Proof of the supernatural

[Kittamaru]

The voice is recorded from a policeman's body cam! "Why won't someone help?" Policeman even responds to voice. The voice occurs at the 1:58 increment. Note audio is always going to be less clear and loud than really being there. Obviously the voice and what it said was clear to the rescuers. Audio analysts should clean up the background noise and amplify the voice to really hear it. Solid proof the voice was REAL!

http://www.reddit.com/r/Paranormal/comments/2zbwga/can_someone_isolate_the_audio_from_158205_its/

https://soundcloud.com/worstedashame/rparanormalmichael_bloomberg


If you listen to both the original and the soundcloud "cleaned up" audio, there are five distinct sounds -
The first is short and soft, sounds a lot like "Why".
The second has a sharp start consistent with a hard consonant like "duh" or "buh", and the second part is a buzzing sort of noise - I hear "doesn't".
The third starts off softer, with a soft "s" sound - definitely sounds like "some", then the next part is muffled, but has a definite hard edge to the end - body or thing both would fit in there.
The fourth is choppy and quick - I can hear both "help" and "flip" out of it.
The fifth is really muffled, single-syllable - I can hear "her", "him", and "it" out of it.

All told, I am hearing:
Why doesn't somebody help her
Why doesn't somebody help him
Why doesn't somebody flip it

None of which is particularly consistent with someone inside the car calling for help. Now, I don't know what kind of microphones these body-cams have - if they are unidirectional / beam style microphones, then it HAD to have come from around the car. If it's an omni-directional microphone (which would make sense on a device meant to capture what is going on around you) it could have come from anywhere within the front and sides of the officer.

EDIT - reading some of the comments - having read someone say they hear "Do you need any help here"... I can sort of hear that too...

EDIT 2 - Okay, I have an experiment I'm going to try ...

I'm going to play the looped recording for my niece (6 years old) and my two nephews (12 and 14) - none of them watch the news/read the newspaper and, to my knowledge, none of them have had any discussions about this story. I will not tell them what the recording is, and will ask them what they hear.

 

[Magical Realist]

https://soundcloud.com/worstedashame/rparanormalmichael_bloomberg


If you listen to both the original and the soundcloud "cleaned up" audio, there are five distinct sounds -
The first is short and soft, sounds a lot like "Why".
The second has a sharp start consistent with a hard consonant like "duh" or "buh", and the second part is a buzzing sort of noise - I hear "doesn't".
The third starts off softer, with a soft "s" sound - definitely sounds like "some", then the next part is muffled, but has a definite hard edge to the end - body or thing both would fit in there.
The fourth is choppy and quick - I can hear both "help" and "flip" out of it.
The fifth is really muffled, single-syllable - I can hear "her", "him", and "it" out of it.

All told, I am hearing:
Why doesn't somebody help her
Why doesn't somebody help him
Why doesn't somebody flip it

None of which is particularly consistent with someone inside the car calling for help. Now, I don't know what kind of microphones these body-cams have - if they are unidirectional / beam style microphones, then it HAD to have come from around the car. If it's an omni-directional microphone (which would make sense on a device meant to capture what is going on around you) it could have come from anywhere within the front and sides of the officer.

EDIT - reading some of the comments - having read someone say they hear "Do you need any help here"... I can sort of hear that too...

That audio sample is too indistinct to me to make out. I prefer the original body cam audio. Note there was no crowd of bystanders this voice could come from. It was out on a deserted farm road. Just rescuers and firemen. None of THEM would shout "Why won't someone help?" when they were all gathered around the car trying to help.

 

[Kittamaru]

That audio sample is too indistinct to me to make out. I prefer the original body cam audio. Note there was no crowd of bystanders this voice could come from. It was out on a deserted farm road. Just rescuers and firemen. None of THEM would shout "Why won't someone help?" when they were all gathered around the car trying to help.

If you watch the video from the start, the road was hardly what I would call deserted - there were several vehicles stopped along the bridge/road, many of which did not have the markings (or license plates) of Police, Fire, or EMT vehicles.

 

[Magical Realist]

If you watch the video from the start, the road was hardly what I would call deserted - there were several vehicles stopped along the bridge/road, many of which did not have the markings (or license plates) of Police, Fire, or EMT vehicles.

All I see is a white police car and something looking like an emergency vehicle. Besides, even if there WAS a woman bystander on the bridge, why would she shout "why won't someone help?" to rescue workers in the act of helping? Doesn't make sense.

 

[Magical Realist]

Here's a video of a ghost investigation with three figures that materialize and then disappear on the staircase. What do you think? Looks real to me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...al-investigation-notorious-haunted-house.html

 

[Kittamaru]

Here's a video of a ghost investigation with three figures that materialize and then disappear on the staircase. What do you think? Looks real to me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...al-investigation-notorious-haunted-house.html

Unless they are also claiming there were "dozens of spirit orbs" floating around... then I call bull. That's dust, plain and simple - you can see the reflections the entire video all over the place - unless, of course, one wants to claim a ghost came from the one sitting guys crotch

All I see is a white police car and something looking like an emergency vehicle. Besides, even if there WAS a woman bystander on the bridge, why would she shout "why won't someone help?" to rescue workers in the act of helping? Doesn't make sense.

Couldn't tell you why they would - people do stuff that doesn't make sense all the time. Case in point, there's an investigation going on in Harrisburg now where a female cop tazed someone five times, then shot them twice in the back while they were face down on the ground drooling

 

[Magical Realist]

Unless they are also claiming there were "dozens of spirit orbs" floating around... then I call bull. That's dust, plain and simple - you can see the reflections the entire video all over the place - unless, of course, one wants to claim a ghost came from the one sitting guys crotch

I see three white smoky figures that appear lined up on the stairs for about 5 seconds and then who disappear. I see the orbs too, but they appear mostly to be dust particles.

Couldn't tell you why they would - people do stuff that doesn't make sense all the time. Case in point, there's an investigation going on in Harrisburg now where a female cop tazed someone five times, then shot them twice in the back while they were face down on the ground drooling

Wow..that's terrible. What was she thinking? I hope this is addressed in an investigation.

 

[spidergoat]

Here's a video of a ghost investigation with three figures that materialize and then disappear on the staircase. What do you think? Looks real to me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...al-investigation-notorious-haunted-house.html

I don't see anything. Not that I would trust a "ghost hunter" any more than a used car salesman.

 

[garbonzo]

Science has reasoned and shown that although some things may be unexplained, it does not mean its supernatural.

Unexplained IS supernatural.

Supernatural events cannot be reproduced on demand.

Source? Stop labeling "supernatural events" together. It's as bad as saying "Male Asians have small genitalia." All supernatural means is that an event is unexplained.

Supernatural events are generally observed or concluded by "individuals" that have some manner of befuddled thinking processes in their brain.

Source?

Science has dragged mankind out of the mire where he once viewed rivers, mountains, the Sun, the Moon etc, as supernatural.

So you agree that these things were once considered supernatural? Therefore supernatural = unexplained.

 

[garbonzo]

You're searching for transcendence.

I kind of like that.

 

[garbonzo]

From the point of view of laymen, there isn't a great deal of difference.

Seen from the street, both science and religion are arguments from authority.

There's lots of grand talk about "The Scientific Method" and "reason", but whatever justifications that scientists possess for the counter-intuitive things they tell the public are largely opaque to those who lack specialized training.

Laypeople are in no position to question anything said to them in the name of 'science'. Their doing so is totally unwelcome. It gets people labeled "deniers" and flamed into smoking lumps of charcoal.

The analogy with "heathen" and "heretic" should be obvious.

Thank you! This is EXACTLY what I was saying! None of us on this thread have read up on every little thing we believe in and the intricacies of that theory or thing we believe in. To say we need to use the scientific method for everything we believe in is bunk. Don't get me wrong, the scientific method is great, but it's like passing that last test. Just because I don't have a license doesn't mean I don't know how to drive, but it's good evidence that I do once I get it.

 

[Kittamaru]

I see three white smoky figures that appear lined up on the stairs for about 5 seconds and then who disappear. I see the orbs too, but they appear mostly to be dust particles.

Wow..that's terrible. What was she thinking? I hope this is addressed in an investigation.

Watch the beginning of the video - from just before the one second mark, right side near the... whatever that door is. First dust particle there. It floats across to mid-scene and down under the view of the camera.
About 6 seconds in, more dust is seen floating up from under view towards the right side of the screen.
At 12 seconds, a few bits of dust fly from the bottom right corner across to the top middle of the scene.
From the 15 second mark, at least half a dozen distinct "orbs" are visible, all moving randomly but in the same general direction.
18 second mark, first set of "glowing bits" are visible on the stairs

It continues on like that... it's just dust, reflecting the infrared light back into the lens.

 

[garbonzo]

I'm going to play the looped recording for my niece (6 years old) and my two nephews (12 and 14) - none of them watch the news/read the newspaper and, to my knowledge, none of them have had any discussions about this story. I will not tell them what the recording is, and will ask them what they hear.

Keep us updated.

 

[spidergoat]

Unexplained IS supernatural.

Every time you open your mouth, you make the world stupider.

 

[garbonzo]

No it's not.


Nope.
The definition of "unknown" is "not currently known".


No.


Did you not?
"It's NOT my fault that people have been widely using and labeling the word WRONGLY."
Who else uses the word the way you do? Anyone?


And, like I said earlier, the term is actually UAP (because of the reasons mentioned in the relevant post).


No it doesn't. As previously explained.


Nice try but "unknown" and "beyond understanding" have completely different meanings.
Neither of which explicitly means "supernatural".


Take a look at all of my (and everyone else's) previous posts on this subject.

I don't know who else uses the word correctly, all I know is that it is correct according to the definitions available to me and reason.

The definition of "beyond understanding" is "currently non-understandable". Just like paddo said, things we know are natural today were supernatural before humans understood it. That means things in the supernatural category can be moved once better understood and verified.

I don't care what the correct term to use in the military is now, I'm talking about the UFO acronym which was and still is widely misused.

"Unknown" and "beyond understanding" is the same.

