Age of Superstition: The Dismissal of ALL VIDEO and PHOTO Evidence

*note* I do not claim any of the images in this thread to be real or hoaxed. Excepty Patty, (Bigfoot) I have made up my mind on that...

su·per·sti·tion (sōō'pər-stĭsh'ən)
n.
An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.

Basically, superstition is when you do not think for yourself.

In the modern age, upon seeing a video or photo of a UFO, cryptoid etc., even if it seems authentic, we immediately conclude that it is a fake. Why do we assume this?



Patterson filmed the most authentic Bigfoot footage in history. It cannot and will not be recreated. The dismissal of a man in a suit has been de-bunked countless times.People have come forward claiming to have been the man in the suit, failing miserably to prove it. Patterson went to his deathbed knowing that he filmed a real Bigfoot and that people didn't believe him. People still believe it's a fake. How's that for heartbreaking? Well, we can thank superstition. It continues today.



Do we immediately assume that the person who photographs or tapes a UFO, Bigfoot etc. has the capability to edit at a Hollywood level? Yes: we do. We rely on an irrational belief that all people have the capability and means to do so; when logically, we must know that is impossible.

Logically, it is very doubtful that the 45 year old housewife who photographed a silver disc over her Arizona backyard is an expert at photoshop and has access to 3D modelling software. It is doubtful, but possible : therefore, we immediately assume that any evidence she gives is a fake. No matter how authentic it seems.



Logically, it is very doubtful that a 65 year old war veteran has the capability or desire to fabricate footage of a flying object in the night sky. Maybe he really did see it out his window, grab the DV camera he received from his family on Christmas, and run outside. Logically, that is more plausible than him 'faking' anything... but we do not rely on logic, we rely on the superstition of the modern age: we cannot and will not trust anything we see.



Logic and evidence are quite literally thrown out the window in favor of skepticism and denial. 'Skepticism' is often a loose-term for outright dismissal. Very rarely can a skeptic admit that the circumstances surrounding certain video or photo evidence supports it's validity, but this is sometimes the case.

But when we use logic to consider circumstances, and all the thousands of untold amateur photos and videos out there, we have to confront a serious question. Is a minority of the evidence real? Are we dismissing real events and real photographs from ordinary people out of superstition? Has living in a modern age where visual trickery is everywhere jaded us?



OF COURSE IT HAS! To claim otherwise is blatant denial and borders dangerously close to pseudo-skepticism. We have to admit that when a fleet of UFO's fly's over the whitehouse, the minute the footage hits the internet, it's going to be called a fake.

Immediately afterwards, outside sources will confirm that multiple witnesses viewed the object etc, and for the first time, we might have to admit that we were being superstitious and jaded. Our eyes were closed. And maybe they have been for the past 30 years.



Maybe all aong we have mistaken reality for special effects... that is a scary reality to live in, but it is our reality. One day, we will see things in the sky and will know in our hearts that they are not real, and the irony will sting. Until then, we continue to deny valid evidence out of superstition, indoctrinated by this modern society with all it's visual trickery and deceptions.

I suppose the only exception will be massive sightings with massive witnesses. Even those events will be dismissed...



This is after all, the modern age, we have our own form of superstition.

Somewhat relevant, I have a 4 year old little brother who despises the Lord of the Rings character, Gollum. 5 years after the movies release, the CGI actor is still convincing enough to frighten children, because it looks like a living breathing person.



If LOTR had been released yesterday, Gollum would look frighteningly real to us, an effect called 'hyper-realism' where the human eye is exposed to details too sharp and too clear to convince them of what they are seeing.

In essence, the age of visual trickery has progressed to hyper-realism, which only insists further that we cannot trust our eyes and must rely on superstition that everything is fake. Otherwise we would be terrified like a 4 year old seeing things they think are real.

reply to post by NewWorldOver


NWO,


I like your post, I feel you are trying to make a good point.

Reality is not what we perceive it to be, and I think all of us at the subconscious level understand this.

That is why you can't change a persons mind with logic, reason, evidence, or even absolute proof.

If I were to find absolute proof of the existence of aliens it would not change one persons mind, no matter what they say, those who believe aliens do exist would still believe, and those who don't would go on believing they don't.

It is the same with the existence of God you can't prove to another person God is real they have to come to that realization on their own, in their own way, and in their own time, because it is God who revels Himself to people not us.

The most we can do is plant and water, God gives the increase.

The whole argument for proof, for logic and reason, it's a facade, a shell game we play with ourselves.

Ego is always in conflict with true self to maintain dominance, it fights to keep from going back to playing a subordinate role after being elevated, that is why people are always asking for perceptual evidence of reality in the first place, they are in conflict with self.

Let me put it this way, at a subconscious level we know that in truth we are not even human but conscious energy using form for our experience.

It's our egos that prevent us from letting go of the idea that only that which can be perceived physically is real, not logic, reason, or material evidence.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.

The invisible things are clearly seen, we know the truth at the subconscious level we deny it at the conscious.

What you're saying makes a lot of sense. We refuse to believe because we are told it isn't so. A lot of it comes from religious training and education. Religion tells you to believe because. And not to believe, because.

Same thing in schools. Teachers tell you that in Columbus' time everybody thought the Earth was flat. Nothing could be farther from the truth, but most people believe because they were told so.

The same goes with what you're saying: don't believe the photos because.

Great points, we should pay more attention to logic.

You should change the name of this thread to "Age of Photoshop: The Dismissal of ALL VIDEO and PHOTO Evidence". Video and photos of bigfoot, ufos and such are regularly dismissed because most people of basic intellect know it is all to easy to fake such images. What's more is the digital age has put advanced image editing tools in the hands of many which make photographic effects so easy that even rank amateurs can produce results which are authentic looking on the surface.

Originally posted by Lilitu
Video and photos of bigfoot, ufos and such are regularly dismissed because most people of basic intellect know it is all to easy to fake such images.

Yes. Today it is easy to fake images. It wasn't easy in the 60's when Patterson filmed his Bigfoot. We didn't have digital technology then. Regardless, , when people saw Pattersons Bigfoot, they said it was a man in a suit. 40+ years later, we have proved conclusively that not even the best Hollywood artists of TODAY are capable of hoaxing a suit like that...

so you see, even before digital technology, people rely on immediate skepticism and the idea that everything is fake . To actually investigate the existence of such a creature is beyond their scope of imagination. They are too afraid to change their perception of reality.

Today, it is alot easier to be skeptical and assume everything is faked. But we are still denying reality with superstitions that everything is fake.

[edit on 8-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]

Thinking for yourself is a big Must.

As to the "bigfoot" - if you take that image into youir photoshop program and anlarge it, you will see that the light spot across the face there reveals an open "eye space". You can ssee the shadow across the mans nose and under his eyebrows.

As to those ufo shots. I'd really like to believe that they are all real. However, humans have been hoaxing each other for a long time. Some of their hoaxes are still being published as fact.
There seems to be no way to ever tell for sure.

You're right, we have to think for ourselves. We can't allow even suspicion or skepticism to halt investigation of evidence.

Originally posted by OhZone
As to the "bigfoot" - if you take that image into youir photoshop program and anlarge it, you will see that the light spot across the face there reveals an open "eye space". You can ssee the shadow across the mans nose and under his eyebrows.

This has already been done, by experts. They have mapped Patties face and have discovered that she has blinking eyelids and a low-set jaw. Her mouth actually opens in the film... I can't convince anybody to accept the research. We are still depending on our own suspicion and amateur opinions to discredit things that have already been endorsed by the scientific community.

Bigfoot, UFO's and E.T.'s have all been endorsed by mainstream science. We are behind the times because we still do not trust any evidence. Nevertheless, evidence has been verified by experts.



[edit on 8-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]

You should read Simulacra and Simulations

www.stanford.edu...

