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: 57
13
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
So sorry, I thought that this was about Criss Angel..Copperfield means nothing to this discussion as he has never attempted to perform feats off of a stage. Criss is the subject of this because he does things that NO ONE else on earth does. The stage magcicians like Copperfield, who use props, are totally different from the adepts like Criss and David and Cyril.

You don't sound sorry. BTW, you are wrong about Copperfield. He would have had quite a hard time moving the great wall of china and the statue of liberty onto his stage, for example. Countless examples of off stage work exist.
You surprised me by accepting the idea that Copperfield always uses props, when all along you have defended Angel when he was accused of doing so. In the last two weeks, your posts have repeated the same points over and over dozens of times. What is the point? If it is critical to you that others see things your way, your constant repetition of the same points will not achieve that. I had been pretty much in agreement with you until now.




posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The stage magcicians like Copperfield, who use props, are totally different from the adepts like Criss and David and Cyril.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
BTW, you are wrong about Copperfield. He would have had quite a hard time moving the great wall of china and the statue of liberty onto his stage, for example. Countless examples of off stage work exist.

You surprised me by accepting the idea that Copperfield always uses props, when all along you have defended Angel when he was accused of doing so. In the last two weeks, your posts have repeated the same points over and over dozens of times. What is the point? If it is critical to you that others see things your way, your constant repetition of the same points will not achieve that. I had been pretty much in agreement with you until now.

I have to side with Eyewitness86 on the issue of David Copperfield, as he does not portray any of the signs of someone who has a Gift of Chi-Telekinesis.

You never see David Copperfield perform street magick like David Blaine and Criss Angel. He sticks to doing his act in a very controlled environment. That is one big indication.

Which is not to imply that Copperfield does not fly in the air - just as you have testified to witnessing. As InSpiteOf has pointed out through his own research and reference link confirmation, this is accomplished through electronic gadgetry.

I don't know about the Great Wall of China trick but the Statue of Liberty feat is a well known illusion. The audience was put on a stage that slowly rotated them to a vantage point whereby they could no longer see it. Thus, the entire illusion was achieved, rather expensively I might add, through subtle and clever misdirection.




posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Exactly. Copperfield is a performer who depends on props and set ups and massive staging to pull off ' illusions '. Criss Angel and others are able to perform their events with eyewitnesses up close and no props at all. This is where the rubber meets the road in this issue. There is NO comparison between these people.

Criss and David and Cyril are the three primary adepts in the world today. There are those who cannot accept the truth, and we see their spurious denials all the time here; silly, way out, nonsensical, odds shattering assumptions that take the place of simple observation and an ability to discern reality. All of the others that perform are just stage magicians and sleight of hand artists; the fact that Criss and the others can ALSO do these things does NOT imply in any way, shape or form that there is a link between them. None.

No, it is apparent: When the denier's are stuck with trying to claim video trickery and paid witnesses and other outrageous and unproven foolishness, it shows the depth of their empty bag of excuses. Someone above complained that I say the same things over and over: that is because I have had to drag the deniers kicking and screaming into the light with logic and facts; they continue to say the same siilly things and the only reply is the facts and logic, and that sounds repeticious I admit but when the deniers have only a few excuses they tend to repeat them over and over again. Nothing new under the sun where the deniers are concerned.

Why do people who see terrible or shocking or amazing things tend to hide their eyes? Ever watched it? People tend to hide from that which confuses or causes them to be shocked for whatever reason. They literally hide their eyes so that despite the fact that some reality is taking place, they pretend that if they cannot see it, maybe it will go away or will not be there when they open them again. It is denial in the extreme; people here do not hide their faces and eyes, but their minds and spirits from the truth so that their version of reality will not be swept away and cause them great trauma. It is a defense mechanism.

Until the fear and trepidation is removed from the equation, the deniers will always insist that their version of reality is the correct one; to admit otherwise would undermine their very limited view of the world and upset their balance. It is just too much input for too little storage space!!

So, over time, we have whittles down the number of excuses that the deniers have in their bag of tricks until they are left naked and ashamed at the fact that the flowing robes they thought they were wrapped in were in fact an illusion; the real truth always illuminates the alck of substance that the imaginers use to placate themselves.

By the way, to the poster above who whined that my apology was inadequate: Guess what? I was being sarcastic!! I was not in any way apologizing, but reminding others that we have long ago dealt with the nonsense about the difference between Criss and all others, ( excepting David and Cyril) as far as gifts go. There are only THREE human beings that currently use their kinetic/ group entity/ etc. abilities to perform and educate and entertain: Criss, David and Cyril. ALL of the others are mere stage performers and illusionists and such. Derren Brown is a seperate case.

Copperfield cannot levitate without props, Randi cannot do anything except criticize others, he is an old washed up stage magician who was so out of date that he had to find a new schtick to survive. Imagine being some stage performer and along comes Criss to blow your act into bits. It makes all the others look like pikers and grade school amateurs. They cannot even step on to the same stage as Criss as what Criss does would make traditional ' illusions ' seem to be as quaint as the Geneva Conventions to the Bu#es!!

When you see Criss doing his thing high in the air in broad daylight, you are in fact seeing a human being defy the laws of physics as currently comprehended by the majority of the people. That is a fact and beyond dispute. Not one example of a likley alternative, more likely than belieivng the act as seen, has even been presented. Only the most weak and ridiculous excuses are used to try and figure out what ' really ' is happening by the denier's. The most outlandish excuses are the most favored by the deniers: film tricks, paid witnesses, invisible props, etc.

Know what the definition of a loser is? That is the guy in a debate given the task of defending the view that Criss Angel uses props for his high levitations and many other feats that cannot and have NEVER been duplicated by ANYONE on earth ever. That is a losing cause yet we still get the stubborn denialists clinging to their unprovable claims of props where none could be and legions of paid and loyal witnesses, etc.

People used to think that the earth was flat; now people think that man cannot defeat or alter gravity; next we will have people saying that if man was meant to fly God would have given him wings!! Well, there are many types of wings, the best are hidden away in the recesses of the spirit and well able to lift the mundane and common weight of denial off of the minds of the people so they can move on to new horizons.

Criss and David and Cyril might be compared, but not the common performer; we are talking apples and kiwis here!! Best to all on the journey to a new way of seeing!!



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 01:25 PM
link   
'I have to side with Eyewitness86 on the issue of David Copperfield, as he does not portray any of the signs of someone who has a Gift of Chi-Telekinesis.

You never see David Copperfield perform street magick like David Blaine and Criss Angel. He sticks to doing his act in a very controlled environment. That is one big indication.

Which is not to imply that Copperfield does not fly in the air - just as you have testified to witnessing. As InSpiteOf has pointed out through his own research and reference link confirmation, this is accomplished through electronic gadgetry.

I don't know about the Great Wall of China trick but the Statue of Liberty feat is a well known illusion.' Paul Richard


Originally posted by eyewitness86
Exactly. Copperfield is a performer who depends on props and set ups and massive staging to pull off ' illusions '. Criss Angel and others are able to perform their events with eyewitnesses up close and no props at all. This is where the rubber meets the road in this issue. There is NO comparison between these people.
Copperfield cannot levitate without props, Randi cannot do anything except criticize others, he is an old washed up stage magician who was so out of date that he had to find a new schtick to survive.
Know what the definition of a loser is? That is the guy in a debate given the task of defending the view that Criss Angel uses props for his high levitations and many other feats that cannot and have NEVER been duplicated by ANYONE on earth ever. That is a losing cause yet we still get the stubborn denialists clinging to their unprovable claims of props where none could be and legions of paid and loyal witnesses, etc.

Paul, it's too bad you missed the China performance by Copperfield, as he performed street magic in it. Maybe you have not seen him do so for some other reason than he cannot. He can, but he may not want to do so for whatever reason. Thanks for allowing the possibility that I saw him fly, because although I don't doubt that there is a real patent, nor that it is in the name of a staffer of his, but I am not convinced that the device is able to achieve what I saw. The explanation of the blue screen, thin wires and a harness, and slits in the box, etc. does not seem to me to be able to be completely hidden from all the viewpoints of the audience. For example, the front row. Would they not see the slits? And even from my seat, at times he was well out above the crowd, far from the stage. Not that I'm saying the patent theory is wrong, just that I am not convinced it is the answer. Besides, I went to 3 shows of his, once watching from row 7, and I saw numerous feats that I have yet to see any explanation for.
When you are in the 7th row, and maybe 20 feet away, you get a very good view. So good that I could see how one of his illusions was done, which to some would be enough to prove he is just using props, etc. But although that may be true, that is not proof it is so. I shook Copperfield's hand after the show and said 'good show' to him. My sense of him at that time was that he had something in his eyes, something very strong. I know that sounds corny, but I see the same thing in Angel and Blaines eyes, and at least one other person. Whatever I sense, I can't say, so take it for what it is, just my own feelings.
I see no value in comparisons, but I will say that I feel Copperfield is at the least a peer of Blaine and Angel, if not a bit better at his craft. I've seen him do many feats that were later done by Angel and Blaine, and even some that I have not seen those two do. Some people are fans of one or the other, and say their favorite is the best, but I don't see any great difference in those three.
Brown I can't comment on.
Many people have abilities science can't explain. Uri Geller, for instance, who has submitted to laboratory testing, and then baffled the scientists who tested him.
Even I myself have done things science is certain are impossible to be real, and yet they are.
But I don't find that surprising anymore. Scientists are constantly learning more, and finding out that they were wrong.



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Hi BlackguardXIII,


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Paul, it's too bad you missed the China performance by Copperfield, as he performed street magic in it. Maybe you have not seen him do so for some other reason than he cannot. He can, but he may not want to do so for whatever reason.

No good reason comes to mind.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
When you are in the 7th row, and maybe 20 feet away, you get a very good view. So good that I could see how one of his illusions was done, which to some would be enough to prove he is just using props, etc. But although that may be true, that is not proof it is so. I shook Copperfield's hand after the show and said 'good show' to him. My sense of him at that time was that he had something in his eyes, something very strong. I know that sounds corny, but I see the same thing in Angel and Blaines eyes, and at least one other person. Whatever I sense, I can't say, so take it for what it is, just my own feelings.

Illusions can be very well hidden, even if they are seen up close.

Although not as powerful as a Gift of Chi-Telekinesis, it sounds like David Copperfield has a Gift of Charisma. I've known people who have had that.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I see no value in comparisons, but I will say that I feel Copperfield is at the least a peer of Blaine and Angel, if not a bit better at his craft. I've seen him do many feats that were later done by Angel and Blaine, and even some that I have not seen those two do. Some people are fans of one or the other, and say their favorite is the best, but I don't see any great difference in those three.
Brown I can't comment on.

David Copperfield has been at it much longer than the other three. Logic dictates that he is a more skilled illusionist simply from having more experience.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Many people have abilities science can't explain. Uri Geller, for instance, who has submitted to laboratory testing, and then baffled the scientists who tested him.

That's true.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Even I myself have done things science is certain are impossible to be real, and yet they are.
But I don't find that surprising anymore. Scientists are constantly learning more, and finding out that they were wrong.

Some scientists are more progressive than others.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Thanks for allowing the possibility that I saw him fly, because although I don't doubt that there is a real patent, nor that it is in the name of a staffer of his, but I am not convinced that the device is able to achieve what I saw. The explanation of the blue screen, thin wires and a harness, and slits in the box, etc. does not seem to me to be able to be completely hidden from all the viewpoints of the audience. For example, the front row. Would they not see the slits? And even from my seat, at times he was well out above the crowd, far from the stage. Not that I'm saying the patent theory is wrong, just that I am not convinced it is the answer. Besides, I went to 3 shows of his, once watching from row 7, and I saw numerous feats that I have yet to see any explanation for.

I don't doubt your appraisal - from your eyewitness testimony - that David Copperfield can levitate in his shows. But him not doing so outside of a magician's stage and auditorium does lead one to conclude that he is probably using props of some kind.

David Copperfield has been in the public spotlight much longer than Brown, Angel, or Blaine. In light of this, doesn't it strike you as odd that Copperfield never made his own street magic video years before the other three did? And that he doesn't have a weekly street magic show just as Criss Angel does now? And why hasn't he done any high levitations over a hotel as Criss Angel did? Or in a large auditorium as Criss Angel did?

Those are all tell-tale signs that he is unable to graduate from being an excellent illusionist to also being someone who performs feats via a Gift of Chi-Telekinesis





posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_RichardNo good reason comes to mind.
I don't doubt your appraisal - from your eyewitness testimony - that David Copperfield can levitate in his shows. ...doesn't it strike you as odd that Copperfield never made his own street magic video years before the other three did?

Maybe he is agoraphobic, or has OCD, or fears assassination by zealots who feel he is demonic, or maybe he just feels at this point it is beneath him, I don't know.
I feel he does not need to justify his choices to anyone, nor even say why he makes them, as they are his to make. Odd? No, if in fact he never made a recording of street magic, which seems doubtful to me. How do you know he never did so? The arrival of small, quality video cameras came after his career began, and maybe that has influenced the current trend? But I do know he has done street magic, and therefore is able to do it. Nothing I have read has suggested to me that he is any more or less likely to use props than Blaine or Angel, and maybe they all do. Holographs could possibly achieve the effect I witnessed, although the level of technology for that good of a holograph is something I have yet to see elsewhere. It is my view that all three do not use props in some of their grander feats, but I know I could easily be wrong. Those who doubt the existance of abilities which are totally unimagined yet by the academic world cannot accept that they do what it appears that they do. But they also can't figure out any alternate method, which shows that they don't know for sure what is being done, as I don't know as well.
At least I can draw on my own personal experiences to make my decisions, something the many people who never saw these things up close can do.



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_RichardNo good reason comes to mind.
I don't doubt your appraisal - from your eyewitness testimony - that David Copperfield can levitate in his shows. ...doesn't it strike you as odd that Copperfield never made his own street magic video years before the other three did?


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Maybe he is agoraphobic, or has OCD, or fears assassination by zealots who feel he is demonic, or maybe he just feels at this point it is beneath him, I don't know.

I doubt it is any of the above reasons, as any of them would be cause to not perform on stage as well.

More likely, it is simply because he does not have the Gifts to do street magick.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I feel he does not need to justify his choices to anyone, nor even say why he makes them, as they are his to make. Odd? No, if in fact he never made a recording of street magic, which seems doubtful to me. How do you know he never did so?

Those who can do street magick (note the spelling) are above and beyond all illusionists everywhere.

I did a search and found a David Copperfield DVD at Amazon.com. In it he does his famous grand illusions that we discussed earlier. But there is no mention of any of the feats that people like David Blaine, Derren Brown, and especially Criss Angel, can perform off-stage, on city sidewalks and in parks.

David Copperfield is an excellent illusionist. But I have yet to see any evidence that he has a Gift of Chi-Telekinesis.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
The arrival of small, quality video cameras came after his career began, and maybe that has influenced the current trend? But I do know he has done street magic, and therefore is able to do it. Nothing I have read has suggested to me that he is any more or less likely to use props than Blaine or Angel, and maybe they all do.

Actually, they all use props to a certain extent. The trick (pun intended) is in being able to perform feats that are near impossible to duplicate, even with props. Like Derren Brown's touchless Chi punch for example.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Holographs could possibly achieve the effect I witnessed, although the level of technology for that good of a holograph is something I have yet to see elsewhere.

Free standing holographs - without a device off to the side projecting the image - are impossible to manifest with physically based technology. This is difficult to explain. Suffice to state that it can be done telekinetically or with a lot of Chi. As with the large Marian Group Entity that manifested a number of luminous holographic images in Egypt in the late 1960s.


Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
It is my view that all three do not use props in some of their grander feats, but I know I could easily be wrong.

If there is ever a video clip online of Copperfield doing a high levitation outside a stage, be sure to start a thread about it and let me know. Even if it is not indicative of a Gift, it sure would be fun to watch.



Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Those who doubt the existance of abilities which are totally unimagined yet by the academic world cannot accept that they do what it appears that they do. But they also can't figure out any alternate method, which shows that they don't know for sure what is being done, as I don't know as well.
At least I can draw on my own personal experiences to make my decisions, something the many people who never saw these things up close can do.

A sound appraisal.





posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Here is a video taken from the extensive list of relevant examples available on the link that PaulRichard provides at the bottom of many of his posts. I have been going to those references and watching and reading quite a few of them and there is a wealth of info there. I highly recommend that anyone who wants a good education if many important truths to visit the link and study the fascinating things there.

Here is a video that should put the naysayers to bed forever; unless they claim that all the people are paid stooges; then we know they have reached the end of the line in excuses and can be considered irelevant for the sake of future discussions.





So, there it is, at arms length, witnesses that could NOT be fooled by props or wires or anything else. To those who say that they will believe it if Criss came in their living rooms and levitated, well, if this isn't close enough for you then you are determined to never believe and you will achieve that goal no doubt. This is as close to proof positive as one can get. More soon!!



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   
This thread is great. Thanks for the entertainment.


No, Criss Angel does not have any supernatural powers, or the ability to levitate without assistance.

Tell me why his feet sway the instant he leaves the ground in that last video? It's because his feet are not directly under the 'wires' that are attached to his body. If he could levitate naturally, he would just go up.

Yes, all those people in front of him are paid to be there, or are friends and relatives, or part of his travel crew. Except the few that the camera switches too occasionally. They are real, but probably watching some other street magic of Criss's.

Are you sure YOU aren't Criss?



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by nextguyinline
 


Here again, the only explanation the skeptics can offer is many paid-off witnesses, and completely invisible props and equipment, with ZERO proof of either.



PROVE the paid-off witnesses, and PROVE the completely invisible equipment please....



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Tell me why his feet sway when he immediately leaves the ground?

I concede, it may not have been wires, but it was something. Maybe something like this: www.thisismagic.com...

I don't want to crash your worlds, so please by all means, enjoy the show.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Tell me why his feet sway when he immediately leaves the ground?

I concede, it may not have been wires, but it was something. Maybe something like this: www.thisismagic.com...


Good find and good luck getting a response to your question. His "gift" doesn't allow him to just take off smoothly I guess.

Also, does anyone else here find it at least a little strange that CA Never does his "High levitation" in a small enclosed place like a normal room in a building? That last video, if he could do that in a regular room and almost hit the ceiling with his head, I would be impressed. It makes his feat suspect that he can only do it at certain venues/locations, you have to admit that.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Tell me why his feet sway when he immediately leaves the ground?


Possibly because the centre of his weight is in his torso and abs, so his legs and feet have to adjust a bit as he lifts off....



I concede, it may not have been wires, but it was something. Maybe something like this: www.thisismagic.com...


Wow, levitate up to TWO FEET in the air with the Icarus Effect!

CA clearly levitates higher than that.

Besides, that's not what I'm asking for. The skeptics are unable to prove their assertion that CA pays off many eyewitnesses and uses completely invisible equipment.

PROVE the paid-off eyewitnesses please.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Also, does anyone else here find it at least a little strange that CA Never does his "High levitation" in a small enclosed place like a normal room in a building? That last video, if he could do that in a regular room and almost hit the ceiling with his head, I would be impressed. It makes his feat suspect that he can only do it at certain venues/locations, you have to admit that.


I've already pointed this out, but in the Luxor Atrium float-down, you can very clearly see the ceiling right above his head.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   
[double post]

[edit on 18-8-2007 by MrdDstrbr]



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr



PROVE the paid-off eyewitnesses please.


.... I've already pointed this out, but in the Luxor Atrium float-down, you can very clearly see the ceiling right above his head.


Listen to what I said; SMALL ROOM, the Luxor Atrium is quite possibly one of the largest enclosed spaces EVER built. And in the video, he is still many feet from the actual top of the atrium, not "right above his head as you claim". Has CA ever done a "high levitation" in a 12 to 14 foot ceiling room? I think not. Doesn't that make you wonder why?

Don't you find it the least bit odd that for most of his illusions that are the most debated, he has relatively few audience members? I know there is a place where you can line up to see CA perform in Vegas, why is it his "crowds" are so small on the videos?

I bet CA could get at least 100 to go to lunch with him, why in the video above, we see only 8 people? Count them yourself. The walk through store window 10-15 ppl, the Golf Course 10-15 people, the Building to building levitation 15-35 people. Hell CA gets more people to his book signings than he does to these "major events" and yet you can just blow off the possibility that they might be paid off.

I'll tell you what, I'll give you a "possibility" of CA actually levitating for real if you give me a "possibility" of CA paying these small audiences to witness a staged illusion. Ok? Can you admit that it might be in the realm of possibility?



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   
MrdDstrbr: You are seeing the exact thing I talked about so many times already: The absolute bottom of the barrel claims that are used to try and debunk the obvious. It is laughable, is'nt it?

One even asks why Criss does not do HIGH levitations in small enclosed rooms!! Imagine that? Uuhhh, maybe because he does not want to bump his head on the ceiling!! Or maybe the entities that are giving him the ' lift' that raises him up are limited in smaller spaces to a degree that is not a factor in wide open places, hence the much higher and longer and moving levitations we see at the Luxor and at the Golf Course events.

In any event, for Criss to levitate ONE INCH off the ground means a great deal, does it not? It means that gravity is not the all pervasive force that binds us to this earth, at least for some! The Denier's would try and come up with some way to try and deny the truth; no matter how unlikely or far out. Of COURSE his feet sway a bit while rising, that is normal. Do you expect him to be frozen stiff just because he is rising? And if so, why?

As already commented on by the very able MrdDstrbr , the upper torso area and upper body contain the most weight, and the legs always swing a bit when a person is picked up; watch anyone being lifted and see;ALSO don't you think that the witnesses that are standing RIGHT THERE would see any wires, etc? If you were there you would have seen any props or wires; they do NOT exist!! Criss simply can levitate and why the hell is that so hard for so many of you to comprehend? What is so freaky abouit an alteration of gravity?

I bet a dollar to a dime that most of the deniers are open minded enough to believe in UFO's!! Is'nt that a conundrum? How could one believe that a disc could alter gravity but not a human being? Is it such a stretch to understand that the unseen forces that exist in the realsm we cannot see with our eyes, the realms already well established as real, could affect gravity enough to lift a mere human?

If a mind can create a device that can affect gravity, then surely another 'mind 'could bypass the machine and affect the same changes to gravity that are caused by the machine; understand? There is a mental block that some people have that does not allow them to progress beyond a certain point; we see the posts of these people often here. They are universally unable to find a likley and convincing way to refute the obvious, so they resort to believing things NOT represented by the evidence. Let me give you an example:

If a Denier was called for jury duty, and agreed to make a decision based SOLELY on the evidence presented in court and not based on ANY personal or preconceived ideas , how would they handle the following?

If the evidence that we have shown here, the video's, the eyewitness testimonies, the thousands of independent witnesses who have seen Criss events up close; if we take all of the evidence and present it and then rest our case, what would the other side produce to refute ours?

Suppositions NOT in evidence, allegations of witness tampering and pay offs for silence NOT supported by ANY evidence, allegations of props and wires, NOT in any evidence, platforms that cannot be seen and are NOT in evidence, video trickery or editing to eliminate props and supports, NOT in any evidence..see where I am going? How could any of these things make it into evidence without some proof? It could NOT!! No judge would allow ' evidence ' to be presented that had no background, no relevance, no PROOF of any connection to the matter at hand.

But our juror that is a Denialist would look at all of the evidence, which contained NO hint or substantial claim of any trickery or props, and that juror would STILL vote to find Criss guilty of using props!! Why? How could he when NO evidence was presented that could possible support the view that props were used? Here is how: If a persons mind is made up before they enter the deliberation room, then the evidence is a moot subject. it does not matter how much evidence there is , or the quality of it , or the reliability of it, all that matters is that the belief system that the juror walked in with is still intact and safe from shock and disturbing revelations.

It is a protective mechanism to keep people from being unable to deal with their usual reality when events occur that would shatter their illusory world of defined parameters and known values. We could have Criss walk right into the Deniers convention, go on stage, and levitate into the kleig lights , and still the deniers would try and find some way to get around the truth; they CANNOT accept it for deep psychological reasons and that is the ONLY way to explain continued denial in the face of all the evidence.

These are not stupid people, they are not bad people, or dumb..they are simply a representation of a segment of the population that has the safety mechanism engaged to keep their perceptions of reality on an even keel; they would not be able to stand the thought of another person having such abilities, some out of jealousy, others out of a fear of what it means at a much deeper level; if Criss can do these things then what ELSE can he do?

And what about the guy next door that seems a little strange..maybe he too can use his mind to do ' things ', and maybe he is even doing them to ME!! See the scary part that the deniers extrapolate from the possibilities? They can personalize threats and fears to the level where they feel remarkably theatened by the mere accepting that such abilities are possible. It upsets their entire basis for rational thought and would present them with unsolvable and maddening realities to ponder. they are not equipped for it yet.

When cigarettes and cigars were first becoming popular and in use, many people walking down the street that saw a man puffing smoke thought that they were devils!! For real! They had no way to comprehend that there was a connection between the thing in his hand and the smoke issuing forth from his mouth and nostrils and fell back on the only thing they knew: What the church taught, that devils spewed smoke !! Not until they were educated enough about the physics of the matter could they understand what was really happening.

It is the same thing here; the deniers do not know the physics of the events, and so claim props and such that there is NO EVIDENCE OF, to keep their balance and sanity intact.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   


As already commented on by the very able MrdDstrbr , the upper torso area and upper body contain the most weight, and the legs always swing a bit when a person is picked up; watch anyone being lifted and see





posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Which of course does NOT imply in any way whatsoever that the force used to affect the uplifting is anything but what I have assereted already. highlighting certain words in disingenuous because all I meant was that if a person is picked up by WHATEVER force, they will tend to sway at the legs, of course.; the term ' picked up ' means just that, picked up by an unseen force.

I am not sure exactly WHAT force is picking Criss up, but it is unseen and not material and not tangible and cannot be felt or touched or seen because it is not part of this realm.

See how petty they get? resorting to highlighting quotes to try and make it seem that a phrase means something other than intended. My God, how low will they go? Criss can levitate and it just kills the deniers that they cannot figure it out!! And all the time they are looking in the wrong room!!No wonder they never see the truth!



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   
So you accept that the force lifting him is only affecting his upper torso somewhere. That seems a bit strange to me. Unless of course it was mechanical of some kind. Like all the other levitations of numerous entertainers.

I don't deny their may be some forces that are unknown, I'm saying that Criss Angel does not have those abilities, nor does he use them in his ILLUSIONS.

Name me one other levitation practitioner that you think harnesses some unknown force. Is there one? Now following this, I am well within sanity and reason to believe that Criss' Illusions are the same.

I'm also inclined to believe that you have some vested interest in Criss and his illusions, because of your numerous, adamant 10 paragraph replies, 57 pages into this humorous thread. Do you work for Criss? Are you Criss? If you don't, you just sound silly with your higher than thou contempt. You aren't gonna convince anyone that an illusionist entertainer has super powers, so just shut-up and enjoy the show.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join