 

[paddoboy]

Unexplained IS supernatural.

No it's not. Unexplained is simply unexplained at this time.

Source? Stop labeling "supernatural events" together. It's as bad as saying "Male Asians have small genitalia." All supernatural means is that an event is unexplained.

You seem confused.
Let me explain. Unexplained means unexplained.
We have no evidence for supernatural events that can be reproduced on demand.
Therefor it's logical to conclude that "supernatural events" as generally perceived and defined, are just unexplained events.

Source?

Supernatural events cannot be reproduced on demand.
It is generally accepted that anyone claiming 'supernatural" is either delusional, has suffered an illusion, or is simply mistaken and confused

So you agree that these things were once considered supernatural? Therefore supernatural = unexplained.

No, they were explained as supernatural at those times.
We know better now and can assign more logical natural based reasoning and logic to them.

 

[garbonzo]

Actually almost all those university studies turned up evidence for esp and precognition. The Princeton PEAR project was a famous one and reached some really amazing conclusions on the reality of such phenomenon: http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

Here's the eyewitness accounts of a haunting involving a research team from UCLA:

And here's a scientific investigation into paranormal rappings. Note the conclusion of the study:

http://www.spr.ac.uk/news/colvin-acoustic-properties-poltergeist-rapping

So where's all these field studies of scientists going to haunted houses and proving them to not be haunted? I don't think they exist, for the simple reason that they don't want to discredit themselves as believers in spooks. Scientists are basically more concerned with protecting their sterling reputations than with finding the truth in this area.

I don't know how anyone can NOT believe in these kinds of supernatural events after seeing that video....

Every time you open your mouth, you make the world stupider.

Right back at you, buddy.

 

[garbonzo]

We have no evidence for supernatural events that can be reproduced on demand.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The point is, we shouldn't label all supernatural events as having specific traits.

Therefor it's logical to conclude that "supernatural events" as generally perceived and defined, are just unexplained events.

We agree! Now tell spidergoat, Daecon, Bells, and Dywyddyr that.

Supernatural events cannot be reproduced on demand.

How do you know? Are you talking about only the events you know about? That's subjective. You can't take state an objective fact like that.

It is generally accepted that anyone claiming 'supernatural" is either delusional, has suffered an illusion, or is simply mistaken and confused

Yeah, it is also "generally accepted" that praise be to Allah in the Middle East.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

No, they were explained as supernatural at those times.
We know better now and can assign more logical natural based reasoning and logic to them.

That's what I just said...So I'm going to take that as a yes. It was more relating to Dywyddyr's argument anyway, but thanks for backing me up.

 

[Magical Realist]

Supernatural events cannot be reproduced on demand.

Sure they can. Many paranormal investigation groups employ a technique of provoking spirits into activity either by challenging them or mocking. Responses are known to occur such as loud bangs and scratches.

It is generally accepted that anyone claiming 'supernatural" is either delusional, has suffered an illusion, or is simply mistaken and confused

You don't get out much do you? The majority of people believe in ghosts:

"This Halloween may be filled with trick-or-treaters in scary costumes, but for more than one in five Americans, some costumes might be real: they told CBS News pollsters they have seen a real-life ghost in some form. And whether or not they've seen one, even more Americans believe that ghosts actually do exist.

Nearly half of Americans say they believe in ghosts, or that the dead can return in certain places and situations.

DO YOU BELIEVE IN GHOSTS?

Yes

48%
No

45%

Women are more likely to say they believe in ghosts than are men: 56 percent of women believe, while 38 percent of men do. More than half of younger Americans aged 18 to 45 believe in ghosts; those over 45 are less likely.

More than one in five Americans says they have seen a ghost themselves, or have felt themselves to be in the presence of one.

HAVE YOU PERSONALLY SEEN OR FELT THE PRESENCE OF A GHOST?

Yes

22%

No

77%

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-majority-believe-in-ghosts/

 

[paddoboy]

From the point of view of laymen, there isn't a great deal of difference.

I'm sure most lay people would be able to see the difference between science and religion based on the claims you are referring to.

Seen from the street, both science and religion are arguments from authority.

That is crap. Science proceeds on evidence and predictive ability.
Religion proceeds on myth and the obscure writings, in an obscure book, written in an obscure age.

There's lots of grand talk about "The Scientific Method" and "reason", but whatever justifications that scientists possess for the counter-intuitive things they tell the public are largely opaque to those who lack specialized training.

So??
I'm sure if all these "public" who lack specialized training, were to be confronted with scientific evidence and reasoning of a particular traumatising event that would affect or extinguish their lives, they would encompass the scientific solution with open arms if it were available.

Laypeople are in no position to question anything said to them in the name of 'science'. Their doing so is totally unwelcome. It gets people labeled "deniers" and flamed into smoking lumps of charcoal.

Bullshit. I question my doctor whenever I have the need to go to him for a particular medical problem. I don't act like some nutty crank and ignore what he tells me and infer he does not know what he is talking about.

The analogy with "heathen" and "heretic" should be obvious.

All the scientific method asks for is evidence. All the scientific method rejects is claims contrary to evidence. :shrug: