Christmas Day Unknown Man Photo(updated version)

why do people laugh at websites like this?
its because of threads like this.
i'm sure you have a few brain cells, why not try rubbing them together.

Originally posted by Kino321
why do people laugh at websites like this?
its because of threads like this.
i'm sure you have a few brain cells, why not try rubbing them together.

This thread is actually pretty toned down, comparatively speaking, in a no-aliens-liking-strawberry-ice-cream sort of way.

reply to post by Legos

but its still stupid, its just a photo of some guy and a made up story.

Originally posted by Kino321
reply to post by Legos

 

but its still stupid, its just a photo of some guy and a made up story.

No offense but your post falls into the same category, that type of non-argument is of very little value.

I don't sense that the OP is lying exactly, but he may be omitting important evidence supporting the non-ghost theory, because it's less exciting. People do this all the time.

Originally posted by Kino321
why do people laugh at websites like this?
its because of threads like this.
i'm sure you have a few brain cells, why not try rubbing them together.

I see you're getting off to a great start here with your first post.You won't last long with that attitude.This thread isn't as bad as some that I've seen here.Atleast this poster has stuck around and he really thinks he's got something in that picture.Truth of the matter is this is a website..where people post from all over the world.We don't know each individual thread starter on a personal level so we can only go on what they tell us and decide for ourselves.

I believe the op is being half honest with us.It's nothing personal against him,but the picture is what it is. Usually things are exactly as they appear,in this case I believe it's a person and not a ghost.That's just my own opinion.You,the OP and everyone else are free to form your OWN conclusion based on the eveidence that's been presented.

reply to post by nightstalker78

so you think the op is lying, then call me an idiot because i said the op is lying.
ok.

reply to post by Legos


But the child is not reacting like the dog is supposedly reacting. So either the child knows the person standing there or does not sense it.

reply to post by Kino321


Firstly,point out where I said he was lying? I don't think he's delibrately doing so,if thats what you mean.

Secondly,nowhere did I call you an idiot.

Thirdly,if you think either of those are true,go back and read what I said again.

reply to post by Pressthebutton


I don't think you'd be risking anything personally. If you agree to send the pictures and a mod agrees to take a look at them, it is a completely mutual agreement. There is nothing sexual about the situation, unless you are the one who presumes it is. It's not like you were walking around naked or anything, so I don't personally see what the big deal is.

I feel like this is a cop out, but that's my personal opinion.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by Pressthebutton

 

I don't think you'd be risking anything personally. If you agree to send the pictures and a mod agrees to take a look at them, it is a completely mutual agreement. There is nothing sexual about the situation, unless you are the one who presumes it is. It's not like you were walking around naked or anything, so I don't personally see what the big deal is.

I feel like this is a cop out, but that's my personal opinion.

I think at this point it's best for a mod to lock this until he sends proof that it was only the 3 of them in the house that morning. The original photo has been discussed to death and there's really no point in this thread carrying on.

reply to post by nightstalker78


The problem with that is 1) What if this person had this experience and it is REAL? So, just because everyday Joe Schmoe has an experience that cannot be explained we should just throw it away? Nothing will more than likely come of the OP's original posting but if he/she said it happened...who am I to say otherwise. We don't have 24/7/365 forensic teams available these days.

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by Pressthebutton

 

I don't think you'd be risking anything personally. If you agree to send the pictures and a mod agrees to take a look at them, it is a completely mutual agreement. There is nothing sexual about the situation, unless you are the one who presumes it is. It's not like you were walking around naked or anything, so I don't personally see what the big deal is.

I feel like this is a cop out, but that's my personal opinion.

I think at this point it's best for a mod to lock this until he sends proof that it was only the 3 of them in the house that morning. The original photo has been discussed to death and there's really no point in this thread carrying on.

How do you figure that posting X pictures not containing additional people constitutes evidence that only the three of them were in the house that morning? Unless it's the visual equivalent of proof-by-contradiction, i don't see how that's possible given that the OP, whose credibility is being challenged in the first place, can just easily leave out any pictures he chooses to.

Posting additional pictures is pointless in that regard and IMO not to be allowed without the parent's permission.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by Pressthebutton

 

I don't think you'd be risking anything personally. If you agree to send the pictures and a mod agrees to take a look at them, it is a completely mutual agreement. There is nothing sexual about the situation, unless you are the one who presumes it is. It's not like you were walking around naked or anything, so I don't personally see what the big deal is.

I feel like this is a cop out, but that's my personal opinion.

The way you're pursuing additional evidence here suggests that you have some inclination to agree that the picture has a paranormal explanation. It's a picture of a man. What additional supporting evidence would you possibly need to make the case that it's not a ghost?

Admit it, you think it might be a ghost don't you? Lets talk about that.

reply to post by Legos


There's a possibility it is something paranormal, but until something is presented that supports his story, I will remain skeptical.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by Legos

 

There's a possibility it is something paranormal, but until something is presented that supports his story, I will remain skeptical.

Naturally. May I ask what aspect of the picture, if any, you find suggestive of paranormal activity? Or is that possibility entirely dependent on the OP's claim that no one else was around?

My feeling is that you want to eliminate any doubt that the OP is lying so you can progress to additional analysis. While that makes sense, it's completely impossible, so rather than push someone to share personal content. just flip a coin and see where it takes you.

Originally posted by nightstalker78


I think at this point it's best for a mod to lock this until he sends proof that it was only the 3 of them in the house that morning. The original photo has been discussed to death and there's really no point in this thread carrying on.

This is a kid and the dog.

No one knows who the other child is. Notice the Dog can see the ghost kid, but the other child cant?

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by Pressthebutton

 

You had a flesh n' blood visitor that your mother forgot about.

And he has his hands in his pockets.
Still, this is better than 'I saw a ufo' and now my dog is sick.

More pages, more wasted time.

OP are you in a band?

In the spirit of searching for truth...

According to earlier statements, there were three people present on Christmas day...
1. You
2. Your mother
3. Your nephew

I'm wondering where your brother/sister, and/or brother-in-law/sister-in-law, would be? Being that present opening time is a big event for the kids, wouldn't your nephew's parent or parents want to be there to watch him open his toys?

Just curious...

So instead of reading 43 pages looking for an answer, I thought I'd just ask in the hope that a participant in the thread will be able to answer.


Pretty much looks like someone standing in front of a door and behind a child.


Is there any more to it than that?

I see that the OP is still active (which sometimes hoaxers can't be bothered with) so that's good.


But I don't really see how this can be cleared up, people will say it's a real man, the OP will say "he wasn't there when I took the picture"

What can ya do?

reply to post by blupblup


Not everything can be answered easily. Is everything black and white? Shades of gray? No and yes. OK, sometimes yes and yes. This is one of those cases where there is not enough forensic data to arrive at a conclusion. In the context of this forum; it is only the OP who is "convinced" of "what he/she has shared". We can only deduce it so far before saying "Well, we can't prove it so it's a lie." or "Well, we can't prove it this time, maybe next time - so be ready!". Until either is satisfactory with the OP then it is time to move on as there is nothing more to add here that will change the outcome as the onus is on the OP.