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: 68
13
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Rollercoaster Thru Criss - Illusion
Unfortunately not the entire clip.

In response to the poster who said his fake hand was sticking out showing a long black sleeve (when he wore a t-shirt) - it looked to me like the black part was his black wristband ...



[edit on 30-8-2007 by violet]




posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Dearest Pavil: Semantics has nothing to do with it; editing and altering are as different as apples and oranges, although both come from trees, they are totally different in their essense. If you ignore that fact than of course it makes no difference, but to most it really means something.

Also, if it could be proved that some woman appeared twice in a Criss production, all it means is that she is likley a fan or lives locally and likes to attend Criss events, not such a stretch,eh? It means nothing without some verification that the event itself was in some way staged.

The removal of a man with a camera walking below the scene that you keep referring to did NOT change the effects or the event in any way whatsoever. It means nothing. Editing is done to enhance the production, and unless some proof of an ALTERATION of the film was proven, it means nothing. That is NOT trickery, just common sense editing to improve the quality of the final product and has nothing to do with what we saw Criss do. If the editing had in some way changed the event or included something that was not there or took away something that was that affected the event itself, then that is a different story, that did NOT happen however and your points are all meaningless.

I saw the clip of the roller coaster included here above and I want to see the whole thing before passing judgement but if it can be shown that Criss was NOT in the first car of the coaster when it took off then this is an example of telek-chi force as described so well by my compatriot PaulRichard. In any event, we are still waiting!! Still waiting for someone to tell us HOW these feats are accomplished if they are in fact just a ' trick '. No takers? oh well.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The removal of a man with a camera walking below the scene that you keep referring to did NOT change the effects or the event in any way whatsoever. It means nothing. Editing is done to enhance the production, and unless some proof of an ALTERATION of the film was proven, it means nothing.


The removal of the man was just one of the points highlighted in that expose'
Do you care to comment on the odd cloud movement as Criss levitated across the two buildings? Or how about his odd landing arrangements (knees bent in one shot, but not in the others)?

You have specifically focused on one part of the video and completely ignored the others.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Ok, since I can't get an answer here's another CA video pretty clearly showing it is multiple takes of the same Illusion. Explain this one away.




posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Dear God how many times do I have to say it ? : That video means nothing!! The words added, which are hard to read, say that Criss must have some see threw(sp.) plastic or something that he is tucking his legs into, right? Well, that does not answer how he could have been above the ground and defeated gravity if his legs were in some device!! What was holding him up?

Also, that other camera was from another angle, down lower, and shows NOTHING but what we saw him do in the other cameras angle. This is NOT, in any way, shape or form, proof of video trickery and faking. No way. What we are seeing here is Criss doing a slight levitation so his feet are off the ground while the towel covers his upper body.

If THIS is all the proof you have of film manipulation to fool people into thinking that he really did something else, than you are mistaken. The other camera, the one behind him, would show Criss no doubt pulling his legs up off the ground, levitating,, thats all. The film production people cannot include every inch of footage in all videos or they would never fit into a time frame. And, like in the video of the Armored Car teleportation, Criss does not want the camera to show him actually disappearing; that would taking the " How does he do it " factor away from those who still think that it is all a trick.

Criss WANTS people to think that it might be a trick so that they will be curious and keep watching; if he showed himself disappearing right in front of the camera, then that would mean that the jig is up and the people who are undecided about the cause of it all would be gone: People who are questioning are likely to pay for the chance to try and figure out how he does it; if they knew how he did it, he would lose a great many fans, although there are many who would be intruiged by the disappearance itself.

Of course there are many here that would see him disappear and still they would scream " Film tricks!!" "Video tampering!! ". and never really comprehend the reality they are seeing. In any event, Criss stands to gain by keeping his events just as they are; inexplicable by ordinary means.

But still, after many requests, no one has given us a REAL and TRUE example of 'trickery ' in any of these events. None. My questions keep getting ignored while the nitpickers look for tiny details that in the end mean nothing at all. The people on the beach, right there, would have seen anything that could have been used as a prop and they did not. What you see is what you get, Criss levitated a bit for fun at the beach and its a minor event for sure.

Please, answer my list of questions above or admit that you are unable to do so. i cannot force you to, I have to rely on your personal integrity and dedication to seeking truth; if you cannot answer my simple questions with a LIKELY and POSSIBLE alternative, than just say so and don't keep ignoring them. The Denier's ALWAYS want to take us away from the high levitations and teleportations and back into the more mundane and simple events, as they can be picked at easily, even though the picking has no final result that fits the desired results that the deniers want.

What about the golf course event, or the armored car event? The Luxor event is a done deal as NOT ONE likley or possible alternative was ever given. If you cannot point to a prop, or person that has seen props, or a witness who claims to have been paid for silence, then you may accept the fact that such things simply are not there; they do not exist!! Rather than being honest and saying " Gee, I don't know how he does it since all of the evidence points to no props "... we get the assertions that there really IS props and wires and such; all invisible of course.

No one asnwered me as to who is selling these invisible platforms and props that Criss supposedly uses to trick us all. If anyone can stroll into a magic shop and buy props that can duplicate Criss events, then SURELY, without any doubt, we would be seeing others try and accomplish the same things, either for fun or to debunk Criss. But not ONE example has EVER been shown to substantiate that viewpoint.

Clouds in the sky ? Give me a break, the clouds are just like they should be and Criss levitates quite openly in that levitation you are referring to; there has NEVER been any proof or evidence that Criss uses film tricks to fool people; how could the people on the ground have been fooled? Unless they are all paid, right? Here we go again; always back to paid witnesses or film tricks..HOW could a man like Criss make a living if he is unable to perform feats without film tricks? the LIVE audiences would never accept paying to see someone that was unable to do the events in person. Criss relies on live performances for his reputation, and the films are just records of the things he does LIVE and in front of close up witnesses.

So, we still have had NO telling or convincing examples given that would refute the position we take. Pointing to a video and claiming some discrepancy where none exists is not evidential or compelling. Sorry. I present clear, openly observed events, and what do you give us? Criticisms of various angles and clouds and silliness like that. You have to realize that the job of proving that Criss is just another guy with a great crew of deceptive and loyal employees and a trunk full of props that no one can see or touch is not an easy thing to do when you have no evidence or proof of such.

We are again asked to stretch the bounds of the imagination to believe the deniers poiint of view; we must see things that are not there, we must believe in props that cannot be seen. We must ignore all of the massive numbers of witnesses that have given their incredulous testimonies as to what they saw and experienced with Criss.

Lets get away from the events that might be in fact illusions, as Criss does all kinds of events..and concentrate on the events that are for SURE are not done with any efects or props, etc. I still am waiting for a reply about the high levitations and teleportations; will we wait forever? Why cannot the deniers simply discuss these events? We all know why, because they cannot come up with a LIKELY and POSSIBLE alternative given the evidence. Thats why. They want to avoid that like the plague and I am still waiting for an answer to my small list of questions. Still waiting, and waiting, and waiting.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by violet
 


Yeah, i missed the wrist band. I didnt think they would screw up something that simple. I still say exactly how i explained the trick that it is how it was done. I was trying to see if the new hand had black nail polish on like chris did but i couldnt see it clear enough to say either way. I was going to bring this up but it's less 'concrete' but the new hand jestures in a way chris wouldn't jesture. The hand is fast moving and does stuff like thumbs up. Chris is very calm and steady moving but there is no way to prove this type of thing from the video.

Oh well i'm out of this thread. Eyewittness just gets on my nerves, he doesnt even want to even consider the posibility of edits/plants/props. He takes chris' word 100% and never questions. He just keeps spewing that chris is god and thats it. You wont change this guys mind. I suggest people just leave him alone in his own head.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Dear God how many times do I have to say it ? : That video means nothing!! ....
Also, that other camera was from another angle, down lower, and shows NOTHING but what we saw him do in the other cameras angle. This is NOT, in any way, shape or form, proof of video trickery and faking. No way. ....


So if the video shows something that is in opposition to your "view" it means nothing, but if it supports your view it is the undiluted truth. How convenient.

Where did that second cameraman go? Let me guess,
he is the same cameraman as in the other video and he just "phases" of the shot? That is just one example in this video that gives telltale video evidence of it being multiple takes of the same "demonstration".

Face it, you can't explain why he is not present int he second shot, nor can you explain the differences in the 'towel wag" that CA does in both shots nor have you explained the lack of the girls comments in the second shot. 3 separate instances and you still manage to brush it off as meaningless. Do you contend that the video is one take of an event still?

Till you can give concrete explanations for each of these anomalies, you belief is busted.

On top of all that, Since there was a camera man behind CA, wouldn't it have been a cool shot showing him levitating from behind?



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Hey PR, have you seen this one? This is Cyril performing the ' card thru glass ' event, while on a boat that has the windows below the water line and NO WAY anyone could be involved on the outside. Cyril breaches the window here just like in the aquarium event, but as there is no one that could be involved ( unless the deniers want to allege a frogman swimming along with the boat!!) there is no way to debunk this one. He clearly is able to change the molecular structure of the glass and get his arm outside and get the card back.

There is NO WAY that this could have been faked. I am curious, of course, to hear from the deniers just HOW Cyril could have pulled this off. Lets hear it, deniers!! Tell us how the card got on the outside of the submerged boat windows, all underwater and on a moving boat, and how Cyril managed to get the card back if it is all a ' trick ".

This should be amusing. I can't wait to hear the possible ways that this could have been done if it is an ' illusion '. Here is a close up and absolutely provable case of Cyrils ability to alter the properties of elements.



So Pavil, since the aquarium event was, according to you, done with an accomplice to hand the card off to and a fake tank set up by Cyril, HOW did Cyril get a fake boat and crew and observers in place, and tell us please how Cyril could have faked this one underwater while underway with witnesses inches away. I am waiting!!



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Poor Pavil!! All he has now is " Towel Wag " !! I had to laugh out loud when I read that one..amazing. Towel wag? It almost has an obscene quality to it..towel wag..funny!! " Would'nt that have been a cool shot?"..Maybe so and maybe not, but the fact is that the cameras all show the same thing, Criss doing a minor levitation on the beach..

If the deniers can ignore tha massive evidence and concentrate only on little nothing issues like this, no wonder they are so bereft of substance. Like I said, lets talk about the really telling events, and not this silly non issue. You are trying to distract from my questions and challenges by insisting on referring to this insignificant nothing of a point.

At least I had a good laugh today!! Hey, Pavil any comment on the video?



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:10 PM
link   
This will be my last post in this thread. Lets recap the last few days.

I was informed that I was prejudiced against telekinesis after I said several times I believe in it.

Then we were compared to savages being forced into religion. As though CA is a god and that they can force us to believe that his illusions are truth. It's funny how this comparison was made because of the ongoing God or no God argument.

I proved that Gift of Chi-Telekinesis was made up by Paul_Richard.

I got told I have no education in a made up phrase. I guess I need to go to made up school and get a "parochial" education in it.

Then I got put on ignore for proving him wrong. I can't hear you.

The only proof I've been shown of CA's powers is video from internet and television. It's not original quality and has been through post production rendering it ineffective as proof. There has been no eyewitness accounts. No links to eyewitness accounts. I never asked for scientific data. I never asked for concrete evidence. Just one link that offered something other than a video on u-tube.

I've shown proof where CA made a DVD teaching people how to levitate on a small scale. I was told that doesn't count because it doesn't show how to do his high levitation. I guess you can just jump right into doing major illusions with no practice on a small scale. I guess that once you've mastered small scale levitation you wouldn't be able to figure out large scale.

