Comments on: Photo evidence of ectoplasm and ghost orbs http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/ Skepticism. Critical thinking. Podcast. Community. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:50:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Nick of CriticalCritique.Com http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-226 Nick of CriticalCritique.Com Sun, 20 Apr 2008 08:28:03 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-226 Nice satire... LOL! ;-D Nice satire… LOL! ;-D

]]> By: DB Skeptic http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-215 DB Skeptic Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:35:01 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-215 Hi John, Good point (though I'd personally disagree with you on the percentages). However, if you're going to fill in the blank and say "this little understood event was caused by X", you'd better make sure that X makes sense itself, and that there aren't better alternatives like Y and Z. Specifically in this case, are you sure that ghost orbs (X) is the answer, and not just light spots on a camera lens (Y), or the photographer was actually lying (Z)? Because in this case, <a href="http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/12/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs-explained/" rel="nofollow">Y and Z are the correct answers.</a> Hi John,

Good point (though I’d personally disagree with you on the percentages). However, if you’re going to fill in the blank and say “this little understood event was caused by X”, you’d better make sure that X makes sense itself, and that there aren’t better alternatives like Y and Z.

Specifically in this case, are you sure that ghost orbs (X) is the answer, and not just light spots on a camera lens (Y), or the photographer was actually lying (Z)? Because in this case, Y and Z are the correct answers.

]]> By: John Campa http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-213 John Campa Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:40:37 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-213 Man probably understand about .01% of our own world and probably about .00000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe. There is a lot more that is "unexplained" than what is "explained" and accurately supported. Man probably understand about .01% of our own world and probably about .00000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe.

There is a lot more that is “unexplained” than what is “explained” and accurately supported.

]]> By: alchobot http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-179 alchobot Thu, 10 Apr 2008 00:19:05 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-179 water vapour - I've been interested in anomalies since a teenager in the 70's, the biggest problem is we want to believe but I can say personaly on seeing one thing which made me go hmm but no recorded eveidence so anyone could say i was daylight dreaming which I admit I have done water vapour - I’ve been interested in anomalies since a teenager in the 70’s, the biggest problem is we want to believe but I can say personaly on seeing one thing which made me go hmm but no recorded eveidence so anyone could say i was daylight dreaming which I admit I have done

]]> By: DB Skeptic http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-119 DB Skeptic Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:11:08 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-119 Light reflecting on the lens?! Absolutely not! It was ectoplasm. Right in front of my face. <a href="http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/12/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs-explained/" rel="nofollow">I can't think of any other explanation.</a> Light reflecting on the lens?! Absolutely not! It was ectoplasm. Right in front of my face.

I can’t think of any other explanation.

]]> By: Simon http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-118 Simon Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:08:48 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-118 What what what are you going on about! You are joking right.....lol. Clearly its the light reflecting on the lens!? What what what are you going on about! You are joking right…..lol. Clearly its the light reflecting on the lens!?

]]> By: James Randi http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-13 James Randi Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:34:04 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-13 While I appreciate the kind kudos from Sandra L H, I must correct her. First, it's "Geller," not "Gellar"; always call the Devil by his oldest name. (From the novel by Sallie Bissell) The spoons supplied to Uri Geller on the Tonight show were not at all special, being exactly what he'd requested, except that he was not allowed access to them before the program, though his assistant Shipi Shtrang attempted to "examine" them... And I agree with Sandra that the best, ever, discrediting hoax was the Sokal affair. You should look that up! While I appreciate the kind kudos from Sandra L H, I must correct her. First, it’s “Geller,” not “Gellar”; always call the Devil by his oldest name. (From the novel by Sallie Bissell) The spoons supplied to Uri Geller on the Tonight show were not at all special, being exactly what he’d requested, except that he was not allowed access to them before the program, though his assistant Shipi Shtrang attempted to “examine” them… And I agree with Sandra that the best, ever, discrediting hoax was the Sokal affair. You should look that up!

]]> By: DB Skeptic http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-6 DB Skeptic Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:44:44 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-6 "<i>Sometimes I think the best way to debunk some of this nonsense is to do it yourself"</i> Quite true. And it's even more fun when you're the one with the original claim: here's the <a href="http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/12/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs-explained/" rel="nofollow">analysis and debunk of the photo evidence of ectoplasm and ghost orbs</a>. “Sometimes I think the best way to debunk some of this nonsense is to do it yourself”

Quite true. And it’s even more fun when you’re the one with the original claim: here’s the analysis and debunk of the photo evidence of ectoplasm and ghost orbs.

]]> By: Sandra L H http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-5 Sandra L H Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:59:42 +0000 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2007/12/02/photo-evidence-of-ectoplasm-and-ghost-orbs/#comment-5 Sometimes I think the best way to debunk some of this nonsense is to do it yourself and then show how it's done. James Randi is, of course, fantastic at this. When Johnny Carson was going to have Uri Gellar on, Carson consulted with Randi and then laid out special spoons for Gellar to use. Gellar, not surprisingly, declined to bend spoons other than his own. Randi has numerous times demonstrated the spoon bending and mind-reading tricks. My all time favorite disrobing of pseudoscience, however, was the Sokal affair, in which Sokal and a colleague published a nonsense paper in a postmodernist journal. Dawkins has a review here http://richarddawkins.net/article,824,Postmodernism-Disrobed,Richard-Dawkins-Nature of the book they wrote detailing what they pulled off. Now dbskeptic just needs to learn cold reading... Sometimes I think the best way to debunk some of this nonsense is to do it yourself and then show how it’s done. James Randi is, of course, fantastic at this. When Johnny Carson was going to have Uri Gellar on, Carson consulted with Randi and then laid out special spoons for Gellar to use. Gellar, not surprisingly, declined to bend spoons other than his own. Randi has numerous times demonstrated the spoon bending and mind-reading tricks. My all time favorite disrobing of pseudoscience, however, was the Sokal affair, in which Sokal and a colleague published a nonsense paper in a postmodernist journal. Dawkins has a review here http://richarddawkins.net/article,824,Postmodernism-Disrobed,Richard-Dawkins-Nature of the book they wrote detailing what they pulled off.

Now dbskeptic just needs to learn cold reading…

]]>