There's no evidence on the video of any voice coming from the car. There's no way to tell the source of any of the sound in the video.The voice is heard coming from the car.
What a small mind you must have to think that there's no other explanation. Can't you think of anything? Really? A ghost is the only explanation you can think of? Figures.That's what the four rescue workers testify to. There is no other explanation but a ghost vocalizing the cry of help from the car.
Who cares what you think? You're been given rigorous studies that show the opposite. Your beliefs count for exactly nothing in this discussion.I think the vividness of the memory overrides any alterations that may occur in talking about it.
People's memories get muddled when they talk about them to other people. That's what the evidence shows. And not only that. It seems very likely that the more often you bring a memory to mind - even on your own - the more likely is to become corrupted. It follows that the more often you tell your ghost story or about the time you thought you saw a UFO, the less likely you are to accurately remember what happened.I mean people don't just make up memories just because they talk about them with other people.
Only a fool will stand in defiance of a huge body of scientific literature on the fallibility of memory and perception. Stop playing the fool, MR.It's amusing how far skeptics will go to debunk the paranormal though, attacking human perception first and now memory. It's a really desperate ploy to debunk imo..
Which studies? Citations, please. (I don't for a minute believe you've read any studies on this.)Studies show only minor alterations in the details of the memory, not the entire experience itself.
There are many examples of proven false-memory, wherein people vividly and emotionally remember things that demonstrably never happened. These include experiences like repeated child abuse, rape and alien abduction.I mean one may be manipulated by someone to remember a blue instead of a black car, but nobody is going to be manipulated into thinking no accident occurred. The memory itself persists due to it's emotional vividness.
Re-posting the video won't make it any clearer than before. There's no clear voice calling for help or saying what you claim you hear. There's some evidence of faulty perception right there - on your part.Here's the audio of the voice from the car again. Clearly it is saying, "Why can't someone help me?"
The rescue worker's words confirm that he heard something from somewhere. Nothing more.And the live response of the rescue worker to that cry confirms it.
I don't say what they experienced, because I don't know. There's not enough information for you or I to know. What I do know for sure is that there's nowhere near enough here to say they experienced a ghost.I trust what they say they experienced over what you say they experienced.
Again with the fixation about lying? Why do you keep bringing that up? Do you secretly think they might be lying? Do you know something I don't?They have no reason to lie.
There's no way to tell from the available evidence. The best that can be said is that it is very likely they are mistaken if they think they heard a ghost.And they are unlikely to be mistaken.
Says the Leading Cheerleader of the Woo Squad.You otoh have an agenda to debunk. And that's a bias I can't trust.
Wait. Wait! Is this you doubting my personal testimony of my own experience? According to you, this ought to be trusted beyond all else.No you don't.
So what if I have?* How does that impact on the strength of the evidence you've put forward? Why are my beliefs at all relevant to the shoddy nature of your evidence?You have an agenda to debunk because you don't want to believe in the paranormal.
How do you know? You don't know them.They're random office workers working in a building. There is no agenda for them.
Maybe, maybe not. You don't know them.They are simply telling us about experiences they had while working there.
They thought they heard a cry for help from the car.They heard the cry for help from the car.
Even the video you posted had to re-wind the tape and explicitly point out to viewers where this supposed "cry" is meant to be heard. Without these instructions, there's no obvious cry to be heard on the video. There's no good evidence that there's even a cry on the recording.I hear a cry for help because that's what's recorded and that's what was heard by the four rescue workers.
All questions are "made up".I don't have to know the answers to your made up questions.
Ba bowm! Sorry, you are incorrect ... about the second bit. You're right about the first bit. So?I have only to present compelling evidence for the paranormal. Which is what I've done.
They'd have to be extraordinarily reliable for us to deduce a ghost from the available evidence here, and they demonstrably aren't extraordinarily reliable. So.Mistakes have occurred. But eyewitness accounts and human perception are still very reliable.
To tell the truth, I can't recall. It's been so long with you posting this crap. Probably you're wrong, but I'm not going to go searching through the archives.You've never debunked a single one of my paranormal posts.
Magical Realist:
I don't say what they experienced, because I don't know. There's not enough information for you or I to know. What I do know for sure is that there's nowhere near enough here to say they experienced a ghost.
Maybe you'll turn up something better than a 2 minute dubious video, but I doubt it.
Again with the fixation about lying? Why do you keep bringing that up? Do you secretly think they might be lying? Do you know something I don't?
