There is NO proof of a haunting

General Discussion About Anything Amityville And Other Paranormal Topics
User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:12 pm

DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:27 am
My concern with it though is it coming so long after the movie. Potentially too late by statute of limitations?
The suit is against 2017's Amityville: The Awakening, which is meant to be an official sequel.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:33 pm

sherbetbizarre wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:12 pm
DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:27 am
My concern with it though is it coming so long after the movie. Potentially too late by statute of limitations?
The suit is against 2017's Amityville: The Awakening, which is meant to be an official sequel.
DC FAN was referring to the 2005 remake. He's usually a bit zonked when posting in here. Anyway I do hope Mrs. Anson gains a little restitution from this travesty. Perhaps a truck load of cashmere sweaters for furthering the fiction? And let's pray that the karma doesn't intervene (like it did with Jay) and keep her from enjoying them!

User avatar
DC Fan
Amityville Addict
Posts: 373

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by DC Fan » Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:46 pm

jimmysmokes wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:33 pm
sherbetbizarre wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:12 pm
DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:27 am
My concern with it though is it coming so long after the movie. Potentially too late by statute of limitations?
The suit is against 2017's Amityville: The Awakening, which is meant to be an official sequel.
DC FAN was referring to the 2005 remake. He's usually a bit zonked when posting in here. Anyway I do hope Mrs. Anson gains a little restitution from this travesty. Perhaps a truck load of cashmere sweaters for furthering the fiction? And let's pray that the karma doesn't intervene (like it did with Jay) and keep her from enjoying them!
So are you going to unzonk me by telling me why it is that, if George was planning a hoax he would invite the press into the house, knowing in advance that nothing would happen to them?

km2020
Amityville Member
Posts: 9

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by km2020 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:14 pm

I am new here and found this thread. I am not sure if the OP has been satisfied in his quest, but I would like to add some things.

First of all, Jay Anson embellished the story. That much is true. However, the base story has not been debunked. I would say there is some kind of entity or spiritual energy in the house. The fact that a picture of a little boy was on the camera that the very skeptical news crew had set up. That wasn't Hans Holzer's or the Warren's camera.

What it does show in that picture is that something appeared as a little boy, but it had an intelligence because it looked directly at the camera. The fact that it projected its image into the camera means that it wanted to be seen. But here's the thing, just because it appeared as a little boy does not mean it was a little boy.

Not only does it look like a little boy, but its eyes are glowing. Think about this, whatever that was not only appeared as a little boy, it peeked around the corner and looked directly at the camera at the right time for its picture to be taken. So it has intelligence. It wanted to be seen. And its eyes were glowing just as the description of Jodie the pig.

That thing with the intelligence knew that there were only adults in that house and that people were there to search and investigate. It knew the people there were not going to be manipulated as it was able to do to the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Remember that the DeFeos and Lutzs had small children. Why do you suppose most hauntings occur where there are children or appear as children? Because children are innocent and children do see more than adults.

When you break it down to the most basic elements, they are similar to a billion other stories of hauntings. I do not believe that was a ghost, but it was definitely something supernatural. And this world isn't 100% natural. Even you can't prove it is, there is no way that you can prove that everything you see is physical nor that everything you hear is originating from a physical source.


Can pigs fly? Certainly, if it is not a physical pig. But if it appears as a pig then it can do whatever it wants. And you can't prove that something didn't happen either. You only believe what you believe because you tell yourself everything you think you see or hear is physical. And you know yourself that not everything you have seen or heard is physical. People do it all the time.

Twins feel pain even though they are apart from each other, also parents feel their children even though the children are in another place. I am going to say this, whatever the Lutzs experienced at the most basic level, it was capable of manipulating them as well as the DeFeos.

Remember, this intelligence is not bound to the physical, and because it is intelligent, it has knowledge. And if it has knowledge, it can manipulate. Was the house haunted? Yes. And yes, it still is. And here is how we can tell, even though you have never been in the house, it can still evoke a feeling in you, it can do what it wants because it compelled you to come onto a forum to tell us you think it can't happen, but it did. You said you were interested in the house. Why? Because it evokes something in you that compels you to think about it. You said you were interested in the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Why? Because your mind was triggered to accept something about them and that is supernatural and you were haunted.

If it had no effect of manipulation over you, then you wouldn't be here. You can deny it all you want, but you were still compelled. And if it can do that across time and space and the internet, just think about what it can do where you are. They use electricity, just as your body does, therefore, it can use the electricity in your body to haunt you.


This is not Medieval, even your very modern CIA and the Russian KGB tapped into remote viewing for spying, so the government is quite admitting that the supernatural happens.

Scientists used science to design the experiments for remote viewing. And we have information about Russia that turned out to be absolutely true.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:43 pm

DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:46 pm
jimmysmokes wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:33 pm
sherbetbizarre wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:12 pm

The suit is against 2017's Amityville: The Awakening, which is meant to be an official sequel.
DC FAN was referring to the 2005 remake. He's usually a bit zonked when posting in here. Anyway I do hope Mrs. Anson gains a little restitution from this travesty. Perhaps a truck load of cashmere sweaters for furthering the fiction? And let's pray that the karma doesn't intervene (like it did with Jay) and keep her from enjoying them!
So are you going to unzonk me by telling me why it is that, if George was planning a hoax he would invite the press into the house, knowing in advance that nothing would happen to them?
Yeah I am. He made sure that Kaplan did not go in didn't he? Because he knew he wouldn't hesitate to expose it as a hoax. And what exactly happened there with his own investigating team, (made up of local tv crew/reporters, The Warrens :D ), a whole lot of nothing.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:03 pm

km2020 wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:14 pm
I am new here and found this thread. I am not sure if the OP has been satisfied in his quest, but I would like to add some things.

First of all, Jay Anson embellished the story. That much is true. However, the base story has not been debunked. I would say there is some kind of entity or spiritual energy in the house. The fact that a picture of a little boy was on the camera that the very skeptical news crew had set up. That wasn't Hans Holzer's or the Warren's camera.

What it does show in that picture is that something appeared as a little boy, but it had an intelligence because it looked directly at the camera. The fact that it projected its image into the camera means that it wanted to be seen. But here's the thing, just because it appeared as a little boy does not mean it was a little boy.

Not only does it look like a little boy, but its eyes are glowing. Think about this, whatever that was not only appeared as a little boy, it peeked around the corner and looked directly at the camera at the right time for its picture to be taken. So it has intelligence. It wanted to be seen. And its eyes were glowing just as the description of Jodie the pig.

That thing with the intelligence knew that there were only adults in that house and that people were there to search and investigate. It knew the people there were not going to be manipulated as it was able to do to the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Remember that the DeFeos and Lutzs had small children. Why do you suppose most hauntings occur where there are children or appear as children? Because children are innocent and children do see more than adults.

When you break it down to the most basic elements, they are similar to a billion other stories of hauntings. I do not believe that was a ghost, but it was definitely something supernatural. And this world isn't 100% natural. Even you can't prove it is, there is no way that you can prove that everything you see is physical nor that everything you hear is originating from a physical source.


Can pigs fly? Certainly, if it is not a physical pig. But if it appears as a pig then it can do whatever it wants. And you can't prove that something didn't happen either. You only believe what you believe because you tell yourself everything you think you see or hear is physical. And you know yourself that not everything you have seen or heard is physical. People do it all the time.

Twins feel pain even though they are apart from each other, also parents feel their children even though the children are in another place. I am going to say this, whatever the Lutzs experienced at the most basic level, it was capable of manipulating them as well as the DeFeos.

Remember, this intelligence is not bound to the physical, and because it is intelligent, it has knowledge. And if it has knowledge, it can manipulate. Was the house haunted? Yes. And yes, it still is. And here is how we can tell, even though you have never been in the house, it can still evoke a feeling in you, it can do what it wants because it compelled you to come onto a forum to tell us you think it can't happen, but it did. You said you were interested in the house. Why? Because it evokes something in you that compels you to think about it. You said you were interested in the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Why? Because your mind was triggered to accept something about them and that is supernatural and you were haunted.

If it had no effect of manipulation over you, then you wouldn't be here. You can deny it all you want, but you were still compelled. And if it can do that across time and space and the internet, just think about what it can do where you are. They use electricity, just as your body does, therefore, it can use the electricity in your body to haunt you.


This is not Medieval, even your very modern CIA and the Russian KGB tapped into remote viewing for spying, so the government is quite admitting that the supernatural happens.

Scientists used science to design the experiments for remote viewing. And we have information about Russia that turned out to be absolutely true.
I would say you are definitely new here if you're proclaiming the ghostie-boy as legit. I would suggest you read the threads on this forum discussing the subject matter before making "haste" decisions.

You claim that Anson "embellished" his book, but go on to say that the "base story" :think: has not been debunked? What is this base story?

You claim that hauntings occur around small children like the Defeos & Lutzes. I wasn't aware the house was haunted when the Defeos lived there? Never saw any reason to believe the house was haunted when and after the Lutzes "fled". And you are correct, children are innocent but they can be easily manipulated and brainwashed, as most children are at a young age.

You claim the house was haunted & still is? What are you basing this on? Did you go inside the house at anytime in your life? And this "intelligence" you refer to that you claim is present inside the house, if it indeed did exist, from what I've read about this so called entity, is anything but intelligent! More moronic I dare say.

User avatar
devilbustedinct
Walking the Burning Fence
Posts: 720
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by devilbustedinct » Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:37 pm

km2020 wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:14 pm
I am new here and found this thread. I am not sure if the OP has been satisfied in his quest, but I would like to add some things.

First of all, Jay Anson embellished the story. That much is true. However, the base story has not been debunked. I would say there is some kind of entity or spiritual energy in the house. The fact that a picture of a little boy was on the camera that the very skeptical news crew had set up. That wasn't Hans Holzer's or the Warren's camera.

What it does show in that picture is that something appeared as a little boy, but it had an intelligence because it looked directly at the camera. The fact that it projected its image into the camera means that it wanted to be seen. But here's the thing, just because it appeared as a little boy does not mean it was a little boy.

Not only does it look like a little boy, but its eyes are glowing. Think about this, whatever that was not only appeared as a little boy, it peeked around the corner and looked directly at the camera at the right time for its picture to be taken. So it has intelligence. It wanted to be seen. And its eyes were glowing just as the description of Jodie the pig.

That thing with the intelligence knew that there were only adults in that house and that people were there to search and investigate. It knew the people there were not going to be manipulated as it was able to do to the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Remember that the DeFeos and Lutzs had small children. Why do you suppose most hauntings occur where there are children or appear as children? Because children are innocent and children do see more than adults.

When you break it down to the most basic elements, they are similar to a billion other stories of hauntings. I do not believe that was a ghost, but it was definitely something supernatural. And this world isn't 100% natural. Even you can't prove it is, there is no way that you can prove that everything you see is physical nor that everything you hear is originating from a physical source.


Can pigs fly? Certainly, if it is not a physical pig. But if it appears as a pig then it can do whatever it wants. And you can't prove that something didn't happen either. You only believe what you believe because you tell yourself everything you think you see or hear is physical. And you know yourself that not everything you have seen or heard is physical. People do it all the time.

Twins feel pain even though they are apart from each other, also parents feel their children even though the children are in another place. I am going to say this, whatever the Lutzs experienced at the most basic level, it was capable of manipulating them as well as the DeFeos.

Remember, this intelligence is not bound to the physical, and because it is intelligent, it has knowledge. And if it has knowledge, it can manipulate. Was the house haunted? Yes. And yes, it still is. And here is how we can tell, even though you have never been in the house, it can still evoke a feeling in you, it can do what it wants because it compelled you to come onto a forum to tell us you think it can't happen, but it did. You said you were interested in the house. Why? Because it evokes something in you that compels you to think about it. You said you were interested in the DeFeos and the Lutzs. Why? Because your mind was triggered to accept something about them and that is supernatural and you were haunted.

If it had no effect of manipulation over you, then you wouldn't be here. You can deny it all you want, but you were still compelled. And if it can do that across time and space and the internet, just think about what it can do where you are. They use electricity, just as your body does, therefore, it can use the electricity in your body to haunt you.


This is not Medieval, even your very modern CIA and the Russian KGB tapped into remote viewing for spying, so the government is quite admitting that the supernatural happens.

Scientists used science to design the experiments for remote viewing. And we have information about Russia that turned out to be absolutely true.
With all that being said, I invite you to do some more research on the subject. Especially about the “ghost boy” photo. We all have our different opinions, but there is NO WAY anyone will ever convince me that photo is anything supernatural. There is much evidence stacked against it (not to mention common sense) that is destroys the entire theory (and the credibility of certain people). I believe the photo 100% debunked as not being anything out of the ordinary, and another example of failed high hopes. Take a closer look.

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:49 pm

The main Ghost Bot thread is here -

http://www.amityvillefaq.com/truthboard ... ?f=1&t=120

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:51 pm

jimmysmokes wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:43 pm
DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:46 pm
So are you going to unzonk me by telling me why it is that, if George was planning a hoax he would invite the press into the house, knowing in advance that nothing would happen to them?
Yeah I am. He made sure that Kaplan did not go in didn't he? Because he knew he wouldn't hesitate to expose it as a hoax.
Kaplan took himself off the investigation after George postponed it.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:23 pm

sherbetbizarre wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:51 pm
jimmysmokes wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:43 pm
DC Fan wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:46 pm
So are you going to unzonk me by telling me why it is that, if George was planning a hoax he would invite the press into the house, knowing in advance that nothing would happen to them?
Yeah I am. He made sure that Kaplan did not go in didn't he? Because he knew he wouldn't hesitate to expose it as a hoax.
Kaplan took himself off the investigation after George postponed it.
Are you insinuating that George might go ahead (later on) and allow Kaplan to investigate? Remember, it was George that postponed Kaplan from investigating due to the fact that he was a vampirologist. So I don't think that George was going allow Kaplan to investigate regardless. And I suppose Kaplan was aware of this and decided not to waste more time. Instead George let the Warrens get involved. Two quacks! But so essential to introduce sheer nonsense into this scheme to further the "haunting"! Wouldn't you agree?

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:17 am

jimmysmokes wrote:
Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:23 pm
Are you insinuating that George might go ahead (later on) and allow Kaplan to investigate? Remember, it was George that postponed Kaplan from investigating due to the fact that he was a vampirologist. So I don't think that George was going allow Kaplan to investigate regardless.
George postponed the investigation after Kaplan went to the press. Kaplan admits so in his book-
I go to the desk and pick up the receiver. It is George Lutz. He sounds rather annoyed.

“You told the press you would be investigating!” he says. “I told you we didn’t want any publicity.”

”Yes, George, but you failed to tell me about the press conference you held on that very same day. I didn’t
feel I was giving away any secrets and, in case you didn’t notice, I took special care not to mention the date.”
I could not believe the audacity of this man! “Since you are not going to be there, I have some apprehension
that people may misunderstand when they see a large group of people entering a vacant house. The police
may think we are intruders attempting to break in. We are merely covering all bases by making it public
knowledge that we will be investigating at some unspecified date.”

This did not pacify George. “Well, I told you we didn’t want any publicity, and you told the press anyway.
I’m going to have to postpone your investigation for at least a couple of weeks. (...) we’re really tired of this
whole thing. We only gave that press conference to clear up the exaggerated rumors about our story. I think
I’ll wait until the publicity has died down some before having you investigate. Cancel your plans for this weekend and I’ll call you in about two weeks.”

“Fine, George,” I said. “Our egos will still be intact whether you call or not. We’ll be here if you need us.”
Wishing him and his family good luck, I hung up the phone and went to tell my staff that this weekend was
off. They were rather annoyed that they had changed their weekend plans for nothing and, like myself, could
not understand George Lutz’s rather strange position on publicity. In my opinion, the Lutzes’ press conference
had started more rumors than it had cleared up.

After discussing the situation at length, my staff and I decided that, should Lutz decide to call back again,
we would not accept the case after all.
,,,George doesn't call back anyway, as he finds out he's a vampireologist and looks elsewhere.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:45 am

They went to the press anyway with their next group they brought in.

I don't understand where you're going here or your point?

"We don't want any publicity"! So lets wait until we can get the local news team in and film their encounter into our home and put it on the ten o'clock news???

