The "Carlos Swett affair"

[Guest]

AND YOU KEEP IGNORING MY ANSWER

Hey Carlos,

You keep ignoring my posts.

I've got a better clip than yours from the World Trade Center a year before the tragedy.

Check it out http://www.scifi.com/happens/happens_1_big.mov

Gee, that's a lot spookier than yours. Beats you by a year too.

Well don't worry Carlos. I'll repeat my question tomorrow and the day after lest anyone truly have any doubts as to whether you were treated unfairly and have a legitimate claim.

Hi again Blue Monk.

And why you keep ignoring my answer?
I put here again and I will repeat it tomorrow and the day after until you read it. Don't worry.
Here it is again:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Blue Monk:

I invite you to read my signature.

Then you can read Andrew Harter's answer to my application and if you can find a quote that my application was not valid , please tell me.

Then I invite you to focus in "the bird".
Just analize it the propper way, but don't forget to see the tape.

_________________

About your stupid clip, read also how it was "made" by SCIFI (channel). Was done for stupids like you.
The other tape , the "live" tape is the one in "discussion".

You are making points and soon you will be in the "next "category in this forum according to the numbers of replies you make.Don't worry it doesn't matter what you said in.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[rwald]

Show me proof that "You have no claim. There is nothing supernatural going on." does not equal "Your claim is invalid."

 

[Purple Tentacle]

if anyone out there is having trouble getting the http://www.inlex.net/bluemonk/WorldTrade01.avi AVI to work, 1 solution could be to download the DIVX player from www.divx.com which should play it.

just a note, has anyone got the AVI to work ?

 

[Blue Monk]

I invite you to read my signature.

Well that was most enlightening. Of course nowhere in your signature does it state what powers or abilities you plan to demonstrate and under what observable conditions as a requirement to the first rule of the challenge.

The bottom line is you don’t qualify under the rules. Period.

I just find it ironic that on one hand not only do you believe aliens exist but that they are manipulating time and space in ways far beyond our comprehension in order to travel the vast wasteland of space to be at this exact time and place for reasons known only to themselves and that you can deduce this only from a brief smudge on a video tape.

Not only are you able to come to this conclusion of the presence of aliens but you can also dismiss the idea that it might be a bird, although we know birds exist, we know birds were present, we can see in other videos the birds present the same color pattern as the image and we can see that the birds flight form an undulating visual pattern that at in given time when slightly out of focus could be misinterpreted.

But of course, compared to the alien theory the bird theory is just too far-fetched.

You can understand all of this from a simple brief smudge on a videotape and yet you don’t seem to understand the very simple rules of the challenge.

But you know, when I say it like that it just doesn’t sound so foolish.

So in closing I would like to point out that nowhere in your signature do you state what power or ability you plan to demonstrate or under what observable conditions.

Therefore can you guess what’s coming next?……

What powers or abilities to you plan to demonstrate and under what observable conditions do you propose in order to meet the first requirement of the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge.
Does anyone one else see this question answered in Carlo’s signature or is this another one of those paranormal events?

 

[rwald]

I saw the video. But then again, I've downloaded every WinAmp video imput plugin I've ever found, so it'd be hard for me to not see a video.

 

[Purple Tentacle]

I saw the video. But then again, I've downloaded every WinAmp video imput plugin I've ever found, so it'd be hard for me to not see a video.

cool, i just wanted to make sure it was a codec problem not a problem with the video itself thanks

 

[Guest]

IS THIS A BIRD????

OR....

 

[rwald]

Well, at least you didn't repost all the pictures.

 

[Guest]

Re: IS THIS A BIRD????

OR A..........

 

[rwald]

Don't make me take that back...

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: IS THIS A BIRD????

Rwald:
Well, at least you didn't repost all the pictures.

Why not???
You don`t have comments about them.

 

[Guest]

ALIENS...?

Not only are you able to come to this conclusion of the presence of aliens but you can also dismiss the idea that it might be a bird, although we know birds exist, we know birds were present, we can see in other videos the birds present the same color pattern as the image and we can see that the birds flight form an undulating visual pattern that at in given time when slightly out of focus could be misinterpreted.

But of course, compared to the alien theory the bird theory is just too far-fetched.

You can understand all of this from a simple brief smudge on a videotape and yet you don’t seem to understand the very simple rules of the challenge.

But you know, when I say it like that it just doesn’t sound so foolish.

So in closing I would like to point out that nowhere in your signature do you state what power or ability you plan to demonstrate or under what observable conditions.

Therefore can you guess what’s coming next?……

What powers or abilities to you plan to demonstrate and under what observable conditions do you propose in order to meet the first requirement of the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge.
Does anyone one else see this question answered in Carlo’s signature or is this another one of those paranormal events?

HI again:

ALIENS? only James randi (..an alien starship?) and you are talking about aliens.

I am talking about a PARANORMAL EVENT, as JREF said in my signature, read it again : OR PARANORMAL EVENT.

Read also Andrew Harter's poor and full of lies answer to my application, NOT a single word that says that my application
was NOT VALID.

ALIENS? Only in your mind.

I am sending another picture for your collection of "birds". Is from a mural I done.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[rwald]

Wow. You replied to your reply. That has to be a first.

Anyway, my response to the pictures would be that, since the object is moving (as your other pictures demonstrate), you can't simply take a single snapshot, expand it, and assume that this is what the object looks like. You need to compensate for the fact that it is moving, and that this would make it blur (the camera takes one picture every 1/30 of a second, but if this thing was moving as fast as you think it was, then it would move a lot in 1/30 of a second.) Since your "examples" don't take this movement into account, they mean nothing.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: IS THIS A BIRD????

Rwald:
Well, at least you didn't repost all the pictures.

Why not???
Your answers are full of contradictions.

 

[Guest]

SO IS A BIRD ?

Wow. You replied to your reply. That has to be a first.

Anyway, my response to the pictures would be that, since the object is moving (as your other pictures demonstrate), you can't simply take a single snapshot, expand it, and assume that this is what the object looks like. You need to compensate for the fact that it is moving, and that this would make it blur (the camera takes one picture every 1/30 of a second, but if this thing was moving as fast as you think it was, then it would move a lot in 1/30 of a second.) Since your "examples" don't take this movement into account, they mean nothing.

Rwald:

WOW,You are not only a Randi's beleiver, you are Randi's lawyer and defender, the "voice "of Randi and now you become the expert in photograp and pictures. WOW again.

But you are forgetting that this expand picture remains in its form to whatever but NOT to a bird. Or you do still see a bird like Harter does? Or has a HAT FORM like in my notarized application I said?

Thanks,
S&S

 

[rwald]

That picture could be explained if the bird was flapping its wings when the picture was taken. If the wings were near the bird at the beginning and end, and were up away from the bird in the middle, a "hat-like" structure could appear. And I'm sure there are other possible explanations I could think of, if I had the time. The point is, you can't immediately say that the only possibility is that it was a paranormal object.

 

[Guest]

A TRAUMA?

That picture could be explained if the bird was flapping its wings when the picture was taken. If the wings were near the bird at the beginning and end, and were up away from the bird in the middle, a "hat-like" structure could appear. And I'm sure there are other possible explanations I could think of, if I had the time. The point is, you can't immediately say that the only possibility is that it was a paranormal object.

Rwald:

Or you are the fan number one of this thread or Randi is speaking through you.?

I don't want you to get a mental sickness trying to find the "possible" explanation to the HAT FORM.

I want to help you:

Only if "THE BIRD " was flying upside down(...), I mean something like you are walking with your hands, or similar, well is more or less the idea.
But don't worry, keep on trying, like Blue Monk.

Thanks,
S&S

P.S. or you are just posting to make points as a "rational thinker"?

 

[rwald]

Why must the bird have been flying upside down? Could you elaborate?

And why do you consider looking for a scientific explanation to be a "mental sickness"? Is it more "sane" to look at everything and say, "That must have been paranormal. I don't care what evidence you have, it absoultly must have been paranormal."?

 

[Guest]

RWALD AGAIN

Why must the bird have been flying upside down? Could you elaborate?

And why do you consider looking for a scientific explanation to be a "mental sickness"? Is it more "sane" to look at everything and say, "That must have been paranormal. I don't care what evidence you have, it absoultly must have been paranormal."?

Rwald(again) :

See , You are the one who are asking me to find you the answer of your trauma.

The HAT FORM is a fact. Is in my notarized application. Right?
Is on the enlarged picture , too. Right?

A bird, when is flying is the opposite form of the hat, I mean like you turn the hat not the way is disigned to put in your head..

Is hard to say it in English, but this will help you:

The wings must be in the up and the body down, the opposite of a hat form. Try to draw a bird flying.

See, I am only trying to help you.
We are at the chat now, any more questions about the HAT FORM, you can ask me there, I will do an exception for you.

Thanks,
S&S

 

[rwald]

Remember, this is not a static picture of a bird in one instant. This is a picture of a bird over 1/30 of a second. Birds move in 1/30 of a second, so the picture is blurred in the direction the bird was moving. The hat shape you refer to is not cause by the actual shape of the bird; it's cause by the bird's wings flapping while the picture is being taken.

If I took a 5-second long exposure picture of you walking at 5 feet per second, and then saw a 25-foot long blur in my picture, should I assume that a weird, 25-foot long paranormal object appeared in the picture? What if you raised and lowered your arms while I was taking the picture? This would make some weird bulges on top of the 25-foot long object. Should I say the object has bulges, or that the object was moving when the picture was being taken? I may not be an expert on photography, but I know more than you.