I was told we're not answering questions when the few questions asked are answered repeatedly. Yet no matter how they're answered they just get asked again.

I think I'm going to put my belief in the television show Heros. There's no proof that they altered any of that show either. I see no wires or props. It must be real. I hope they always save the world. At least they're not in it for money and just want to help mankind.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


I notice with some dismay that you seem to have ignored my pertinent questions of the last video I presented. Am I to assume that you can not come up with a reasonable explanation for those three major anomalies?

Why try to change the subject every time you are faced with evidence you can not explain away? I at least try to answer/explain things. Can't you?

I am the one who spoke about this video being better than the fish tank one in the first place on this thread. No doubt Cyril is a good magician. He takes tricks to another level. As like the other trick I am not sure of all the mechanics involved. I would guess that yes, there is a scuba person nearby to plant the outside card, which by the way we never see what card it is. In this particular trick, I would contend the card never leaves the interior of the boat in this version of the trick. You can buy cards that "tear" in identical ways, did you know that? If you slow the motion down it looks a little weird but nothing like a smoking gun.

Here's a simple question how come no water comes in as the card goes "through" the window in the first place? Based on my experience on pool sidewall holes, even a half second or so would have given at least 16oz of water gushing through, probably more as that water had more pressure, yet we see not a single drop.

As for the hand going through the glass, no it did not. Watch the cloth in front of the glass as he "punctures" the glass, why does the lower left end become bunched up like something (a fist) is there. Again the amount of water does not correspond with what should be expected. Heck we see more water in the Fish Tank trick than this one.

As I have stated previously, I do not know how the whole trick is done, I have a feeling it is a trick that Cyril and his team invented, which is why it has never been see nor done by anyone else. Magicians who own a specific trick make sure others do not infringe on it. For example the Blackstone family owns the Dancing Light bulb over the audience trick and only select people they pick and pay them a royalty can perform that specific trick.

It's a very good trick, not evidence of phasing or whatever you wish to call it. If they are so powerful why must they always cover up their actions with other objects. I know, so they don't attract too much attention to themselves right? It's not like Cyril, Criss and David want attention do they?


[edit on 30-8-2007 by pavil]

[edit on 30-8-2007 by pavil]



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Hi Eyewitness86,

Good video of Cyril.

Criss Angel did this on a moving bus with a deck of cards, with the chosen card instantaneously appearing and sticking to the outside of the glass. A version of this with a window to a restaurant is also performed by David Blaine.

Cyril's version is a little better than either of the above, as it entails a large aquarium.

In all three cases, the entire deck is used on the window, with the pertaining card instantly appearing on the opposite side of the glass.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86[/I saw the clip of the roller coaster included here above and I want to see the whole thing before passing judgement but if it can be shown that Criss was NOT in the first car of the coaster when it took off then this is an example of telek-chi force as described so well by my compatriot PaulRichard.


Criss was not shown in the first car of the Coaster, before it started up. A camera man was in the front seat, and then Criss ended up being in his place when it came to a stop. The camera man had vanished.

So you say - " if it can be shown that Criss was NOT in the first car of the coaster when it took off" - then it proves TK?! Criss Angel said it was "an ILLUSION", before the event. You desperately cling to this TK gift doing all the work, completely discounting him saying himself it was an illusion. Amazing!

A Rollercoaster did not pass through his body, or as he put it, a solid moving through a solid, inhabiting the same space, or something like that.

He didn't teleport himself onto the coaster either!



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I think what you two CHI TK believers fail to see is that the Illusion doesn't just begin at the start of the actual Feat.

Consider it begins before that, when he is talking and/or suggesting how amazing it will be, and all the snippets of his crew enforcing "the unbelievable". The Illusion has already started! The difference with you, is that you fall for all this, hanging on to every word that is said and promised. You claim to be able to recognize his use of mentalism, but you really don't. Doesn't he say he likes to blur the lines between reality and illusion? It blurs more for you because you cant see the lines where the illusion began. You don't see that it still carries on following the feat either.

Eyewitness, you in particular are clueless, because all you see of CA is youtube snippets of parts of shows, and you depend on PR's assertion you've missed nothing.

[edit on 31-8-2007 by violet]



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:51 AM
link   
So, STILL no alternatives to what we see, eh? STILL no comments about the Cyril video, except for Pavil, of course, who says " Yes, there was a scuba diver...or " The card never went out " despite that fact that it can claerly be seen on the outside. Amazing. Pavil even says it allo " He takes it to the next level ". Thats it!! It IS the next level, you deniers simply do not know what that ' next level ' entails!! Thats the story!!

Still stuck on the roller coaster when I specifically asked for ways that the videos I posted lately could be debunked. Pavil always agrees with the most outrageous and unbelievable answers as he can think of nothing better, but at least he is trying. the others just ignore the videos with the impossible to refute events and keeps harping about the ones that they think they can pick apart easily. try the hard ones people.

You know, the deniers have a pattern; if presented with proof that cannot be gotten around without looking foolish, they simply ignore it. then, when they get a video that seems to have some telltale signs of a possible illusion, they spend loads of time on nitpicking points that have NOTHING to do with the event. Pavil claims his nitpicking is ' major anomal;ies " even though they are unproven and speulative to the max.

What a crock!! Ignore the telling evidence and spend time on the side issues." Why does the paper towel bunch up when someone puts their arm thru it"? Well, Pavil it is because the towel acts that way naturally, did you expect it to stay perfectly straight while it was being stressed? My God. The card appears INSTANTLY on the OUTSIDE of the window UNDER WATER on a MOVING craft. But since Pavil cannot believe what he is seeing, he must assume the most ridiculous suppositions imaginable. Scuba diver clinging to a moving boat and managing to place the exact same signed card, torn exactly like the one inside, on the oputside of the window without being seen by the camera. If that excuse doesn't make you either laugh or nauseous then you are of a Pavilllian mentality for sure!!

Imagine asking rational people to believe that. Just think, rather than admit that Cyril can alter the properties of glass, we are asked to accept a thesis even more outlandish and impossible than actually being able to perform the feat!! it staggers the sound mind when denial reaches a fever pitch and all logic flees. Then when all else fails, they fall back on ' editing and film ' excerpts. There is NO BOUNDS to the amount of straight faced silliness that the deniers will resort to to keep their paradigms in line and safe. I asked a list of very simple questions which NO denier dare take on. I present videos that are irrefutable by any intelligent or likley scenario, and all we get is " towel flap' , scuba divers ( evidently with the same invisibility props that are alleged elsewhere ) , and referrals back to videos already dealt with thoroughly.

Insistence on remaining with a subject that has been already refuted is a desperate measure and an indication as to how specious their arguments really are. Hey, lets crown the Head Denier, whomever that may prove to be, with a title. Hhow about " Baron of Greymatter " ( barren!!) That would describe a denier pretty well I think: Stubborn refusal to deal with specific issues and insistence on asserting the most UNlikley and impossible scenarios possible. How can a denier justify their position, even to themselves? LACK of proof equals plenty of proof to them. That is amazing.

Anyway, now that logic and reason have shown the total lack of a response that is due any respect from the deniers, we can safely assume that there is no denier equiped to refute our suppositions adequately and that we have shown plenty of evidence that Criss and Cryil and David can and do alter the material reality of substances. Proven. Done. Only a rabid denier could continue to deny the facts. they will not because they CANNOT, and that is that.