There's no way to tell from the available evidence. The best that can be said is that it is very likely they are mistaken if they think they heard a ghost.
Wait. Wait! Is this you doubting my personal testimony of my own experience? According to you, this ought to be trusted beyond all else.
So what if I have?* How does that impact on the strength of the evidence you've put forward? Why are my beliefs at all relevant to the shoddy nature of your evidence?
(* and I note that you're just making shit up about what I supposedly believe, to suit your own biases. Hint: if you want to know what I want or don't want, try asking me.)
How do you know? You don't know them.
Maybe, maybe not. You don't know them.
They thought they heard a cry for help from the car.
Even the video you posted had to re-wind the tape and explicitly point out to viewers where this supposed "cry" is meant to be heard. Without these instructions, there's no obvious cry to be heard on the video. There's no good evidence that there's even a cry on the recording.
All questions are "made up".
You really ought to know the answers to basic, sensible questions before you go around making a fool of yourself by claiming ghostly activity, you know.
They'd have to be extraordinarily reliable for us to deduce a ghost from the available evidence here, and they demonstrably aren't extraordinarily reliable. So.
To tell the truth, I can't recall. It's been so long with you posting this crap. Probably you're wrong, but I'm not going to go searching through the archives.
What's certain is that you've never made the beginnings of a good case for anything paranormal with your posts on the topic. At best, you've posted a lot of inconclusive stuff which could have any number of plausible non-paranormal explanations.
And yet you yourself had no compunctions about offering your own interpretation, different from the testimony in the video.We go by what they say they experienced instead of by what you the armchair skeptic says about it. Every time.
Sure.Yeah..four eyewitnesses and a body cam are extraordinary evidence for the voice. It doesn't get any better than that.
And that testimony changed several times. Which one was correct?We have the eyewitness testimony of the four rescue workers and the audio of the body cam.
OK. They said they heard a high pitched voice cry for help. Simple explanation - the toddler cried for help.They were there. We go by what they say they experienced instead of by what you the armchair skeptic says about it. Every time.
A little help from a protecting angel goes a long way:How is that you get to offer your own interpretation, but you start name-calling when anyone else does it?
I think James has MR in a test tube, studying. And, James if your reading this...would you like to make any predictions resulting from these studies.I do find Iconstantly have to cut you a little slack to save you from autobans, but that's okay.
Yeah..four eyewitnesses and a body cam are extraordinary evidence for the voice. It doesn't get any better than that.
Oh autobans!A little help from a protecting angel goes a long way:
Is this not the same event?
Is this not the same event?
So everything we said applies here. So that was easy.
Unless there was something you wanted to draw our attention to.
No, it really isn't, in these circumstances.We have the eyewitness testimony of the four rescue workers and the audio of the body cam. That's enough to know that a voice was heard calling out from the car for help.
"Hey, Tyler, did you hear some kind of sound when we were looking around the car?"Lying is your go to explanation. Either intentionally or unintentionally. Like how the 4 rescue workers got together and hyped up a story about a voice.
None of them even wants to commit to the whole ghost thing in the CNN interview. See how uncomfortable they are about having that rubbish pushed on them?They were there. We go by what they say they experienced instead of by what you the armchair skeptic says about it. Every time.
My personal belief, whatever it may be, is utterly irrelevant in evaluating the strength or weakness of the available evidence.You're a dogmatic armchair skeptic who doesn't want to believe in the paranormal. If you aren't then you are doin an awful good imitation of one.
How many people work in that particular office? (You have no idea, I assume.) Only a subset of those who work there are putting their names and reputations on the line by telling ghost stories. So, no, these aren't random people. They are self-selecting believers in ghosts. Nobody interviewed the other workers who think their stories are bullshit.They're just random people working in an office. Office workers aren't hired on their belief in the paranormal.
No office worker ever wanted his 15 minutes of fame, either, I suppose.Neither do you. But I know these are innocent people without an agenda like you have. That's what we find among office workers. There is no conspiracy of office workers bent on proving the paranormal.
There's some noise on the body cam, or else it picked up somebody's voice from somewhere nearby, or .... There are so many possibilities, none of which is ruled out.They heard a cry for help. You can hear it on the body cam.
Can you enhance the sound? It's very unclear that anything is being said.LOL! I can hear what the audio is saying on the first play of it. The fact that you can't has to do with your desire not to hear it. That's the skeptic bias working overtime.
You don't worry enough. You seem happy to be just another fool on the internet.You worry too much about how I look.
Really? Doesn't get any better? This is the Best of All Possible Worlds when it comes to proof of ghosts, is it? No wonder nobody takes ghosts and their believers seriously.Yeah..four eyewitnesses and a body cam are extraordinary evidence for the voice. It doesn't get any better than that.
Mostly, because there's so little to go on when you post one of your cut-and-paste videos, it's impossible to do more than to show that reasonable doubt exists about your wild claims. Debunking would, in most cases, require proper examination of the circumstances, which would require going to the places, interviewing the witnesses, investigating all the relevant circumstances thoroughly, and so on.Right..so you've never debunked a single one of my posted paranormal accounts. Tks for confirming that.
Magical Realist:
No, it really isn't, in these circumstances.
"Hey, Tyler, did you hear some kind of sound when we were looking around the car?"
"I did hear something."
"It sounded like a voice to me. What do you think?"
"It could have been a voice, maybe. I'm not sure. Let's ask Bill if he heard it."
So, the 4 rescue workers get together and discuss it. Even if a few of them aren't sure, they don't want to hurt Tyler's feelings (or whoever said he heard a voice first), so they give a half-hearted committal to the story.
Next thing that happens is the media descends and suddenly the four of them are on CNN being quizzed about the story on national TV. What are they going to do at that point? Back down? Talk it down? Is any of them going to break ranks and now publically say that he isn't sure what he heard? The expectation from the press is that these guys are there to tell the ghost story, and the pressure on them to do just that is significant at this time.
Is Bill going to let Tyler down by saying, "Well, actually I have my doubts as to whether there was a voice."? Unlikely.
Look at those four guys being interviewed on CNN. At least three of them look uncomfortable. How did it get to this, they must be thinking.
None of them even wants to commit to the whole ghost thing in the CNN interview. See how uncomfortable they are about having that rubbish pushed on them?
My personal belief, whatever it may be, is utterly irrelevant in evaluating the strength or weakness of the available evidence.
Skepticism, by the way, is all about not falling into the traps of bias and dogmatism.
How many people work in that particular office? (You have no idea, I assume.) Only a subset of those who work there are putting their names and reputations on the line by telling ghost stories. So, no, these aren't random people. They are self-selecting believers in ghosts. Nobody interviewed the other workers who think their stories are bullshit.
No office worker ever wanted his 15 minutes of fame, either, I suppose.
There's some noise on the body cam, or else it picked up somebody's voice from somewhere nearby, or .... There are so many possibilities, none of which is ruled out.
Can you enhance the sound? It's very unclear that anything is being said.
Also, it seems that even some of your fellow ghost hunters disagree with you about what this supposed voice is supposedly saying. What does that tell you?
You don't worry enough. You seem happy to be just another fool on the internet.
Really? Doesn't get any better? This is the Best of All Possible Worlds when it comes to proof of ghosts, is it? No wonder nobody takes ghosts and their believers seriously.
Mostly, because there's so little to go on when you post one of your cut-and-paste videos, it's impossible to do more than to show that reasonable doubt exists about your wild claims. Debunking would, in most cases, require proper examination of the circumstances, which would require going to the places, interviewing the witnesses, investigating all the relevant circumstances thoroughly, and so on.
It seems that you expect people to believe your ghosts stories when you, personally, put no work at all into trying to verify them. Something that is put forward with no effort can often be safely dismissed with no effort.
Skeptics have the advantage of consulting science on the metaphysical aspects of reality. But unless persuasive evidence of a supernatural occurrence is provided to begin with, I doubt if anyone will take the time and effort to debunk the "story". There are more interesting phenomena to consider, such as "entanglement", of which there is direct evidence.I simply post the evidence as given in the accounts. It's up to the skeptics to debunk it if they can. Or else just bitch about what it isn't, which isn't debunking at all.
Great. So:Yes...it really is sufficient. Multiple eyewitnesses corroborating the voice and an audio of the voice being responded to in real time.
You are such a hypocrite.And that's an insult meant to disparage me. Do you always resort to ad homs like this?
You are such a hypocrite.
What makes you a hypocrite is that you cast insults about like confetti, then cry foul when you perceive insults directed at you.Another ad hom...You guys should start a club.
What makes you a hypocrite is that you cast insults about like confetti, then cry foul when you perceive insults directed at you.
Grow up.
You're insulting people AND you're a hypocrite about it.Says the one who just insulted me..