I was really captivated at the beginning of this video. I was highly intrigued, but as it went on, I started to roll my eyes. In my opinion, this is a
Here's some of the evidence that I found to be egregiously silly:
- early in the documentary, we're told to that the research team is told to place a camera on the table. It allegedly is picked up by a spirit, and
pictures are taken. We're shown what these pictures look like. We see a group of men, some portrait photos, some sort of palace, etc... basically, we
see photos from the past. Here's my question though: why on earth were the photos in black and white
?! This lends strong, strong, strong
credence to the idea that these photos were not taken by spirits, but were instead photos taken decades ago when color photography was not available.
In other words, spirits didn't get any pictures were the cameras -- the Scole group acquired existing photos and claimed spirits took them during a
session. Remember that many of the photos were, in fact, in color, so we know it wasn't the film/camera they were using.
- at the end, Allis DuBois is seemingly describing the death of of one of the scientists. Her description of the death is only vague and doesn't match
what happened that well, it sounds very-much like a cold reading. She says things like, "knees buckled", implying that he was standing up and fell
over. This is did not happen, as he was clearly seated. She says there was a banner hanging up, describing the event; it's logical that we would
expect to see a banner with text on the wall (perhaps something along the lines of, "2005 Annual Conference"), but instead we see a mural
Really!? The "connections" felt extremely forced in the editing process.
- we're told that the film was sealed in a box, and that one of the researches signed the canister that it resided in. However, I don't see how that's
foolproof at all. That in no way shape or form proves that it was the film that was actually developed. Why couldn't another hoaxed film roll have
been swapped into the signed canister after the experiment / before development? The guy who signed the canister doesn't say he developed the film
himself, it seems to be implied that he monitored the film up until it was sent off to be developed (even though they did it locally with their own
machine, it doesn't say that HE ran it through the machine -- there was potential for one of the Scole researches to swap it out).
- perhaps the most damning evidence of all; if these four mediums really did get spirits to supernaturally produce all of this, why would just quit
conducting these experiments? This would be arguably the biggest breakthrough in the history of humanity, and they just decide to quit after five
years / 500 experiments because they "felt [they] had done all [they] could?!?" WHAT!? At one point -- when addressing the criticism of the Scole
experiments not being able to take place in a lighted area -- one of the mediums says, "the Spirit Team told us that it would take years
develop a solution to produce these effects in daylight". I'm supposed to believe that these Scole team isn't going to dedicate the rest of their
lives to making that happen? Nonsense. Sounds like the hoax was getting old to them and they decided to pursue new avenues. Nothing anyone says can
convince me that them moving on from this is anything other than a massive red flag.
- some of the pictures/videos were just ridiculous. The photos with disembodied heads looked like someone manipulating photos in a video editing
software, or with more traditional photo manipulation techniques. The heads often had outlines -- almost like they were (poorly) cut out of one photo
and then pasted into a another.
- why wouldn't they allow the infrared cameras? Oh yeah, because the Spirit Team claimed that it would disrupt their ability to produce results. How
This documentary was a little bit creepy, I'll admit. But as it went on, the evidence became more and more laughable. Some of the testimonial was
convincing, but these people were sitting in complete darkness, and the human mind is very good as tricking us into seeing things that weren't really
there. The most convincing anecdotes took place when these subjects were the most susceptible to trickery of the mind/senses.
edit on 2-3-2013
by dellfriday because: (no reason given)