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:56 pm

jimmysmokes wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:45 am
I don't understand where you're going here or your point?
The point was to show you the correct reason things broke down between Lutz and Kaplan.
"We don't want any publicity"! So lets wait until we can get the local news team in and film their encounter into our home and put it on the ten o'clock news???
Yep - and Kaplan went apeshit over it! So clearly they had a different approach a month later... namely Laura Didio talking them around.

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:06 pm

sherbetbizarre wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:56 pm
jimmysmokes wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:45 am
I don't understand where you're going here or your point?
The point was to show you the correct reason things broke down between Lutz and Kaplan.
"We don't want any publicity"! So lets wait until we can get the local news team in and film their encounter into our home and put it on the ten o'clock news???
Yep - and Kaplan went apeshit over it! So clearly they had a different approach a month later... namely Laura Didio talking them around.
Yep, better to have it publicized on the news (little hokum thrown in) to promote a "haunting" than have a "vampiorlogist" report on finding nothing ey'? Not good to expose but better with exposure 8-)

While we're on the subject of things breaking down with George, you are aware that several other incidents like this happened with Mr. Lutz and his involvement with certain people regarding the horror? Almost a pattern (if you will). I can bring these forward if you like!

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:50 am

jimmysmokes wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:06 pm
While we're on the subject of things breaking down with George, you are aware that several other incidents like this happened with Mr. Lutz and his involvement with certain people regarding the horror? Almost a pattern (if you will). I can bring these forward if you like!
I witnessed it happen with Ric Osuna, and that was a case of Osuna flouncing off when his underwritten pro-haunting book was put on hold, only to return with a pro-hoax book.

Again, another example of someone's fragile ego being bruised, so off they go, putting themselves front and center of the story...

User avatar
jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 687

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by jimmysmokes » Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:21 am

sherbetbizarre wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:50 am
jimmysmokes wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:06 pm
While we're on the subject of things breaking down with George, you are aware that several other incidents like this happened with Mr. Lutz and his involvement with certain people regarding the horror? Almost a pattern (if you will). I can bring these forward if you like!
I witnessed it happen with Ric Osuna, and that was a case of Osuna flouncing off when his underwritten pro-haunting book was put on hold, only to return with a pro-hoax book.

Again, another example of someone's fragile ego being bruised, so off they go, putting themselves front and center of the story...
I just read that break-down piece you did on Osuna. Did he respond to you?

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9868
Contact:

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by sherbetbizarre » Tue Dec 24, 2019 4:04 pm

jimmysmokes wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:21 am
I just read that break-down piece you did on Osuna. Did he respond to you?
Nope, just a few weeks after his book came out, he never posted a single thing on Amityville again (Spring 2002).

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Streaming on Twitch from the red room
Posts: 718

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by Amit Y Ville » Tue Dec 24, 2019 4:23 pm

I'm thinking about buying his book to be fair to see what all the controversy is about. I heard a lot about him years ago and know you guys think he is a charlatan. From first glance I can't see him having any connection to the Defeos. He's even posted a pic of him on his website portraying him as being shot in the forehead, which is a lottle disrespectful.
Had to have high, high hopes for a living - Panic! At The Disco

Brooke Forrester
Amityville Addict
Posts: 698
Location: In love

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by Brooke Forrester » Wed Dec 25, 2019 1:47 pm

I believe that’s a birthmark, which I am sure you knew...you don’t have to like somebody but trashing their physical appearance is childish and not necessary.

User avatar
believer
Amityville Member
Posts: 53

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by believer » Wed Dec 25, 2019 8:40 pm

Brooke Forrester wrote:
Wed Dec 25, 2019 1:47 pm
I believe that’s a birthmark, which I am sure you knew...you don’t have to like somebody but trashing their physical appearance is childish and not necessary.
Yes, it is a birthmark.

And in Amit Y Ville's defense, I honestly think that Amit Y Ville thought that Ric was mocking the DeFeo's without realizing that Ric actually has that birthmark. (Even though a quick Google search would resolve any doubts/questions....but alas, it is Amit Y Ville after all.)

User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1972

Re: There is NO proof of a haunting

Post by msmart112 » Wed Dec 25, 2019 10:09 pm

Brooke Forrester wrote:I believe that’s a birthmark, which I am sure you knew...you don’t have to like somebody but trashing their physical appearance is childish and not necessary.
Well said.

Post Reply