Nice thread,I've always said that the proof is out there. I mean,20,000 year old cave paintings weren't photoshopped. Sure,the majority of the so called evidence is going to have logical explanations. But there's some in there that will be real.

If I'd have had a camera with me when I saw a ufo,I'm sure people would have immediatly said "fake" But I'd have known the truth. I think with some,it's a defense mechanism. To hide themselves from the truth. Maybe they're just not ready for it.

See, the problem is one of personal experience. I have never seen anything in the sky that wasn't a cloud or bird or anything else that wasn't supposed to be there. I have been in that situation where no one believes me about a given claim, but dang it I Know The Truth! It truly is frustrating to see people scoff at my claims when I know what I am saying is true.

But yet, when I am the one who has not experienced (in this case a UFO sighting) what others claim to have experienced, I must doubt the validity of their conclusion as to what the thing they saw was. I cannot trust what I see in a video because logic tells me that there are people that will do anything for attention, will lie because they can, will get a kick out of getting believers all riled up about something they know is fake- the list goes on and on. But the biggest reason for my initial skepticism when dealing with UFO "proofs" is the fact that we cannot trust our eyes if we are not seeing the proof first-hand. Even then, our minds will race to put together a cogent logic for what is being seen.

I would love to wake up and turn on the news and see the pundits and anchors falling all over themselves to tell the world that beings from another world have arrived and finally validated claims made for arguably thousands of years. I know without doubt that everyone would be a believer if aliens just f n showed up and said hello (or whatever).

Only a seriously disturbed person would deny their existence while staring one in the face. He might look at an alien that just landed say, in NY, and put his hands over his ears and scream "LALALALALALA!!!", hoping it all just goes away, but it will not, if it is real.

The evidence is overwhelming, but it is just evidence. It is not proof. If I hit a man in the face, the evidence is the bruise. The proof is actually seeing me hit him.

edit: punctuation

[edit on 15-3-2008 by obilesk]

reply to post by NewWorldOver

Logically, it is very doubtful that the 45 year old housewife who photographed a silver disc over her Arizona backyard is an expert at photoshop and has access to 3D modelling software

and why do you accept that the footage was indeed shot by a ` 45YO housewife ` ? because " she " told you ?

if you are trying to fush a fake / hoax - the backstory you craft to explain its origin is as carefully scripted as every other element - the legend of the players is finely sculpted to pander to just the sentiments you express

Everything you see can be explained away. Every UFO can be a optical illusion, satellite, bird etc. Even sightings by entire cities can be explained away by saying its atmospheric conditions or whatever.

Its easy. The system works by credibility. People trust the one with high credibility. Sources such as mainstream media has high credibility. So people ask them what "really" happened. A shot down UFO is a crashed satellite, moving lights on NASA videos is ice crystals and so on. People dont have the technical knowledge or ability to judge weather thats true or not.

Who do you think the media gets their info from? The people who shot down the UFO in the first place. There is great entertainment watching the news once you know where they get their "truth".



[edit on 15-3-2008 by Copernicus]

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
and why do you accept that the footage was indeed shot by a ` 45YO housewife ` ? because " she " told you ?

I don't. In fact, I don't consider the backstory of footage to be a credit at all. Neither is it a discredit. The footage itself is what should be examined... but authenticity is impossible to claim. Therefore our assumption that everything can be fake will override the subconscious realization that we are seeing UFO's. It's called impulsive denial and we do it all the time.

Therefore if you consider a 45 year old womens footage to be a hoax created by some third party hiding behind a curtain, you may be in compulsive denial. The footage itself may be authentic. To avoid serious consideration is superstitious behavior.

We already have high ranking military and government officials who have issued statements on record that UFO's and E.T.s are a real deal... but the footage and expert testimony and every other piece of evidence available to the public gets scrutinized to death. This happens with every thing outside our scope of daily life.

There have been public cases of UFO's floating in the sky while military fired weapons at them... people see these things, the media might even report on it, pictures may be taken but we would rather assume everything is explainable as a hoax. Reality may be too much for us to consider.

[edit on 26-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]