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.

 

another question from me regarding werewolves.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Hi, I am the person who made this post a year ago:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
but unfortunately I lost internet connection due to problems with the phone line for a few months and that is the reason I left the post so abruptly.

But I have another question. Hypothetically If a video and pictures was posted here which showed a werewolf would that be proof enough for you to believe they exist? and by that term I don't mean of one that has some disease or anything I mean of a person actually transforming into one. What else would you need to prove it if those pictures and videos are not enough. Oh and of course I am talking about good quality pictures and video, not one that has been eidted, cut or anything else and not one done in dull backgrounds where you can't see it.

Oh and even if it denied laws of science, would you still believe it. (this is an important point if the video was real I think).

Its just hypothetical, don't get any ideas haha, I am not one, just want to know of what proof you would need. You will know why when the time comes(may be a long time). Patience people. And again this is NOT about me in any way.




posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
ive said this befor on a werewolf thread but hey werewolfs are interesting i dont really think they were people shapeshifting after getting bitten but maybe they were real animals which evolved sometime during the ice age and managed to survive i dont know the idea of a pack of werewolves attacking a mammoth seems cool to me



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   
It would have to be a very, very good video, for one. Though with technology the way it is, with computer graphics being as advanced as they are, it might still come under scrutiny. I personally wouldn't believe it until I saw it with my own eyes, in person.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 01:12 AM
link   
I know what you mean with evovling technology but I am sure there are people here who can analyse a video right?



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mr cryptoman
ive said this befor on a werewolf thread but hey werewolfs are interesting i dont really think they were people shapeshifting after getting bitten but maybe they were real animals which evolved sometime during the ice age and managed to survive i dont know the idea of a pack of werewolves attacking a mammoth seems cool to me


I am talking of a person who has the ability to do it. To transform into something called a "werewolf". Don't like that term because of its inaccurate meaning. Try not to think of it as a movie one lol. Rather just a person who can change into soemthing else.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 01:33 AM
link   
Here's another hypothetical question for you: What would happen to a werewolf if you put him ON the moon?



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   
The body of proof should be equal to the divergence the phenomena has from accepted reality.

As such, no a video wouldn't be enough. You would need a specimen to transform under controlled laboratory conditions and be able to replicate the effect repeatedly under those same conditions before human to animal transformation would be an accepted phenomenon.

The same stringent proofs that exist in science must be applied before changes can be made to our understanding of reality.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spuggy
The body of proof should be equal to the divergence the phenomena has from accepted reality.

As such, no a video wouldn't be enough. You would need a specimen to transform under controlled laboratory conditions and be able to replicate the effect repeatedly under those same conditions before human to animal transformation would be an accepted phenomenon.

The same stringent proofs that exist in science must be applied before changes can be made to our understanding of reality.


I see what you mean and its a good point. but 1) I do not mean a human to animal transformation but rather just a human to something which is commonly known as a "werewolf" (manwolf) but not what you see in films though i.e. not some very big creature who goes rampaging around killing.

also 2) what if this hypothetical person didn't want to show you in a laboratory as it may and most likely have consqeuences if it was released into the world.


Hmm maybe I should post my reasons for this BUT I need to think about that so look out as the reason why may come soon.

[edit on 12/1/2007 by Snake64_009]



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gemwolf
Here's another hypothetical question for you: What would happen to a werewolf if you put him ON the moon?


Nothing in my opinion. I don't believe in the typical werwolf in which the moon affects them.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 11:24 AM
link   
....the tranformation of a human being into a wolf is nothing more than folklore. The lunar cycle that is responsible for inducing this effect is yet another myth to add to the fear factor.
Werewolves belong to the long list of mythological creatures conjored up from the fertile imaginaton of people who had limited scientfic knowledge of their world.
I agree with other posters that in this time of highly advanced digital imaging that it is likely any 'evidence' submitted would be a hoax.
I rest my case.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by anglosaxon
....the tranformation of a human being into a wolf is nothing more than folklore. The lunar cycle that is responsible for inducing this effect is yet another myth to add to the fear factor.
Werewolves belong to the long list of mythological creatures conjored up from the fertile imaginaton of people who had limited scientfic knowledge of their world.
I agree with other posters that in this time of highly advanced digital imaging that it is likely any 'evidence' submitted would be a hoax.
I rest my case.


It seems you have not read my post above...I did state not the typical one and not one that transforms into an animal. Also can you not agree that Tv and books have clouded the "possible" truth that something along the lines of transformation exist?

Anyway I will be posting my reason why I made this topic and the previous one a year ago. It is long and will take some time so I may not be able to do it for a couple of days but hold on tight it will be a worthwhile read.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gemwolf
Here's another hypothetical question for you: What would happen to a werewolf if you put him ON the moon?


Within a few years, he might cover it in an orbiting cloud of hair.



Originally posted by Snake64_009
It seems you have not read my post above...I did state not the typical one and not one that transforms into an animal.


That wouldn't be a werewolf, then. By definition, a werewolf is "a person transformed into a wolf or capable of assuming the form of a wolf."

That being said, surely you don't mean simple transformations of things like the eyes, ears, teeth, etc.? I have known people to take a change in eye color as proof that they're werewolves.


Also can you not agree that Tv and books have clouded the "possible" truth that something along the lines of transformation exist?


No, the laws of physics have done that.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join