It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by starfire2453
Sorry . . . to read that . . . but I expected it . . . GUY MALONE has documented the poltergeist sorts of goings on being highly correlated with fallen angel/ET/critter abduction events over hundreds of cases.
reply to post by Serdgiam
On both legs?
Consistent in all dimensions, factors, aspects?
Color me skeptical.
I'd agree quite similar but not absolutely consistent in all dimensions, factors, aspects.
Even TRYING HARD to manually--by hand--place a 100% consistent design on paper--stable flat paper on a stable flat table--is challenging.
Incidentally--even in VERY SIMILAR ways to get a design from a basket or grate or seat or some such just does NOT result in such a 100% similar mark. It may be SIMILAR appearing . . . but that's not the same thing.
Take quality photos and put them on a very accurate grid and then see how similar they are.
Have you ever once heard of a haunting that included infra red marks on people?
I don't know how black light would show up or emphasize such marks, or not.
reply to post by Mr Mask
That post comes across as self-convinced omniscience and arrogance, to me.
1. It PRESUMES/ASSUMES that you KNOW ALL the technologies available for making such marks--including the fallen angel/black ops technologies.
2. It PRESUMES/ASSUMES that you KNOW ALL the methodologies of applying such technologies.
3. It PRESUMES/ASSUMES that the evidence on the thread is sufficient for you to state 100% ABSOLUTELY EMPHATICALLY that there's ABSOLUTELY NO--0.00000000000000% unsmudgable tattoo type element to the marks.
4. Then there's the attitude that goes with your post . . . assailing a very earnest, forthright, candid and OBVIOUSLY QUITE HONEST grandmother.
then turn around and use links for what at best could only be considered as fringe science or investigations. in the next post you had the gall to invoke Ocham's razor, which by the way is spelled wrong, as far as referring to it, it is referred to either as Occam's razor or Ockham's razor. anyway way, which put in the simplest way i know is, when considering hypotheses, the one with the simplest or fewest assumptions is the best choice. in what world is aliens/ black ops, mutilations, being marked by demons or any other number of things that that fringe science/ investigations suggest the simplest or the fewest assumptions.
blather off with absurd responses
i would also get a portable black light, you know like the ones that csi techs use. you can probably pick one up on ebay pretty cheap.
then when her friends come over turn it on and shine it towards them, you might even get another surprise.
reply to post by Serdgiam
Certainly 'technically' you could be quite right about the evidence presented and perspectives involved.
I think in terms of the dogs . . . I'd encourage you to take some pics of what you've seen so routinely and lay them side by side with the pics in the thread. I think you'd be surprised at the degree of differences, then.
I guess I'll continue to trust my extensive experiences at evaluating nuance. LOL.
I read both grandma and granddaughter as way above average in terms of being candid, no-nonsense, straightforward sorts.
also written as Ockham's razor from William of Ockham (c. 1287 – 1347),