ogilvy Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?d...10996&hl=en i found this on a link from a christian forums site. this and similar testimonies are meant to prove its all true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 psst... hey buddy... wanna buy a ghost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 The light produced by the bonfire is reflecting/refracting as the camera moves. That's why the camera operator is able to move the image back out of the fire, through the fire and around it. It's not a trick - the operator isn't trying to set up a hoax - but someone's making a lot more of it than it is. Why would an angel be on fire anyway? Wouldn't it make more sense to say it was a demon? No offense against you, pippa_wonders. It's just an observance of a very bring light through the lens of a camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 The light produced by the bonfire is reflecting/refracting as the camera moves. That's why the camera operator is able to move the image back out of the fire, through the fire and around it. It's not a trick - the operator isn't trying to set up a hoax - but someone's making a lot more of it than it is. Why would an angel be on fire anyway? Wouldn't it make more sense to say it was a demon? No offense against you, pippa_wonders. It's just an observance of a very bring light through the lens of a camera. Yup and there were clearly no signs of momentum either. The speed and behavior of it pretty much gives it away as a reflection. The curvature of the lens makes it not totally move in sync with the camera, but it is connected if you look close. Notice, it ONLY moves when the camera moves, AND none of the spectators acknowledge its presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 According to the babble, an angel has to be discerned while it is in a human host. Then again, what do you expect form a religion that worships at the feet of urine stains on overpasses, knotty trees, images on grilled cheese sandwhiches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Like Kenny said, it's extremely clear that it is a reflection caused by the fire, since it moves synchronous with the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Internet Jesus Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 consequently that is the single largest piece of evidence their side of the debate owns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabula Rasa Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 consequently that is the single largest piece of evidence their side of the debate owns. It's funny. Right after I got saved at youth camp when I was 16, for a moment, I thought I saw a guy with wings sitting at a table writing in a book. Of course logic tells me now that the old brain was playing tricks, I was still on an emotional high and my vision was influenced by all the talk about the saved person's name being writtenin the lamb's book of life. In regard to the video, even though I haven't seen it, just some of the christian logic regarding angels debunks said sighting. An angel wouldn't let itself be detected unless it wanted, and if it did, the sight of said celestial being would be so bright the camera couldn't pick it up. The camera lens would be fried. (Sorry if I sound like the fundies, the programming's tough to root out.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 It's partially lens flare and partially the shape of the iris in the Camcorder. It's caused a few UFO flaps down the years... since the light source is flickering, it causes the 'angel'/'fairy' shape... BTW, bringing momentum and f=ma (where a is a vectorised acceleration) wouldn't dissuade a beleiver... who says angels have mass? And how many pins can one get into an angel's head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 I think it was an angel and just like in the story of Lot I now want to have sex with it. It looked hot (that's right...I said it). mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Everyone in 'Possibly Earth' get out now... run... do NOT look back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 BTW, bringing momentum and f=ma (where a is a vectorised acceleration) wouldn't dissuade a beleiver... who says angels have mass? And how many pins can one get into an angel's head? My bad, I forgot for a sec that it takes actual thought processes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 I think it was an angel and just like in the story of Lot I now want to have sex with it. It looked hot (that's right...I said it). mwc LOL Hot indeed! Must be a "demon"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted February 13, 2008 Author Share Posted February 13, 2008 The light produced by the bonfire is reflecting/refracting as the camera moves. That's why the camera operator is able to move the image back out of the fire, through the fire and around it. It's not a trick - the operator isn't trying to set up a hoax - but someone's making a lot more of it than it is. Why would an angel be on fire anyway? Wouldn't it make more sense to say it was a demon? No offense against you, pippa_wonders. It's just an observance of a very bring light through the lens of a camera. haha i no way believed it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Maybe the round dot that also moves is an angel dog and they're just out for a pee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Possible responses: It's no angel, that's my wife! It's no angel, it's Fantastic Four's Johnny Storm! Flame on, baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 i'm disappointed with the angel. its a silly looking one,and it moves funny, more like a ghost, not that i've ever seen one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts