera. There is no film.

I take a lot of pictures, cat pictures, pics around the house after I arrange new furniture stuff, no shadows around for years in my pics.

The smaller the picture is made the more obvious the shadow. In fact it goes down to the floor in front of the table.

[Futzbucket]

Beowulf, I've been comparing your photo with other people's photos of shadow people, and I have to say that your photo seems to me to be the most unique. What sets it apart is the candle.

I seriously think this photo would be a huge hit in the paranormal / supernatural community.

I'm fully assuming that you're being completely honest with this photo (and it's not some clever photoshop), but I can't wrap my head around that candle in how it's not effecting the shadow. The top, middle, and bottom of the shadow is the same level of darkness, as much as I can tell. This photo makes no sense at all.

The illumination from the candle should cause some reaction. The only thing I honestly can think, is this can not be a shadow. A bug on the lens, maybe?

This video is an excellent example of the effect caused by a bug on the lens...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oQE_v_ZgBI

...what do you think?

[Phil H]

I seriously think this photo would be a huge hit in the paranormal / supernatural community.

You mean among the credulous and the unpragmatic, I assume?

I'm fully assuming that you're being completely honest with this photo (and it's not some clever photoshop),

Whih is, of course, the first thing to be determined, before plumping for the occult or mystical explanation. ( I do not, I emphasise, for a moment believe that Beowulf is being anything but scrupulously honest.) But mechanical issues are the most likely explanation.

Sorry to be a party pooper.

Phil

[Futzbucket]

I seriously think this photo would be a huge hit in the paranormal / supernatural community.

You mean among the credulous and the unpragmatic, I assume?

I'm fully assuming that you're being completely honest with this photo (and it's not some clever photoshop),

Whih is, of course, the first thing to be determined, before plumping for the occult or mystical explanation. ( I do not, I emphasise, for a moment believe that Beowulf is being anything but scrupulously honest.) But mechanical issues are the most likely explanation.

Sorry to be a party pooper.

Phil

So...you don't think it's a bug?

[Phil H]

I honestly have no idea what it is - I simply sugget one should consider the mundane ahead of the metaphysical.

Phil

[Futzbucket]

Well, he seemed interested in a ghostly explanation, and I do love a good ghost story, so I shared what I know that's a hodgepodge overlay of everything I've read on the subject and presented it as if I actually believed it.

Which I don't, to be honest. I do love the concept though, and I've spent some time considering ghosts and how they would exist if they did. I find most things that fall under the category of the supernatural, paranormal, and the unexplained fascinating.

As for the connection between ghosts and demons, that dates well back in the belief of ghosts. Catholicism, for example, do believe in ghosts (purgatory), but you will never see or hear them. The only creatures in that "spirit realm" that can interact with you at all are angels and demons. An angel wouldn't show itself without some expressed purpose, so therefor this has to be a demon.

An interesting read is to check out ghost stories from other cultures. Every single culture has ghost stories. It wouldn't surprise me if it was possible for a person to just read ghost stories all their life, there are so many, and I find most to be rather clever and creative.

As for a mechanical issue, I'm not really sure about that. Mechanical issues tend to repeat themselves. Still, it's a solid concept. For a rational explanation, I'm going to go with "bug on lens".