Ghost captured on home security camera inside home

[Syne]

Litany of an evasive backpeddling hair-splitter:

"LEARN TO READ, MORON!"

"For christ's sake, learn to read."

"Learn to read."

"Already have, many times. Go read them again, dipshit."

"You also insist on conflating two different meanings of the word "compelling."

"Again, you fail to understand the difference between knowing and believing."

First, the word is backpedal. I'm not selling things on the black market, dipshit.
Second, backpedaling is going back on what you've previously said. You're the only one doing that.

And this post of yours is just your desperate attempt to avoid arguments you might finally be starting to understand enough to you know you can't refute.
You're just whining to avoid any further humiliation.

[Zinjanthropos]

And this post of yours is just your desperate attempt to avoid arguments you might finally be starting to understand enough to you know you can't refute.
You're just whining to avoid any further humiliation.

When you blend reality with superstition or things that appear unexplainable, then what you project is a facade, ignoring known facts. An outright fairytale. Make believe. (And if done right, a source of income)

Too many mistakes? Not doing his research? Overconfident? Can’t handle criticism? Doesn’t or refuses to recognize the value of skepticism? Gone too far and respect has waned, needs to humble himself and apologize for victimizing the general public.

Doubt if all of his believers would change their minds. In fact I think his believers are similar to those people who meet an celeb actor and talk to him/her like they’re really the characters they portray. I can’t imagine being at a convention with that crowd unless I was there to bilk them.

[Magical Realist]

It's strange that most people who don't believe in ghosts seem more disturbed by them than people who believe in them. All that grueling mental gymnastics and rhetorical sophistry aimed at little more than keeping them safely non-existent. Personally I haven't the slightest worry about ghosts even being a firm believer in them. They are pretty much like bees and wasps---they will only bother you if you bother them. Or as Jack Kerouac put it: "You get used to the dark, you realize the ghosts are all friendly."

For those of you new to this growing field of knowledge and research after seeing the 3 compelling videos I posted in this thread, here's a brief summary of various kinds of ghosts. I would add shadow persons or blobs as well, often witnessed at locations that are historically imprinted with negative emotions.

https://www.ghostsandgravestones.com/types-of-ghosts

[Zinjanthropos]

All that grueling mental gymnastics and rhetorical sophistry aimed at little more than keeping them safely non-existent.

Can’t remember if Syne or myself ever said ghosts were non-existent, we’re just saying the proof for them is non-existent. Prove ghosts exist and no problem. Don’t pretend they exist. I’ll be the first to welcome a poltergeist into my house if that ever happens.

Somehow I think we’re back to square one.

[Magical Realist]

Never believing in the evidence for ghosts is a surefire way of never believing in ghosts. It amounts to the same sort of denialism. It's like saying we never denied the Holocaust happened we just don't believe there is evidence for it. That's a distinction without a difference.

[Syne]

What MR is displaying is called "ideological purity." It's where you're so invested in your own religious/quasi-religious ideology that any deviation is seen as direct opposition... regardless of any shared ground. This is why he can't accept that I believe in ghosts. He's so inured in his delusions that he can't imagine someone both believing in ghosts AND not accepting everything that vaguely looks like one as evidence. He can't accept that someone could shared his belief in the existence of ghosts but be objective enough to understand the criteria of legal and scientific evidence.

He projects his own feeling of being disturbed by the naysayers... and we know this because his ideological purity demonstrates that he is more emotionally invested that anyone else here. People aren't usually emotionally invested in watching dumb tricks played on dumb animals. It's just entertaining... and a little interesting to see if the dumb animals ever figures out the trick (even when you do it slower, to show them).

[Magical Realist]

Oooo yeah. I'm such an ideologue! All I do is post evidence upon evidence of something but have no idea what it is other than a ghost. Just like I believe in other kinds of anomalous phenomena without knowing what it is, like uap and bigfoot and synchronicity. Can't really be much of an ideological anything if I have no belief about what it is now can I?

"An "ideological purist" is an individual who rigidly adheres to a specific set of beliefs or principles, often rejecting any compromise or deviation from their core ideology. They tend to be uncompromising, resistant to evidence that contradicts their beliefs, and may view those who hold differing views as morally corrupt or unaligned with the true principles of their ideology."

[Syne]

Exactly, you're ideology is that everything that seems the slightest bit mysterious or unknown cannot possibly have a mundane explanation. It all must be ghosts, UFOs, bigfoot, etc.. Now you're trying to play like Peter, denying your beliefs three times before the cock crows. But when you never allow for anything but paranormal explanations, it's very clear what your belief are.

You are the definition of "an individual who rigidly adheres to a specific set of beliefs" (e.g. everything the slightest bit anomalous must be paranormal), uncompromising (even to the point of denying definition of legal and scientific evidence and refusing to accept/understand simple distinctions, like between belief and knowledge), and "resistant to evidence that contradicts their beliefs" (to the point that your own threshold for being convinced otherwise is magnitudes higher than the threshold you think everyone else should have to be convinced).

But no doubt, your delusion is designed to make sure you are isolated from all this with your willful ignorance.

[Magical Realist]

Exactly, you're ideology is that everything that seems the slightest bit mysterious or unknown cannot possibly have a mundane explanation.

Nope...just the things I select that have no mundane explanations. Like the 3 videos I posted here that you could provide no mundane explanations for. I go thru probably 20 or 30 videos a week of unexplained phenomena and am always eliminating the mundane ones---the obvious CGIs, the floating balloons, the deformed tree trunk. It's part of the science of studying the anomalous. And it's why I always post the most compelling and convincing cases here which always piss you and Zin off.

even to the point of denying definition of legal and scientific evidence and refusing to accept/understand simple distinctions, like between belief and knowledge)

In other words not taking your anal-retentive hair spitting seriously. Yeah. I basically proved to you that videos are always powerful evidence in both crime conviction and science, giving lots of examples how they show how things actually happened. And I proved how we all gain all our knowledge of the world thru our 5 senses, which include looking at videos. There's really nothing more to say on it. You can keep pretending I didn't show that but it's a matter of record for anyone to look at.

But when you never allow for anything but paranormal explanations, it's very clear what your belief are.

That's because I've already analyzed the video before posting it and have eliminated all mundane explanations. I'm certainly not going to post one I think is questionable.

You are the definition of "an individual who rigidly adheres to a specific set of beliefs" (e.g. everything the slightest bit anomalous must be paranormal),

Nope..only the ones I have already concluded are paranormal. Not "everything." That's the virtue of having studied a phenomenon for like 20 years. You tend to get really good at finding the genuine ones and screening out the fakes.

[Zinjanthropos]

I've already analyzed the video before posting it and have eliminated all mundane explanations.

Maybe you can divulge the criteria used for selecting videos to post.

How did the street lights, Chinese lantern and Sasquatch videos get past your critical glance? Those three examples were so glaringly wrong that it suggests you have a major flaw in the analytics program. Don’t know how anyone can trust any conclusions made after your very poor analysis of these videos?

That’s a problem MR. The easiest vids to debunk actually got past some tight scrutiny.