Miss me? (smiles)

[LightPiercingDarkness]

Dude, the image appears automatically (or should).
Besides, viruses can´t be transmitted in JPEG files.

They can also be posted like the others.

Whats with you. Having a bad hair week?

Trying not to miss a chance to be-little someone?

shoo

Lyndale

 

[komencanto]

They can also be posted like the others.

Whats with you. Having a bad hair week?

Trying not to miss a chance to be-little someone?

shoo

Lyndale

I don´t understand why you just don´t look at it from here. There is no possibility of anything bad happening if you look at a jpeg file. Nontheless, I will mirror that photo, and my ones (which I have done in BMP, a high quality JPG and a low quality JPG for your amusement in my internet space, where you can enjoy them better.
Give me 5 minutes....

 

[komencanto]

OK, I´ve uploaded a bunch of images here:

http://www.wiblin.id.au/photos/index.php?path=L2xwZC8=&page=1

alternatively, you can go to www.wiblin.id.au/photos and click on the folder called lpd. There are other various photos of me there.

The 3 sets of photos are mine, I could not find any demons in them at all. It would be nice if LPD could give us the specs of the camera he is using, as well as the program and level of JPG compression he is using to convert his photos.

If anyone wants me to put up any more photos, please just ask.

LPD, you can find the picture roger posted as the ninth in that directory. I have just noticed that the bmps don´t show up with the photo album program I´ve got there. Hmmm, I´ll find another way to post them.
Theres nothing interesting in them though.

 

[roger]

Thanks Komencanto, I don't understand Lyndale's objection given that my image is posted using exactly the same techinique he used to post his own pictures.

Lyndale, my image is posted in exactly the same way as yours: I used the attach file function. You probably just have images turned off in your preferences, so it is showing up as a link that you need to "download". Anyway, Komencanto is hosting it on his server, so you should be able to see it that way. It's the next to the last one on the lower right on his page.

Roger

 

[Powa]

Dude, the image appears automatically (or should).

Yesterday at some point I only saw a link where the image was supposed to be. So this is probably why LPD talks about downloading.

 

[komencanto]

Has anyone noticed that my images, with a decent camera show nothing of these faces.

Let me explain why. As LPD said in his first post, the photos were taken with a webcam. Thats right. Those terrible quality little cameras you use to stream images. They are very poor quality, as LPD´s images show.

The fuzz they produce appears as horizontal lines in almost all cases, especially in low light. I have a terrible $50 old digital camera which does the same thing. You can see this here: http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lightpiercingthedark/vwp?.dir=/Yahoo!+Photo+Album&.dnm=picture+in+basement...showing+circles.jpg&.view=t
Unfortunately, the size of the images is small, but I´m sure you get what I mean.
Now, all of the vague face shapes which I have seen are merely one of these lines with 2 dots (sometimes instead you form the eyes out of a dark patch). The better ones also include some shape distinguishable as a nose.

Go look at the faces you have seen (if indeed you managed to find them), and you will find that they are almost always a combination of this sort. In many pages of course I couldn´t find a single decent face, mostly the more heavily light ones.

The skulls LPD talks about are usually the white marks he makes himself, but I did find one which had a long line down the side in that page about.

The expressions are mostly an invention of our minds, which are exceptionally adept at recognising slight expressions on peoples faces, as this is a very important thing for us to be able to do.
The expressions though are quite cartoonish, and do not look like REAL human expressions.

Just some thoughts.

I am still waiting for the contact information of the person with whom you are preparing your case agaist the JREF. A phone number, an email, a website. You stated earlier that it is in this thread and that I missed it, but I guarantee you that it is not, so please tell me now.

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

Lets say in front of you is a table. On this table are 2 pictures.
One pictue is digital and one is not digital. Both pictues were takin in the same location of the same subject (the subject is doesnt matter). But when you look at each picture you notice only one difference. The digital picture has faces/aritifacts in it.

Do you know what the difference is? Actually nothing.
(I am not talking about the mechanics of the process)

Both devices are opening a lense and copying what they "see".

The difference is the RESULTS, NOT the "opening a lense" (and yes the "opening a lense" is not truely the digital "way" I know that. I just use the "opening a lense" statement for a lack of better words).

What I am trying to get at is...both devices take a picture of WHAT THEY "EACH SEE".

Are you catching that?........"WHAT THEY "EACH SEE".

If you take a picture of a flower, your going to see a flower.
If you take a picture of a bird, your going to see a bird.
If you take a picture of a person your going to see a person.

If you take a picture of something you don't know, your going to take a picture of something you don't know.

Concerning the picture above with those smiley faces.
If I were to say to you....that those are not (smiley) faces...you would agrue with me that they were. Wouldn't you? Of course you would and do you know why you would?

Make a list and its that same list why I say those "other" faces are real also.

You will find that if you compared my reasons (with my faces) with your reasons (of why you think yours are smiley faces), you'll find the results Identical on a very High percentage.

You think about that very very carefully and compare both lists in your head, before you reply.

Lyndale

and if you still dont get it (because of my lack of explaining). I will agrue with you that those are not smiley faces and you will convince me that they are. And I will use your same (for the "most" part) arguement against you....you dont believe me...try me.

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

just because the finding is.........obviouse.........done with simple equipment.....etc.


If thats the "formula" to do so...then so what?

If you had equipment that costs millions of dollars and only that equipment could do it........does that increase the validity of it?


Noooooooooooooooooooo it don't.

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

and that crap about the mind needing to see this or that.

I understand that arguement and if it wasn't for the precise, repetitive results .......I might agree.


short story..


When I first came to this forum ....peoples first reactions were "oh my" what is that. then the very first agruements from "everybody" was.......I faked all the pictures and there was no way this is happening.

Then when I told everyone "how it was happening".......everyone CHANGED their tune and said ...what your saying now...its just a mind thing.

You know what...once we are passed the mind thing....I wonder what lame excuses you will come up with next.........I wonder again....are we near the end yet when you have no more lame excuses and you'll finally just admit it ?


Lyndale

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

WAKE UP!!

Lyndale

 

[komencanto]

Lets say in front of you is a table. On this table are 2 pictures.
One pictue is digital and one is not digital. Both pictues were takin in the same location of the same subject (the subject is doesnt matter). But when you look at each picture you notice only one difference. The digital picture has faces/aritifacts in it.

Do you know what the difference is? Actually nothing.
(I am not talking about the mechanics of the process)

Both devices are opening a lense and copying what they "see".

The difference is the RESULTS, NOT the "opening a lense" (and yes the "opening a lense" is not truely the digital "way" I know that. I just use the "opening a lense" statement for a lack of better words).

I´m sure this is a mistake many people have committed, so I´ll explain the difference to you.
Firstly, as you would have noticed if you had visited the page with the photos I took, that my higher quality digital camera shows none of the faces yours does.
Next, digital and analog camera do do something fundamentally different. Digital cameras encode their images to JPEG while analog cameras have a thing called "absolute resolution", that is, it imprints exactly the light you put in and doesn´t have pixels. Because the JPEG encoding (which we use to reduce file size) does not produce a perfect reproduction, it sometime produces things called "artifacts", which are imperfections caused by reproduction. I am not saying this is the main reason you are seeing faces in your picture, I just want to explain that there is a difference. I´m sure there are more differences someone more interested in photography could explain to you.
I think if you scanned a JPEG of the real photo you are talking about you would find that it would turn out just the same in that digital conversion. BTW, my digital camera does indeed open it´s lense =)

Concerning the picture above with those smiley faces.
If I were to say to you....that those are not (smiley) faces...you would agrue with me that they were. Wouldn't you? Of course you would and do you know why you would?

Make a list and its that same list why I say those "other" faces are real also.

You will find that if you compared my reasons (with my faces) with your reasons (of why you think yours are smiley faces), you'll find the results Identical on a very High percentage.

You think about that very very carefully and compare both lists in your head, before you reply.

and if you still dont get it (because of my lack of explaining). I will agrue with you that those are not smiley faces and you will convince me that they are. And I will use your same (for the "most" part) arguement against you....you dont believe me...try me.

You´ve missed the point. They DO look like smiley faces, and in both cases you think you have seen a face, but you would not argue that those faces are actual real human faces. They are pictures, in one case, deliberate, in the other case they exist just by chance by a process I described earlier.
Understand now?

just because the finding is.........obviouse.........done with simple equipment.....etc.


If thats the "formula" to do so...then so what?

If you had equipment that costs millions of dollars and only that equipment could do it........does that increase the validity of it?

Noooooooooooooooooooo it don't.

Of course not. But if more sophisticated and accurate equipment showed that the effect was just a error caused by impresition on the cheaper and less accurate equipment, then yes it would reduce the validity of those original results.

