The Movie Paranormal Activity

Wouldn’t you have thought it would be made the news before the movie was released? Conversely, wouldn’t it have to be a very rare occurrence in order for it to not be well documented?Consider that actual skepticism perhaps requires not only evidence, but context and a framework? Some random piece of footage not adequately tested with questionable providence should not convince anyone.

quote:

---

But the problem I see is that some people will automatically assume that if one's arguing that the claim is that it must be a fake to be false is arguing for the opposite claim (it must be real), but that simply is not true, and is actually arguing for a false dichotomy. For the general rule in discussion is if someone makes a positive claim then they must back it up, and saying it must be a fake is a positive claim. And arguing against it should in no way be taken for an argument that the footage or evidence must be real. It's just an examination of that individual claim.

---

But there is no footage. You are talking about parts of a film, first you have to establish that the ‘so-called footage’ existed separate from the film.Fake is often just a shorthand term. You seem to be suggesting that rejecting a claim requires the same support as supporting a claim. It is my understanding that one piece of evidence can invalidate a claim, while rarely is a claim validated by a sole or in this case, soul piece of evidence.To answer your question, no for myself, footage by itself wouldn’t normally be evidence of real paranormal activity.

Not the context you wrote it, but doesn't that apply to ghosts, UFOs and the like as a more reasonable explanation?

Are there some paranormal subjects which would take less proof to convince you? I’m not sure if you’re exempting some paranormal subjects from your list.For myself, if the question is highly improbable events, then improbable event could explain another. If one is going to posit ghosts, then why not inter-dimensional beings who seem like ghosts, psychic time-travel, ghostly astral projection, aliens pretending to be ghosts, mimics taking ghostly form, etc.Film evidence is problematic, not only because it is so easily faked, but also as its presentation of any event is quite limited.

Are you are using a non-standard meaning for the terms ‘imagine’ and ‘might’ when you require that someone actually first produce a result?