It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

REAL DEMON PHOTOGRAPHED: The Case of Joe Martinez

page: 16
17
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance


Pity that the OP just does not get how dumb that is.


Mysterious photo showing possibly the only image of a real demon ever captured.

Yeah I guess I don't "get how dumb that is" because it seems interesting to me and a lot of people lol.




posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Your truer hidden meaning here is that you just don't believe demons are real. Right or wrong?

Wrong. I have no opinion one way or the other on the subject. So if you think they are real, it's your burden of proof to convince me. If you actually care. If you don't care, then fine. I'll remain unconvinced. So far, I haven't seen anything other than a blurry photo and an opinion.

What do you think a demon is?


I know exactly what a demon is, I don't just think it. And I'm not here to prove anything to you or anyone. Why do you put the burden of proof on others or even suggest proof of anything? Is this subject and all discussion about this topic having a prerequisite of proof placed upon it? I wasn't aware of that. Do you want me to care about proving something to you? I meant that in a good way. If more people cared about their fellow human being the world would be a lot better.

You seem a bit hung up on this and slightly combative as well. (Welcome to the human race though, it's mostly this way with everyone when it comes to such things). The average person doesn't want them to be real, since that would force a serious reevaluation of their desired reality.


Unless you witness demons manifesting yourself, there is no way to prove anything about them because the supernatural is beyond human science, and I believe you may already know that.

There are a few prerequisites about knowing the reality of things like this which are beyond the motivations of most people to attain in even the smallest of efforts. (Which is why you will see a majority giving kudos to all the debunking efforts seen happening when things like demons are being discussed.)



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete


He/she is not trying to convince people not to believe in spirits or "rallying against believing in spirits". Here you go again putting words in poster's mouths and making stuff up. Yet again.

Can you not get your head around the fact that not everyone on here shares your blind faith that this is a photo of a demon and that posters who do not share your opinions/beliefs are not automatically Govt shills or whatever? People are allowed to not agree with you, you know.

That is a lot of assumptions that you are making about contacting the guy and you are also confusing the guy in the photo with the guy/gal who took the photo. In fact you do sound very confused generally. You need to have a word with yourself.




What, you think I phrased something slightly wrong? I don't even know what it was, and I don't care. Arguing semantics is always a dumb tangent for any conversation.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance


Pity that the OP just does not get how dumb that is.


Mysterious photo showing possibly the only image of a real demon ever captured.

Yeah I guess I don't "get how dumb that is" because it seems interesting to me and a lot of people lol.


"Possibly", you already accepted it as absolute proof of your own beliefs, and you want others to bend to this proof too, clearly

I don't say there is something like angels or gods, what I say is that to see an image and jumping to conclusions that your faith has been completely proved right is a very big jump, and an irresponsible one

You want truth and faith and you are willing to deceive so that everyone follows your same faith and ideas. That's not true religion, you are asking people to lose their logic, close their eyes and follow blindly on a path that you don't even know what it goes because it is based on a random image that could be anything but to you is a demon dog

What of it isn't? Do you care about all the people that lost their time and possibly more when following the fake evidence?

That's how cults are made only

That's what bothers me, I don't care if you consider it absolute proof but you are looking for other's to do too, even if you say you don't, because other wise why post here and defend so much the 'possible evidence' of you don't care if others believe or not

It does not make any sense, like organized religion or a criminal government investigating themselves and reaching the conclusion they are not guilty of any crimes

Don't make a lie part of spirituality, isn't religion supposed to be about truth? Where is the truth on this image, I don't see a demon dog and you see one, how is your version of reality better than mine? Who choses who's right or wrong

Anyway see you around, this is meaningless now



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 09:15 PM
link   
oldcarpy:

Ok, I see my wrong phrasing on the last page.

I said, "We don't need to try to track down the guy who took the photo 20 or 30 yrs ago, and who has avoided attention about it."

Well, you got me. The phrasing is slightly wrong.

However... The guy did presumably ASK to have his picture taken, and so he indirectly MADE his photo get taken.

So it's a matter of whether MAKING someone take own's photo, counts as "taking" the photo. No, but it's a small semantic mistake.

And it's a stupid tangent to point out small semantic mistakes, especially when the meaning is completely obvious and clear.

I should have said:

"We don't need to try to track down the guy who ASKED THE PERSON WHO took the photo 20 or 30 yrs ago, and who has avoided attention about it."

What a pity that you have nothing to contribute but jumping on small grammatical / semantic details.



posted on Aug, 16 2018 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarriorMH

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance


Pity that the OP just does not get how dumb that is.


Mysterious photo showing possibly the only image of a real demon ever captured.

Yeah I guess I don't "get how dumb that is" because it seems interesting to me and a lot of people lol.


"Possibly", you already accepted it as absolute proof of your own beliefs, and you want others to bend to this proof too, clearly

I don't say there is something like angels or gods, what I say is that to see an image and jumping to conclusions that your faith has been completely proved right is a very big jump, and an irresponsible one

You want truth and faith and you are willing to deceive so that everyone follows your same faith and ideas. That's not true religion, you are asking people to lose their logic, close their eyes and follow blindly on a path that you don't even know what it goes because it is based on a random image that could be anything but to you is a demon dog

What of it isn't? Do you care about all the people that lost their time and possibly more when following the fake evidence?

That's how cults are made only

That's what bothers me, I don't care if you consider it absolute proof but you are looking for other's to do too, even if you say you don't, because other wise why post here and defend so much the 'possible evidence' of you don't care if others believe or not

It does not make any sense, like organized religion or a criminal government investigating themselves and reaching the conclusion they are not guilty of any crimes

Don't make a lie part of spirituality, isn't religion supposed to be about truth? Where is the truth on this image, I don't see a demon dog and you see one, how is your version of reality better than mine? Who choses who's right or wrong

Anyway see you around, this is meaningless now


Blah blah blah.

It's a compelling photograph, regardless all your bantering.

I'll enjoy your absence from the thread.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete


You don't get irony, do you? It is you that is arguing semantics endlessly like a dog (demon?) with a bone. As for me "jumping" on small grammatical details perhaps you have forgotten that in another thread of yours you accused me of all sorts of nonsense because you said I had misspelt the word "sea".

Even though it was not actually me.

Priceless. Pot. Kettle.

By the way, you still sound confused.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete


Thankfully cropping and enlarging a photo doesn't change the actual imagery. Same with color enhancement.


Yep, it does.

The image you posted is a different image to the one I posted. That means they changed.


Zoom, crop, color enhancement does not count as changing the image, which remains the same despite zooming, cropping, colors.



This may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on ATS. Thanks for the laugh.


Well I'm sure the discerning, thoughtful readers can understand what I've said about that.



What, that zooming, cropping and colour enhancing does not change the image? Of course it does. Give it up, man.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete


"Arguing semantics is always a dumb tangent for any conversation"

Seeing as how that is all you ever do on here, what does that make you?



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete


You don't get irony, do you? It is you that is arguing semantics endlessly like a dog (demon?) with a bone. As for me "jumping" on small grammatical details perhaps you have forgotten that in another thread of yours you accused me of all sorts of nonsense because you said I had misspelt the word "sea".

Even though it was not actually me.

Priceless. Pot. Kettle.

By the way, you still sound confused.



Blah blah blah, troll troll troll, banter banter banter.

Irony nothing.

I'm not arguing semantics at all, about anything. This is a thread about a compelling photograph.

Busting me for slightly wrong phrasing (that was still 100% clear what I meant) is just a stupid thing to do.

When I mentioned someone misspelling the word "sea," that's more than arguing semantics, that was me accusing him of not being a native English speaker. Because I don't think any native speaker would misspell the ocean as "the see."

I already acknowledged that it was him and not you. "Priceless pot kettle" nothing.

I'm not confused about anything unless you'd point out something specific.

I would think that you seem confused, just because you're derailing a thread about an interesting photo, into a stupid argument about busting me for slightly wrong phrasing in one of my posts.
edit on 17-8-2018 by peacefulpete because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete


Thankfully cropping and enlarging a photo doesn't change the actual imagery. Same with color enhancement.


Yep, it does.

The image you posted is a different image to the one I posted. That means they changed.


Zoom, crop, color enhancement does not count as changing the image, which remains the same despite zooming, cropping, colors.



This may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on ATS. Thanks for the laugh.


Well I'm sure the discerning, thoughtful readers can understand what I've said about that.



What, that zooming, cropping and colour enhancing does not change the image? Of course it does. Give it up, man.


Look, I don't know what semantic meaning you guys might think you are making in this never-ending nonsense argument.

It's absolutely true that a photograph's image can remain fundamentally intact, with some reasonable color enhancement. It's very possible to slightly increase colors without losing the obvious original image.

I don't believe you guys are confused about what I've been saying about that for the last 6 months.

How else do you want it phrased, exactly?

And zooming / cropping are not even worth discussing whether they count as "changing" the image lol.
edit on 17-8-2018 by peacefulpete because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

People, I like a good ghost story or what have you, but this thread is just ridiculous, if the guy wanted to quit drugs, he should just say so and stop making up stupid stories.

Additionally, any rational society would classify the demon/angel thing, or collectively, religion, as a mental illness

edit on -180002018-08-17T12:55:34-05:000000003431201834082018Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:55:34 -0500 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete


"Arguing semantics is always a dumb tangent for any conversation"

Seeing as how that is all you ever do on here, what does that make you?


Seeing as how I don't argue semantics for no reason, that makes me able to discuss topics that are more intelligent than busting me for how I phrased it slightly wrong, re: who "took" the photo.
edit on 17-8-2018 by peacefulpete because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: peacefulpete

People, I like a good ghost story or what have you, but this thread is just ridiculous, if the guy wanted to quit drugs, he should just say so and stop making up stupid stories.

Additionally, any rational society would classify the demon/angel thing, or collectively, religion, as a mental illness


Call religion / spirituality a mental illness if you want to, but remember the context is the MAJORITY of humans who have ever lived lol.



posted on Aug, 17 2018 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: peacefulpete

People, I like a good ghost story or what have you, but this thread is just ridiculous, if the guy wanted to quit drugs, he should just say so and stop making up stupid stories.

Additionally, any rational society would classify the demon/angel thing, or collectively, religion, as a mental illness


Call religion / spirituality a mental illness if you want to, but remember the context is the MAJORITY of humans who have ever lived lol.


Our ancestors actually worshipped real things, you know things like the sun and seasons which brought the crops, not the idea of some deity in the sky, or some demon in the depths, which is what I'm referring to as mental illness. It should also be noted that spirituality and religion are separate of each other, in today's context



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete

I'm sorry but this looks like a dog poking his head from the set of stairs going up behind the couple.

Nothing to see here I'm afraid.



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: wellsybelieves
a reply to: peacefulpete

I'm sorry but this looks like a dog poking his head from the set of stairs going up behind the couple.

Nothing to see here I'm afraid.


You should see the original image, not the zoomed in one. There isn't anything a dog or anything can climb up on to even be there in the first place..You are dismissing the entire thing without any investigation or understanding. It's okay, who would even wish to believe it is real?



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 04:01 AM
link   
"When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land."

You act like kids, or stomp fools who can't really get it, i wonder where you come from or which church you belong to

In any case i was happy away but reply from peacefulpete made me go back

By the way peacefulpete i did see your original reply, you are full of hate lol, no matter how you try to hide you would burn me to death on a stake if you were able to, because i don't believe on crap. So much for the religious person, how easy you show your true colors

Keep enjoying my absence from this thread, and also keep rotting your soul and hiding and ignoring what doesn't fit your religious intolerance



And remember, you can edit your post to hide your sin, but God already knows what hate you feel for me in your soul, nothing will hide those words from him


I will drop again, no reply please, i could not care less and i did not read your edited reply, only the first one that shows the same thing i have always known about organized religion, it is a very very very big toilet

edit on 18-8-2018 by WarriorMH because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2018 @ 07:01 AM
link   
^WarriorMH:

What the hell are you even talking about. My last response to you was not edited. You can see the post above (page 16 of this thread).

This is my last post responding to WarriorMH:


Blah blah blah. It's a compelling photograph, regardless all your bantering. I'll enjoy your absence from the thread.



posted on Aug, 19 2018 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: peacefulpete




What the hell are you even talking about. My last response to you was not edited.



They never said it was,

they said you can edit it not that you have.

Semantics you say?

Yeah, when you completely misinterpret the easiest of sentences and reply with crap no one ever says then every thread and post you post will be replied to with "semantics" pointing out your misinterpretation or ignorance.







And zooming / cropping are not even worth discussing whether they count as "changing" the image lol.



Of coarse they are not because when you said this





Zooming, cropping, color enhancement does not count as changing the imagery itself.


So a poster cropped the image this thread is about and asked you to find the wife in the cropped photo that by going by your understating doesn't change the image.


You cannot see the wife in the image because the cropping .....wait for it....




Changed the image.



This is why you don't want talk about it.




I don't believe you guys are confused about what I've been saying about that for the last 6 months.


NO


No one is confused, this is why you keep getting quoted and your response is "semantics" because you cannot simply admit you were wrong.

You change whats said in linked articles to your threads by not actually quoting using the ATS function to quote text from another source and you try and put it in your own words that changes what is said to what you link too and you do this as well in replies to posters, reply to things never said.

Its not semantics or trolling by asking this, seriously do you not see how often you say things were said when they never were?



clear example is the start of this post about the edit thing you said to another poster, no one said you did, how is it possible to confuse what was said?



edit on 19-8-2018 by InhaleExhale because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join