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.

 

Demon Caught on Film??? Looks real!

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 08:04 PM
link   
To start off, I am a new member to ATS. I have always been extremely interested in the world outside of the physical world. I don't want to bore you with my life story, so here's this interesting pic i found whilst searching the internet:



This is an enlargement of the Demon chasing the deer:



Supposedly, the picture was taken by a Deer Cam ( a camera placed in the woods with a feeder attached to it in order to attract animals). The deer cam was owned by someone by the name of Brian M., who swears it is not photo-shopped or fixed in any way. As you can see, there is a clear outline of wings and horns on this creature. If it is hunting this deer, it is obviously carnivourous, fast, and powerful. The deer also seems to be running away, which is unusual because the Deer Cam is a fixed object and would not disturb the deer in any way. I am a firm believer in demons, mainly because I witnessed somebody in my church get possessed by something 2 years ago. Your thoughts on this?




posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   
My thoughts? Why would a demon be chasing a deer? Aslo, the lighting is wrong. See how the light is projecting traight down in the center of the pic? Then why is only the rear portion of the demon highlighted? One more thing, comparing the size of the deer with other objects in the picture of known size, that is one extremely small deer. About the size of a very large cat or a small dog. And if those were really wings on its back, they not only dont look large enough to support its weight, they are positioned in the wrong place for proper aerodynamic stability, that thing would always be flying with its body vertical - from neck to feet hanging straight down.

If its a flying predator, how come it didn't just do a surprise pounce on its initial attack, killing it in one swift motion? Why chase it on foot?



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   
No demon. But maybe a new predator. Tell your friend to get a better camera and try and catch it.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Interesting picture some things come to mind right away. First It seem like its missing the lower part of its leg
Theres nothing in the picture that would hide its leg there either its just gone.Second Its wings are far to small for flight in comparison to its body.


jra

posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I agree about the missing legs thing. It doesn't look like there's anything hidding it. It just fades off. Also the end of the wing is blacker then the background. That just doesn't seem right to me. It looks quite fake to me, personally.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Odd I came across this same image, minus the bizarre creature, while searching for El Chupacabra.
Will try and find it again.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
This picture is totaly un-real, just look at the legs hit has no knees. If u look at it, notheing about this demon is practical at all. This picture is further discredited by the fact that it apeared on another site [email=cybercletus@hotmail.com]http://www.cryptozoology.com/gallery/gallery.php?page=7. If u go there u will notice the picture with the demon and the original picture of the deer by its self in colour. I think this closes the case



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I've seen this pictuer a few times. Some with out the "demon" in it and other with it in it. Usually the ones with it in it claim it to be the ever elusive "el chupacabra." I think it is a fake. The lighting on it is wrong to, like someone pointed out.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   
In response to the claim that the deer is much too small, here's a picture of a deer and a relatively medium sized dog together:



And as for the part about the "demon's" leg suddenly disappearing, look closely at the larger pic. The tall grass and weeds are hiding "its" legs.

I am not saying that I'm fully convinced this photo is genuine, but its just some food for thought. Continue Posting Your Thoughts



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Well, I've recently found out that this photo was a hoax!! Whilst looking for a size example of a deer cam, I came across this picture:



(notice the exact similarities of the vegetation and positioning)



I am sad to say that this thread came to an end so quickly, but feel free to express your views on the reality of demons and such. My views on demons have not changed because of this hoax, but I am now more wary of the tricks that your mind can play on you.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   
I didn't say it was 'too small' i just said that it was 'extremely small'. Exactly like your pic of the deer and the dog would be my guess (i like the pic btw).

Now i admit the legs things is a good example of 'hoaxery' but to play devils advocate for a moment, its a demon... shouldn't it have 'fade away' powers or something? Maybe it isnt 'fully in this dimention'?

Anyways, this all gave me a good laugh and i appreciate the post.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Been debunked so many times. Cant see how you say it looks real...
Looks stupid to me, and just as real as this one of the Chupacabra:



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBlueSoldier
I am a firm believer in demons, mainly because I witnessed somebody in my church get possessed by something 2 years ago. Your thoughts on this?


The pics are interesting though far from convincing. What I did find interesting was your statement that you witnessed somebody in church being possessed. Now that is very interesting to me. I would love to hear more about this. I'd love to hear your account of this.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   
That, honestly, has to be one of the worst faked pictures around. As others have said, it's been debunked frequently. It's a composite of two photos and the "monster" is actually a toy.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Aside from the usual debunking that occurs (which is based on the location of a photo showing that the one with the alleged demon is fake), I really am getting tired of seeing statements such as the following being used to debunk photos...




And if those were really wings on its back, they not only dont look large enough to support its weight, they are positioned in the wrong place for proper aerodynamic stability, that thing would always be flying with its body vertical - from neck to feet hanging straight down.


Lets talk turkey for a second. In fact, lets talk ABOUT turkeys... they have wings, right? Can they fly? No.

There you have it. Turkeys have been debunked. We'll all enjoy our Thanksgiving hamburgers this year, since we now know that turkeys have been hoaxed.

Whew.

Sorry for the sarcasm and I don't mean to offend the original poster... but debunking the unknown is a much finer art than simply looking at a picture and pointing out the things that don't "fit". Whether it's an allegation of a supernatural creaters, extraterrestrials, or whatever... by sheer virtue of the fact that they are not of our world, they will likely bear features that do not make sense in our world.

For example, what if the creature in the original phot of this thread had been real? The wings that don't conform to our understanding of the use of such appendages for flight doesn't fit. What if in the world of the supernatural creature, there was a very heavy atmosphere -- thus requiring less lifting surface. What if, in their world, wings were not meant for flight, but for combat? Or were a legacy appendage?

Please! Debunk with care!



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I would like to thank Centrist for a clear and RATIONAL approach to the investigation of the unknown, however Christmas is just not going to be the same anymore



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
centrist says:


Lets talk turkey for a second. In fact, lets talk ABOUT turkeys... they have wings, right? Can they fly? No.

There you have it. Turkeys have been debunked. We'll all enjoy our Thanksgiving hamburgers this year, since we now know that turkeys have been hoaxed.


Au contraire, turkeys can fly quite well; it’s the farm-bred ones (who had the ability and sense bred out of them) which cannot do so well.


… by sheer virtue of the fact that they are not of our world, they will likely bear features that do not make sense in our world.


Although you may argue that there are some other-worldly creatures running around (which, for what it’s worth, I do not believe), it is not the choice of world-of-origin which drive physiology, but the laws of physics. We won’t see elephant-sized mice or mouse-sized elephants -- even on the planet Fnork -- because the Square-Cube Law works everywhere. We may see weird critters, but they will undoubtedly follow physical laws.


What if in the world of the supernatural creature, there was a very heavy atmosphere -- thus requiring less lifting surface. What if, in their world, wings were not meant for flight, but for combat? Or were a legacy appendage?


Regardless of the atmosphere requirements, the rules requiring wing placement to provide lift over the center of gravity would undoubtedly stay the same. With a super-dense atmosphere and low gravity acceleration, I could theoretically posit an animal weighing a hundred kilograms with wings of less than a square meter in lifting area …

…but they probably wouldn’t be growing out of the critters’ knees or his neck!

Besides, an animal designed to live in a super-dense atmosphere or one with a low gravity acceleration wouldn’t be very well able to chase a deer in a planet which (in comparison) would be have a partial vacuum for an atmosphere and exhibit jovian-like gravity, would it?

And wings for combat make as much evolutionary sense as a catapult designed for lobbing marshmallows. If what had once been lifting surfaces changed for some sort of combat (how this would help in combat eludes me) they’d still, as legacy appendages, be in a place that would show that—at one time – they actually made sense from an evolutionary and mechanical point of view.


Please! Debunk with care!


I try.

[edit on 18-11-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Centrist


Lets talk turkey for a second. In fact, lets talk ABOUT turkeys... they have wings, right? Can they fly? No.

There you have it. Turkeys have been debunked. We'll all enjoy our Thanksgiving hamburgers this year, since we now know that turkeys have been hoaxed.

Whew.




I have loads of wild turkeys around where I live and they do indeed fly. I have personally seem them fly to the tops of the highest trees around my house.

Off_The_Street is quite correct



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I believe this topic has already been made.
Firstly, on the subject of wings, it really makes me doubt that these exist. What was the ancestor of this creature and what made the wings disfunctional?
Secondly, if it was a deer camera (aka a security camera), there would be more than one frame of the "demon"s capture. This same exact frame has been roaming the internet.
Thirdly, the ground is flat, but the lighting makes it seem like it's round. Even if it was, it'd be only a slight slant and the "demon" would not be at such an angle.
Finally, the "demon" doesn't appear to have any joints, especially in a hunting stance, where it would be utilizing them the most. Carnivorous animals are normally not that short and stout.
I've always been skeptical of this picture. I hope what I said makes sense.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   
It looks like somebody has been photochopping kangaroos.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join