MerakSpielman
First Post
That's my point! If, hypothetically, ghosts look like people wearing white masks, then there cannot ever be a photo of a ghost that you consider anything but a fake. No matter how many real pictures were taken of ghosts, you would dismiss them all.Buttercup said:
There seems to be an assumption that if a ghost were caught on film that it would somehow look different from a real, solid person. Hollywood portrays ghosts as translucent, glowing, off-white-bluish floating figures. If this is not the case, and ghosts look just like normal human beings, then all photos of ghosts will be indistinguishable from normal photos of regular people. In which case, there would be no such thing as photographic proof of the existence of ghosts. "Look! Here's a picture of the ghost walking down the north passage!" "Still looks like a regular person to me..."
Of course, to appear on a photograph, a ghost would have to emit/reflect real light. If a ghost emits light, then where does that energy come from? If it reflects light, then it needs something solid/semisolid to absorb some wavelengths and reflect others. The ghost in this instance is taking on more and more physical qualities that are associated with something solid and composed of matter. We have yet to quantifyably measure anything inherent in a human that is definatively a "soul." If we can't measure it in a living being, why does it become measureable (in terms of light emission/absorption) when the body is no longer present? It seems to me that, if ghosts really exist, they would have to exist in a manner that totally defies science. Such an existance would either magically break the laws of physics, say, by creating energy from nothing (glowing, opening doors without a physical body) or be totally magical in nature (it can be "seen" only in the minds of humans whose brain somehow reacts to the presence of the ghost) in which case they shouldn't show up on film at all
