From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 12:47:25 -0400 Archived: Wed, 16 May 2012 13:00:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Pat Delgado's Family Issues Statement >From: Dave Haith<visions1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto<post.nul> >Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 19:50:37 +0100 >Subject: Pat Delgado's Family Issues Statement >----- >From: cprandrews.nul >Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 3:49 PM >Subject: Family Issues Statement >The family of deceased crop circle researcher Pat Delgado issues >a statement following claims by a medium and paranormal >researcher nancy talbott to have made contact with him - its >trickery. >Nancy Talbott (BLT) and Robbert van den Broeke have made many >claims, which have included capturing on digital photographs >UFOs, animals of all kinds and even Elvis Presley. Robbert >claims special knowledge of when and where crop circles will >appear near his home and they have. I must though say that these >have all been very un-impressive and highly reminiscent of many >hoaxes Ive seen over the years. >Recently they claimed to have mysteriously captured clear images >of my deceased friend and research colleague, Pat Delgado and >crop circle maker David Chorley, of Doug and Dave fame. Both men >are said to have given personal messages to Robbert and Nancy >Talbott. >In light of the latest claims the Delgado family have issued a >statement - go to my website to read: >http://tinyurl.com/76d2k8u >Colin >www.ColinAndrews.net >Blog:http://colinandrews.blogspot.com/ The accusation of trickery on the part of medium Robbert van den Broeke is unsupported in Colin Andrews' article. The motivation for that accusation seems to be disbelief in an anomalous event and a perceived attack on the good name of the deceased Pat Delgado. This would not be the first time that Pat Delgado was involved in high strangeness, though. In fact, Colin Andrews reports on this himself on his own website in a discussion of the Cheesefoot Head crop formation. There it is said that Pat "Levitated and was pulled backwards by an invisible Force", and Colin "had a real job to break Pat free from the force". http://tinyurl.com/br66d5z In that case, I suppose Pat Delgado was around to give his permission to publish. So is permission required to show one's own image of a deceased person? That might be kind of hard to get. How long after the person has passed on should one wait to publish the photo? Robbert van den Broeke's video showing the process that captured the two anomalous images is at the following url. http://tinyurl.com/c6uq5rc An attempt to debunk the images is presented at http://tinyurl.com/7saktss The author of the latter video argues that the faces in Robbert's images match warped versions of faces found in an old YouTube video. But people's faces don't change that much over time, so the source of the image is not particularly relevant, especially if warping and stretching of the image is done to optimize the match. Although some people may accept the argument as proof of trickery, merely showing that one can reproduce an effect does not prove that the original effect was a fraud. What it does do is discourage any further thinking about what may be going on. I've been thinking about this kind of thing lately, especially in the context of physical mediumship. It seems that reproductions of objects that existed in the past is more the rule than the exception. Apports, or objects that seemingly appear in mid-air in the seance room, often seem to be from another era as if they existed in the past. The same can be said for photos found on unopened film after a seance. These photos are often reproductions from books in libraries, old newspapers, or someone's personal photo collection. So maybe it should not be surprising that Robbert's anomalous photos are similar to photos subsequently found elsewhere. At the very least, it is nowhere near proof of fraud. On the other hand, proof of the absence of fraud is hard to come by after the fact. The procedure shown in Robbert's video is a nod to proper control, but obviously could be much improved. At this point, the onus for proof of fraud lies with the accuser. In the absence of such proof, the most one can legitimately do is reserve judgment. William Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp