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.

 

criss angel discussion...

page: 49
13
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   
By the way, the FACT that NOT ONE OTHER HUMAN BEING on this earth can duplicate Criss Angels feats is telling; also, Criss Angel is parsing his words carefully, as PR states. He gets a lot more mileage out of the public when he makes statements like those he makes. It keeps the simple minded wondering.

He says that he does not have ' magical powers' or ' supernatural abilities' etc., and that is exactly right!! It is NATURAL abilities that Criss uses. Get that? NATURAL. There is nothing ' unnatural ' or ' supernatural 'about what Criss does; it may seem that way to the uninitiated but in reality it is very natural indeed. That is what gets the Denier's so hot and bothered; the fact that Criss CAN do these things and the fact that the Denier's CANNOT do these things means a great deal in the mix. It insults the Denier's to believe that they CAN do the same things Criss does IF they had done all of the work for many years that Criss has done.

It is like watching a piano virtuoso playing some incredibly hard piece of music; to the ignorant, it might seem incredible that a person could make complicated marks on a sheet of paper turn into beautiful music; many would say " It must be a trick, no one can play like that", totally ignoring the fact that the music is being played right in front of them!! It makes them feel inadequate and somehow lesser when they see people doing things that seem impossible or very difficult and realize that they have NO excuse for NOT doing it themselves, other than laziness and lack of dedication.

If CRISS can do it, then I should be able to !! Right? Wrong!! Not unless you are willing to make the sacrifices and do the work to achieve the skills necessary for the task !! But Criss parses his words carefully so that he keeps the mundane minds wondering how he could possibly accomplish such events without props, while the people who KNOW how he does it, or at least have an idea that lies outside of the' props and wires ' foolishness, can rest easy knowing that we are witnessing a true demonstration of the sublime abilities that are real and in evidence.

Criss does NOT say that he is using props, he does NOT say that he has no abilities that transcend the mundane; he is simply trying to keep the aura of the unknown in play to keep the people coming and the money flowing. All that some competitor of Criss would have to do is to duplicate one of Criss events using the same factors, same camera angles, same conditions, etc. just once. That would prove that Criss is using props as it would explain the likley result in a way that is believable. BUT, NO ONE on this earth can, as of now, duplicate Criss events.

If they could, they WOULD. Why? It would take Criss out of the premiere spot in the world of esoteric performances and relegate him back into the role of ' stage magician ', and forever destroy his ability to hold the high ground in that realm. Coppefield and Randi and all the others would LOVE to be able to levitate like Criss does; the performers are always trying to outdo each other for more spectacular events so they can get the big bucks. But NO ONE can even come close to Criss for such events; not even close. But what does that mean to the Denier's? NOTHING!!

Common sense, logic, material reality, evidence, facts; these are the enemies of the Denier's; all they have is silly supposition, twisted and tortured logic and a stubborn denial of all of the relevant evidence. If all I had in an argument was the assumption of a negative, an unproven and impossible negative at that, I would think about slinking away before my lack of substance was noticed and exposed. We have done that and still, to this day, NOT ONE person has posted an INTELLIGENT and LIKELY alternative based on the available evidence.

Imagine a detective that appears at the scene of a crime and declares that he has solved the matter despite not reviewing the evidence thoroughly or interviewing witnesse and anaylzing the films, etc. He has a ' gut feeling' that he knows how it was done and so he closes the case and smugly moves on, ignoring the smirking criminal with blood stains on him and a weapon hanging from his pocket!! The Denier's are shameless in their desperate search for itty bitty alleged signs of some hidden manner in which the events are done; pathetic, sad and empty.

The FACT is that Criss CAN perform events that the Denier's CANNOT explain away with any of their sorry excuses and assumptions; it is plain and clear that Criss CAN do what we see him do. the fact that NO props or such are possible or visible in some of them means a lot to us, but nothing to them; THAT is the difference; WE are holding the high ground and the Denier's are desperately sweeping up the debris of their logic and sifting it for some sign, any sign, that supports their beliefs. But alas, there ARE NONE!!

Harnesses hanging from thin air, platforms and props that are invisible, witnesses paid off and loyal to the death, bits and pieces of statements that have mnay meanings..THIS is what the Deniers cling to, and without shame. How can an intelligent person NOT see the utter LACK of substance in their views? Staggering denial of the facts and evidence is a sad foundation but the only one that the Denier's have left; I guess any port in a storm, yes?

