‘Soul’ Of Dead Hospital Patient Pictured Leaving Her Body or Camera Trickery (my Emphasis)

n an occasional series of dubious, grainy video clips that purportedly show ghostly going-ons, we bring you this latest viral wonder.
Posted to YouTube, there is little back story other than the claim it is CCTV footage from a hospital in China and apparently shows the lifeless body of a woman on a single bed, with a sheet draped over her. The black and white clip – which has been viewed more than 100,000 times – then sees an ethereal shape “sit up” from the still form and trail quickly from the room.





An ensuing debate has naturally followed over whether the clip actually shows the soul of a dead woman leaving her earthly form or is simply a demonstration of some sketchy computer software skills. Some viewers of a more faith-based persuasion have viewed the clip in the context of their own impending deaths. “This video would offer a real shock for the materialists. What you see… makes you want to pray for your own soul to have a beautiful future after the death,” said one viewer on Tuko. Others, like MeatVision, have reacted with horror: “Oh my god! That scale animation, that transparency, horrible video composition. This is fake as f**k.”


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/soul-of-dead-hospital-patient-pictured-leaving-her-body_uk_579b300fe4b07cb01dcf7499

Who knows?

I counted three souls. Two might have been the same, the second in close-up.

Original Quill wrote:I counted three souls.  Two might have been the same, the second in close-up.

Evening/afternoon Quill. Do you believe in souls leaving a body?

I rarely believe any video evidence like this unless I've seen it with my own eyes. These days stuff like this is easily faked.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I counted three souls.  Two might have been the same, the second in close-up.

Evening/afternoon Quill. Do you believe in souls leaving a body?

Oh? Was it ever there?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I counted three souls.  Two might have been the same, the second in close-up.

Evening/afternoon Quill. Do you believe in souls leaving a body?

Oh?  Was it ever there?

Huh?

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Oh?  Was it ever there?

Huh?

Was the soul ever actually in the body?  It would be more practical if the soul was stored on a closet shelf, tucked away safe.  It doesn't have to be in the proximity of the body, especially today with Wi-Fi and the Internet.

That was the thesis of the film The Matrix, where the bodies were kept in tanks, separate from the consciousness, which in actuality were computer manifestations of life, events and memories.

I'LL FILE this nonsense away with the laughable "Area 51 alien autopsy" fakery, and the Sasquatch and Loch Ness Monster photo's and video clips...

AS that X-Files poster says :
"I Want to Believe"..

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Oh?  Was it ever there?

Huh?

Was the soul ever actually in the body?  It would be more practical if the soul was stored on a closet shelf, tucked away safe.  It doesn't have to be in the proximity of the body, especially today with Wi-Fi and the Internet.

That was the thesis of the film The Matrix, where the bodies were kept in tanks, separate from the consciousness, which in actuality were computer manifestations of life, events and memories.

Oh I see what you're saying yes.
Do you believe in souls, though?

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Was the soul ever actually in the body?  It would be more practical if the soul was stored on a closet shelf, tucked away safe.  It doesn't have to be in the proximity of the body, especially today with Wi-Fi and the Internet.

That was the thesis of the film The Matrix, where the bodies were kept in tanks, separate from the consciousness, which in actuality were computer manifestations of life, events and memories.

Oh I see what you're saying yes.
Do you believe in souls, though?

We have this damnable self-awareness. If all there was to our existence was our physical being, though it would be phenomenal itself, it would in no way explain our consciousness.

Throughout the history of philosophy, we have been preoccupied with the mind-body dichotomy. We make the mind-body distinction because we see a separation between epistemology and ontology: how we know vs. what we know. As René Descartes said in his Discourse on The Method: “Je pense, donc je suis..” I think, therefore I am. As soon as you recognize the process of thought, as distinct from that which thought is about, you are entertaining the question: what is mind?

A mind divorced from corporeal reality is the equivalent, if not in fact, of a soul. To suppose that that mind ceases to exist when the body ceases to exist would be to entertain an extraordinary coincidence. It would be to hypothesize that mind is at some point, matter. I have seen no evidence of that.

At some point, this gets into universal questions, such as: what is light, motion and time? If all of reality were corporeal, then there would be no motion. If there was no motion, there would be no change. If there were no change, than all of reality would be a firmament of stasis.

Some argue that that is in fact real...that once there was a void (nothingness) which existed at the speed of light. But that the big bang caused a 'slowing down' of the universal void, which in turn created or coalesced matter in the form of particles, which in turn created motion, and thus time. Thus in that cause/effect model, matter is the independent variable, where time and motion would be the dependent variables. It is entirely possible that the soul is a dependent variable.

Of course, this is the obverse of religion, which posits god as the ultimate independent variable, and the soul as a dependent part of the theological system. It's kinda like the ptolemaic (or geocentric) question: do we perceive ourselves as the central focus, or are we mere satellites to a bigger universe?

I do know that the body seems to shrink when the soul departs. Something is lost...not just the obvious, but the body looks smaller, particularly the head. Probably something to do with muscle relaxation but it's weird.

HoratioTarr wrote:I do know that the body seems to shrink when the soul departs.   Something is lost...not just the obvious, but the body looks smaller, particularly the head.   Probably something to do with muscle relaxation but it's weird.  

You do not know or the body already shrinks with age and you just made that all up?
So show us how on earth there is a soul before and after, based on size?

I don't know whether it's real or fake...it's a nice thought though to believe that when a person dies something inside them moves on to a higher plane.

Syl wrote:I don't know whether it's real or fake...it's a nice thought though to believe that when a person dies something inside them moves on to a higher plane.

That is a very nice way of looking at this.

+1

Thanks Didge.
I sat with my mum for hours after she had passed away. I just didn't want that to be it...if you know what I mean.
I have an open mind about death, souls living on, reincarnation etc....I doubt none of us will know for sure till we die.

Syl wrote:Thanks Didge.
I sat with my mum for hours after she had passed away. I just didn't want that to be it...if you know what I mean.
I have an open mind about death, souls living on, reincarnation etc....I doubt none of us will know for sure till we die.

My heart goes out to you, as its never easy to lose those closest to us.

Gave you a thanks

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:Thanks Didge.
I sat with my mum for hours after she had passed away. I just didn't want that to be it...if you know what I mean.
I have an open mind about death, souls living on, reincarnation etc....I doubt none of us will know for sure till we die.

My heart goes out to you, as its never easy to lose those closest to us.

Gave you a thanks

I ould give a thanks back if I could .
It's not easy and it's something the vast majority of people have to go through sometimes in life.
I think sharing experiences can sometimes help....never for sympathy, but it's heartening when people can show empathy to others...which I have noticed you often do.

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


My heart goes out to you, as its never easy to lose those closest to us.

Gave you a thanks

Thanks back.
It's not easy and it's something the vast majority of people have to go through sometimes in life.
I think sharing experiences can sometimes help....never for sympathy, but it's heartening when people can show empathy to others...which I have noticed you often do.

I do have empathy for others, i just get frustarted with people at times, because I can be impatient, bcause i wrongly am expecting them to understand something as I might understand this differently.
I need to be more patient, but thank you, you have an endless amount of empathy, by the very fact you place others before yourself.

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Thanks back.
It's not easy and it's something the vast majority of people have to go through sometimes in life.
I think sharing experiences can sometimes help....never for sympathy, but it's heartening when people can show empathy to others...which I have noticed you often do.

I do have empathy for others, i just get frustarted with people at times, because I can be impatient, bcause i wrongly am expecting them to understand something as I might understand this differently.
I need to be more patient, but thank you, you have an endless amount of empathy, by the very fact you place others before yourself.

I imagine in RL you are more patient. I can be just as bad tempered and impatient as the next person...and my OH would agree wholeheartedly

I do think even on forums a persons kindness and empathy will show  though....if we post alongside someone for a while  their true self shows eventually even if they try to put on an act.
Something I can honestly say I don't believe you ever do.
And before this gets to sound too nicey nicey....I can still remember when we couldn't stand each other.

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


I do have empathy for others, i just get frustarted with people at times, because I can be impatient, bcause i wrongly am expecting them to understand something as I might understand this differently.
I need to be more patient, but thank you, you have an endless amount of empathy, by the very fact you place others before yourself.

I imagine in RL you are more patient. I can be just as bad tempered and impatient as the next person...and my OH would agree wholeheartedly

I do think even on forums a persons kindness and empathy will show  though....if we post alongside someone for a while  their true self shows eventually even if they try to put on an act.
Something I can honestly say I don't believe you ever do.
And before this gets to sound too nicey nicey....I can still remember when we couldn't stand each other.

That is very percetive, as in real life I am very patient.
I agree that many have empathy and do so in different ways on here.
What we are all guilty of is how we are too easily to judge each other and more so off when people are failing at the debate.
I do not think we could not stand eahc other, as at the time we just clashed. If as i said to eddie yesterday, that we constantly keep the door open to even people we have not gotten on with. Then that is truely a positive thing. As no matter how badly we may perceive someone, by leaving open the door to allow and give that person a chance, shows the true nature and kindness in all of us

I agree Didge, not holding grudges benefits us as much, probably more than anyone else.

I think when we see RL happenings, or watch video's like the ones you post sometimes of truly inspirational yet 'ordinary' people acting with such compassion and love....it puts a daft squabble on a forum into perspective.

Syl wrote:I agree Didge, not holding grudges benefits us as much, probably more than anyone else.

I think when we see RL happenings, or watch video's like the ones you post sometimes of truly inspirational yet 'ordinary' people acting with such compassion and love....it puts a daft squabble on a forum into perspective.

Agree 100%

Syl wrote:I don't know whether it's real or fake...it's a nice thought though to believe that when a person dies something inside them moves on to a higher plane.

I think it definitely does. That's purely my belief based on personal experiences.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:I don't know whether it's real or fake...it's a nice thought though to believe that when a person dies something inside them moves on to a higher plane.

I think it definitely does.   That's purely my belief based on personal experiences.

I'd like to hear them.

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

I think it definitely does.   That's purely my belief based on personal experiences.

I'd like to hear them.

Shortly after my mother died, I was thinking of switching mortgage lenders. It was June. Cut a long story short, I was using a company who assured me this that and the other, blah blah, and that they had checked with my current mortgage lender and it was fine to go ahead and do what I wanted to do. I was all set to go. That night, my mum came to me in a dream and she was holding up a calendar with December 31st highlighted in gold. Just that date. Next day, I rang my mortgage lender myself and they told me if I'd gone ahead with the deal at that time I would have had pay a hefty fee to them as an early redemption penalty. The date that penalty changed and ran out, was 31st December.

That dream was so vivid, I remember every detail of it. She also came to me a month or so later and told me that things were not right, that I needed to call my brother. I did so the next morning ... .and that phone call stopped him from committing suicide over our mother's death.

Wow.
And I believe you completely.

Similar things have happmed to me. I'll have to write it all down and post it up.

eddie wrote:Wow.
And I believe you completely.

Similar things have happmed to me. I'll have to write it all down and post it up.

Absolutely true. I've not had many dreams since then about my mum though I've had lucid dreams where I've met her and talked to her within the dream, knowing that I'm in the dream, if you know what I mean. It's an odd experience, like you're tootling along in a typical dream, and suddenly it all stops and you realise you can control what you say and converse with that person and you know that you're within the dream but not part of it. Then the person steps back and the dream continues. I know....weird!

Dreams are different to visits from people.

eddie wrote:Dreams are different to visits from people.

Will answer before I go.
Yes and no
Dreams some believe are actually and feel like their souls have left their bodies and are else where.
Which I am not arguing whether its possible or not or even if there is any truth to this, but people do claim their souls during sleep travel to different realms and that what they see is vivid and real. Some claim they are able to pass between what they claim are two worlds. I have an uncanny ability to know and be fully concious of when a dream is bad and fight to wake my body up as if I am not actually within my body. It could all just be within my mind, which seems the most probable answer. It is a wierd feeling, but one where I am very conscious of my surroundings.

Anyway night

Didge wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:
I do know that the body seems to shrink when the soul departs.   Something is lost...not just the obvious, but the body looks smaller, particularly the head.   Probably something to do with muscle relaxation but it's weird.  

You do not know or the body already shrinks with age and you just made that all up?
So show us how on earth there is a soul before and after, based on size?

NOW  you know why I consider Horatio to be the 3rd stupidest person on this forum;  (after Tommy Monk and Major/Stormee..)

She makes up crap like that regularly on her posts..

Wolfie why do you have to be such a complete fuckwit to people?

eddie wrote:Wolfie why do you have to be such a complete fuckwit to people?

You see, this is why it's pointless even having threads like this. All you get is abuse for sharing.

eddie wrote:Wolf, admin have received a complaint about your constant derailing of threads with pointless posts that only contain abuse.
If it continues then you will be placed in the basement for a period of time.
Please debate politely and answer the post, not the poster.
Thank you

And you say this hasn't become arch-conservative?? Tag-teaming RW'rs with a badge.

Quill I don't expect you to take off your bias hat and try to see things from another perspective.

eddie wrote:Quill I don't expect you to take off your bias hat and try to see things from another perspective.

No different to your bias Eddie

Hoaratio was being abusive about me here on three threads, where I gace none and being off topic and speaking about me.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17250-were-discovering-new-ways-to-detect-if-someone-is-lying

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17245-why-does-everything-have-to-be-dumbed-down-and-boxed-up#328115

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17105p50-15-reasons-why-artistic-people-are-difficult-to-understand#327494


If you warn wolf after failing to warn Horatio, then it is as seen unbalanced.
You cannot chastise one, when the person clearly complaining has no problem doing exactly the same

HORATIO is a fuckwit; and a nasty bigotted fuckwit at that...

Defend oneself against her fuckwittery, and the vitriol floods forth..
People attack me for being nasty against those who attack me; but completely ignore those friends of theirs who originate the nastiness in the first place -- we only have to see when eddie and Raggs defend Horatio (or Tess or VoD in the past), or when nicko has jumped to Tommy's defence.

'Tribalism' at its' best..
And all the worst when the sisterhood gangs up on individuals...          

I agree with didge. He thinks independently--if conservative in his views--and gets into trouble for it. That's not fair to either side.

The problem for the mods is not RW thinking, but any thinking at all. We seem to have mods who equate reasoning as too controversial for prime time around here. In fact, I only bring in RW as this is consistent with the RW war on any kind of intellectual activity, which seems to be the play around here.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

HORATIO is a fuckwit; and a nasty bigotted fuckwit at that...

Defend oneself against her fuckwittery, and the vitriol floods forth..
People attack me for being nasty against those who attack me; but completely ignore those friends of theirs who originate the nastiness in the first place -- we only have to see when eddie and Raggs defend Horatio (or Tess or VoD in the past), or when nicko has jumped to Tommy's defence.

'Tribalism' at its' best..
And all the worst when the sisterhood gangs up on individuals...          

The problem with calling people 'fuckwit' and 'twat' is that it joins in with the RW agenda to reduce all thought to dog whistles and jingos. If you feel some urgency to call people names, it's best to just walk away and wait for a time when you can make your point in rational terms.

They can't stand that.

You find as much censurship and more so from the left, making this political fails to see its actually personal.
Anyway, my view is this.
People should not be moderated for mere name calling unless it is hate speech or turns all out into a forum war, which then ruins the debating. Many people name call on here and swear at others and talk about posters all the time. That should not be seen as such a henious crime. Even more so when many posters do this. It becomes even more redundent when only some are moderated and thus will be seen more so as personal. I mean we are all adults and I only posted up and reported hoartio to make a point. I really am not that bothered about the abuse thrown because they simple are words. Which should not allow the forum to turn into a nanny state. Espcially if only some are singled out for moderation. The reality is, if you do not like abuse thrown, and actually do also throw abuse, then you have no call to complain about it.

Its as simple as that

Wolfie, please show where I have "jumped" to tommy's defence, I tried to make clear what he was trying to say, and I did, in my OPINION HE WAS CORRECT. are we not allowed an Opinion without Wolfie opening his big mouth, with 4ever aping HIS insulting remarks? What happened to rubbish the post not the poster, or does that not apply to the Brits on here? Whatever, all you Yanks and Aussies are up each others arses. So chew on that.

Didge wrote:You find as much censurship and more so from the left, making this political fails to see its actually personal.
Anyway, my view is this.
People should not be moderated for mere name calling unless it is hate speech or turns all out into a forum war, which then ruins the debating. Many people name call on here and swear at others and talk about posters all the time. That should not be seen as such a henious crime. Even more so when many posters do this. It becomes even more redundent when only some are moderated and thus will be seen more so as personal. I mean we are all adults and I only posted up and reported hoartio to make a point. I really am not that bothered about the abuse thrown because they simple are words. Which should not allow the forum to turn into a nanny state. Espcially if only some are singled out for moderation. The reality is, if you do not like abuse thrown, and actually do also throw abuse, then you have no call to complain about it.

Its as simple as that

That is a rational, lucid and well-organized argument.

I disagree.

The basic reason I don't like reducing debate to jingos and dog whistles, is because it is a miss opportunity—a missed opportunity to further the thinking.  

Now, while didge appears to believe that the curses and names can go on simultaneous with reasoning, I find it curtails it.  I respect his opinion, but I believe we differ on our theory of psychology.

What is happening, if we accept swearing and name-calling,  is that mods are being pulled into judgments of which curse is worse than the other.  "Twat" is ok, but "paedo" is not; "retard" or "regressive" is ok, but "fuckwit" is not.  You all can see the futility of that, right?  

So, then what happens is these factions arise, and they are typically around RW'rs, as the RW controls the admin around here.  And that's why we hear the complaints of Wolf, me, 4Eva — didge should be with us if he saw what we see (ftnote: so often he's on the other side, and that obscures the dynamics).  So it's not a list of words and curses that brings on a mod threat, but whether the curse was at HT or one of their RW friends.

Whether from them misconstruing a debate as curses, or simply selectively choosing which curses are worse by whose ox is getting gored...it's not me who is biased.

Well, that's my view of what's going on.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Quill I don't expect you to take off your bias hat and try to see things from another perspective.

No different to your bias Eddie

Hoaratio was being abusive about me here on three threads, where I gace none and being off topic and speaking about me.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17250-were-discovering-new-ways-to-detect-if-someone-is-lying

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17245-why-does-everything-have-to-be-dumbed-down-and-boxed-up#328115

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t17105p50-15-reasons-why-artistic-people-are-difficult-to-understand#327494


If you warn wolf after failing to warn Horatio, then it is as seen unbalanced.
You cannot chastise one, when the person clearly complaining has no problem doing exactly the same

Did you report it?

THREAD LOCKED