Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
People hear what they want to hear.
Far more often and on a routine everyday basis, people hear what is actually there.
People hear what they want to hear.
Couple of inconsistencies here:Here's the audio of the voice from the car again. Clearly it is saying, "Why can't someone help me?"
And the live response of the rescue worker to that cry confirms it. This was no fake memory.
This is not a routine or everyday event. While you might be correct; it certainly does not apply here.Far more often and on a routine everyday basis, people hear what is actually there.
Couple of inconsistencies here:
- 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).- The video clearly says "No one knows where the voice came from." So, no one knows.
- 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.
- 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.
People can be wrong about what their senses tell them
The rescue workers swear they heard 'someone saying "help" ', yet you believe you hear "Why can't someone help me?"
This is not a routine or everyday event. While you might be correct; it certainly does not apply here.
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.
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....Ah yes. A quadrupal instance of group deja vue. That explains everything!
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.
MR, you say ''Clearly it is saying'' . Do you consider the audio was that good?Here's the audio of the voice from the car again. Clearly it is saying, "Why can't someone help me?"
How do you know the baby was unconscious when they were approaching the car?Yeah...that unconscious baby was crying for help.
Well, if they were all lying as you claim, then why would you still take them seriously?That explains the fake memory all four rescue workers misheard on that momentous occasion.
Yes, people are very often right; say 90% of the time. Then there is that 10% of the time that makes headlines.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.
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?It is for rescue workers, who are trained to heighten their senses of hearing and seeing in a rescue situation.
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.Yeah...that unconscious baby was crying for help. That explains the fake memory all four rescue workers misheard on that momentous occasion.
This is not a typical situation.Far more often people are right about what their senses tell them,
Nothing in my points suggests they did not hear what they say they heard, so I'm not sure what you're arguing here.especially when 3 other people and a body cam confirm hearing the same thing.
What they heard and what you heard are not the same. See how people report the same event differently?You realize don't you that "help me" is literally part of the sentence
"Why can't someone help me?"
Someone "coulda" recited Dickens. If it's not in-evidence, then why are you postulating unknown events?Plus there could have been several calls for help beyond just that one audio clip.
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.It is for rescue workers, who are trained to heighten their senses of hearing and seeing in a rescue situation.
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.
Ah. So a toddler saying "help" or "help me" would qualify as "that kind of stuff.""Help me. Help me now. That kind of stuff."
Ah. So a toddler saying "help" or "help me" would qualify as "that kind of stuff."
See - a simple explanation.
Yes, they were there. And we are told what their sworn testimony is.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..
People do embellish stories, adding details as they recount it multiple times.
Yep. Very young children have high pitched voices.No..they said it was a woman's voice
How do you know that?and besides the baby was unconscious.
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.
It is more* plausible that a toddler sounds like a woman than that a ghost was in the car calling for help.LOL! A baby's voice sounds nothing like a woman's voice.
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'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.
Correct. They do NOT know if the toddler was conscious when they heard the cries for help. Your assumption that it was is unfounded.It's what the rescue workers said. The baby was unconscious when they found it.