But in any event the LACK of proof of props means something, at least to those of us with critical thinking skills and an open mind. To the others, NO amount of proof will suffice; they would deny the proof if it bit them on the ass; it is just too much for them to grasp and so they deny.




posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86

They simply cannot grasp that they are unable to demonstrate or indicate ANY of the invisible helicopters or platforms that they claim must be there. The LACK of evidence to them is just a non-issue!! Amazing. They cannot grasp what they are seeing and refuse to believe anything that challenges their belief systems, and so deny without shame.

When did we say the props were invisible? Oh right, never. You use this claim to invalidate what we say, while it holds no grounds or connection to our position. The concept others and myself believe is at work here is Post Production Editting Nothing invisible about it, accept for the end product.




Where could the helicopter possibly be located that could hold Criss up and yet not be seen? The video clearly shows Criss suspended in the air, lit by the most powerful private light on earth, 42.3 BILLION candlepower, and yet even that much light cannot illuminate the minds of the denier's; they cannot see any effects or props, they cannot imagine how a man can do such things without props, and all this means to them is that there MUST be props!! It staggers the sound mind to see twisted logic like that applied to such issues, it is really sad.

To the bolded: Right above him
To the underlined: they cannot be seen by those that view the video because the video does not show the space above CA. Its really that simple.
As to your lighting claim, at such a height, in conjuction with super thin wires and an audience a half a mile away, powerful light only helps to obfuscate the prop. David Copperfield used power light and a background that matched the colour of the wires, so is CA.


Personally, I would be ASHAMED to admit that I believed that some Las Vegas performer could stump my imagination; the Denier's REVEL in it!! They accept that their imaginations are so limited that all they can do is presuppose invisible wires and helicopters and props that cannot be seen and for which NO evidence exists whatsoever!! How banal, how limited, how droll.

You still havent answered my challenge to show us solid proof of CA's abilities. Tests, studies, how bout him admitting to it? Oh wait thats right, he admitted he doesnt have powers.




The odds alone dictate the truth: It is mathematically more likley that Criss can perform his high events without props than it is to believe that he can do them WITH props that cannot be seen or photographed and that all of the witnesses and employees are silent and loyal forever.

I asked you awhile ago to provide such statistical analysis and you still have not. Show us your calculations and back up your claim. If you cant, leave statistics out of the thread.
Once again, the props are easily photographed, and just as easily editted out of the final product.




It seems that defying logic and common sense can get tiring to them and so, unwilling to be honest enough to say " Hey, I do not know how he does it, but he might just have the abilities to perform these events without help". That at least would be HONEST;

It seems that defying logic and common sense can get tiring to them and so, unwilling to be honest enough to say "Hey, i do not know how he does it, but he might just be using props and post production editting to preform these events". That at least would be HONEST.

Put your money where you mouth is, show us the solid proof you claim to have. Show us the statistical analysis you have done to prove that it is more likely that CA can levitate than use props and hide it.

[edit on 7-8-2007 by InSpiteOf]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard

Originally posted by InSpiteOf
If this is the video Im thinking it is, it will be brushed off by PR. He will make it seem as if CA is using a play of words to cleaverly hide is ability.

You are correct in your assumption.


Ya, what a shock, twisting the words CA to fit your views.




Shouldn't you guys be over at the new Qigong thread trying to disprove the impact and validity of Chi/Ki just as you attempted to disprove Criss Angel's levitation ability?


Nice try to misdirect.
My contention isnt that people do not possess such abilities, as Ive stated before. but rather that CA is not one such person.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 10:30 AM
link   
How ridiculous!! What gaul!! The helicopter that hovers above the Vegas Strip with no lights and that cannot be seen buy the OTHER helicopter that is taking the clear film of the event..is THAT what you believe/ The helicopter would HAVE to be invisible as the films show the scene clearly; it is IMPOSSIBLE for two helicopters to be in that close a proximity without lights and pilots cooperating..and the FAA would NOT allow ANY aircraft to fly without lights..no way.

There was only ONE helicopter, not two. The wtinesses in the adjacent hotels would have seen it and so would the helicopter taking the video's. It is the WORST excuse I have heard yet, the furthest stretch of the imagination, the most UNlikley possibility. You think that helicopters are silent and give no prop wash to objects and people below? Amazing to the sound mind that anyone could cling to such a tortured and illogical assumption as that; it is really pathetic.

The evidence is right in front of you, yet all you can do is chime in with foolish side issues that have NO bearing on the events at all. The statistics I mention are common sense; I am not going to spend hours making graphs and charts, you would deny them also. NOTHING will convince the closed mind, nothing. We HAVE presented all of the proof and evidence needed for an intelligent and honest appraisal of the events; you on the other hand have nothing but a LACK of evidence to prop up your dead horse. There are NO invisible helicopters, which is the ONLY way that there could have been two of them at the scene, and there are no thin wires that Criss was hanging from, no props, nothing but Criss and his abilities.

No one can present enough evidence for you as you will find some baseless and irrelevant side issue to cling to that makes no difference to the issue at hand; you are unconvinceable. you see NO props, and yet assume there are props there. You see NO wires or helicopters and yet assume that they must be there, you hear from many witnesses who have seen the events, not ONE of whom has EVER shown a way in which it could have been or was faked. You simply lack the imagination and open minded ness necessary for critical jusdgement!! Thats all.

like I have said over and over again; if Criss disappeared from right in front of you, you would think that you were drugged with some hallunicogen or were being hypnotized..you would NOt simply see the truth and accept it; it is TOO challenging for you, too far out for you, too much for your limited minds to actualize into a belief. So deny and deny and cling to the ridicul;ous as you will; the people with critical thinking abliities see thru your weak ' arguments ' in a second.

You are like an attorney with a client who is dead bang guilty; all the lawyer can do is bring in dise issues that are meant to confuse the facts and misrepresent the truth so that the weak of mind and judgement can be influenced. The main truths get sidelined as the silliness takes over. Look at the OJ Simpson trial; if he did not have a team of high class lawyers that can throw confusion and twist the evidence to fit their desired outcome he would be behind bars today.

Stick to the issue and the facts and see that there is NO EVIDENCE that Criss uses props for his high levitations. NO evidence. yet you demand that WE show evidence to you!! What nerve. If there were helicopters and wires and props showing on the videos then WE would have the job of explaining them away; you cannot explain away a LACK of evidence so you turn it around as if it is incumbent on US to present even MORE evidence!! There IS NO amount of evidence you would accept so stop the dishonest attempts to change the burden from you to us; it will not work. WE hold the high ground, there is NO evidence of props; YOU must show how it could be done with NO props evident, but you CANNOT.

A silent and lightless helicoipter hovering over Criss indeed; what do you take us for? That is ludicrous..beyond nonsensical, the fact is that you cannot show ANY indications of props and we show NO props are there or possible and yet you cling to the only lifesaver you have; a broken piece of flotsam that is taking on water as we speak. Better get on board before the waves wash you away into the deep and dark depths of denial and stubborn refusla to accept the facts.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The statistics I mention are common sense; I am not going to spend hours making graphs and charts, you would deny them also. NOTHING will convince the closed mind, nothing. We HAVE presented all of the proof and evidence needed for an intelligent and honest appraisal of the events; you on the other hand have nothing but a LACK of evidence to prop up your dead horse.

To the bolded: In other words, you have done no statistical analysis and are making a guess. Statistics are not common sense, they are the product of intense research and study, something you obviously have not done. Once again, you back your claim up with nothing
Oh, and I would not deny them, Id certainly ask you for your sources, and probably pass the analysis and data on to one of my friends in that field for a peer review.


There are NO invisible helicopters,

Your right, their not invisible.


like I have said over and over again; if Criss disappeared from right in front of you, you would think that you were drugged with some hallunicogen or were being hypnotized..you would NOt simply see the truth and accept it; it is TOO challenging for you, too far out for you, too much for your limited minds to actualize into a belief.

Attacking me as closed minded does nothing to promote your position. You know nothing about me and assume so much. You say I am closed minded why you are unwilling to accept the possibility that he may just be a simple illusionist.


You are like an attorney with a client who is dead bang guilty...
You are like an advocate of creationism arguing with an evolutionist. You have faith that God created the earth, I have critical thinking and observable evidence.
Your analogies are pointless and do nothing for this argument accept inflame the participants.


Stick to the issue and the facts and see that there is NO EVIDENCE that Criss uses props for his high levitations. NO evidence.
There is no evidence that Criss is using TK.


yet you demand that WE show evidence to you!! What nerve.

No, i demand that you produce the evidence you claim to have in favor of TK. Studies, CA's admition, tests, etc.

