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: 50
13
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   
My question to the believers and to those that find the idea of an NDA to be hogwash, have any of CA's production or editing crew come forth to claim that he is the real deal? If not, why do you think that is?


Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
However, there's nothing stopping hundreds of independent eyewitnesses from doing so.

By that token, there is nothing stopping those witnesses from putting their independant footage on the net, yet none exists. Doesnt that strike you as odd?



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".

I digress, I do not no why, I am stumped. Though my gut feeling lies between NDA's and controlled crowds.
(im sure that made eyewitness happy)



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


Didint Copperfield make the statue of liberty disapprea in public? Was it impossible for him to set up his equipment without anyone noticing?

[edit on 8-8-2007 by InSpiteOf]




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Back to the old ' confidentiality agreements ' again are we? Ho hum..I thought we had dispelled this old tired silliness already. but once again:

A " Confidentiality Agreement ' is worth absolutely NOTHING unless: Some employee spills the beans and causes demonstrable harm to Criss by the breach, and then Criss would have to file a civil suit ( it is NOT a criminal matter at all) and take the alleged offender to court for a trial and verdict and possible damages. The damages are limited by law in all states and even IF such a scenario were to take place, the value of the info and the money that could be gained by the outing would be far greater than any possible rewards gotten from a court judgement.

In other words, if some employee spilled the beans on Criss, he could stand to make a lot more from the act than Criss would gain from the lawsuit. How much assets do you think the average film editor has? Hmm? He may make a decent living..say 45-75 k a year depending..but he is quite UNlikley to have assets that would offset the harm ratio done by the exposure..get it?

There is NO penalty attached to civil suits that could outweigh or compensate Criss for the loss of his career, no way. To even sue the guy afterwards would cost Criss even more big bucks and with a likley payout of less than the cost of his attorneys fees, Criss would no doubt settle for making sure the guy never worked again in the industry.

But to claim that some civilly enforced confidentiality agreement is so scary to the employees that they tremble at the thought of a court case is just ridiculous considering the consequences and cost to Criss from exposure, and the fact that outing Criss ( perhaps at the behest of one or more competitors) would make the ' whistleblower ' famous for a while and probably a hero to those who are insistent that there must be some trickery involved; that is worth money to the squealer as well..

Fame and fortune await the person who conclusively proves Criss is using props and film trickery; the penalty would be miniscule in comparison much later IF a lawsuit was even brought. Why would Criss sue the guy after his career was ruined? More money down the drain to the lawyers for what return? To get some small judgement from a middle class guy? Please. A judge cannot make civil penalties runinous to a person and so Criss would stand to gain nothing but bad publicity for hounding a person that was ' only telling the truth '..See? Not so hard to imagine MANY reasons to tell, and NO good ones to remain silent for so long and WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

You guys believe that EVERY EMPLOYEE is so intimidated by the civil lawsuit possibilities that they remain faithful out of fear. Fear is NEVER a factor for loyalty, only love is. Fear breeds contempt and contempt breeds breach of trust; you have the logic and reality all backwards insofar as real life goes.

No, you are the ones supposing and assuming; we are examining the evidence and making sound judgements based on the available evidence; you are assuming negatives and reaching so far out on the limb that you always snap the limb and fall to the ground with a thud. So far your arguments all resonate with a thud, and so does the logic you use. Human beings are disposed to treachery and deceipt and personal aggrandizement and that can and will overcome legal technicalities every time.

The penalties for betrayal are very minor compared to the harm done and the possible fame and income that could be realized from the exposure. If Criss could be ruined by one employee, that means that he is always living in a totally precarious position at all times; only fear keeping him in business..not a very good way to insure the future, now is it? In your world, Criss is always one step away from ruin; just one disloyal employee could bring the whole thing down..that is IF there is anything to squeal about, and we have seen NO evidence at all to support that claim.

How much more likley is it that Criss simply does the events and the employees do not have to worry about slipping up and possibly getting sued and Criss does not have to worry all the time about everyone that works for and with him..makes a lot more sense to me given the evidence.

So, it is ILLOGICAL in the extreme to believe that some agreement that can only be enforced at a later date after all the damage has been done, and at great cost for attroneys, court fees, etc., is the impetus for the total lack of anyone ever coming forward. There is ALWAYS one bad apple in every barrell and Criss' employees are no different than any other human beings in their basic mindsets, so Criss could NOT have, over all these years, simply lucked out every time and in every employee. If you believe that I have some really nice mountain land to sell you..a little steep but what the heck!! You seem like intelligent people, I am not and never will personally insult you...but it seems like a real conundrum when intelligent people can be at such extreme ends on a logic scale:

One of us is wrong and one of us is right. I say that the available evidence shows that there is no reason to assume that your position is valid; the more likley reality is that no evidence exists that can show that Criss is using props in some of his high events, among others, and to assume that they must be there in spite of the lack of evidence is just not logical and rational thought. It defys logic to believe that all employees are always loyal, for whatever reason, or to believe that props can be used without being seen by the close up eyewitnesses and that all we are seeing is video trickery. That is beyond the pale.

I believe that the following statement can best summarize the debate so far:

Until some demonstrable proof or evidence of fakery is shown, or even alleged, then we can assume that what we are seeing is as it happened and was faithfully recorded by the cameras. If Criss has to fake the film, how could he possible have a live audience up close as we see over and over and accomplish what we see him doing? You cannot have it both ways..either he fakes it with film or he doesn't, and live performances kill any chance at fakery when done in the open and without any observable props.

Think about it, if everyone knew Criss was using innate abilities, it would be old hat quickly, no big deal. Keeping people guessing is half the game. That is why he says little.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Fame and fortune await the person who conclusively proves Criss is using props and film trickery;


Really? To prove a stage magician uses props and trickery is the road to fame and fortune?

I'd think it would be more along the lines of - "This just in! 'Da Vinci Code' novel discovered to be fiction!"

But that's just me.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Who said anything about a stage magician? We are talking about a stage far above the Luxor Hotel and open golf courses and close up eyewitnesses. You are talking about apples and we are talking about oranges. just because Criss CAN do events on stage as well as in the open does NOT make him just a ' stage magician '. Perhaps you have not read this thread through very well, your comments seem like those we heard at the start of all this.

Fame and fortune are indeed in the cards for anyone who can successfully prove that Criss Angel uses props in his high levitations; the result for Criss would be ruinous and the attention and publicity and possible riches are quite feasible in a situation like that. this is SHOW business!! Kill or be killed; and to think that Criss' competitors, who really are few and far between considering..are unwilling to pay off an insider for the real dirt is just beyond belief.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86



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.
You have been show multiple instances where footage has been spliced together from two separate attempts at the illusion ( Factory levitation watch the man on the ground, he is only in one of the two shots from the same time period.) and yet you claim they are not changed.


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.


Cop out and not reading my posts fully. I say that in his levitating he ALWAYS uses a jacket, find me a levitation where he does not use a jacket or additional over garment. Nice try with the "desert is cold" arguement. What about the golf course then. Have you ever golfed on a course when it is sunny and over 90 degrees? It's god awful miserable the humidity just is constantly coming up from the ground, no one in their right mind would wear a jacket there but what do we see CA doing? You don't see anyone else there so cold they need to wear a jacket.
My "excuse" for the other events is that he doesn't' need to "hide" things on his torso for those events. Take a look at most of his making things appear tricks, he has a long sleeve bell bottom cuff jacket on, seem odd to you? When he has no need to hide things he doesn't wear the jacket, it's pretty standard fare for a magician. Misdirection, look it up.




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
Still no one has mentioned the explanation for the no continual shot of the area above CA as he levitates? Cmon, give it stab at least.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Who said anything about a stage magician?


Ok, replace the words "stage magician" with "entertainer". My comment stands. No one is going to achieve fame and fortune for rolling over on Criss Angel's trickery. It's a "given" in any rational mind that there are props and trickery involved. So the news revealing the how would solicit a yawn at best.

You guys want to buy into the paranormal explanation, go with that. If you're satisfied that's the deal, it's neither here nor there to the rest of us.

But if you really think you're going to convice people there's something supernatural or paranormal or any kind of actual levitation going on, you're wasting your time. And it's yours to waste, so have at it.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Its a given in any rational mind? Now YOU are the entertainer..a real comedian!! And pray tell, exactly HOW are we who believe in no props on some events irrational? tell us , if you can , why it is irrational to believe in what you see when there is NO evidence to the contrary?

What is rational to you is irrational to us, so how can you claim such sweeping' truths ' to be believed? Just because you say so? you had better have a lot more ammo than your opinions only if you want to be taken serioulsy here; we have been all through all of your closed minded and illogical counterparts and have proven satisfactorily that the LACK of evidence of props MEANS SOMETHING!! To YOU it may not, but that seems to make YOU the irrational opne, not us.

You are presupposing that all events MUST be faked..we are assuming that ALL possibilities are open. Let's see, ALL scientific inquiry demands that no predetrmined outcomes can be permitted, of course. How can any possibility be left out and still be a valid study? it cannot be. So when you make a blanket statement like you do, it reeks of the closed mind denying the facts and evidence to cling to a comfy mindset, and it is quite telling.

Explain if you can just how you think Criss managed to do the golf course levitation since there were many stunned eyewitnesses and no props shown or possible. If you cannot even guess with an intelligent and likley response, then you have lost the battle and should retreat: continued insistence on holding to a faulty logic is just embarrassing and those with an open mind will dismiss your comments as utterly without value.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
continued insistence on holding to a faulty logic is just embarrassing


We certainly agree there.



and those with an open mind will dismiss your comments as utterly without value.


Considering your definition of "open mind", I can live with that.




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86

Explain if you can just how you think Criss managed to do the golf course levitation since there were many stunned eyewitnesses and no props shown or possible. If you cannot even guess with an intelligent and likley response, then you have lost the battle and should retreat: continued insistence on holding to a faulty logic is just embarrassing and those with an open mind will dismiss your comments as utterly without value.


1. The Event is done shortly after dawn, not many people out on the course. The Crowd is not that large, I would not even call it a crowd. As for stunned, paid audiences can do that. I know, you will say they are not a "staged" audience. Why not do the stund midday when the shadows would be directly below CA when he "levitates" and there are hundreds or people out on the golf course to "stun"? You probably don't find that the least bit odd.
2. CA wears the jacket even then, I know you will disregard but facts are facts. But once again show me one levitation he does without it on.
3. Props are hidden by editing the shots to never show the area directly above him as he actually levitates. Watch the edits again. Even the SPOV camera never pans up during the actual levitation to the area 200-300 feet directly above him.
4. Music is edited in, that may cover the helicopter noise. Again you will discount this.
5. He never has the area above him blocked by any tree, ect.

There is nothing that can't be explained by having a small group of paid "spectators" present and careful editing of the actual video, chopping out anything you don't want to be seen. Yes I don't have evidence of the Helicopter, wires or harness, but that is due to good editing of the film record. Please include my whole quote if you wish to use it.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by pavil]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   
I gave up arguing with this lot of.. ... people, many pages back, but i still find it amusing to note that they assume to paint the 'skeptics' as the minority here.

Seriously, you go to people and ask them if Criss Angel is a magician or telepath? I sure know which answer will be the dominant one.

Having an open mind is great, i have one, everyone should have one. There is a difference, however, between an open mind and gullibility.

I believe mental powers exist, such as the QuiGong (spelling?) etc, but you can't use your belief in them as an argument in this debate. Just because you believe they exist, doesn't mean Criss Angel has them.

His JOB is to make you believe what he does is real. He is a magician, you aren't meant to be easily able to work out how his tricks are done.

I won't post again in this thread after this, because trying to talk to Paul_Richard and co. is like talking to a brick wall... covered in sound-proof concrete.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by fooffstarr
I believe mental powers exist, such as the QuiGong (spelling?) etc, but you can't use your belief in them as an argument in this debate. Just because you believe they exist, doesn't mean Criss Angel has them.

His JOB is to make you believe what he does is real. He is a magician, you aren't meant to be easily able to work out how his tricks are done.

I won't post again in this thread after this, because trying to talk to Paul_Richard and co. is like talking to a brick wall... covered in sound-proof concrete.

Thank you.


Those of us who have come to know that Criss Angel is an illusionist who also occasionally uses his Gift of Telekinesis - as with his high levitations - all appreciate the compliment.


I may not post in here like I used to, but I still am known to occasionally lurk to see what is happening.

BTW...it is spelled Qigong and pronounced Chi-Gong.




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:41 PM
link   
So the fact that the majority of the people are too dense to see the truth is somehow evidence for their superior judgement? What? That is ridiculous and you know it. Cannot wash pal.

The majority of the people think that the 9-11 ' attack ' was all some big goof up just like Uncle Dick says..or at least they act like they do, no outrage nationally..( suck thumb here and rock back and forth ). The American Idol show is better known than who is on the Supreme Court. the average American is clueless about anything that the major media does not tell them. pop a beer, watch the game, ..that is the mindset of the common man. it is the exception when a person moves beyond that and explores and investigates and opens up new possibilities.

To ask the average American to point out Italy on a world map and they pick Australia..ask them what year the 9-11 coup happened and most guess 93 or 95 or anything bit the right year. clueless. And THIS is the standard by which YOU gauge your reliability to discern reality fully? That is really embarrassing..it is so void of content that it screams out for rejection as a source of wisdom, don't you think?

It is the 5 % of the people that can appreciate the more sublime aspects of reality; that does not demean the other 95%, they simply need education and guidance, thats all. But like a wayward child who sometimes has to hit bottom despite all of the efforts of concerned advice , some Denier's must be nailed to the wall of logic and facts and made to admit that they are grasping at straws and suppositions totally unsupported by the evidence.

It is now back to the old ' video editing ' as nausem, but NOT ad infinitum!! I for one am through pointing out that the film allegations are unfounded and the other spurious silliness like depending on the knowledge of the lamest citizens in current events and civics on earth, US, the American public..shallow, self centered, content to let others determine their reality and the truth for them..and suppose that they are the ones who really know whats what. I am going from amused to sickened very quickly.

The old excuses told over and over and still no validity..when will an original thinker come along and give credit to the opposing view?? Cameras trickery as a last resort, paid off audiences FOREVER LOYAL..blah blah...my God. How about something new and with SOME small chance of being possible or likley. So far NONE of the above is even close.Period. The majority are fools, that is a given, look at whom is the freakin President for God's sake. Rely on the open mind for observations if yours are undeveloped..it will speed your journey along immensely.

It is intellectually dishonest to continue to deny and reject the available and pertinent evidence in favor of unfounded suppositions based on a belief in the negative assumption and the unproven and unlikley possibilities. Jackets and ignorant masses are the backbone of the Denier's vault of proof; a dusty and moth eaten and empty room without illumination of any kind. Stagger around in the dark if you wish, but do not insult ours and your intelligence by claiming such empty reasons for disbelief are really valid and pertinent to the issue: they are not.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Why don't you actually try to refute my statements rather than going on a tirade about how right you are, when you have provided no proof whatsoever for you arguement.

Did CA learn his TK just by himself? Did he have a mentor? Who? Had CA shown evidence of TK throughout his life?
Why didn't he do this major levitation in Season One? I assume the levitations were done in Season two from my recollection. Wouldn't you do your best effort that first season to cement your series and future $$$$?

All those are valid questions, maybe you can answer them since you don't seem inclined to really respond to my other questions with a valid rebuttal.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
It is now back to the old ' video editing ' as nausem, but NOT ad infinitum!! I for one am through pointing out that the film allegations are unfounded

Pavil pointed out an instance of video editing which you cleaverly ignored, ill post it again for your recollection:

You have been show multiple instances where footage has been spliced together from two separate attempts at the illusion ( Factory levitation watch the man on the ground, he is only in one of the two shots from the same time period.) and yet you claim they are not changed.

That was taken from a post above.



It is intellectually dishonest to continue to deny and reject the available and pertinent evidence

seriously. What evidence do you have?
You have witnesses, hardly credible as none of them have sworn to what they saw, and only appear on MindFreak productions.
Well thats about it actually.
Please do present what clear evidence you have. I know pavil and myself are dying to see it, and also to read you refutation to his previous posts.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Back to film editing to hide the props and paid off witnesses. That is really all I have heard. The posts above that talk about totally different events and splicing film that has NOTHING to do at all with the events in question are nothing but a straw man .. yet again. It is silly.

If you Denier's will actually have the nerve to state that the Luxor event or the Golf course event were done with paid witnesses and editing out the cranes or whatever supposedly allowed Criss to levitate high in the air and trvale over some distance..then you cannot be made to ever see the truth no matter what. You are a closed door. If you are that bereft of ideas about this then you are wasting time and effort here; all of ours.

It ALWAYS boils down to the weakest and most laugable excuses ever: Here are the Top reasons for believing the Denier's version:

1. Witnesses are all paid off to look amazed even though they must surely see the props and cranes and wires supporting Criss. They are either bussed in from God knows where or just recruited off the streets, presumably.

2. These witnesses are made to sign ' confidentiality agreements ' that promise dire consequences for any leak of the real facts. So far the fear seems to be working as a motivating factor as not one person has ever come forward to report being paid or coerced in to signing or anything else of the sort. Amazing, eh? Absolute loyalty to strangers forever.

3. After the filming is done and the wires and cranes and props and helicopters and such are all put away, the corwods are dispersed with another dire threat of extreme retribution for any laapse of loyalty, and the film is trucked off to a studio where busy little bees hover around the videotape with computers whirring and then they just wipe out all traces of the cranes and wires and sanitize the film and voila! it just LOOKS like Criss is levitating!!

4. Naturally, all of these employees and contractors and film people are ALSO under the threat of some dire and terrible consequence for spiling the beans about all the video trickery and editing out of the props: So far not ONE person has ever come forward to claim seeing or being a party of any video editing that would hide props..criss must have some fearsome influence over thousands of people to make them all toe the line WITHOUT EXCEPTION over many years.

5. Because Criss wears certain types of clothing while performing some events, this means that he MUST have some ulterior motive for wearing said clothing and the logical conclusion of course is to assume that the ulterior motive is to hide some wires or other props so he can be attached to the crane or helicopter that will later be edited out by the folks in #4 above.

6. If any or all of the above fail to persuade a skeptic who believes that no props are used, then simply fall back on the old favorite: " YOU show US more proof ". Say it over and over again, and sooner or later the believers will tire of the game and go away. Just keep repeating it: " We need MORe proof!! Show US the proof !! you MUST prove that they are not doing all we claim and if you cannot then that makes us right, see?"


The above is so totally empty of any reasonable assumptions that it screams out for rejection as a viable alternative to the truth. the Denier's have only a very few sorry excuses and false allegations and sidestep's left and so we see the result: the utter lack of substnace in their arguments.

I believe that is any halfway intelligent person, someone with no opinion either way on this issue, were read this entire thread, they would have to come down on ouir side even if they did not accept the main premise of opurs. The reason? Because we have more liklihood of being right than they do. their excuses simply do not satisfy an inquiring mind at all. they do not persude but rather generate ever more unlikley and outlandish proposals to cover their negative assumptions.

One would have to accept multiple and outrageous odds to even begin to accept eh rational of the Denier's. their story gets ever more convoluted as the numbers of crazy assumptions rises all the time.

Does anyone really accept that all people who witness the events we speak of would be loyal and silent forever, to a man? Hmm? Do you? If so you are a sucker for any weak story. my God, what does it take to make some p[eople see? Odds off the charts? No, they simply deny the chart has validity and that odds don't matter. That one issue alone solves the case: to believe that thousands of witnesses over the years have all, without one exception, maintained total loyalty to Criss or have been in such fear of a possible civil lawsuit at some point in the future that they remain slient forever. Same for all employees and staff and friends.

But the Deniers do not like to talk about that, notw do they? No, they do not because they cannot; it is IRREFUTABLE that if Criss was using deception to perform his high events someone would have, by now, spilled the beans for one reason or another. To believe the opposite is just foolhardy and stubborn refusal to accept the facts. No matter how many times I refute the ' confidentiality agreement ' nonsense as I did thoroughly above, it still does not sink in to them. they skirt around the undeniable issues and ignore them while trumpeting the nonsense and far out suppositions that serve as their foundations.

It is really uselss at some point: One can only debate and challenge those who have the dedication to honest appraisal of the facts and a wilingness to change the viewpoint if given adequate evidence. NO amount of evidence is enough for the Denier's, none. it does not matter, a;; that matters is keeping their preconceived notions intact so no disturbing possibilities will be injected into their psyches. too much to handler so the results are what we see before us as the basis for the Denier;s creed:

Obfuscate, deny, ignore, misstate, allude,suppose..these are the tools of the Denier's. WE on the other hand, have the total lack of evidence to the contrary of our view as our starting point and much more beyond that. but before the Denier's can be expected to see the really important parts about this issue, they must first break through the walls of denial and accept the massive amounts of evidence, whether circumstantial or actual, that overwhelm their absolute LACK of any proof of deception whatsoever.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Back to film editing to hide the props and paid off witnesses. That is really all I have heard. The posts above that talk about totally different events and splicing film that has NOTHING to do at all with the events in question are nothing but a straw man .. yet again. It is silly.


Nice rant.

I see you still have not presented any evidence to prove your contention. Lets try just one question and see if you can answer just it. You say that CA does not edit his production and "the video shows what the crowd sees" and "if CA can't do it live, CA just won't do it". I beleive those are CA's words. Explain this to me then. Here is my only question I want you to answer:

In his factory levitation, is it the video documentation of a single "levitation"?

Pretty simple and direct question, can you attempt to at least answer it.



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 01:39 PM
link   
what a shock, you didnt refute a single point pavil made. Instead, you went into another tirade about how much we cant handle the truth. You answer none of our questions, yet demand we answer yours.

Your original point about video editting:

Originally posted by eyewitness86
It is now back to the old ' video editing ' as nausem, but NOT ad infinitum!! I for one am through pointing out that the film allegations are unfounded

The film allegations are not unfounded, pavil pointed out an instance of such an event, on this page of the thread! The fact that such editing has been done before cannot be refuted He has done it once, and can easily do it again!

It is entirely possible that the Luxor event (atrium) was shot in more than one stage, and edited together to appear as one. It would go something like this:
stage one: criss does his trick in a closed off area
stage two: actors are paid to play witnesses and to act shocked (to something that isnt happenning in front of them )
stage three: the two parts are edited together at post production levels.

I am going to ask you a very direct question, and I would like a very direct answer:
What is so impossible about the above scenario?

One other request of you, pease compile a list of the evidence you have to support your claims. Including direct witness testimony, statistical analysis (which you boast you know), Mechanical and Civil engineers stating it would be impossible to rig something up to fake such levitation illusions, etc.
If its easy for you to compile a list of what you think we believe are facts for denial, it should be just as easy for you to compile a list of what you believe are facts for belief. I ask you to do it in a civil and concise manner.

Edit to add: pavil beat me to it, please answer his question than mine.

kinglizard: Not only do they not listen, they completely twist his meaning around to suit their views. "I have no superpowers" becomes "I have no superpowers because what powers I do have normal" And they say we have the blinders on...

[edit on 9-8-2007 by InSpiteOf]



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Had I known that the two supporters of Chris Angel in this thread wouldn't even listen to Chris Angel himself telling the world in an interview (Below) that he has NO "superpowers" (and at one point starts laughing at those that believe)....I would Never have posted to this thread.

I mean if they won't even listen to Chris, there is no way they will listen to me or anyone else for that matter.




posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Here is are some videos for you.






BTW I still think Criss Angel is a great Performer. His Cirque Show is going to rock.

Mod edit: to repair vid links


[edit on 8/9/2007 by kinglizard]

Thanks was just doing that myself KL

[edit on 9-8-2007 by pavil]

[edit on 9-8-2007 by pavil]



posted on Aug, 9 2007 @ 03:29 PM
link   
AMAZING clips pavil, i wish we still had WATS, you get as many as I could give you for finding those!

What say you, eyewitness?



new topics




 
13
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join