When I first came to this forum ....peoples first reactions were "oh my" what is that. then the very first agruements from "everybody" was.......I faked all the pictures and there was no way this is happening.

Could you please provide a link to that thread, I´m interested to read it but I´m sure you can find it more easily than me.

You know what...once we are passed the mind thing....I wonder what lame excuses you will come up with next.........I wonder again....are we near the end yet when you have no more lame excuses and you'll finally just admit it ?

This idea of "you were wrong with your first argument, so you must be wrong with all of your future arguments" is silly.

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

You are wrong.

and..

concerning the link you requested.

I am not going to re read the thread...but some where in here I called someone randi (several times I know) and they argued that they checked out past posts and that is how they knew what they knew (who knows it might of even been you). So...If it means that much to you ...to see how lame everyone was in the beginning you go search.........that is if hal hasnt already dumped it.

and if its not there ....then one could assume that ...that indeed was randi earlier in the thread lieing and manipulating everyone.

Either way....I don't really care if you look or not....anyone in here with any integrity (scuse spelling) can verify what I said about that in the beginning (though i doubt they will).


lyndale

 

[komencanto]

You are wrong.

What a strong challenge! About which point am I wrong, and why do you believe that?

And why do you never answer me when I request to know the name of the person with whom you a planning to sue the JREF?

 

[Rolfe]

anyone in here with any integrity (scuse spelling)

You mean, excuse you for spelling it right?

Rolfe.

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

About which point, and why do you believe that?

And why do you never answer me when I request to know the name of the person with whom you a planning to sue the JREF?

"which point".............most.

"why".........................Some see the sunset and some see only the clouds.


"who".........................not your concern, is it?

 

[komencanto]

It is clear to me that you are entirely unable to defend your position against the arguments laid against you.

You show paranoid tendencies in your hatred towards JREF and your obsession with the 1 million dollars.

You appear delusional about your ability to win your case in court.

You are unable to see any point of you except your own and are so totally convinced of your own correctness you will often not even bother refuting the valid arguments of others.

I am sick of wasting my time arguing with someone who doesn´t respond to reason.

I suggest you show your demon pictures to your friends or family and see what reaction you get.

As other before, I am worried about you and suggest you speak to someone you know in real life about what you see.

I will no longer argue with you about these photos.

 

[roger]

I take it your NOT going to answer whether my picture correctly identified faces or not?

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

It is clear to me that you are entirely unable to defend your position against the arguments laid against you.

You show paranoid tendencies in your hatred towards JREF and your obsession with the 1 million dollars.

You appear delusional about your ability to win your case in court.

You are unable to see any point of you except your own and are so totally convinced of your own correctness you will often not even bother refuting the valid arguments of others.

I am sick of wasting my time arguing with someone who doesn´t respond to reason.

I suggest you show your demon pictures to your friends or family and see what reaction you get.

As other before, I am worried about you and suggest you speak to someone you know in real life about what you see.

I will no longer argue with you about these photos.

It is clear to me that you are stuck in "no it ain't land'.

It is clear to me that you will not go back and search the past threads like I suggested (but no, that would make me look good).

I find your last response interesting. Almost sounds like your "not going to reply anymore based on something that was just said or did in these last couple of replies and not the strong stance I have?..............mmmmmmmmmmm?

Makes you rub your chin and go mmm. (oh, not that any of you knows what that means).

Little man (whoever you are)...you live in a world of convience and you do and say what is convient at hand for what you want others to think about you.

Ever just stop and think, there is no corner to back me into because they are real?

It is you and everyone else in here that has the corner shaped butts (to say). Not me. I just wish I could keep you stuck in it. Oh well, I don't mind the excercise, it only strengthens and proves what I 've been saying.

You want some more of me?.........come and get it.




Lyndale

 

[LightPiercingDarkness]

I take it your NOT going to answer whether my picture correctly identified faces or not?

I will answer when I see it here and I dont have to click on it.
I see the one on the other page with out the smilies..can't you do the same like that one?

Lyndale

I will not click on anything in this forum, regardless of what you say, but I will respond when you learn how to put it here.

 

[Powa]

and if its not there ....then one could assume that ...that indeed was randi earlier in the thread lieing and manipulating everyone.

One could just as easily assume that the demons themselves deleted the thread, because you revealed their faces to everyone.