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: 74
13
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by InSpiteOf
is anyone else having trouble reading the recent posts in this thread?

THis post is really just a test. I cant read anything past a post by PR from yesterday.

I had the same problem this morning.

Perhaps one of us should start a new discussion called: "Illusion Versus Magick."

Okay...who wants to boost their ATS points today by starting a new thread?





posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   
am i just being cynical or is " being suspended by fish hooks in your flesh " a bit of a fraud IF he actually has " the gift of levitation "

what is he really doing / demonstrating - beyond the silly practice of sticking things in his body ?

dont get me started on the dynamic load that a 75-85kg man would exert if slung below a helicopter



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by violet
Hanging from fish hooks is one of his most amazing feats. I'm sure he has scars from it though. Or are you saying there are none?

The hooks in Criss Angel's body when he hung from wires attached to a helicopter was not an illusion. You probably disagree. I'm not sure if he has any scars. But my point was that he heals very quickly from his feats that put a high toll on his body. That is an indication of a Gift of Healing. That is why some people heal faster than others, especially when mutilations are performed. Fakirs have been known to do this too but not as extensively; it is all a matter of degree.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
am i just being cynical or is " being suspended by fish hooks in your flesh " a bit of a fraud IF he actually has " the gift of levitation "

You mean that someone with a Gift of PK would not want to self-mutilate his body?

I wouldn't and you wouldn't, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he wouldn't.

He wanted to impress people with his pain control and self-healing ability. Not my cup of tea.


Originally posted by ignorant_ape
dont get me started on the dynamic load that a 75-85kg man would exert if slung below a helicopter

Go ahead...get started.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by keymaster
Remember a few pages ago when I came across a post on another board from a user named Oberon?

Guess what? He replied. This is what he had to say about Criss Angel.

Tim,

Screaming doesn't do anything to further either argument.

Can we get your friend to show us a picture of the harnesses, wires, etc. that were used?

That would greatly help your case.

Right now we have Oberon on the one hand and 1 Tru Criss Angel Fan on the other.

A pic would tip the scale in your favor


At least for that particular feat.




posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
PaulRichard, the Denier's will NEVER talk about the FACT that STILL not ONE of them has been able to point us to any props or evidence that would support their view, none. They will NOT answer what Criss was hanging from at the Luxor or golf course because they do not have an answer that would be taken seriously. INVISIBLE props and supports and platforms..THAT is what the denier's assert as proof, amazing isn't it?

For example, I will ask one question and we will see that not ONE denier will give us an intelligent and LIKELY alternative:

Please tell us HOW Criss Angel levitated on the golf course if in fact props were used.

If you say that the crowd was all paid off and silent forever, realize that this is NOT likley. If you say that the film company edited the ' props ' out, then explain the reactions from the observers that were right there. If you say that a combination of paid witneses and edited video account for it, realize that you are now asking us to believe in TWO UNLIKELY events at the same time. Please just tell us a LIKELY and INTELLIGENT alternative, one that is believable and LIKELY.

Since there is NO evidence that any props were used, and there is NO evidence that witnesses have ever been paid to lie or act suprised, and no proof of film editing to MISREPRESENT the event has ever been shown, I hope that you deniers have some new ammo. Your old ammo is rusty and the powder is wet.

If you look at the number of OUTRAGEOUS ASSUMPTIONS, ALL TOTALLY UNPROVEN, that have to be accepted before the deniers claims can be taken seriously, it is plain to see that there are NO alternatives except the obvious: Criss is NOT using invisible cranes and wires and platforms, he does NOT pay witnesses to lie and remain loyal forever, and there has NEVER been one reply of MERIT yet to these truths that we assert.

The deniers are so obtuse that even when shown a video of Criss above the Luxor Hotel, with the brightest light on earth illuminating the scene and NO PROPS visible, they deny. Even when the Engineering Dept. DENIES that ANY props, supports, platforms or ANY OTHER apparatus were used in that event, the deniers still close their eyes and insist that there really ARE props there!! We just have to accept that they are all invisible and unseen and that Criss is just so smart and clever that he is the ONLY HUMAN BEING who can be so slick and have such a great team of invisible prop people...RIGHT?! Is that right? Thats what the deniers believe and ask us to believe also. Astounding gaul.

I also tried to debunk the Criss events mentioned above, I wanted to see if it was some far out illusion that Criss pulled off; but there is NO proof of such and NO evidence that would support a claim of props. One must IMAGINE them being there in order to believe the denier's story. IMAGINATION is NOT acceptable evidence for me, sorry. Anytime someone asks me to IMAGINE in order to prve something to me, they have lost already. JUST IMAGINE...THAT is the cry of the denier. IMAGINE if there were invisible props and Criss got them. IMAGINE that Criss pays off his witnesses..Imagine if Criss has a team of loyal to the death employees that would keep his ' secret props ' always secure and safe and never mentioned or alluded to in any way at all..IMAGINE!!!

Sorry, rather than imagination I prefer the EVIDENCE, the evidence that plainy shows that Criss does NOT use props in those events. I do NOT want to have to stretch my bounds of credulity to the max in order to accept a hypothesis that has NO proofs at all. That is asking too much. The deneier's are always asking to to IMAGINE things NOT in evidence and that is a losing case every time. Imagination can accomplish things that the evidence never can; you can IMAGINE that Criss has some invisible props, but you cannot see them or photograph them or get anyone connected to Criss to admit to, even after many years of chances and many films and events.

Rather than trying to figure out a way that Criss can find and use invisible props and never get caught, why not open your minds and try and find a way to believe WHAT YOU SEE AND THE EVIDENCE? Why not? Because if you did that and found the truth, your limited realities and paradigms would be shaken to the core and you would have to reevaluate your enitre structure of perception and truth and that is just TOO MUCH for the provincial mind to grasp without great trauma to the psyche.

What OTHER reason could account for the denials we see here? How can reasonably intelligent people cling to a position that contains NO evidence and only has conjecture and imagination as a basis for its beliefs? They simply do not see that a LACK of evidence is a key element in their delusions. The Denier's starting positon is this:" There MUST be props. I refuse to believe in any scenario that does not fit my preconceived notions about reality so there MUST be props." That fact alone, the denial of the possibility of an alternative, dooms then in a debate, where both sides start equal and prove a case, accepting the best argument.

Since the deniers always discount any possibility that Criss is NOT using props, they then are stuck trying to find some PROOF of props..some picture, some witness, some evidence..but so far NO ONE has presented that picture, or witness, or proof..NONE AT ALL. This fact does not even give them pause!! All they say then is " well, even though I am not intelligent and savvy enough to figure out where the props are and how they could possibly be used under these circumstances, I will still believe that they are there because to believe otherwise means that there are realities that I am NOT ready to accept yet, and that would upset my whole outlook and challenge me too badly, and so I will just DENY the whole thing and insist that others do so as well".

If THAT is not the saddest and most bleak and barren argument I have ever heard, then what else would surpass it? Maybe the official story of 9-11, but barely. The Denier's position is very much like the 9-11 Official story believers position: Ignore all of the relevant evidence when it disproves your position, refuse to accept the plain proof right in front of you in favor of ' imagining what may have occurred ', alleging things totally UNsupported by any evidence and giving it the same weight as real proofs, etc.

Will ANY denier answer the question above? We will see? Won't we?



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86

For example, I will ask one question and we will see that not ONE denier will give us an intelligent and LIKELY alternative:

Please tell us HOW Criss Angel levitated on the golf course if in fact props were used.



I have already proved that one "high levitation" has been edited for dramatic effect and there is a lot more evidence that shows it to be multiple takes. I have also showed that the Freemont levitation is a fraud, using the same planted girl for the trick on two occasions.

As for the golf course it without much doubt uses wires to levitate CA. Yeah I know "invisible" to you, I prefer selectively shot by CA's film team.
Watch the hand and feet routine CA goes through before he levitates. There is even a you tube out there detailing it. It's pretty obvious hes is securing the wires just prior to the start of the levitation. Yes you can see them as they are very small in comparison to the shot, for all intents "invisible" on the film. This also explains his weird leg motion at the end of the levitations as well. it is him getting out of the wire setup. I am pretty sure this effect calls for some pretty good upper body strength to make it not appear to be lifted up by the arms as well as the legs. Watch, he has to cross his feet to make the "wobble" of the multiple wires look smaller. I would lean towards a Crane but I am not sure of the platform the wires hang from.

I forgot, your "huge" crowd at the golfcourse of maybe 15 people were "in" on it and persuaded to act astounded. Heck if someone gave me beer and free greens fees in Vegas, I would do that too. You wouldn't have to pay them.

Of course, you will scoff at it. Sooner or later CA will get sloppy or someone in Vegas will get real good at tracking him and either photograph or video it. Even then you will deny it.

I see you moved quickly away from the girl levitated in two videos and changed topics to avoid debating it. What's the matter? Can't come up with any good rebuttal other than the "girl lied" That's weak. I would have expected you to put up more better defence of your position, seeing as how badly it was destroyed.

Go back to the diatribes about the "absolutely no proof", "invisible blah blah blah" that you do.

I answer all of your direct questions as much as possible, why don't you answer this one.

Is it possible that CA did in fact prearrange the Fremont levitation given the information you now have?

I await your answer.


[edit on 8-9-2007 by pavil]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Paul_Richard
 



Paul Richard, you seemed to have taken 1 TruCrissAngegFan at his word why all of a sudden this level of skepticism on Oberon detailing of his meeting with CA? Double standard there.

What if someone could provide you with a copy of the agreement they signed to see CA perform his "feats"? Would that mean anything? Naw, probably forged right?



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Sorry, rather than imagination I prefer the EVIDENCE, the evidence that plainy shows that Criss does NOT use props in those events.


This may be hard for you to believe but YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE! all you have is youtube video's. The reasons they are not classified as evidence are as follows: 1) the quality is garbage 2) anyone can post whatever they want on youtube 3) even if the videos are legitimate CA productions, they have gone through extensive editing processes. 4) they are not RAW footage and therefor are suspect.

Once again i present you a challenge: show me a court that will accept post production footage as evidence of an event and i will show you a goose that lays golden eggs!




What OTHER reason could account for the denials we see here?

Because we are right.



The Denier's position is very much like the 9-11 Official story believers position:

We;ve been over this, here's what i have to say to your pathetic analogy:

Originally posted by InSpiteOf
Really? We seem to be doing more digging and independant research than you are. All you have done is post video's from official sources, sounds more like you fit the believers side than we do.

You can find that here, along with my point by point commentary and rebuttle to the post that lead up to mine.

How about instead of spinning another diatribe, you actually go point by point through our posts and show us the error of our ways? Or is doing that too much of a challenge for the evidence you believe you posses?


Ignore all of the relevant evidence when it disproves your position,

You mean like how you dodged pavils questions about the girl in more than one of CA's levitation tricks? Or how bout that other guy posted by violet with the help of keymaster? Where's your commentary on those video's? What excuse can you come up with to futher deny the obvious?


refuse to accept the plain proof right in front of you in favor of ' imagining what may have occurred ',

You mean like how you brush off and ignore the building 2 building expose' video? Or how about that long list of video's that keymaster posted a few pages back, exposing different ways his tricks are done with props and clever camera angles and editing?


alleging things totally UNsupported by any evidence and giving it the same weight as real proofs, etc.

Ya, like how CA has the ability to levitate, heal, transport, transmogrify, ect, ect. Prove to us he can do this. And as highlighted before, youtube video's are not evidence

At least you understand your position somewhat. So far you entire closing paragraph highlights your positiong to a T.

So what happened to your list of evidence you were going to present? What happened to the fomal debate our two sides were going to enguage in? Pushed that away already because you cant mean simple evidenciary standards?



[edit on 8-9-2007 by InSpiteOf]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I totally agree that by showing videos posted on Youtube doesn't class itself as evidence.

A court of law wouldn't accept edited footage by the defence as evidence, because hey...IT COULD HAVE BEEN EDITED! So why should we accept videos released by Angels production team?

This goes both ways though as far as I'm concerned. My views on spirituality are very broad. I believe in the other side and that humans 'out there' have gifts, but I'm not so daft and in a World of my own like some people here, to believe that videos and tv shows released by a professional production team count as evidence! That in itself is absolutely crazy! Everything that goes on television (except of course live television - but then even the recent LIVE Big Brother in the UK showed daily was 3 minutes behind LIVE. So the production team could edit out certain parts for advertising reasons,) is edited. So to say that because you have watched Angels videos of his tv shows and it clearly shows no wires or supports, acts as evidence is absolute ludicrous.

If I said I could push over objects with the power of though alone, and posted a video here showing my 'feat' - you'd all say that it could have been edited and that you'd want me to do it in a controlled environment so you could see I was using no tricks or camera trickery wouldn't you? I wouldn't expect you to believe me otherwise! Yet when Paul and Eyewitness see videos edited and released by Angels production team, that acts as raw evidence?! Can't you see how silly that sounds? Or maybe you're just 'too out there' and need to come down to Earth ever so slightly?

I believe in the paranormal, I've seen ghosts, I've heard ghosts, and I've witnessed so many things there for I'M NOT a 'NAYSAYER' or a 'DISBELIEVER.' It's just incredible that you guys take Youtube videos as 100% evidence. JUST INCREDIBLE!



But like I said it also goes both ways - right back at the disbelievers, posting videos from Youtube showing how Angels levitations are faked etc. For the exact same reasons. The footage is edited down, and they aren't raw footage of him doing the 'feat' presented from every angle. Unfortunately guys, from the way I see it, you are fighting a losing battle here. For and against. The believers say it's obviously levitation as there can be no evidence shown that he is using tricks and wires, and that the footage has been edited. The fact is, that they can' quite seem to grasp that ALL TRICKS ARE MEANT FOR YOU NOT TO KNOW! THAT'S THE TRICK ITSELF - IT LEAVES YOU WONDERING!!

And for the non believers you can't win the debate either because nobody will come forward from the production team saying he fakes all his 'stunts.' Why would they? IT'S MEANT TO BE MYSTERIOUS!! JUST LIKE PAUL DANIELS AND MANY OTHER MAGICIANS. IT'S MEANT TO LEAVE YOU WONDERING. If they said "Yes he uses ropes for those levitations, people are paid off for those tricks, and yes, the other ones have been edited in the studio," the fun and mystery level just hits rock bottom!

It really makes me laugh, and laugh I do always at Eyewitness, how he asks for evidence from the non believers, yet offers non himself except Youtube videos! LOL GO YOU! Edited clips from his television shows is 100% evidence?! It's clearly not! You seem like a bright and educated man...can't you see how edited videos wouldn't stand up in a court of law. So how can we accept it for evidence here at ATS? It would be silly to even start to believe them!



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Arawn
 

I would say that all both sides have is the footage supplied by CA and uploaded, in poor quality, to YT.

That footage is the only evidence of the events other than the witnesses there. Now it seems feasible that people have to sign a non disclosure chitty or something. I have noticed that when CA has large crowds the tricks are distant and difficult to see. Close up work has smaller crowds, making it easier to control.

I do sometimes wonder if the CA Cult have ulterior motives in their defence of their position. Something ain't right but I can't put my finger on it.

The vids are no proof of Chi-TK (wot?) and also they do not show any props for obvious reasons. It does seem nonsense to me to just accept that CA can walk on water etc, when there are many other alternatives. If you can look at a CA video and instantly believe that he is really doing it, then how the hell do you get through life and movies? How did John Wayne die so many times in films? How come General Custer always looks a different bloke, Errol Flynn one minute, Robert Shaw the next?

The CA Cult finds the possibility of make-up, props etc so difficult to grasp, that it is easier to accept something that is less day to day like Chi TK.

Well taking the fact that they cannot grasp the use of props, it must be easier for them to accept that all the old westerns, and ancient world films like Spartacus were made by time travelling


Personally, I think that whether or not the Cult believe what they say, even if you produced every single witness and prop, to them in person they would say they were lying or been paid off. Even if the Messiah himself were to stand in front of them and say so they would not accept it, such is their apparent belief.

Illusion is all about playing the mind. Some people give Illusionists a head start though



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
STILL no answers as to my question. The question is very plain and specific. Please answer the question, if you can. If not, we can assume that you CANNOT and WILL not explain HOW Criss did the golf course levitation. Tell us how, in a likley manner, he pulled off the event. Thats all. Not too hard. Just give us some PLAUSIBLE and LIKELY ways that it could have been done given the evidence at hand. No wiggling, no obfuscation, no sidetracks, just frame an answer and present it. We are waiting.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
The hooks in Criss Angel's body when he hung from wires attached to a helicopter was not an illusion. You probably disagree. I'm not sure if he has any scars. But my point was that he heals very quickly from his feats that put a high toll on his body. That is an indication of a Gift of Healing. That is why some people heal faster than others, especially when mutilations are performed. Fakirs have been known to do this too but not as extensively; it is all a matter of degree.


i know it wasn't an Illusion! Looked real to me. So I won't argue this one. I would say that the human body is able to take on alot of pain if and when the time arises.

[edit on 8-9-2007 by violet]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
STILL no answers as to my question. The question is very plain and specific. Please answer the question, if you can. If not, we can assume that you CANNOT and WILL not explain HOW Criss did the golf course levitation. Tell us how, in a likley manner, he pulled off the event. Thats all. Not too hard. Just give us some PLAUSIBLE and LIKELY ways that it could have been done given the evidence at hand. No wiggling, no obfuscation, no sidetracks, just frame an answer and present it. We are waiting.


Umm....I must have been put on ignore again by them for giving them something they could not disprove. Too funny, it's almost sad. Can someone find and post the CA levitation explained video. I know I saw it out there. It details why he does the leg and arm motions and why he has to cross his legs.

Thanks



[edit on 8-9-2007 by pavil]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by something smells

Illusion is all about playing the mind. Some people give Illusionists a head start though




That one quote I thinks sums up much of this thread. Their belief borders on religious for them.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
STILL no answers as to my question. The question is very plain and specific. Please answer the question, if you can. If not, we can assume that you CANNOT and WILL not explain HOW Criss did the golf course levitation. Tell us how, in a likley manner, he pulled off the event. Thats all. Not too hard. Just give us some PLAUSIBLE and LIKELY ways that it could have been done given the evidence at hand. No wiggling, no obfuscation, no sidetracks, just frame an answer and present it. We are waiting.


STILL no response to my piece by piece analysis of your post(s). Pavil answered you plain and specific question, as he has done before. You cleaverly ignore him whenever he raises valid points.

The deniers side has answered question after question, while getting no answers to our own questions to you. Its YOUR TURN to answer OUR QUESTIONS.

If you cannot address us, and our questions specifically, it is a clear sign of YOUR ATTEMPT AT OBFUSCATION

Come on man. We address our points, questions, and rebuttles to you and your specific inqueries. Why can you not return the favor?



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Pavil: I can read your replies and they do NOT answer the question. The video of Criss showing a ONE FOOT UP levitation is NOT the same as the golf course levitation!!! OBVIOUSLY!! ONE FOOT and hundreds of feet are DIFFERENT, right? Can you see that? I hope so.

So, STILL NO reples about the golf course levitation and HOW it may have been tricked out. NONE. NOT ONE denier will answer the question. What does that mean? The obvious; they CANNOT without sounding silly and so they just IGNORE the simple request I made. Very telling, isn't it?

WHY are the deniers so afraid of responding? WHY won't they answer the question? We know, but do they? I wonder. Always slipping away instead of answering. Just answer the question, and NOT with some video showing a trick ONE FOOT off the ground; show us some proof of a HIGH levitation or tell us ways that it might have been done given the evidence at hand. If you cannot, then just say so.

Refusing to answer a simple and direct question that actually has some meaning tells us that you are running scared. You cannot find a way to describe the event WITH props that would seem sensible, so you just wiggle and run. EVERYONE reading this thread shouyld know that the DENIERS have refused to answer one simple and PERTINENT question, and instead insists on side issues and silly nonsense.

ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADMIT THAT YOU CANNOT!! Simple.Tell us HOW Criss LIKELY pulled off the golf course levitation please. Lets hear the deniers give us a likely alternative. STILL WAITING.



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADMIT THAT YOU CANNOT!! Simple.Tell us HOW Criss LIKELY pulled off the golf course levitation please. Lets hear the deniers give us a likely alternative. STILL WAITING.


I think there's an explanation for the golf video itself just a few pages back. Are you choosing not to accept that explanation?

Furthermore, this is exactly what's wrong with many conspiracy theorists out there. They know a few details, and they think they're a master of the trade. Do I know all of the inner workings of a microwave? No. Can I still use one? Most of the time. I don't just assume that it's some sort of magical device that transports my food closer to the sun for a few seconds and brings it back. Can we give you a play by play of every one of Criss Angel's stunts? No. Do we still know that they're illusions? Yes. You can't expect people who aren't somehow in direct contact with Criss to be able to explain away all of his tricks, but that does not mean that they're magic. Where would the fun in watching the show be if we just knew right off the bat how everything was done?



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Paul Richard, you seemed to have taken 1 TruCrissAngegFan at his word why all of a sudden this level of skepticism on Oberon detailing of his meeting with CA? Double standard there.

There is no double standard.

Oberon is an eyewitness (I think). 1 Tru Criss Angel Fan is also an eyewitness. They both testify different things but they are both witnesses regardless.


Originally posted by pavil
What if someone could provide you with a copy of the agreement they signed to see CA perform his "feats"? Would that mean anything? Naw, probably forged right?

You know as well as I do that that is something which could easily be faked.

If you want to totally win this debate...

All you have to do is go out and film Criss Angel when he does a high levitation off of a magician's stage and show us in your film the wires, props, etc., that he uses.

That would settle the argument completely.


Are you ready?




posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   
aww nuts , eyewitness is back to his silly challlenge , re the golfcourse

well - he already has my answer - what is the object above mr angels head ?

PS - i asked first - andd he refuses to reply - how cowardly

if - as eyewitness demands , the stunt can be fully explained using only mr angels edited boradcast segment

then why can eyewitness not identifty the object ????

its very simple - if you want us to deliver answers based on ONLY the edited youtube clips - why can you not provide answers based on the same clips ???

so - what is the object above mr angels head ???



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join