There IS NO amount of evidence you would accept so stop the dishonest attempts to change the burden from you to us; it will not work. WE hold the high ground, there is NO evidence of props; YOU must show how it could be done with NO props evident, but you CANNOT.

If we find RAW footage, then we will talk about what is apparent. Currently, none exists to the public. Therefore any footage released by CA and is crew is suspect.

By the way, when ignorant ape produced a theory as to how the levitation could have been preformed, you brushed it off with nothing to back your claim up. If no wires are possible the way ignorant ape depicited it, please show us how it is mechanically impossible. Otherwise, admit that there is a possibility.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by InSpiteOf
If this is the video Im thinking it is, it will be brushed off by PR. He will make it seem as if CA is using a play of words to cleaverly hide is ability.



Originally posted by Paul_Richard
You are correct in your assumption.




Originally posted by InSpiteOf
Ya, what a shock, twisting the words CA to fit your views.

It's called psychological analysis.

You should try it sometime.

That is, after you learn how.



Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Shouldn't you guys be over at the new Qigong thread trying to disprove the impact and validity of Chi/Ki just as you attempted to disprove Criss Angel's levitation ability?



Originally posted by InSpiteOf
Nice try to misdirect.

Not quite.

The other discussion is very similar to this one.


Originally posted by InSpiteOf
My contention isnt that people do not possess such abilities, as Ive stated before. but rather that CA is not one such person.

If you continue to neglect to provide us with what you consider to be someone with a Gift of Telekinesis, then how are we to determine that you have any inkling as to what that entails and that you can even tell if someone has one in the first place?

Or are you going to dodge this direct question YET AGAIN?





posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   
YOU have critical thinking and observable evidence? LIKE WHAT?? What is your obervable evidence? That there are NO props evident, right? And you call that evidence for you? Amazing, simply amazing.

And Clueless Simians observations were refuted thoroughly by me and the engineering dept. at the Luxor!! There is NO WAY the hotels of uneven heights could support the props needed for such a possibility, nor would they cooperate in it. We would SEE wires and supports in the video if they existed, but we do not. They are NOT there. there has not been ONE intelligent or likley response so far, none at all.

To claim that the hotels had some rigging set up that cannot be seen is stupid, but no kore so than the invisible helicopter scenario you propose. All of your ' evidence ' is INVISIBLE. That does not faze you though, as I knew it would not. The LACK translates to you as evidence, and that is just ridiculous!! Staggering silliness.

You cannot come up with even a likley way it could have been done, GIVEN THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, And the evidence is masive and certain. you on the other hand have nada, zero, nothing but a supposition based on a belief in what cannot be seen!! Total illogic masquerading as a possibility.

No, there is no wiggle reoom here; either you have some rational and likley way he faked it, or you do not; And so far not ONE person has given a likley alternative that is supported by either the observable evidence or even a sensible alternative. Please tell me HOW, in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary, Criss could have done the Luxor event, seeing that there are NO props seen or evident and the Hotel itself has denied that ANY platforms, supports, props, or anything else was used in the event. the Luxor does NOT have rigging set for high levitations and to install such equipment would reuire more than just throwing rops across the Strip.

You guys really amaze me; the denial reaches new heights when you get desperate enough to assume from NOTHING some supposition that merits no respect at all. there are NO props, none can be seen, none could have been possible under the circumstances..NOT ONE person ever come forward with the ' truth '? Can you believe that? You believe that Criss engenders loyalty from everyone? Puleeeeze.

You have ZILCH except a closed mind and a lack of alternatives that make any sense. From now on how about something original from you denier's instead of the same old same old nonsense.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
YOU have critical thinking and observable evidence? LIKE WHAT?? What is your obervable evidence? That there are NO props evident, right? And you call that evidence for you? Amazing, simply amazing.

Ahem, what you are quoting me as saying is part of a baseless (much like yours) analogy. I worded it specifically to inflame your position, as you have done to us.

Your evidence is circumstancial.
The lack of visible props to you is evidence of no props. You cannot concieve that post production editting could possibly hide what video evidence would show.
MindFreak is an editted production, that much is undeniable fact, yet you cannot take it a step further and see that all his illusions are editted?

