It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
@Thunderfinger, there is a logic in quantum physics or else Schrödinger wouldn't have been able to give us his famous mathematical formula which supports pretty much all of physics and chemistry. If quantum physics had no internal logic, we wouldn't be able to make successful predictions based on it. However, I will concede that it's not a deterministic Newtonian logic we're quite familiar with from every day experience. Anyone willing to study quantum physics has to find that logic first and for some, that is the proverbial step too far that'll keep them from seeking more knowledge in the field of quantum physics. Some of the great quantum physicists have hyperbolically proclaimed that quantum physics "makes no sense", but that doesn't mean it can't be logical. ;-)
Exhibit D: Lord Combermere's Ghost at Combermere Abbey, 1891, taken while his funeral was taking place some four miles away:
More details can be found here:
http://www.combermereabbey.co.uk/history-restoration/ghosts-the-paranormal/
You keep feeding us pictures, we will give you the same bull. Pictures can be faked; this isn't particularly high-tech stuff so yes, even in those days they could be faked. Optical effects, probably inside the camera at the level of the photographic plates, mustn't be excluded as a possibility either.
Let me give you something else to think about. Say we're dealing with ghosts. Remarkable thing then that they appear in the shape and form of the body owner when the body itself is physically present at the burial. Even if I were willing - and I'm not - to believe in something elusive as a "soul", surely it wouldn't don a beard or wear clothes. At the very least you can concede that x in the following equation,
THE LIVING - THE CORPSE = x,
wouldn't possess any visual features of the living at all. An image requires light to be reflected on matter and subsequently directed onto our retinas. So the ghost is real matter? Either that or the ghost in your pictures is a light source of his own, but then he himself would have to convert some kind of energy into light energy. Is it heat, electricity, nuclear power? And before anyone brings up the usual "low temperatures" in the room where ghosts have been spotted, let me tell you that such heat, as it was evenly spread in the room, cannot be usefully converted to other forms of energy anymore. That would completely defy the second law of thermodynamics, which is reasonably absolute.
We must then conclude that the ghost is either a material object, which begs the question what's in the coffin - unless matter in the ghost world can multiply - or the ghost has found a way to go against the second law of thermodynamics, which even the universe itself cannot conceivably accomplish.
Let me produce some more things to think about:
- why are we only seeing ghosts of people worthy of ghosting out? Or of spoiled pets? Where are my pictures of the ghosts of cows, sheep, bees and spiders? Oh, and is there a time limit for ghosting out? I mean, where are the ghosts of dead cavemen? Or dead dinosaurs? Come on, we've GOT to have dinoghosts somewhere?! A dead T-Rex reappearing where it once roamed?
- if ghosts possess the physical features of the deceased, as the pictures want us to think, surely they must also have vocal chords and a mind. Surely they can talk and reason. Surely not all of them drop down for a quick, silent, scary hello but instead grab the opportunity to remain an active, loving and caring member of the family. No such reports, right? Surely at least one of them has tried to sit down with Dr Phil or Oprah to discuss their experiences.
- where are the dead dude's legs? His hands are there. Does he get off on a selective resurrection or reappearance?
- is it me or is that ghost rather small in comparison to the furniture? Are ghosts getting washed before they come back, shrinking in the process?
- I have lost people I truly care about. I'm still in the house where one of them died. Why am I unfortunate enough to never see their ghosts? Who decides which ghosts come back and which stay dead and buried? Is there a curse involved? Am I being punished for "not believing"? When I was six I still believed. But my great-grandfather never showed up again, no matter how hard I begged him to. And he was a kind man so I'm sure his ghost would likewise have been very kind. Oops, he skipped my bedroom.
- since ghosts can obviously break the laws of physics, one is led to believe that they can transport themselves anywhere they like, at any moment of their desire. Surely dead humanoids from planet ZygZag in the constellation of Zorax B1 are also entitled to a miraculous reappearance, totally unbound by the laws of physics. Why am I never seeing fancy YouTube videos of dead tentacled aliens popping up from the realm of the dead?
Returning to my equation above, x = 0. It's that simple.
I think that the spectre is fairly clear to see. There's even a arrow in one picture to point him out. It's a famous picture, liker all of the exhibits I have shown so far have been. Well unless he was a known nudist during his life I'm not sure why he should be naked in the picture. He appears as he was in his mortal life in what was acknowledged as his favourite chair. I'm afraid that I'm not buying into this clothes and naked ghost theory of yours either.
A quick look at the hand reveals that the figure appears to be in exactly the same pose in each of the photos.
Interesting on the stage trick - not heard of that one before.
I agree that it's not the best picture in the world.
I think they all are the same picture though. Just different prints of the same thing, so there is no reason for the hand to move, if that is what you are referring to there.
You don't notice him right away. The thing with clothes is that they are human construct a ghost would not need. It is not like the police would arrest one for indecency. In fact why would a ghost have the same appearance as the person he was in real life? Why would the spirit be a carbon copy of the body? And it is NOT a theory, merely a fair question. Our body is the way it is because of a number of functions. These functions do not exist for a ghost. Same with clothes. The ghost has no reason to wear anything. He's not going to get cold. He has no body to protect. He has no longer an age, no need for eyes and ears or legs... This picture is a complete cultural construction. Why is the afterlife so darn mundane?
I can "get" the concept of a spirit which represents our persona after we die, some sort of time echo with the life energy that we had. (it is true that our bodies do have electical energy within them), I dont agree with it but I understand the concept. I dont understand the concept of including the clothing. Cotton, wool etc , just a set of woven threads. Why should they become ghosts? Again, it just shows a lack of thought and insight. Ghost Y fronts? ghost knickers? Ghosts nappies for babies?
My own trousers although not haunted, does have a monster living within ! ;)
clothing and reluctance to be photographed .
Question: are the clothes ghosts too? Ghosts of clothes so to speak. Funny how they all seem to need them in afterlife. Sometimes hoods too according to the monk picture you posted here.
I think one appears in ghost form how one appeared in their life.
able to communicate with a medium.
Do you live a Standard or Special Edition life? ;)
But why? And you don't appear in your life the same way everyday. Do ghosts have ghostly wardrobes?
Here's two links showcasing just how easy it has always been, even as early as the mid-1800s, to employ photographic trickery:
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2012/aug/29/classic-faked-photographs-in-pictures
http://listverse.com/2013/07/11/10-famous-photos-of-the-paranormal-that-arent/
And a retort to the Lord Combermere silliness:
http://www.angelsghosts.com/lord_combermere_ghost_picture
Of course logic must be dispensed with in this case as the story is great for tourism at Combermere Abbey. Which reminds me of another reason these "ghost" stories persist in such frequency, often spread by those who own the properties with so-called hauntings: $$$.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper's_ghost
Although I haven't watched it here's a you tube video on the same subject:
Regarding the figure and his hands being in the same position - I think it suggests that it was one photograph of the Lord somehow transposed onto others.
Used it to explain a ghostly occurrence. ;) There's also a reason why No Magician
believes in ghosts etc.
Here's a master at work. :)
Ok ignoring the bible here is the story of Christ from outside sources
The Story of Christ outside the bible
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.
From tacitus we can derive three things
1. Christ not only existed but Was sentenced by Pontius Pilate
2. There was an event that Tactius derives as being a superstition but he has not fully checked this (reffering to like the resurrection of Christ)
3. And that there were followers of Christ who were then known as Christians
With Josephus we get more of the story
And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king, desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrin without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.
The first of three passages gives us even more info specifically
1. James Was interrogated by the Sanhedrian
2. Him and other Christians were to be stonned for their beliefs (both event are described in the book of acts I believe)
Passage 2 gives us John the Baptist
Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man... Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion... Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.
So we now just based on these three sources have the following outline
John The Baptist existed was a wise man and a man of God and was Against Herod, whom Herod had killed. Jesus Existed Was delivered to Pontius Pilote Crucified Died and rose from the dead (sure tactius doesn’t say that out right but he does point out a superstion he has not fully checked which honestly what else could it be) he had followers one of whom was his brother James and all of whom were persecuted by the romans (tacitus) and Jews (josephus) for their beliefs and while they plead guilty for their beliefs they reufsed to give them up and were killed by stoning (tacitus and Josephus)
And I haven’t even hit the most controversial of Josephus Passages that some “scholars” claim was tampered with (I put it in quotes because again why would anyone tamper with Josephus.. surely if he was againt christ or gave a differeing account the writings of josephus would be deemed heretical and just simply destroyed by the church once they rose to power… but ignoring common sense here is the third passage)
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.
And I can understand why skeptics immediately want to cry “tampered” because it’s basically the gospel story but not in the gospels and independent of them. Even though Tacitus and the first two passages of Josephus already give the bare bones story of the 4 gospels and is again independent of them (and no one questions them except for the most harden of conspiracy theorists.) the third lays it bare and flat. Jesus was the messiah was crucified under Pontius Pilate rose again on the third day and the prophets for told of him.
I hate to be the barrier of bad news but anyone who doubts Christ existed is either extremely naive (which i consider you to be as one can be quite smart and still naive) or extremely politically motivated (a slew of so called scholars under Soviet Union rule proposed the Christ myth theory and ironically when the soviet union collapsed a lot of them recanted their orignal beliefs sighting Jesus of Nazarth existed was a teacher and had followers).
In fact no credible historian believes in the Christ myth period. Someone else posted the meme about logic not being good against religious people because if they used logic their would be no religious people... So wizard Pat etc show me the failed logic in the above yes I realize Josephus third passage is controversial to say the least but there is no evidence it is fraudulent in fact it's really down to faith and again looking at how the early church simply threw out the gnostic gospels (Ah the 5000 foot talking cross ) rather then try and change them to fit any sort of dogma one must believe that with Josephus logically they would do the same destroy rather then edit in fact the only reason one could assume they edited it was to fool 21st century historians which is incredibly naive to say the least. And besides we get the bare bones story in passages 1 and 2 of Josephus and we get the rest with Tacitus. Utilizing further archeological evidence the tomb of Caiphus (the high priest when Christ was crucified) was indeed found and he did exist. There is also the James Ossuary etc. so looking at physical archeological evidence we begin to see there is way more support then just the "con men" who wrote the bible unless Tacitus and Josephus were in on the conspiracy of so who else is in on if he Easter bunny the dragon in Patb's basement..
Like I said I have a masters in history and he truth and evidence is on my side not yours but by all means please come forth with your conspiracy theories I have answers to them all.