(September 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The man has clearly preformed scientific experiment on the negative of the photograph, documented every procedure he used, and found that there had to be a light at that position to strike the negative, the only conclusion is the supernatural, because lights just don't hang over peoples heads normally.

Quote:But I like the fact that when presented with scientific evidence, you refuse to acknowledge it.

(September 17, 2014 at 1:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(September 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: But I like the fact that when presented with scientific evidence, you refuse to acknowledge it.

Really? I like the fact that you think what you present should be swallowed wholecloth (sorry - horrible mixed metaphor) before it's been established actually to be "scientific evidence". Not to mention that you expect it to be above scrutiny and criticism.

Quote:George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners and the last of the 15 men who established the organization to be elected to that office.

Mr. Lacy's first meeting was the 1942 inaugural meeting of the society. Two years later he married Lucile Peters Lacy who would later become the tenth president of the ASQDE.

During Mr. Lacy's early work in law enforcement he arrested Charles Ponzi, the namesake of the Ponzi Scheme. He began his career in forensic science as a general criminalist and ballistics expert. As a ballistics expert, he worked on the Bonnie and Clyde case. He later specialized in questioned document examination. He was responsible for establishing the Houston Police Crime Laboratory. Mr. Lacy maintained a private practice in Houston, Texas for many years.

George Lacy was the author of number of articles and professional papers, such as "Handwriting and Forgery Under Hypnosis," published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and "Magnification versus Enlargement," published in the Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal. Mr. Lacy passed away in 1962

(September 17, 2014 at 1:18 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(September 17, 2014 at 1:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Really? I like the fact that you think what you present should be swallowed wholecloth (sorry - horrible mixed metaphor) before it's been established actually to be "scientific evidence". Not to mention that you expect it to be above scrutiny and criticism.

Ok then, what are your credentials.

Here's a little bit about George J. Lacy from http://www.asqde.org/about/presidents/lacy_g.html

Quote:George Lacy was the fifth president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners and the last of the 15 men who established the organization to be elected to that office.

Mr. Lacy's first meeting was the 1942 inaugural meeting of the society. Two years later he married Lucile Peters Lacy who would later become the tenth president of the ASQDE.

During Mr. Lacy's early work in law enforcement he arrested Charles Ponzi, the namesake of the Ponzi Scheme. He began his career in forensic science as a general criminalist and ballistics expert. As a ballistics expert, he worked on the Bonnie and Clyde case. He later specialized in questioned document examination. He was responsible for establishing the Houston Police Crime Laboratory. Mr. Lacy maintained a private practice in Houston, Texas for many years.

George Lacy was the author of number of articles and professional papers, such as "Handwriting and Forgery Under Hypnosis," published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and "Magnification versus Enlargement," published in the Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal. Mr. Lacy passed away in 1962

(September 17, 2014 at 1:20 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(September 17, 2014 at 1:18 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Ok then, what are your credentials.

Here's a little bit about George J. Lacy from http://www.asqde.org/about/presidents/lacy_g.html

We don't give a shit about his credentials, Huggies.

(September 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The man has clearly preformed scientific experiment on the negative of the photograph, documented every procedure he used, and found that there had to be a light at that position to strike the negative, the only conclusion is the supernatural, because lights just don't hang over peoples heads normally.

But I like the fact that when presented with scientific evidence, you refuse to acknowledge it.

(September 17, 2014 at 1:25 pm)Stimbo Wrote: What credentials do I need to evaluate what you call evidence for whatever it is you're claiming? What are your credentials for presenting it? Or are you merely hiding behind those of your man? In which case my question stands: do we accept the truth of the claim purely on the credentials of the claimant? If so, then account for Hale's elf. At least we got a telescope out of it.