Just to clarify, you have no statistical evidence or analysis available to prove how mathematically probable it is for CA to levitate correct?


to PR:
1) Precursor for the story: being young at the time, my recollection of events is somewhat limitted, though i retain much of the details in my mind as I have gone over it many times through the years.
2) I was never great at meditating when I was young.
3) At this time, I have no names to offer you as I am at work, when i get home I will either edit or post the names of the temple and the Rinpoche
The only legitimate case I have witnessed and drawn conclusions from resides in my past. When I was young, my mother would take me to a tibetan temple in Toronto. There, we would both meditate under the guidance of a Tibetan Rinpoche ( an incredible and inspirational man.) One day, late in the afternoon, he took a question (well, his interpreter took the question and translated it for him) from a member of the temple. I forget the exact question, but to paraphrase : "Ive tried to walk a path of enlightenment all my life, but its given me none of the happiness and abilities i seek. How do I even know they exist?" Classes in the afternoon were relativly empty from what I remember, Rinpoche said something to the effect "You would believe what you saw, would you not?" The person replied yes, afterwich Rinpoche gave his translator instructions and lead us in a guided meditation. I do not know length of time that passed, but his translator asked us to close our meditation and open our eyes. THe site we saw was mystifying to say the least. Rinpoche was floating, levitating what must have been 2-4 feet off the ground. From what I gathered he was still in a meditative state.

It was this Rinpoche that gave me the prediction (years later) that i would benefit from The Ayahuasca Vine and ceramonies. I base my beliefs in Levitation and TK from this experiance, and the experiances I have had while traversing the esoteric under the guidance of my current teacher and Ayahuasca.

Again, I will fill in what names I can later today.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
YOU have critical thinking and observable evidence? LIKE WHAT?? What is your obervable evidence? That there are NO props evident, right? And you call that evidence for you? Amazing, simply amazing.


What about my observation that CA is always wearing a long sleeve jacket while he does this trick? You just blow it off, while it is a documented video fact. He never does the Levitating without it, go look.

We have also observed than never in the video record we are shown a clear uniterrupted shot of CA levitating then panning up to the 200-300 feet above him. I have also observed that he never "TK's" under a structure or a clear plexiglass tube that would eliminate "he is using wires" arguement. You never have addressed why in CA video, we never see that space of 200-300 directly above him.

Your arguement that you can't see any of the "props" in a controlled editing video has gaping holes in that logic. You can't even admit the possibility that CA intenionally does not video the area above him and mabye, just maybe he might be hiding something by the constant use of a long sleeve overgarment when doing this trick. Logic demands that you consider all possiblites, isn't there a big problem taking the video evidence of a TV program edited by the same performer doing the Illusion at face value. All of the "fan" videos have gone through the same video editing, CA will not show something that ruins the Illusion.



nothing but a supposition based on a belief in what cannot be seen!! Total illogic masquerading as a possibility.


Couldn't have said it better myself, but I am referring to your supposition. Your "proof" is based on the video documentation of the event by a known Illusionist which you take as gospel. Even then there are still major questions about the levitation that still you have no answer for other than "look at the video" when the video we request (the uninterrupted shot from CA to the 200-300 feet above him) is never shown by CA. If video of that shot existed and clearly showed nothing above him, I would be more inclined to belive he has TK.

Until you or CA can provide an uninterrupted video shot of him Levitating with only a short sleeve tee shirt, and then panning up 200-300 feet directly above him, I will be inclined to believe that he is hanging from wires with a harness on him. I fully understand that CA won't show either but to convince me, that is the video shot I will need. My lack of video evidence is precisely that, there is no video showing him, then panning directly above him 200-300 feet. Is that redundent enough.


As for CA disappering right in front of me, he does that to someone in his video. All he does is put a cloth in front of him and drops below the table which has a mirror in front of it making him seem to disappear. Sorry to bust another bubble.

Also you are getting kinda snotty with your tone, please stop that and keep it civil. I can agree to disagree withsomeone without calling people names. Thank you.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   
interesting article and interview with him

From
www.newportmercury.com...




"I do not believe that anybody has the ability to do anything that's supernatural," he revealed in a radio interview with fellow magician Penn Jillette.



he's just a great showman.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Great anecdotal testimony InSpiteOf


I am sure that all of us would like to hear more about it.


Hey...you should start a new thread about your experiences.



[edit on 7-8-2007 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Great anecdotal testimony InSpiteOf


I am sure that all of us would like to hear more about it.


Hey...you should start a new thread about your experiences.



[edit on 7-8-2007 by Paul_Richard]

Thanks
What exactly would you like to expand on?
I may just do that, but not untill after the 24th, as I am going for what I can feel will be an impactful spiritual walk. One that I believe will draw experiance and lessons from the others, including the experiance I just shared.

[edit on 7-8-2007 by InSpiteOf]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I hadn't heard about this.
NBC planning Uri Geller/Criss Angel 'Phenomenon' reality competition

Here's an interview about the show, it discusses how Criss will challenge Gellar (btw, Geller's been caught on camera cheating, in a show aired in Israel)

audio



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Pavil: I blew it off because it is nonsensical. The fact that people are required to wear clothing in public is NOT a reason to doubt the absolute impossibility of there being ANY credence to the view that Criss uses harnesses. None. Criss doesn't use a harnes at the Luxor because there would be absolutely NOTHING that it could be suspended from. If all Criss had on was a thong the naysayers would simply fall back on the same old tired ' video editing ' crap.

There is NO depth to which the denier's will sink in refusing to accept the truth. The lamest excuse is like some great revelation to you; yet to us who can see beyond our noses it is just more baseless and foolish nonsense, given all of the observable evidence. There is NO evidence that Criss uses fild trickery and editing; ONCE AGAIN, do you expect us to believe that Criss engenders such extreme loyalty that NOT ONE empoyee or ' film editor ' has EVER come forward with an explosive ' tell all ' book or video that gives the ' secret deceptions ' away. It has never happened and never will because it DOES NOT HAPPEN, plain and simple.

Criss does not need to use tricks like that when he has abilities of such magnitude. Again, if ANYONE ON EARTH could duplicate Criss events, they WOULD have to slow Criss down and boost their own fortunes. No, it is clear: Criss uses esoteric abilities on SOME of his events and that has not and canot be refuted. Done. The weak and spurious silliness like' he is wearing a jacket ' do nothing to illuminate, only to obfuscate the truth. I prefer the better and higher critical thinking abiities which show clearly that Criss is a unique individual and that he has abilities that no other human being has at this point in time.

The hard proof is right there in front of you, if only the blinders are dropped. No more silliness about clothing; it means NOTHING whatsoever. Come up with some REAL alternatives please or simply admit being stumped. That is honest at least, which is a far cry from the stand most denier's are taking; simple denial is NOT evidential.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The fact that people are required to wear clothing in public is NOT a reason to doubt the absolute impossibility of there being ANY credence to the view that Criss uses harnesses.


Since when are people required to wear long sleeved jackets in public?
He chooses ( or maybe HAS TO wear it ) during the trick.



Again, if ANYONE ON EARTH could duplicate Criss events, they WOULD have to slow Criss down and boost their own fortunes.



Right... I doubt that ANYONE has these powers, especially CA who is profiting from people who thinks he does. If others had the power, they would come forward and use them for profit.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Pavil: I blew it off because it is nonsensical. The fact that people are required to wear clothing in public is NOT a reason to doubt the absolute impossibility of there being ANY credence to the view that Criss uses harnesses. None. Criss doesn't use a harnes at the Luxor because there would be absolutely NOTHING that it could be suspended from. If all Criss had on was a thong the naysayers would simply fall back on the same old tired ' video editing ' crap.


How is it crap? Its perfectly clear and evident that some video editing goes on. You simply cannot deny this fact. If you do, you have no clue how to put a show together.

Im going to quote myself here:

You cannot concieve that post production editting could possibly hide what video evidence would show.
MindFreak is an editted production, that much is undeniable fact, yet you cannot take it a step further and see that all his illusions are editted?

Just to clarify, you have no statistical evidence or analysis available to prove how mathematically probable it is for CA to levitate correct?


Id still like an answer to the above.


There is NO evidence that Criss uses fild trickery and editing; ONCE AGAIN, do you expect us to believe that Criss engenders such extreme loyalty that NOT ONE empoyee or ' film editor ' has EVER come forward with an explosive ' tell all ' book or video that gives the ' secret deceptions ' away. It has never happened and never will because it DOES NOT HAPPEN, plain and simple.

Yes, there is. Everytime a camrea cuts away to another shot, thats editing. Everytime there is music in the background, thats editing. Everytime you see an interview spliced in, thats editing.

People working in the field of video editing sign confidentiality agreements in these instances, its part of the business.
To top it off, who would give a job to someone that violated such an agreement? Who would give a job to someone that obviously wants to make am extra dime on the side, off something thats being marketted as a mystery? (IE MindFreak) Its called professionalism.
The Show Is Edited. Period.


Criss does not need to use tricks like that when he has abilities of such magnitude.

Then where is the independant footage of such events? If he didnt need editing and trickery than why not release the raw footage?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Did anyone watch Criss Angel last night on A&E?

I couldn't see the whole episode.

But I did view his manipulation or near levitation of a circular manhole cover.

Very interesting





posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:08 AM
link   
OK, here is my reply to the nonsense about editing: Editing is a necessity for ANY film production. You simply cannot fit many hours of film into a half hour or one hour show without it. Here is the rub: Editing is perfectly normal and done all the time. ALTERATION of existing film is different, way different. What you are alleging is that some person(s) are sitting down and taking film and changing the events that are seen to fit a false and preconceived outcome. In other words, sure anyone can fudge film and make it appear to be something it is not; BUT Criss Angel has stated over and over that they do NOT use trickery in the editing process at all, and I believe him. Why?

Because the most telling parts of his events are shown in constant clips that do not give any chance for alteration. Also, it is a FACT that Criss would lose his entire living and be shown as a sham forever if even ONE film editor were to come out and say that he was involved with changing film to show something that does not represent material reality and what occured.

If the film has NOT been changed to represent an event in a manner that is not consistent with the event as claimed then the film is legit. Simple. Editing in and of itself is as common as any other mechanism for cutting down the length of a show; it all has to fit in a time frame. There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, from ANY source, that purports to show that film trickery is used to make people think that he is really doing events that are not in fact what is alleged. NONE.

Again, you ignore this: NOT ONE person has EVER claimed to be a witness to any tampering of the film to represent an event falsely. Do you really believe that Criss could engender such loyalty? And if so, why? Why would he be any different than any other client or boss who hires an editor to make a cohesive show out of many film clips to fit in a time slot and be a smooth and flowing show. There is NO evidence, none, that Criss has EVER used trickery in film or any other way to try and make people believe that they are seeing something that they are not.

How do you explain the mirror event where Criss folds his bare hands together in front of a mirrir, and without the film cutting away, he materializes money and cigars ( what a bonus for Monica Lewinski ! ) from nothing..or rather he duplicates the material object from the image in the mirror. In the most telling events, there are NO stops in the film, it rolls continuously while the critical part in viewed, and so there is NO possibility of editing being a factor; you cannot edit without editing marks on the film and at least a split second jump where the editing takes place.

No, the old ' film editing ' is a straw man and not valid. Answer me this please: Why do you think that Criss Angel could get legions of people to remain silent forever? There are people who would pay big bucks, no doubt, to unseat Criss as the premiere illusionist AND adept of this time, and you can bet that if trickery were used, someone would have come forward by now to get their 15 minutes of fame and make Criss look bad.

NO ONE has only friends, especially in businesses involved with entertainment, there are always enemies also, so why have we never seen oNE person EVER come forward with an ' inside story ' on Criss? I will tell you why, because they do not exist !! That is why. No other explanation makes even an iota of sense. If Criss is so special that all who work for and with him are loyal to the death then maybe he is special enough to just be doing what you see him do. I will not mention odds as they can be done any which way; but with not ONE example of allegation of trickery I am convinced that there are NO secrets to tell, only events to be appreciated.

PR, I do not have TV where I live( antennas do not work and the trees stop satellite; yeah I live in the midle of nowhere ) and so I get all video from the computer, but I am anxious to see the latest MindFreak show as well. No doubt we will be hearing about all of the gremlins that are running wild making things seem to be something that is not real while we shake our heads at the seemingly inexhaustable excuses that the Denier's have in their bag of suppositions.

Think about this: A denier would see an event personally, up close, and be convinced that they are simply too naive to comprehend the ways that they could be fooled; film gives them an added level of deniability and a way to assuage themselves as to why they cannot figure out how he could pull it off. Criss has had thousands of eyewitnesses to his events, and NOT ONE has ever claimed to be able to explain with mundane means what they are seeing, at least not efffectively. If the Denier's here saw the events personally, they would insist that they are just unable to discern the props but that they must be there.

No, there is no way to convince the blind that there is a great difference between red and green; they just have no basis to comprehend the subject due to lack of previous input; well, the Denier's have had no previous input that would allow them to consider the sumblime answer; they are content to see only blackness and trying to comprehend colors would be too disturbing given the inability to explain it rationally.

As to the nonsense about clothing, Criss can wear a suit of armor for all I care; the FACT that there is NO way for the event to have been staged is telling enough. Criss does not always wear a jacket; in the desert the temps drop quickly at night and so naturally anyone would dress accordingly. Many of his events are shown with him wearing only a shirt and pants; what excuse do you have for THOSE events? Hmmm? Oh yeah, the film trickery that no one ever exposes..riiiiight.

You might have some luck convincing the person with little interest in the facts that Criss is just some hack that has a great ( and loyal ) staff, but those of us with an open mind and the ability to discern the evidence cannot be swayed by spurious allegations TOTALLY UNSUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE. You are ice skating uphill, and the faster your legs go the more tired you get; soon you will run out of steam and start the inevitable slide back down the mountain of denial to stay comfy and secure in your limited realm.

I hope that your alternatives in the future have more substance than what we have seen so far. As it is, we can assume from the evidence that Criss is for real



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
BUT Criss Angel has stated over and over that they do NOT use trickery in the editing process at all, and I believe him. Why?

If you look at my post above, you see where the confusion lyes. You say he uses no trickery or editing, i responded in kind.



There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, from ANY source, that purports to show that film trickery is used to make people think that he is really doing events that are not in fact what is alleged. NONE.

The only source of CA illusions is from his production company. There is no basis for comparison between raw footage and aired footage. You are speculating.



Again, you ignore this: NOT ONE person has EVER claimed to be a witness to any tampering of the film to represent an event falsely. Do you really believe that Criss could engender such loyalty? And if so, why?

I didnt ignore it at all, Others and myself have said it over and over:

People working in the field of video editing sign confidentiality agreements in these instances, its part of the business.

Why would someone violate an order that can cripple them financially and legally? People sign confidentiality agreements all the time, same with NDA's (non disclosure agreements) and never violate them in the life times, why is so hard to believe that people in this profession would violate such an agreement?


There is NO evidence, none, that Criss has EVER used trickery in film or any other way to try and make people believe that they are seeing something that they are not.
again, there is no evidence because the raw footage has not been released.



How do you explain the mirror event where Criss folds his bare hands together in front of a mirrir...
Never seen it, cant comment on it.


No, the old ' film editing ' is a straw man and not valid. Answer me this please: Why do you think that Criss Angel could get legions of people to remain silent forever?
Asked and answered.


NO ONE has only friends, especially in businesses involved with entertainment, there are always enemies also, so why have we never seen oNE person EVER come forward with an ' inside story ' on Criss? I will tell you why, because they do not exist !! That is why. No other explanation makes even an iota of sense.
Confidentiality agreement/ NDA sure seems a plausible explanation.


Think about this: A denier would see an event personally, up close, and be convinced that they are simply too naive to comprehend the ways that they could be fooled[...] If the Denier's here saw the events personally, they would insist that they are just unable to discern the props but that they must be there.

Im glad you can see the future and put yourself into others minds, perhaps you'd like to run a class on remote viewing? Or are you just proposing a situation based on speculation?



they just have no basis to comprehend the subject due to lack of previous input; well, the Denier's have had no previous input that would allow them to consider the sumblime answer; they are content to see only blackness and trying to comprehend colors would be too disturbing given the inability to explain it rationally.
Did you read my post directed to PR? My story (so to speak) of my interactions with a Rinpoche when I was young? If you did, I can only assume these comments are not directed at me.



I hope that your alternatives in the future have more substance than what we have seen so far. As it is, we can assume from the evidence that Criss is for real

And of course the evidence you keep reffering to is this:
No visible props
Criss says its real
Eyewitnesses are baffled (im sure none of them have the technical knowhow to answer mechanical posibilities)
you cant figure out how he does it, therefore it must be real.

Is that about right? Did i miss anything? If I did, please, list it.

Also, please answer my question that I have posted, than reposted. It can be found below:



Just to clarify, you have no statistical evidence or analysis available to prove how mathematically probable it is for CA to levitate correct?


[edit on 8-8-2007 by InSpiteOf]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   
InSpiteOf: you are correct in that CA's production crew and film editors would not be motivated to spill the beans due to NDA's etc.

However, there's nothing stopping hundreds of independent eyewitnesses from doing so.

And yet we have found NO evidence of that, of eyewitnesses saying things like "Yeah I was there when CA's production crew were setting up their props, invisible wires, harnesses, cranes, completely invisible plexiglass platforms, hot-air balloons etc".

Why? Since he does these feats in such public locations, the setup/teardown involved would be impossible to hide from the public.....



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join