Is this a real ghost?

[Cainkane1]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...oto-of-ghost-man-standing-next-to-her-brother

This is supposed to be a legitimate photo of a ghost.

 

[Aepervius]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...oto-of-ghost-man-standing-next-to-her-brother

This is supposed to be a legitimate photo of a ghost.

The answer to that question is as always : no.

 

[theprestige]

Betteridge's Law of Headlines

 

[pattylt]

Betteridge's Law of Headlines

Sorry for my ignorance. What is this law ?

 

[Spindrift]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...oto-of-ghost-man-standing-next-to-her-brother

This is supposed to be a legitimate photo of a ghost.

Ghosts don't wear green shirts.

 

[Trebuchet]

If the headline ends in a question mark, the answer should be assumed to be "no".

 

[Crossbow]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...oto-of-ghost-man-standing-next-to-her-brother

This is supposed to be a legitimate photo of a ghost.

Sure it is a real ghost.

So go torture it just to make sure that you are saving lives.

 

[fagin]

Doesn't look like any ghost I've ever seen.

 

[JayUtah]

Ghosts don't wear green shirts.

Or have shadows cast on them, or respond to shading.

 

[Loss Leader]

If the picture is unretouched, I'd say it's a reflection of the TV screen on the back window.

 

[tinribmancer]

We need a facepalm icon.

Articles like that are always filled with stupid people posting stupid comments, like this one:

I love when stuff like this happens. Little glimpses into another realm or dimension. Cameras always pick these things up

 

[fuelair]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...oto-of-ghost-man-standing-next-to-her-brother

This is supposed to be a legitimate photo of a ghost.

No, just no!!!!!

 

[fuelair]

Sorry for my ignorance. What is this law ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines


eta welcome in and www.dogpile.com is your friend!!!!!

 

[baron]

That ghost spoils what would otherwise be a beautiful photo.

 

[Cat Not Included]

Damn photo-bombing ghosts. Don't they know that's rude?

 

[Cainkane1]

I don believe in ghosts but unless its a reflection which it probably is its a good fake.

 

[JesseCuster]

Articles like that are always filled with stupid people posting stupid comments, like this one:

"I love when stuff like this happens. Little glimpses into another realm or dimension. Cameras always pick these things up"

I once came across a guy on another forum, who ran ghost tours for a living, and who claimed to be a professional photographer, who made one of the silliest comments I've seen about ghosts and cameras.

He claimed that 'modern lens grinding techniques' allowed camera lens to pick up more of the electromagnetic spectrum and this allows new cameras to be better at photographing ghosts. What do you even say to something like that?

 

[tinribmancer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines


eta welcome in and www.dogpile.com is your friend!!!!!

RationalWiki's version is funnier better, IMO.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law

which re-directs me to the page "Just Asking Questions (9/11 twoofer tactic)"

The JREF forums call it "JAQing off." "Marquis de Carabas" coined the acronymous term after they had dealt with one too many 9/11 truthers, with this later description by "VespaGuy"

I once came across a guy on another forum, who ran ghost tours for a living, and who claimed to be a professional photographer, who made one of the silliest comments I've seen about ghosts and cameras.

He claimed that 'modern lens grinding techniques' allowed camera lens to pick up more of the electromagnetic spectrum and this allows new cameras to be better at photographing ghosts. What do you even say to something like that?

Facepalming seems to be the best option. Same goes for idiots that make the same claims about "filming ghosts"...

 

[Giordano]

It is as convincing as the other "ghost photographs" I have seen.

 

[wasapi]

I once came across a guy on another forum, who ran ghost tours for a living, and who claimed to be a professional photographer, who made one of the silliest comments I've seen about ghosts and cameras.

He claimed that 'modern lens grinding techniques' allowed camera lens to pick up more of the electromagnetic spectrum and this allows new cameras to be better at photographing ghosts. What do you even say to something like that?

Perhaps, "No offence, but you're nuts"?