This week, I discuss the Conference House ghost photo that we took back in the early 2000s. Is it really a ghost? Or just some weird defect in the camera? I also discuss an odd shadow person that appears in a phot we took in 2006. Is it really a shadow person? Or again, just some issue with our camera?
It’s always easy to jump to conclusions when we see something we don’t understand. Especially when there’s that desire to believe that something is paranormal or supernatural. But it’s important to always scrutinize every piece of evidence, and to use Occam’s Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. meaning that basically, most pictures of ghosts or UFOs or Bigfoot or any paranormal phenomena can usually be explained by more mundane explanations. Hoaxes, misidentifications, issues with the camera or other recording equipment, are all far more likely than a paranormal solution.
Always Debunk First
Overall, the key here is to eliminate all practical explanations first. Only once we’ve done that can we even consider the possibility of something being paranormal. The pictures below are from this week’s podcast. They are included in the YouTube and Spotify video versions, but if you are listening on a podcast audio only platform, these are the pics used in this week’s episode.
What do you think was captured in these photos? Do you think we photographed the Conference House ghost? Or was it just motion blur? And did we capture a shadow person on film in Brooklyn? Or was that just a camera defect? If you have thoughts, or weird photos of your own you’d like to share, email me at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Check out the video below, or find us on your favorite podcast platforms!
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Google Podcasts | Stitcher