Still, it is good for a laugh now and then; hearing the excuses and silly allegations from the deniers at least is a prime facia case for our position being validated. We are asked to believe the most insane and outlandish reasons to accept the deniers view, and most people will see thru that in a second. Sorry, boys, you have failed to refute us, and you have failed to answer the hard questions with anything approaching a sensible and likley alternative. PR, they just don't remember the old song " There is none so blind, as he who WILL NOT SEE ".

And the band played on....



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I know I said I was done, but I have one more thing to add.

First, why does the video posted earlier showing how the building to building levitation was digitally altered keep getting ignored? It proves beyond a reasonable doubt that it was two shots combined.

Also, I found a guy who saw CA live. Read what he has to say. His post is under the name Oberon.



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by keymaster
 


Let's take a look at what this Oberon person had to say...


Chris Angel is a fraud.

...Chris Angel has a troupe of hairstylists and makeup people around him. Everyone who is there on camera, must sign a release, if they don’t they are very rudely forced to leave the space. He was doing the trick of levitating a woman when we saw him, so we signed the forms, only to find out that the woman he was levitating, was taken into a back room, with her husband and coached on the trick...with hair and makeup people fussing in between. I am amazed, this has not been uncovered, and it was a huge let down for my son and I as we were big Angel fans. I would say that, in my opinion, Chris Angel may not even have known one trick before Hollywood found him as a person to look good for the camera. Since this display, I would say my loyalty will stay with David Blaine, at least he can’t fake his endurance displays. There was nothing whatsoever real or even an attempt at illusion from Chris Angel. If anyone does not believe this letter, then I urge you to go to the Alladin and see for yourself.
(cleaned up some spelling and grammatical errors)
Source

There really isn't anything that points to Criss Angel and his crew pursuing nefarious activities.

Those who are going to appear on camera, in any capacity, often have to sign a release that grants their permission to be filmed. Hair and make-up artists working on everyone that is to work with Criss is also not out of the ordinary.

The point that he makes about the couple going into a back room and being "coached on the trick" is pure speculation. Furthermore, no amount of "coaching" would help with his levitations anyway. What, you mean Criss would say something like, "Now pretend you are asleep when the camera is filming and don't touch the invisible wires that I will use to project the illusion that you are actually levitating."



Nice try.

Now get us an eyewitness that can testify to Criss Angel using props, gadgetry and/or paid-off witnesses for his levitations and teleportations





posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Just a few things as I am tired.


Originally posted by eyewitness86
...despite that fact that it can claerly be seen on the outside. Amazing.

No, you can see "a Card" with it's back towards us. We never see the other side of the card like we do in the fish tank. It "appears" to be the same card since the tear looks identical. I have already explained about the card decks that tear in the same manner. That is why I contend that the signed card never leaves the interior of the boat.


Pavil claims his nitpicking is ' major anomal;ies " even though they are unproven and speulative to the max.
... Why does the paper towel bunch up when someone puts their arm thru it"? Well, Pavil it is because the towel acts that way naturally, did you expect it to stay perfectly straight while it was being stressed?


So in two shots of the identical same time frame of the ONE and only event, the towel behaves in TWO different manners? That is an anomaly. That the Girls voices are not present in the second shot is an anomaly. The angle that the camera takes the second shot is different, but there is only one cameraman behind that girl and he manages to shoot two angles of the ONE and ONLY attempt of the illusion at the same time? How did he do that? Have a foot mounted camera as well as the one on his shoulder? There wasn't enough room for two camera men there behind the girl so that argument fails as well. That is an anomaly too. Add on top of it you can't see the cameraman in the lower angle shot at all and you have more than compelling combined evidence that in fact the video is actually multiple takes of the same trick combined to look as just one take. That must mean that the girls saw CA perform the same trick at least twice and still sound amazed. Hmmmmmm. I will let others judge who is closer to the truth, you or I?


My God. The card appears INSTANTLY on the OUTSIDE of the window UNDER WATER on a MOVING craft.
Now now, we don't know the boat is moving, in fact I bet it is still, but it can't be proved either way.


he must assume the most ridiculous suppositions imaginable. Scuba diver clinging to a moving boat and managing to place the exact same signed card, torn exactly like the one inside, on the outside of the window without being seen by the camera. If that excuse doesn't make you either laugh or nauseous then you are of a Pavilllian mentality for sure!!
Pavillian mentality.....I like it. Anyhow, you can't state for certain the boat is moving. You can't state for certain the card is the signed card, since we never see that side of it from the inside of the boat and I have already told you how cards can be torn exactly the same. I would venture to say that the card on the outside is actually on a sheet of Plexiglas, you would never see a "hand" place it and it would "appear" instantly. Look at the tape, the card does "appear" in a weird fashion. I can't put my finger on it, it just looks off.



Imagine asking rational people to believe that.


I really don't think you want to ask rational people whose explanation is more plausible, but go ahead.




That would describe a denier pretty well I think: Stubborn refusal to deal with specific issues and insistence on asserting the most Unlikely and impossible scenarios possible. How can a denier justify their position, even to themselves? LACK of proof equals plenty of proof to them. That is amazing.
I think what is really amazing is that most people here would use that definition more for you than others. But what do I know.



we can safely assume that there is no denier equiped to refute our suppositions adequately and that we have shown plenty of evidence that Criss and Cryil and David can and do alter the material reality of substances. Proven. Done. Only a rabid denier could continue to deny the facts. they will not because they CANNOT, and that is that.


Whaaaa??????? Oh I see you win because you say so again. And again, I wonder how I lost that judging.


Just wait for the video I have in store for you Paul Richard and Eyewitness.
If I manage to find it you will be unable to refute what is in it. How do you like that challenge? Can you handle the truth? Better hope I am unable to find it.



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Those who are going to appear on camera, in any capacity, often have to sign a release that grants their permission to be filmed.


So there should be a record of all the people who have witnessed the "higher levitations" right? CA should know their names and addresses, wonder why he doesn't ever get one of those "fans" requesting to put up a fan site or talking about their "event"?



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_RichardThe point that he makes about the couple going into a back room and being "coached on the trick" is pure speculation. Furthermore, no amount of "coaching" would help with his levitations anyway. What, you mean Criss would say something like, "Now pretend you are asleep when the camera is filming and don't touch the invisible wires that I will use to project the illusion that you are actually levitating."
.............................

............Now get us an eyewitness that can testify to Criss Angel using props, gadgetry and/or paid-off witnesses for his levitations and teleportations




The speculation point is valid for both camps. You are speculating that the gentleman is using a power that science does not accept exists. Science does for me. Any balanced judgement would accept the speculation of something that exists, proven science (the Internet that you are using for example) over something that has not been demonstrably proven. So I see it as science that exists in the real world, up against something that exists in your mind.

As for coaching. You do not net a degree in Chaos Theory to undertake the part as a stooge in a magic trick. If Mr Angel had all these mysterious powers surely he could have magically done the make up for them. Illusionists have for years used the release as a cover for their real skills.

As for finding witnesses, silly point...why do you think they get them to sign the forms?

Where can the average Joe find a demonstrative example of so called Chi-Kinesis or whatever it is called?

If I put my hand in a fire and it burns, life experience has taught me that.
If I walk in front of a tank, I will come off worse. life experience has taught me that. Tanks and fire are real.

If I see either event on the TV, I can accept either it really happened or it was staged and acted.

Life experience has shown me that magicians do not have real powers, they are masters of illusion and manipulation, smoke and mirrors etc. So when I see one on TV I am sure it is an illusion.

So do the CA believers believe that the battle scenes from "Battle of the Bulge", with Robert Shaw were real and that Johnny Storm, The Human Torch from the Fantastic Four film was actually burning?

If you cannot accept that CA is but a TV entertainer, how much of TV do you really think is real? Have ever watched "Galaxy Quest"? I see parallels with the CA cult and the ThermianS. LOL.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join