Whenever I read old books they mention seeing monsters, devil's and ghosts whenever they're in a lonely place. As we live in a world full of CCTV's, why can't we see a single one of these creatures?
They come from inside your brain and are holographically projected onto the environment, they're not physically there to be recorded.
gee maybe they don't exist?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razorand/orwhat >>41514218 said. technically nothing except what is real to someone is real so there's that.idk man maybe we should just stop thinking about spirits/demons and fuck some bitches instead, try it OP
>>41514199We did see the Fresno Nightcrawlers.
>>41514199Because modern recording devices are digital as opposed to chemical.
The old analog T.V. had captured many weird distorting signals and even weird ghost images too. But the tech people disregarded them as noises so they moved to digital. Also, those vintage cameras from the Victorian era can capture ghosts easily if you ever find some.
>>41514230>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
>>41514199Digital images are not "real", they are a recreation in a way. Analog captures the very photons that bounce off the real object; the information is encoded physically in the medium. In the case of digital, the sensors reinterpret and reproduce a very small fraction of the actual information transmitted with the light they capture.This is also why with the advent of digital photography, there are much less instances of captures orbs and things like that than you would expect seeing how many there were in the past with analog photography.
>>41514230Occam's Razor cannot be applied when you lack too much information about a phenomenon. It just says that the explanation that requires the less assumptions about what's happening is the more plausible one. But when you lack 99% of the information on an experiment, it's useless.The guy who postulated it used it to justify the existence of angels, by the way.
>>41514199Spirits don't exist. The jig is up.
>>41514199This is a good question. I have recordings of spiritual activity on my Jobs CCTVobjects move when there is no possible explanation. Signs that have hung for years will fall down as if their adhesive stopped sticking, stuff like that.
>>41514335What does that mean? Then chemical processes shouldn't be captured either>>41514975Interesting explanation
>>41514230I wonder who could be behind this post
>>41514199You can't bypass the spiritual world rules. Spirits need plasma in order to really be seen materially. In this case the camera will be able to record them, but in other contexts? Nope. And remember that cameras were created at the likeness of the human eye and the human eye is limited dby God Himself. Have this in mind. Do you think a device created by limited beings will be able to see what is supposed to remain unseen? Spare me.
>>41514218what is the age of consent of a ghost?what are the spiritual implications of topping a ghost?
>>41521414>toppingNigger yew r gheyI did see a pretty girl ghost once when i was delivering papers as a teen. She had long hair and big booba in some 1800s night gown
>>41514199people only really check CCTV when they need to check shit, most CCTV boxes wipe 2 times per annum to save storage space. The sheer amount of shit that goes unnoticed on cctv is staggering. theyre eyes that cannot see.
>>41524131Trail cameras start up when they sense movements, plus camera have AI now
>>41514199Because they don't exist retard lmao
>>41524131>theyre eyes that cannot see.>theyreyour eyes can't read nigga lmfao
>>41514218thisjust as the brain can receive a signal from your sensory organs, it can receive non-physical signals
>>41524193iirc, those FLOCK cameras still require a person to check it using a prompt for a licence plate or face. trail cams are way less common than CCTV, but i have seen some weird shit caught on them in the past
