Ghost in the house

I live in Ravenna Ohio. In May of 2008, my son took a picture of our house with a digital camera. It was in the afternoon and he was not looking for ghosts. Upon looking at the picture on the computer, there is an image of what appears to be a child looking out of the window.I was the only person in the house. We were astonished by this image to say the least. We have lived in this house for about fifteen years and it is a former parsonage. We have experienced strange activity in the house as well as the former owner. A paranormal research team asked to come last June to do an investigation. They did pick up an EVP, and sent the photograph to Kodak lab. Kodak told them that the photo was genuine and untouched. Could you please take a look at this photo. T

house

boy

What do you think?  Comment and vote now!

585 Responses to “Ghost in the house”

  1. Belinda Says:

    1) Is there any blue item in the window normally (like some sort of package)?
    2) Is it possible that this was a reflection of your son or another passer by?
    3) There’s an odd dark area around the candle, which seems to slice into the face – is the candle electric? – I note that it is reflecting off the ‘ghost’ which is a bit strange
    4) Has there been any previous evidence of this particular ghost appearing?
    5) Is there any history of a child such as this having died in the house?
    6) Can you give us the link to the EVP and investigation?

    Interesting photo though! Thanks for posting it

    • Dawn Says:

      That picture is freaky and gives me goosebumps. I have had my own experiences with ghosts and so maybe that makes me more likely to believe. I WISH I had some photographic proof of my experiences. If you’re curious to read about my experiences, feel free to visit the above link to lens on Squidoo.

    • BobaMilkTea Says:

      It looks as if it was photoshop if you look closely at the candles and it seems to me greyish paint. The fire from the candles doesn’t look right to me…if you look at all the other candles they have that glow around it, but that one doesn’t and what is that greyish pain there?

      • cynicgardens Says:

        Amazing how the advent of Photoshop has made everyone a photo expert? Many simply know that since they can… or could fake a photo, then everyone else does too. We tend to judge others by our own worst possible behaviors.

      • DanQuayle Says:

        First of all- the candle in the window doesn’t have the soft glow surrounding because it is not shining through curtains.
        I don’t know why it is assumed that this is a child, because of his height?
        This detailed, solid, human man clearly sports a groomed mustache and beard; is wearing a blue-collar uniform with an obvious name patch over his right- hand pocket; and the fact that he’s on his knees in the sitting room suggests, to me, that he is there doing some work on an electrical outlet or telephone installation.
        Or he could be a plumber mum was bangin’ and rather than explain that one… Hey! It was a GHOST!

      • DjChuck Says:

        I wouldn’t say it was a beard and mustache, my impression is that he has blackish lips but I agree that it is definitely a blue collar shirt the collar is very apparent. And yes, there does appear to be a name patch. very odd no matter if it’s a person or not.

  2. exzagal Says:

    I have been a lurker on this site for quite a while and this is one of a few photos I have seen here … that has me goosebumps. I’ll be following the thread with interest.

  3. danielbradberry Says:

    That could be a combination of some object behind the window and a JPEG compression artifact, of a reflection of somebody walking past the window – notice how there is a lot of activity in the glass that is clearly tree branches outside.

  4. Harry Knockers Says:

    This is one I’d say is something other than paranormal. The face looks flat–two dimensional. Not like something with depth. This may be a case where we’re seeing a face because that’s what we are wired to do.

  5. edinburghskeptics Says:

    This image has been doing the rounds for a while. I believe it is the genuine original but its still had a lot of publicity.

    I’m going for pareidolia. Zoom in on the ghost, the face is contorted, proportions aren;t right and the face is in fornt of the curtain whilst the body is behind it.

    I doubt its a reflection as other images would show up, I’m guessing a combinaiton of the lighting, possible window smears and fortunate chance poisitioning all contribute to the ghost.

    I’m going for natural explanation, but still a great example of pareidolia.

  6. Lu Ann Says:

    I am the person who sent the Ghost in the house photo. The candles are electric and there was nothing blue in the window. If you have a specific question about the photo, you may contact Jeff Danelek at ourcuriousworld.com.

  7. catdearg Says:

    it must be a genuine picture as you can see the photo taker reflected on glass door . as to the ghost he appears to be peeking round a net courtain as if holding it

  8. Rob Goldstien Says:

    This photo is literally bonechilling. I think the deformed mouth is the most disturbing part.

  9. Anthony A Says:

    Scary.

  10. Sandra Says:

    The house seems old. According to the evidence described by the person who sent the photo, I think the boy is a ghost.

  11. Colin Says:

    It’s a Fart Gnome.

  12. Dave Says:

    “the house seems old” – no it doesnt. Looks like 1960s or later.

    A genuine photo, but no ghost.

  13. Jo Says:

    I also see other images in other windows. I believe this house is haunted.

  14. keet Says:

    it looks pretty good, however its dark inside the house and light outside, (perfect for reflections), therefore i believe it is just a reflection of something like it is with the other windows.

  15. Jeff Says:

    C’mon folks–this is the sorriest attempt to debunk a photo I’ve ever seen. Reflections from outside? Where is the person standing? How would this be done? This is a full color apparition, not light shining off tree linbs. It is not pareidolia, either, as convenient as that might be as a catchall explanation. This is either a Photoshop trick (and one of the finest in history at that) or a genuine capture. There is no other explanation. Let’s all try again to be a little more objective.

    • keet Says:

      who said its a human reflection, it could be a number of things reflecting which ends up appearing similar to a ‘human face’? could be marks on the window that the lamp inside is lighting making them visible. if you know much about photography involving light and glass then you would understand how the marks could appear on the glass.

  16. ruthie Says:

    I see another child standing to the right and slightly back from the window, the shirt is a pink striped one. Possibly a stern looking older woman above and behind that. I agree this house is haunted.

  17. ruthie Says:

    Upon further inspection, I see an older boy in the same windo farther back in the shadow on the right side. This is chilling. Is there a history of this being a foster home or something like that?

  18. ruthie Says:

    In the same window. look closely at the other pane on the right. just the face of a taller boy close to the curtain. then just to the left of the boy in blue, you can see the girl and a large figure behind her.

  19. ZeroCorpse Says:

    Reflection on window from outside + pareidolia = “a face”

  20. ruthie Says:

    Ok. If you say so, it’s your opinion. I see at least 4 enities in this picture. It could very well be reflections of who knows what, but I say this is the real deal here. The house used to be a parsonage? Wow! they loved the preacher didn’t they. Maybe look into that. It’s sad to say, but many pedifiles use the diguise of being a religios person to get to child victims. Were there ever any missing kids cases around that area that was never solved? Not saying that it is the cause for this haunting, but is a possibility

    • ghosthbuster Says:

      all you guys think that ghosts are waiting human to take them photos????
      i believe (so i make this work…) but ghosts are not stars!!!
      death to pedofile….leave the kids alone!!!

  21. Jo Says:

    ruthie,
    I see what you see and also feel that your instincts of the background of the the person that occupied this house may be connected to the haunting.

  22. Ronald Cummings Says:

    Wow

  23. Mike Says:

    There’s no redeeming quality to debunkery. Honest skepticism is a healthy thing but headlong disbelief for its own sake is useless… if not just horribly stale.

  24. Miss Marisa Says:

    this really freaks me out…

  25. Miss Marisa Says:

    This is really creepy…

  26. B+T F0R3V3R Says:

    hey, i really think it would be hard to photoshop somthing of this calibur. ths is one of the very few photos that make me turn around to see if somone is standng there.

    Thanks,
    Brian

  27. Harry Knockers Says:

    Wait a second. Look at that gray statue in front of the door. What are the chances we are seeing that statue (window acting as a mirror)? I think pretty good. Otherwise, what, it’s the ghost of a 5 year old who is dressed like a manager at a factory? With a pocket protector?

    • keet Says:

      lmao! they did have them working at a young age back then, maybe he got promoted quickly!

    • Lilly Says:

      Who says a ghost has to appear in Victorian dress? Maybe they appear in the outfit they died in. If the “ghost face” may possibly be smears, reflection, etc., what about the blue shirt? How can that be explained? The “ghost image” does not look anything like the other reflections in all of the other windows.

      • keet Says:

        i can answer those questions for you:
        1) blue shirt, its an object on the window shelf, you can tell by it being behind the curtain whereas the smudge is in front of the curtain.
        2) the ‘reflection’ of the face isn’t a reflection, it is a diffusion occurring in the glass due to the light behind it and highlighting a smudge or mark; so it will not look like other reflections.

  28. Ronnie G. Says:

    who the hell is that?

  29. TW Says:

    this is either the best photoShop ever, OR IM SCARED SHITLESS.

    • keet Says:

      why do people always believe photographs can be photoshopped all the time? i do photography and believe me, its easy to do most things when you’re actually taking the photo. i hate it when people look at my photos and say, ‘so how did you do that in photoshop?’ simple answer, ‘i didn’t!’
      its all to do with light rays, materials and camera settings.

    • clara jayne Says:

      It’s lens flare from the candle

  30. Jo Says:

    Don’t stare at the face too long…just let it go.

  31. Lilly Says:

    You don’t know for sure if there was any object on the window shelf…and why would someone put something in the window that looks like a blue shirt with a collar? That would be rather tacky. I can clearly see that part of the “ghost child’s face” is behind the curtain. Also, how do you know for sure that any lights were on in the house? It is clearly daytime, and most people don’t have lamps on at that time of the day. All of the other windows look so clean, so why would there be a smudge on that particular window, close to a blue object with a collar, that somehow came to look just like a child wearing a blue shirt looking out of the window?

    • keet Says:

      the blue object could be anything, you may only be seeing some of the object, the curtain may be covering the rest. it may be an ornament of such.
      the part of the mark that you say is behind the curtain is the bit where there is no curtain. the reason i know the light is on in the house is because it is clearing there in the window glowing, like there is in the doorway windows. there may have been a smudge on there accidentally, by maybe leaning on it, whipping it, etc. to be honest this mark looks like a kid’s face thats been smashed in, its all distorted.

      • Kitty Says:

        Lu Ann (the person who sent in the photo) has already stated previously in this thread that there was nothing blue in the window. If this is true, what is your explanation then? I’m not challenging you, just interested to know your view.

  32. Lilly Says:

    I’m not quite sure what you’re saying, but the lady stated that there was nothing the color blue in the window. If there was a smudge there, how could it possibly show up at that distance the photo was taken, in broad daylight?

    • keet Says:

      theres a light directly behind the smudge that lights it up. try getting a sheet of glass, make a hand print on it, then put a light behind it and you’ll clearly see the light making the mark more visible. trust me i know this by doing advertising photography with glass objects.
      the lady may not remember having anything there at the time, however the photograph is taken from such a distance that how were they to notice it at the time. it could be something that had been placed there at the time but is not usually there.

  33. Lilly Says:

    Also, how are we to know what a ghost is suppose to look like? Maybe it was an incomplete manifestation, or maybe the child had a deformity.

  34. Mike Says:

    Well, just applying the Mark-1 eyeball to this picture… and then a little familiar recognition technique, I’d say that was a blue shirt with a section of the collar apparent.

    Ghosts DO wear clothes, you know. No self-respecting spirit is going to come out in public stark-nekked for all us bone bags to laugh at.

    What’s the issue with a little girl ghost wearing a blue shirt anyway?

  35. Jeff Says:

    Hey “keet”, do you notice that you seem to be the only one who buys off on your “explanation”? Of course, maybe you’re just gifted in the ability to see things no one else can see.

    • keet Says:

      or maybe i’m the one that doesn’t have tunnel vision. i look at all possibilities before coming to a conclusion. i myself have seen a ghost before so i do believe in them, however there are so many things in photographs that can appear as a ‘ghost’ but is actually a normal explanation for it. i have studied the photograph and believe that it is clearly a smudge on the window, made visible by the light behind it. are you not the ones giving me no explanation for your judgements?

      • Mike Says:

        Hey man, if you wanna see a smudge, please do feel free. Personally, I am seeing that blue shirt w/collar but… this IS a ghost pic we’re talking about. You are allowed to see anything you want to :)

      • keet Says:

        what happened to this ‘ghosts’ neck then?

  36. Lu Ann Says:

    Hi~ I am the person who sent the ghost in the house photo. I can assure you 100%, that there was nothing on the window ledge, inside or outside, the color blue. Upon seeing that image on the computer, I immediately went to the window, and tried to find an explanation for such a disturbing image. I examined the window, and also looked around that whole area. I am still baffled by this photo. Thank you

    • keet Says:

      i’m afraid i am still going to stick to my conclusion of it being a mark on the window, due to the facts i have been pointing out and no one else has managed to prove wrong. the ‘face’ is too flat, there is lighting behind the window that is diffusing through the glass making this mark visible, the ‘shirt’ is behind the curtain whereas the ‘face is infront of the curtain and this persons neck, well it appears that he has none?
      simply it is an optical illusion of what people want to see rather than what they do see.

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hi Keet~ That’s o.k.~ I respect your opinion. As for me, I do see “pale skin” near the collar area. I don’t know why this image appeared in the window at that moment in time, but I know there are things that happen, that we can’t explain. Thank you

      • keet Says:

        thanks, everyone is down to there own opinions and i’m glad you see it that way. if i was near where this house was i would come and take a look, however all i have is this photograph. i am glad to see that there is someone that says everyone can think for themselves. thank you.

  37. Logan G Says:

    keet stfu

    • keet Says:

      everyone’s open to their own opinions. i’m just saying mine; people that say i’m wrong, i’m just giving a reason why i’m thinking that way, wot is your thought about this image seen as though all you’ve said is telling me to stop saying wot i think it is. giving your own opinion is the freedom of speak, isn’t it?

  38. Brandal Says:

    Somebody was walking around the house. And this was a daylight, argh…c’mon, guyz. This pic was recorded like this coz the photographer took it shakely.

  39. ruthie Says:

    Jo…. if you know how to contact the owner of the photo, have her/him look into the other ghosts in the picture. Obviously we are the only 2 here who can see the other enities. I know I can’t look at this photo for any length of time. It truely frightens me.

  40. Jo Says:

    Ruthie,
    I feel that you and I see enough to know what is going on in this place so I would recommend we let the producers of this site take it to the next step if they wish. I really do not want to open any doors on this one.

  41. Belinda Says:

    I’d like a little more detail on the history of the parsonage. I wonder if Lu Ann would be so kind as to tell us the original name of the parsonage so that we could do some research of our own?

  42. Spanky Says:

    Yeah, this picture in my opinion is the most “authentic”. Yet again, it can be explained by a mere windows reflection.

  43. Lu Ann Says:

    Hi Belinda~ The house was a parsonage for the United Methodist Church Pastors and their families, between 1959-1978. A doctor lived here several years before it became a parsonage. I believe he built the house, but I’m not sure. Thank you~

  44. Mike Says:

    What is real? Take the average, everyday stop sign. Many of us see these things at intersections but many more obviously do not. Some don’t even slow down to look for them.

    Go figure.

  45. michelle Says:

    that is so scary

  46. DC Says:

    Garbage! garbage! garbage! I’ve seen enough in 50 years that I could fake this with a box of crayola crayons! C’mon people! Stick to the real purpose of this challenge and stop trying to undermine a perfectly legitimate inquiry. Someone puts this up for a joke or to immortilize their stupid kid and say “Look honey! You’re on the internet!”

    • Fio Says:

      DC. your an ass clown to think that way. what I think is your response is because your a big baby and afraid of the truth that ghosts do exist. I myself have recordings and unedited photos to prove the existence

  47. Jeff Says:

    Alright, I think we can all agree that we all see pretty much what we’re predisposed to seeing. That’s why there never will be a photograph of a ghost that will ever be good enough to constitute proof–it’s simply not within us to agree on anything. Oh, and DC, I have a few ideas what you might do with your crayons:-)

    • karen Says:

      you go jeff!!…there is no need to be ugly DC…i agree with jeff, there will always be skeptics and believers the same…all you can do is have your own personal experiences and learn from those…i myself (my own opinion) see the blue shirt w/collar and the face is BEHIND the curtain not in front of it…you can clearly see part of the jaw/cheek that is covered by the curtain..the reason for no neck is the tilt or lean of the face is blocking that visually…you can clearly see the candle reflecting into the room BEHIND the figure (boy)…i do see where it looks to be a taller figure in the background of the other window, very faint but it’s there….now i am a paranormal researcher here in the state of florida…i do scientific research with electronic equipment….we believe but we do not just jump at everything being true paranormal…i do though believe this is something unique and very interesting…thank you lu ann, for sharing it with me!

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hi Karen~ You are very welcome. I am looking for answers as well. I am wondering if this child image in the window, is causing the paranormal activity in my home.

  48. DC Says:

    I guess it looks pretty freaky…

  49. Jennie Says:

    It looks like a reflection of a child outside, not anything inside, to me.

  50. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    What is it with “ghosts” that they like to appear to folks, but never stay around for study or interaction? Hmmm?

  51. Jo Says:

    “never stay around for study or interaction ? Isn’t this photo a study in their interaction with us ??

  52. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    Hardly. Why only peek out when someone snaps a shutter, and then go away? Why can’t we ever walk up to one and interact? They just want to keep us guessing? What’s the point?

  53. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    I mean really, what are believers claiming anyway? That these are “spirits” that used to “inhabit” a body?

    If they show up on film, don’t they have to have some substance? Wouldn’t that substance have to “leave” a body upon death? Any proof/evidence that such a thing happens? I’m not aware of any.

  54. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    Not to mention that this ethereal substance would have to somehow look just like the body of the person they left behind, including clothing!

  55. Jo Says:

    Grumpy,
    Your statement at the end of your statement “I’m not aware of any ” implies to me that you have had no contact with spirits in any way. So that is the reason for your non belief in spirits. That is ok with me because it is your makeup. Eveyone is entitled to believe or not to believe in these things. It is healthy to be not gullable and believe anything that is put in front of us. Of all the photos that is presented in this site, this one just appeared to be one that some of us believe is worth commenting on. I can look through 100 photos and nothing hits , but then.. I see this one and it does get a reaction. It is great that we all can have different views.

    • Lilly Says:

      I agree with you, Jo~ 100%.

    • karen Says:

      yes jo is exactly right!…being skeptical is not a bad thing…we need people on both sides to weed through the things that are illusions, reflections, matrixing, so that we can find the truth…nobody knows anything of the afterlife or beyond…thats why us researchers and investigators are out there….trying to learn and help people who are having experiences they can’t explain or are making them scared…most people don’t understand the unexplained or fear the unknown…we want to help them and find answers…

  56. Mike Says:

    As ridiculous a contract as it is, why not put yourself in the shoes… or shirt, of a ghost? In this case, you are the ghost of a child, haunting this home for whatever reasons. The corporeal residents can’t see you but you watch them go about their lives day in and day out.

    One day, someone walks out front with a curious contraption that may be a camera but due to the laws of ghostdom, you can’t leave the building. The next best thing is to peek out the window to see what’s going on.

    Ooops! For some reason as yet not fully understood, cameras and in particular, digital cameras are sometimes capable of imaging the spectral wavelengths that you occupy and your presence was captured in a picture. Making it all more embarrassing, you are now plastered on the wild, wild web where skeptics, desk’perts and other fubar types take to denouncing you as being a fake or a smudge.

    People are such a pain.

  57. keet Says:

    i believe that i have seen a ‘ghost’, ‘spirit’ or what ever you want to call it before. i am also a photographer and know a lot about what can happen with photographs. illusions can occur with glass due to reflection and refraction, the family of lights and the simple objects in the shot. i am sure that this is just due to a refraction in the window due to a mark on the glass, however it is not a hoax, just something that someone believed it to be a ‘ghost’. i know many people see something in a photograph, can’t explain it therefore they assume it’s a ghost because it can’t be explained. i would like to ask all the people out there that always say ‘there’s no such thing as ghost because it hasn’t been proved’, why is there no such things as ghosts when it HASN’T been proved they don’t exist? especially when there is nothing to explain certain other photographs?

  58. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    “why is there no such things as ghosts when it HASN’T been proved they don’t exist?”

    Yes, and there are invisible dragons in my garage.

    I refer you to my earlier statements, which raise rather elementary problems with the whole “ghost” issue.

    • keet Says:

      yes you are not aware of any however you are not aware if any could possibly exist. if you say that ‘spirits’ or ‘ghosts’ don’t exist, prove it, this photograph is not proof i know that however prove to me that no such things exist

      • grebmob Says:

        Lost all respect for you keet at this point. Sorry I was really loving your insight but your epistemology is quite distorted. It is impossible to prove the NONexistence of something, only positives can be demonstrated as true. Negatives can only be disproved to the extent that the contradict the already proved. (which is why I do not believe in any infinite higher being). This brings me to my current notion of the paranormal. I do not belive in ghosts or any other paranormal event and the reason for this is that (to my knowledge) there is no consistent theory attempting to explain ghosts. If anyone thinks they have a theory or can link me to sites with theories, please do so at aynthing@hotmail.com (please no spam). And please don’t tell me that energy cannot be created or destroyed because that is too easy to debunk. And nothing religious please. And finally concerning this picture (and this concern may be dismissed via a coherent theory to be via email) but clothing would not appear on a ghost in any of the adhoc theories I can conjure up.

  59. Mike Says:

    Ghosts are, as a matter of fact, an article of faith. You believe or you don’t. Proof is not required. Minds will not be changed with skeptical criticisms or professed knowledge.

    This is a part of the charter of the human condition.

    • Schouw Says:

      Actually – thath’s not quite true.

      My ex was a disbeliever until he went along with me on a ghosthunt – and actually felt the presence pass right through him.

      NOW he’s a believer :)

      • ZC Says:

        Your ex is an idiot, then.

        Ghosts are not real. I was a believer, did my own ghost hunting for years, and even went to college hoping to be a parapsychologist in the 80s (eventually switched majors, though), and these days, now that I’m not a gullible kid, I can debunk ANYTHING you claim is a ghost. ANYTHING.

        “He felt a presence pass right through him”

        No, he didn’t. He got a chill, or he got the creeps because you were building up the experience psychologically. There was no “presence” but your own, and his mind tricked him into feeling “something” and filled in the blanks with the most at-hand explanation which you, no doubt, provided to him.

        That is not evidence of ghosts. That is evidence of being easily manipulated by a group of thrill-seeking goofballs telling scary stories.

        Put me in any “haunted” house, and I’ll pick it apart and prove you wrong.

      • Nathan Says:

        This is one creepy pic!!!

  60. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    Ghost are just an “article of faith”? Like fairies, gremlins, leprechauns and gods? Beyond scientific investigation and proof?

    Thanks, we can now move on. Enjoy.

    • Mike Says:

      Yes, currently ghosts (belief therein) are an article of faith. Thank you, though, for spinning it all into a furball. You may have a future in politics.

      And yes, articles of faith (ie: God) do not require proof for belief. However, none of it is ‘beyond’ scientific proof… which another fine mess you led us into.

      How do you do that? Never mind.

      If you were moving on, please, don’t stop… or let that screen door hit you in the nose.

    • keet Says:

      beyond or we cannot prove it doesn’t exist so we’ll just say it is not scientifically possible? like the atom being the smallest molecule and earth being flat; don’t always believe what is ‘scientifically’ correct because even science is known to be wrong sometimes. just be open minded and look at it from other points of view, don’t just stick to the tunnel vision that many people see.

      • Grumpy Old Fart Says:

        I didn’t say it (existence of ghosts) wasn’t possible. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. To date, there is none. And from what I can see, very little has been done to gain such proof.

        Why do you think that is?

      • keet Says:

        i understand your point, however you say there is no extraordinary proof there is anything possible, yet there is also no extraordinary proof that it is not possible. i am an open minded person and i don’t believe that this photograph is real, i just think it is an illusion; however i have seen better than this with my own eyes and i do believe that there is something out there.

  61. Mike Says:

    @GOF

    *”But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”
    No, actually it does not.
    The standards of scientific proof are not subject to whim… and since nothing unreal exists, anything that would constitute proof would be absolutely ordinary.

    *”To date, there is none.”
    Absolute proof? Maybe not quite yet but evidence? It is abundant and growing in caliber all the time.

    *”Why do you think that is?”
    I think we live in a wonderfully dynamic universe… and it is only a combination of human arrogance and devout ignorance that would dare say that something… anything absolutely cannot exist within it.

    We are only a few short centuries removed from an age when the Earth was flat and at the center of the universe… and only a single century passed believing that heavier-than-air machines would never fly.

    Imagine how silly our grandchildren will think we were to hold ourselves in such high esteem while being so pitifully stupid.

    Sir, I submit to you that if their is an extraordinary claim, it is that human consciousness DOESN’T survive physical death.

    • Mike Says:

      PS –

      Goodnight all.

    • Grumpy Old Fart Says:

      “…evidence? It is abundant and growing in caliber all the time.”

      Do tell.

      “Sir, I submit to you that if their is an extraordinary claim, it is that human consciousness DOESN’T survive physical death.”

      Evidence thereof?

      What got us beyond the world of flat earth, demons and witches was Science. I’ve not seen any supporting these ghostly claims. Would love to see some.

  62. Mike Says:

    More spooky images… this time from New Zealand

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1177885/Can-believe-youre-seeing-The-ghostly-images-left-New-Zealand-spooked.html

    • Belinda Says:

      Hmm.. I really think that is definitely a case of pareidolia – having often watched the different shapes created by a coal or log fire (quite mesmeric, rather like watching shapes created in the clouds I suppose :-)

  63. Mike Says:

    @GOF

    Okay, you win. I surrender to your intellectual torture devices and will no longer consider that life is anything but a mistake. When I die, everything I am and ever was will just end. No hope, no afterlife, nothing.

    Moreover

    The universe is dead. There is no life on any other world or plane than what we know here and now. Our narrow little lives mean nothing and never did. No God, no justice, no good, no evil… just bad guns and inanimate people.

    As the victor of this debate, you are granted two extra minutes of unmeaningful life, with which you may not pray, observe a raindrop, a falling leaf, butterfly or anything that might inspire higher thought.

    Congratulations. You are now the perfect citizen of the perfect 21st century world.

    • ZC Says:

      You know what’s sad? That people feel like they need ghosts or gods to make the universe seem inspirational or amazing, when it’s pretty damned amazing on its own.

      The fact that you need to believe in things that don’t exist to distract you from the reality you live in, and that you consider that ‘higher’ thought… Well, that chills me more than any ghost could.

      To me, the universe is wondrous, and it doesn’t need any spirits, gods, afterlife, or EVPs to make it so.

      I pity those who are so terrified of non-existence that they need to lie to themselves every day in order to keep going. You know deep down that everything you profess to believe in is sheer fantasy; You can’t be that willfully stupid as to NOT know it’s fantasy, after all… So you lie to yourself, because it chases away the dark thoughts that bounce around in your head as you lay down to sleep every night. Those “what’s it like to not exist?” thoughts that so disturb you.

      You lie to yourself, and you gather as many other people as you can into the fantasy, because if enough of you lie to yourselves and each other, all together, maybe you can convince yourselves that it’s not a lie, and that since other people are saying it, it must have some truth to it.

      But it’s a lie. There are no ghosts, and the universe is amazing enough without them. It’s just that YOU, like all other creatures in the universe, are just a speck of dust that will return to the matter from whence you came, and your consciousness– like all others in the universe– will wink out of existence.

      Just because you are a speck doesn’t mean you’re not an amazing, wondrous thing. It just means you’re no more special than anything else in the universe… And you’re no more eternal, either.

      All things end. Deal with it, and stop projecting your angst over the truth upon other people who have accepted it.

  64. Belinda Says:

    @GOF and Mike

    It really doesn’t matter which of you is correct, the point is that we strive to find the truth

    TBH, when we die and that’s the end of the matter as it were – then so be it, we won’t know any better so who cares.

    But if there is more, even if it is just the passing of energy from one spot to another (energy is never lost etc…), then we should know all about it.

    Surely it is our role as sentient and inquisitive beings to find that out?

    But what really bugs me regarding the idea of existence after death, is that IMO animals are capable of thought, dreams etc. and we are discovering more and more that they are capable of complex interaction using ‘language’ of their own – So surely they should follow whatever fate becomes us after death? And yet, I never see a picture of a ghost of a mongoose posted anywhere, only now and then do we hear of pets that have interacted strongly with humans such as monkeys, cats or dogs coming ‘back’ to visit us.

    • Grumpy Old Fart Says:

      “Surely it is our role as sentient and inquisitive beings to find that out?”

      Absolutely!

    • Kitty Says:

      Maybe animals do follow our ‘fate’ after death. I believe I have had the experience of what you might call a ‘ghost cat’ before.

      I was woken up one morning by a cat’s loud purring, and the feeling of paws kneeding my lower abdomen and hip through the quilt. When I looked up, thinking it was one of my cats, there was nothing there.

      I talked to my mother about it, and she said that her bed used to be in that position before our house was renovated and extended, and her cat Oscar used to wake her up every morning by purring and kneeding her.

      Oscar had been dead for 16 years, I was 14 at the time and never knew him.

      Just because we’ve not seen many/any photos of ghost animals does not mean there has not been experience of them.

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hello Kitty~ My son and I were in the kitchen one night. It was very late. My son was standing near the sink, and I was near the pantry a few feet away. Out of the blue, came a very loud and distinct “meowing” sound. It lasted for a few seconds. We do not have a cat.We both stopped and looked at each other. The windows were closed and locked, so it was not coming from outside. It sounded as if it was right behind me, in the hallway. I turned to see if a cat had gotten into the house, but nothing was there.

  65. Grumpy Old Fart Says:

    Mike,

    No need to over the top and around the bend my friend. Of course there may be life elsewhere in the universe, there may even be ghosts! But let’s be a little less credulous. Let’s demand a little more evidence than blind faith. As Carl Sagan said, “science is a candle in the dark”. Leave the demon haunted world and come into the light.

    Finally, don’t despair that there’s no evidence of an invisible being dictating the meaning and purpose of your life. YOU are the creator of meaning for your life. Take hold of that life, your world, and enjoy.

    • Mike Says:

      Dang… did you think that was really over the top? Hmmm.. and I worked on that for hours too.

      Okay… let’s just slice it down the middle. Those who believe in life after death get to experience it and those who don’t, get the shade drawn and eternal nothing.

      No muss, no fuss.

      (Thanks for pointing all that out, by the way. We strive for perfection in our imperfections… except, of course, when perfection is finally achieved through the same ;)

  66. Mike Says:

    All head-butting aside… I have really enjoyed the debate here. I ‘hope’ that what I believe to be true is indeed so but… without anything except my own leap of faith, there is always the chance I’ll wake up… just dead.

    To GOF: You stole my name, you know. I have written previously (elsewhere on the web) under the tag “Old Fart’ but clearly, nothing is worse than one that is also grumpy ;)

    I hope that the keepers of this castle will do us a favor and add more images, often, so that we may continue the conversation.

    Anyone interested in personal conversation can write me at:
    mfrankln-at-gmail.com

  67. Patrick Says:

    It’s a computer monitor or television on inside the room.

  68. ruthie Says:

    A doctor built this house? Was it also his private practice? Also have any unusual things happened here? Am just curious. Would very much be interested in any type of study if one ever gets done. Keep us posted.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Hi Ruthie, It was told to us when we moved here, that a doctor built this house in 1930. His wife was from Canada. My husband was told, by an elderly neighbor, that the doctor saw patients in the house as well. We have experienced strange activity, as well as the former owner. Thank you

  69. ruthie Says:

    Also, A computer Moniter? what? In 3-d? Half the kid in blue is behind the curtain.

    • keet Says:

      yeah half the ‘kid’ behind the curtain (the unknown object) and the other half (diffused light from the electric candle light through marks on the window) infront of the curtain.

  70. ruthie Says:

    Lu Ann,
    This picture has really peeked my interest in the paranormal. [more-so than usual, anyway.] I hope you can come up with an explanation, other than reflections[of nothing], smudges and lighting. I wonder if the boy in blue is the only figure you see in the photo. Jo asked about abortions. That’s a good question, the age of the kids suggest something other than abortion. Even if you are skeptik, bring in a phsycic. Would love to hear what he/she would have to add to this.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Ruthie,
      I have no explanation for this strange photo. I must tell you that very odd things occur in this house. I do not believe this photo is a smudge, reflection or a trick of the light. I had a very professional team of paranormal investigators come. They suggested a psychic as an option. I have posted the link to the EVP they caught. It does not sound like the voice of a child. Thank you.

  71. Lu Ann Says:

    Link to EVP:

    [audio src="http://www.paranormalresearchersofohio.com/user/Hey_thats_not_nice.wav" /]

  72. ZeroCorpse Says:

    It must suck to be as terrified of dying as some of you people are.

    1. It’s not a ghost.

    2. When you die, you stop existing. Your brain will shut down, the electrical impulses will stop, the chemicals that make up your memories fade, and you’ll cease to exist. We all didn’t exist originally (prior to conception) and we’ll stop existing eventually. No big whoop. Stop trying to soothe your fears with pleasant faerie tales and accept it; You’ll be happier and a lot less annoying to other people.

    3. @Jo: Yeah. It’s aborted babies staring out the windows. Sure.

  73. ZeroCorpse Says:

    Seriously. Stop.

    PAREIDOLIA. It’s a light pattern that only KIND OF looks like a face.

    And no, Jesus isn’t on your toast. The spirits of aborted babies aren’t hanging out in your living room.

    “Very professional” paranormal investigators, huh? Were these degree-holding parapsychologists, or self-proclaimed “ghost hunters” who watched too much TV? “Consult a psychic”??? Are you kidding? You call that “very professional”?

    The EVP could be a lot of things, including your “very professional” ghost hunters whispering themselves, or recording over old tape, or picking up radio signals.

    Frankly, if you’re this easily caught up in a “haunting” hysteria, then you probably deserve to be scared… You’re the one scaring yourself, and you’re asking “psychics” and “paranormal investigators” to enable you.

    You don’t WANT to believe the simple explanations given by the good (and logical) people here. You WANT it to be a ghost. You WANT to be spooked, so go be spooked.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      ZeroCorpse, I didn’t call a psychic and I’m not scared. What would you think if this image showed up in your photo? Thank you.

      • ZeroCorpse Says:

        Fart Gnome.

      • ZeroCorpse Says:

        Just so you know, that last one was not me. Someone slapped my name into the box and posted with it.

        As for your question: I would think it’s a reflection from the road, or light bouncing off an object in the room beyond the window. Without seeing the surrounding area, or the room, I cannot make a clear determination.

        What I can say, however, is that it’s not a face. It’s something that your brain sees as a face because that’s how our brains are wired. It’s called “pareidolia” and it explains about half of the pictures on this site.

        As for what makes me the expert? I spent 15 years investigating the paranormal and occult. I went to college seeking to become a parapsychologist (and changed majors when my opinions changed and I grew up a little). I entered and debunked more “haunted” places than I can even remember, and that was all before 1994.

        I also have a keen eye for B.S., fakery, frauds, hoaxes, and lies. I can pick apart a stage magician’s act, spot a hoax a mile away, and tell when most people are lying. I can debunk just about anything you wish to consider a “haunting”.

        The problem is that people who want to believe it’s a haunting aren’t going to be deterred by the logical explanation. They want it to be a haunting, because that’s exciting and makes it seem like life doesn’t end with death. If it’s not a haunting, then they have to face the mundane truth of it, and that’s not as fun or as self-assuring.

        And honestly, considering my loquacious nature, my grammar, and my standard lexicon, does anyone really think I’d post something as short as “Fart Gnome”? For goodness’ sake! It’s not even properly capitalized.

        If you’re going to impersonate me, at least put a little effort into it, kid.

    • Fio Says:

      who made you the expert Zero? Or is Zero the size of your IQ?

      • ZeroCorpse Says:

        137, actually.

        And you can read above if you question my experience and opinion on the matter.

  74. Jo Says:

    zero, I didn’t say they were aborted babies. You are the one that said that. You believe what you want but no need to put people down for their comments. I do not need to come to a site to be put down by someone so full of hate as you.
    Later…

    • ZeroCorpse Says:

      Not hate.

      Disgust. Pity. Frustration.

      It’s people who continue to lie to themselves about these ridiculous superstitions that are dragging down progress in other areas, allowing themselves to be preyed upon by charlatans, and doing plenty of preying on others.

      So yeah, I resent this mindset, but I don’t hate you. I don’t even know you. I just kind of feel sorry for you, that you’ve been drawn into this silly belief and can’t get past it even when faced with logical choices.

      To each their own. If living like that is what makes you happy, then go ahead. Don’t seek knowledge. Reject logic and reason in favor of superstition and fantasy. If it makes the world seem more magical to you, fine.

      No hate here. Mostly just dissatisfaction with the lack of reason in the 21st century. I mean, all these years after the Dark Ages, and we’re *still* dealing with people who insist there are ghosts, gods, angels, and other foolishness.

      We should be past this stuff by now. We really should.

      • Jules Says:

        You are wrong. That is NOT a reflection. This is extremely scary and a very unique photo. I think deep down, you are scared, because you have no idea what it is.

      • Jules Says:

        Get off your high horse. You are no expert because you investigated a few haunted locations. Ghost sightings and photographs are rare. I think this one is one of the real ones.

  75. Santos Says:

    Olhe, existem mais fantasma na janela; observem… Realmente Ruthie esta certa, pena que tudo é photoshop

  76. CorCoxx Says:

    go fuck ur self spick.

  77. BetsyBoop Says:

    This is hard to look at for too long… this is one of the most disturbing photos I have ever seen.

  78. Vincent Says:

    There are some things you can’t explain, and this photo is proof of that!

  79. P3TR Says:

    It depends on who’s comment you read…

  80. Jules Says:

    This image is definitely behind the curtain. I don’t agree with the smudge theory at all. No Way! How could a “smudge” be seen from that distance? The candle bulb/ night light must be only about 4 watts. If it’s a smudge, and the lady still has the candle in the window, wouldn’t the ghost image still be seen today?Wouldn’t it still be there NOW? What about the blue shirt? This photo is remarkable!!!

    • keet Says:

      for a start, if the smudge is too small to be seen then so would the face (because they are the same size). second, you’d be surprised what a bit of light can bring out. third, the window may have been cleaned since then. fourth, who says it’s a blue shirt.
      now you answer me this, what happened to this so called ‘ghosts’ neck?

  81. Clare Says:

    I would never live in this house… too spooky!

  82. P3TR Says:

    @ keet

    i see the neck clear as day…:)

    • keet Says:

      where? if you mean the reflection of the lamp then it isn’t a neck. i think you want to see it rather than you do see it. unconscious state of mind

      • P3TR Says:

        It’s just my opinion, but I feel if a ghost wants to manifest, it must take alot of energy to do so. If this is a “child ghost”, maybe it tried it’s best to appear as close as it looked in life. If a little of the neck is not fully formed, or a little of the mouth area, no big deal. Is a ghost expected to look “perfect” in every way, to be considered a genuine capture? I think not. When I see this photo, it looks like a child looking out of a window. If a tiny piece of it is missing here and there, that’s o.k. with me. Have you ever heard of an incomplete manifestation? I read where a ghost can appear a little distorted, or incomplete. That makes perfect sense to me! Maybe it’s just the best this little person could do.

      • P3TR Says:

        Also, if I may add, the famouse “Ghost in a car” photo appears to have no eyes. The famous Brown Lady of Raynham Hall ghost, seems to look misty, like a white vapor, with no features at all! What about an Orb? An orb is considered a ghost in the form of a ball of light. They take less energy of any form. An orb has no features at all, no neck, no nothing. This is an amazing photo.

      • keet Says:

        i have already given people proof that this is a diffusing light source from inside the window. when people are trying to tell me i am wrong, i am just giving them proof of what it is. nobody has been able to prove my opinion wrong as of yet, all anyone keeps saying is ‘its a ghost’, ‘its was injured as a child’ and all the rest of it. when someone proves that my believe is wrong, then i will look at it again. a ghost may not have all its body when it comes back however i have given reason and proof. i have looked at it from all angles and have come to a final opinion whereas others have looked at it and seen a ‘ghost’ without even looking at other possibilities.

      • Kitty Says:

        Keet, we have not so much seen ‘proof’ that is is defused light, as your own opinion. You have no ‘proof’ that this is a smudge and some lighting, just as the believers here have no ‘proof’ that it is a ghost.

      • keet Says:

        yes however i have a clear explanation of what is occurring and can describe how and why it is occurring. others have not been able to explain anything of this ‘ghost’, just the issue that it could be a child, maybe a disturbed child from the past. i have described in detail how my theory occurs. has anybody tried pressing there hand on a pane of glass putting a light behind it then taken a photo? no. try doing this and get back to me about what you find. have many people given any other suggestions except this ‘ghost’ issue that is described at the beginning? people read the first bit then jump to the same conclusion and not think what other possibilities there are.

      • karen Says:

        keet…your THEORY does not provide PROOF!…again it’s just YOUR opinion….that does not make it PROOF!

      • Anonymous Says:

        my theory provides a possibility, one that i am able to answer any queries about it.

      • clara jayne Says:

        ‘Also, if I may add, the famouse “Ghost in a car” photo appears to have no eyes.’ If you look closely at that photo the lady in the back has glasses on and the ‘no eyes’ that you see is light reflecting from her glasses to create white circles.

  83. ruthie Says:

    SANTOS<
    I can only understand a few words. please translate. I only understand Ghost, truely, see, certain, suffer. none of the rest . I failed spanish class. lol.

  84. ruthie Says:

    Keet, You say you are giving people proof of it being light or whatever. Were you actually there when this photo was taken? Have you ever been to this house to look around for this light? You are guessing just like the rest of us. The difference is you don’t believe it could be a spirit and are not open to discussion on the topic. I on the other hand, am convienced it is indeed a spirit, but am open to the possibility that it may not be. Your ramblings on lighting and smudges and reflections don’t make since. So until you get concrete proof that it isn’t a spirit, stop being so mean………………
    CorCxx, please don’t use that kind of racial B-S when talking to someone who submitted a post to me. I find it very offensive.

    • keet Says:

      i am not being mean, only stating more factual possibilities of why this image is happening, explaining to others what they don’t understand about it. i am open minded, i believe in spirits myself however i am describing what is happen to the light source as it is diffused through marks on glass. why do i need to look around the house for a light when it is clearly sat there behind the window in the photo? make a mark on some glass, press something against it, then shine a light through it and you’ll see that mark become visible to the camera. when you’ve done that you’ll understand what i mean. i have had a lot of experience with this kind of thing happening when shooting glass in a studio. all little marks on glass show up when put to a light source, no matter if it is visible to you or not it will show in the photograph. your eyes don’t work the same as a camera does. when you have done this get back to me.

  85. Clare Says:

    I think the ghost child is behind the curtain. I don’t think it is a smudge. Is there someway to find out conclusively that it is NOT a smudge? This child looks worried or sad.

    • keet Says:

      i dont mean it to be just a smudge, it could be a mark of some sort on the window. trust me try it on a sheet of glass yourself then you may look at it another way.

  86. YeVonne Says:

    wow worst photoshop ever…

  87. Clare Says:

    That “mark” sure looks like an eerie, sad child looking out of the window, wearing a light blue shirt…

    • keet Says:

      that ‘shirt’ is behind the curtain. the mark/smudge on the window is in front of the curtain, you can tell by the light reflection of the electric candle being in line with the mark/smudge.

  88. Clare Says:

    keet, you can clearly see that part of the face is behind the curtain. Please tell me why someone would put something that looks like a shirt in the window? I’m just not seeing what your seeing….

    • keet Says:

      you can clearly see it is in front of the curtain by the fact that you can see the left side of the ‘face’. you cannot see the blue object behind the curtain. answer me this, if the ‘face’ is behind the curtain, why is it still possible to see?
      for the numteenth time, who says it was deliberately put there? it may not always be there. you people really need to open the possibilities more and look at every possibility before coming to a conclusion. most of you seem to have tunnel vision; all you’re seeing is what you want to be seeing rather than what you are seeing

  89. Mike Says:

    The (apparent) blue shirt brings to mind a fairly deep question regarding these supposed spiritual, physical manifestations. That being whether what you are seeing is actually physical in any way or entirely spectral.

    Let me explain.

    First of all, if you were seen wearing a blue shirt, it would be because of the light frequency reflecting from it. Lacking a source of light (sun, lamps, flashlight, etc.), no one would see you or your pretty blue top.

    Follow?

    In the case of visual manifestations, are we seeing light reflecting from a physical or perhaps, gaseous formation or contrarily, does the spirit emit its own light source… as in from ‘the other side’?

    Keet, for all the lack of tact, does make a good case for thinking outside the box regarding the image in the window. So, while I may (and do) disagree with his/her observations, I am moved to perhaps reconsider exactly what it may be that is providing that blue channel lighting.

    • keet Says:

      if theres no light you cannot see anything as you say however there is an electric candle light by the window, that is where the diffused light source is coming from leaving that mark/smudge on the window visible, and lighting that blue object. you can even see a little reflection of the light on the window.

      • Clare Says:

        keet, the lady stated that there was nothing the color blue in that window… I can also see a collar. How is this possible?

      • keet Says:

        ever put something somewhere and forgot where it was? ever found something that you dint think was there? precisely, you sometimes forget something is or was there, and believe so much that there was nothing there at the time.

  90. Clare Says:

    keet, I have looked at every possibility. It looks to be a lace curtain. What do you mean~ it may not always be there?

    • keet Says:

      if its a laced curtain then surely you should be able to see the rest of this ‘shirt’, which you cant so that’s proved that possibility out. if you could see this ‘face’ through the curtain, then you should see a brighter coloured object even clearer.
      by saying it may not always be there, i mean it could be something that gets moved. you don’t keep everything in the same place all the time do you?

      • Clare Says:

        the curtains are pulled back, so that changes your theory..

      • keet Says:

        what? that makes no sense at all. how does it change my theory? we were saying about this crap that you came up with saying the lace curtain was see through. i just said why can’t you see the rest of this so called ‘shirt’ as too which you never answered. states my point about you people seeing what you want to see.

  91. Clare Says:

    I just mean that, if you pull back a lace curtain,as in the photo, some of the curtain will be “bunched up” and therefore harder to see through. I think that near the face, the curtain wasn’t bunched together, so part of the face can be seen. Do you see what I’m saying? You sound angry. I’m just trying to figure this out.

    • keet Says:

      it’s less bunched up at the bottom then the top so how’s that possible to see this ‘face’ and not the ‘shirt’?

  92. Clare Says:

    what if it’s more bunched up towards the bottom? I guess we will have to go to the house and take a look. keet, i feel this is the image of a ghost child. I believe in ghosts and an afterlife. I don’t believe that every “ghost photo” i see is real. This one is so strange. Don’t you agree it is rather strange? I really don’t think i could live in that house.

    • keet Says:

      it doesn’t look like it’s more bunched at the bottom because you can see more of the curtain there.
      i too believe in ghosts and believe that i have seen one before, however i also understand what can happen with light when taking a photograph. people that have never seen a ghost in real life believe what they see on TV. many dont think it could be anything else, and others that actually took the photo then come up with some stupid story to con people into believing them even more.
      the way in which the mark appears to be similar to a face is quite strange, like when you see some object from a distance you believe is something else until you get closer to it.

      • Clare Says:

        keet, you said” like when you see some object from a distance you believe is something else until you get closer to it.” In this case, the closer you get to the image, the MORE it looks like a human face! Just look at the cropped photo. My brother can’t even look at this photo.

      • keet Says:

        i disagree, the closer cropped image is the one that explained what was really happening in the photograph

  93. Janice Says:

    “Matrixing”, “reflection”, “imagination” are the catchall words used by people who don’t believe in ghosts because they don’t want to believe in ghosts, and they hope if they repeat them enough they’ll appear so smart that they can convince the rest of us that we’re not seeing what we clearly are seeing.

    That is a human face. It’s not reflection, it’s not matrixing, it’s not my or your or anybody else’s imagination. Great, chilling, ghost picture.

    • keet Says:

      i believe in ghost, and i also believe this photo is just a trick of lighting. it is not reflecting, matrixing or imagination it is simply light rays refracting and diffusing light. it’s just another photo that has a normal explaination but was not faked

      • Ronald Says:

        that photo is “simply light rays refracting and diffusing ligh?”…there is no way. Just look at that photo!

      • keet Says:

        i did look at the photo that’s how i came to the conclusion. read the past numbteen comments i’ve left to explain whats happening in this photo, such as the candle light reflecting at the same point as this ‘face’, and the face being infront of the curtain with the ‘clothes’ being behind it, etc, etc…

  94. Lilly Says:

    The camera doesn’t lie… it’s a ghost.

    • keet Says:

      the camera doesn’t lie… but lighting does. with the correct lighting you can make anything happen in a photograph

      • Lilly Says:

        oh keet, come on, you know your not 100% sure its lighting…does maybe a small part of you think its paranormal? You said that you believe in ghosts, that you even saw one… that’s amazing! Do you think its impossible to capture a ghost on film? Have you ever seen a ghost photo that you thought was the real thing?

      • keet Says:

        im 99.9% sure its lighting because there’s always another possibility to everything. i’ve seen things like this happen before. it is clear that because people see something they are not sure of, they say straight away that it has to be a ghost. why? then, once their mind is made, they cannot look at it from other angles. i’ve not seen any ghost photos on here that i believe are genuine. the only one close to it was the one that came first in the competition, however i was still in two minds about it. it was more convincing, however there were other possibilities. they later went on to try and research it and it ended up being a normal explanation but not faked. i think it is possible for people to be convinced so easily now because they would rather have something to believe rather than not knowing what it is.

  95. Mike Says:

    Janice,

    We all apply words to describe things around us. If ghosts do exist, there is nothing supernatural about them. In fact, if they exist (and I think they do), they are entirely natural. So is everything that really exists. Nothing unnatural can exist, just like nothing unreal can exist. It’s finally just a matter of knowledge/science and understanding.

    What we see with our eyes is the result of light exiting any scene or object. Without it, there would be nothing for anyone to see. Where it is coming from is what is being debated.

    What we conceive is the result of thought, and upon exiting the human mind, becomes idea and opinion. Without it, there would be no acceptance or denial for anyone. This is truth and above and beyond debate.

    Life is wonderful, no?
    :)

  96. Anonymous Says:

    ~ “when you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however imbrobable, must be the truth.”~ Sherlock Holmes

  97. Tessa Says:

    Could this be something more ominous? Has the house been blessed? I would call a priest.

  98. John Says:

    this is not pareidolia….this photo is so scary.

  99. June Says:

    I notice the pocket protector is on the right side. Most are on the left. Also you were in the house at thje time and could have been doing something near the window. Did your son rush straight in and print it out? Most people wouldn’t bother. So lots of things could have happened. Also there is no date on the photo, and I wouldn’t be able to remember what happened on a particular day, or where I put objects at certain times.

  100. Lu Ann Says:

    Hi June, I’m not sure that is a pocket protector at all. I was in the house at the time the photo was taken. I was looking through the ivy wreath on the front door, watching my son take the picture. He immediately uploaded the photo onto the computer. When you unexpectedly see such a disturbing image in a photo, you do remember exactly what happened on that particular day. There were no objects in the window. Thank you.

    • keet Says:

      you think you remember however, have you ever put something someone then forgot where that was? have you ever found something and thought, ‘i dont remember putting that there’?

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hello Keet, Of course I have done that, everyone has from time to time. I really don’t know how to explain the image in the window. All I can say is that the “blue shirt” is part of the ghost.

      • keet Says:

        thats if it is a ghost…

    • Peter Says:

      The picture being uploaded immediately is not the same thing as stating that the ‘ghost’ was noticed immediately.

      You do not make it clear if your ‘ unexpected seeing a disturbing image’ was the same day or some later day.

  101. Lu Ann Says:

    I believe this image is the spirit of a child. That is just my opinion. I respect the opinion of every person who makes a comment on this photo.

  102. Gabby Says:

    Who the heck is that?

  103. mileschodeish Says:

    this really freaks me out.

  104. Tom Jason Mandrake Says:

    well… this is the most disturbing photo of all posted i would say… i must admit i heard may heartbeats when i first saw it. who knows how it was to people who live in that house.
    personnaly, i don’t believe in ghosts. people, god and ghosts and things like that don’t exist! u must be stupid to even try to belive in such crap.
    this is a play by shadow, light of a candle, a cat that was running by the window, something that was on the window and replaced later when the photo wasnt even developed yet or something like that.

    nice pictures.

  105. Phil Says:

    What on earth do you mean by a cat running by the window? where do you see a cat? What do you mean by something was on the window and replaced later? I think this photo scares alot of people because they really can’t explain it. This is damn scary.

    • keet Says:

      thats the problem, they cant explain it; however if you give them a perfectly plausible explanation they wont believe you.

  106. Anne Says:

    Has anyone noticed what seems to be a big eye on the same window of the supposed ghost, where there’s a white blur? On the second quadrant up to the left when looking at the image. Looks like one picture on top of another. Strange. Might be nothing, though…

    • Lilly Says:

      Anne, what do you mean by “looks like one picture on top of another?”

      • keet Says:

        like taking 2 shots on the same negative and you see both images over one another. i see what you mean, however i dont think it is.

  107. Mike Says:

    I have looked at this image now for weeks… and from a hundred different ways… (thank you Lu Ann for the originals)’

    In my opinion… as an amateur photographer and web graphics hobbiest, I can find no fault with the image itself. What you see is what you get. I do not feel it has been tampered with.

    I do have a lot of questions that don’t offer easy answers. The main one is in the color channel arena.

    Let me explain.

    Every color picture carries a full spectrum report that can be examined. Call it image forensics, if you will. In this picture, there is a very narrow blue channel that looks self illuminated. In other words, it does not look like it is reflected light but rather, self-generating… which is otherwise impossible.

    To repeat our process, you will need to take the image to a good graphics program, reduce the broad spectrum lighting to something under 70% and then, re-light the image like an x-ray; from behind, but NOT in the negative.

    From there, you will see (clearly) that the blue channel lighting (shirt) reflecting from other proximate surfaces features in the picture… which would not be possible if it had been overlaid or inserted post-exposure.

    I have shared my results with both the owner of the picture and this website’s host.

    I won’t pretend to know what it is we are seeing but… I am personally satisfied that it was something there at the time of the exposure and not added later.

    Mike
    mfrankln@gmail.com

    • keet Says:

      i have said that there has been no tampering with the image along however i have also given a plausible explanation for the ‘face’. diffused light from the lamp behind the window highlighting the marks. you can tell because there’s a slight reflection of the light in the window on the same pane of glass that the mark is on.

  108. Lilly Says:

    I felt from the very beginning that this photo was very strange and so scary. I think you are looking at a ghost of a child that haunts that house.

  109. Fantafob Says:

    Very good photo. There appears to be several images in the main window, and the top right window seems to show something. But if the windows are well cleaned with polish and its a clear day and dark inside, you may see those type of images. You have to wonder why he is wearing a factory overal. Also the candle flame is reflecting off his neck.

    • keet Says:

      how can it reflect from ‘his neck’ that isn’t even there? light only reflects like that on glass and glossy metal and plastic.

  110. BassMan Says:

    The ghost child would be wearing the attire for a child in the 1930’s. Isn’t that when the house was built? I don’t think that’s a pocket protector. Maybe it’s some sort of badge or pin. Very creepy.

  111. Sadie Says:

    There is an eeriness about this photo…it could be a boy or a girl.

  112. kitti Says:

    seeing a child ghost is not something some would want to see, so as we go through possibilities of it being a spirit or not, some tend to think of it as not just so it’s easier to look at, so it’s easier to sleep at night, just so we don’t have to fathom it being a ghost. i do believe it’s real. however, the other figures in the windows look like siding on a nearby house, not other ghosts. it is very disturbing to see a child ghost especially in ur home.

  113. Lu Ann Says:

    Hello, if you would like an update on this photo, please got to Mr. Danelek’s Website here:

  114. ruthie Says:

    Bass- Could be a name tag if he was a patient of the doctor.

    • BassMan Says:

      Ruthie, I was thinking the same thing. This child seems very sad about something. I wonder if he/she needs help.

  115. Penny Says:

    I think this child needs help crossing over. Very didturbing photo.

  116. Anonymous Says:

    LOOKS REAL TO ME!!!!

  117. Anonymous Says:

    THE GHOST LOOKS REAL TO ME!!!!

  118. Thomas Says:

    The ghost lookes real to me!!!

  119. keet Says:

    the report could not explain the factual believes that i stated, just said that ‘the explanations to be either particularly compelling nor scientifically sustainable’. that is not proving them wrong just simply saying, ‘oh well i dont think that thats the case so i’ll just say they’re wrong’.
    the right height for a child? ‘the right height for a child to press their face against the window then?
    no neck there? explanation ‘shadows lost in the detail’. thats not possible, due to the second photo taken that proves it. you can slightly see the mans neck, however it is brighter that day, (you can tell by the sunlight shining on the bush and more reflections on the window), therefore it would be harder to see inside a darker room, especially through glass. also the candle light is closer to the subject and brighter in the original photo suppling more light to light up the neck. that therefore proves his statement false.
    the candle light inside is also taller and brighter in the original photo, providing more light rays to diffuse across the glass and highlight the smudge/mark on the glass.

  120. Victoria Says:

    All I can say about this photo (whether it be real or fake) is that it scares the living daylights out of me! I honestly can’t look at ‘the little boy’ for too long because the image makes my spine tingle.

    So if it is fake, well done.
    If it’s genuine then you’re a brave lady for living there.

  121. Aaron Says:

    Hey All
    My wife knows the woman who’s son took this picture. She informed me about how it is posted on ourcuriousworld.com and I decided to find the house. It is only about 4 minutes away from where I live. The house was built in the 1930’s and sits on a side street about 1/2 block from a state route here in Ravenna. The whole town of ravenna has big trees along the street so, yes as many of you have observed there are trees reflecting. The house is only about 15 feet from the road, so the pic was either taken from the sidewalk or possibly the street. I did take several photos of the house with no results. it is a creepy photo, and knowing the family I will tell you this is no hoax…..

  122. Peter Says:

    I’m more puzzled why everyone says it is a ‘child’, when the ‘face’ is actually far more that of a balding middle aged or elderly man.

    A closer inspection reveals a curious sort of ‘double exposure’ of the ‘face’, with the right side of the face all appearing to be oddly higher up than the left side. Hmm.

  123. Mike Says:

    This photo has really inspired a lot of comments and thought.

    Just curious, though… I wonder if it is basic, human curiosity or a special attraction to the unknown that inspires it all.

    Or maybe both?

  124. Peter Says:

    I decided to seperate the ‘shirt’ and the face completely and assume there is an accidental allignment. And that’s when it dawned on me what one is actually seeing here. It becomes very obvious indeed once one’s brain snaps into the right perception mode :-

    I would think it highly likely that there are windows on the other side of the house. You are actually seeing THROUGH the house to a room next door..and it takes only a slight change of perception to see that the bright line at the ‘chin’ of the face is actually the reflection off the top of a table ! ( you can even see the legs of the table ) The minute you perceive that…the ‘face’ just disappears. Look at that face again…..it is very clearly stuff in a room next door. The ‘nose’ is likely a lamp shade…and the ‘eyes’ are pictures on the wall.

    ( Notice that a door frame visible in the other window has an arch similar in size and shape to the brow of the ‘face’ )

    As for the ‘shirt’….once again the correct perception mode resolves it. It is a sticker on the outside of the window that is peeling off ! The ‘pocket’ in the alleged shirt is a label on the sticker. You can clearly see it is peeling off both at the top and at the right side.

    • Peter Says:

      Actually, on even closer inspection, the object in the room next door looks to me to be a piano…with the top up. Can clearly see the white of the keys. And of course….it’s now obvious why the ‘eyes’ appear so square. They are ! They are pictures on the wall.

      I’d be willing to bet there’s an arched door right at that location in the house. Am I correct ?

    • Lilly Says:

      peter, are you serious? The nose is a lamp shade, and the eyes are pictures? A sticker is the shirt? How do you know how the house is furnished? I laughed out loud when I read your comment! This is clearly not a double exposure….a balding old man? Does this photo scare you , peter?

      • keet Says:

        he never said anything about double exposure lilly!

      • Peter Says:

        ” How do you know how the house is furnished? I laughed out loud when I read your comment! ”

        Lol…..you might not laugh so loud if it’s confirned that there is actually a door at that exact spot. At least I put my money on a testable hypothesis.

  125. Peter Says:

    Of course I am serious. Er….how many ‘children’ have you come across with patently SQUARE eyes ??

    You need to download the pic and zoom in on it. It is blatantly OBVIOUS that the ‘chin’ of this apparition is actually the reflection off a surface top in a room next door. It is patently OBVIOUS that the ‘nose’ is actually some object like a lamp shade in a room next door. It is patently OBVIOUS that the SQUARE eyes are objects like pictures or windows in a room next door.

    It could not be more obvious that the ‘face’ is simply an optical illusion generated by objects in a room through which you are simply peeking through the door.

    I would gladly bet there is a door in that exact location.

    • Peter Says:

      The more I look at that ‘face’, the less ‘human’ it becomes. Square eyes….and not a result of pixelation as the pixels are much smaller. What one is seeing is….er….genuinely square ! And what’s with this ‘kid’ having Santa Claus’s eyebrows ? And dead straight too. Hmm….and right above the square aperture…..like…er….the top part of curtains to..er SQUARE windows.

      And the crooked mouth. Oh..the poor kid ! And you’d think, hey, if that white line is teeth they’d sort of be IN the mouth and not several inches below it.

      And isn’t it strange how the overall shape and size of the face is identical to that of the arched window you can see in a door that is visible in the other window.

      Hmm..big clue there !

  126. Lilly Says:

    peter, what are you talking about? I see nothing you are seeing. You do not make any sense at all. Square eyes? I see very distinct eyes.I can see what looks like the pupil in one eye. You can clearly see the eyebrow bone. It looks as if the child is looking right at you!! This photo is very disturbing. It is not several things pieced together to make this one image. You are saying that you see legs from a table, lamp shade nose, a peeling sticker, square pictures for the eyes, a piano and keys, etc… this photo is bone chilling.

    • Peter Says:

      You clearly have not looked at the photo close up. At about the level where the pane of glass stretches from top to bottom of screen..the so-called ‘face’ is very clearly seen as the illusion it is. The illusion disappears….and it becomes patently obvious that what one is REALLY seeing is furniture and stuff in a room beyond.

      Of course you can’t seen that…as you WANT to believe in ghosts !

      Yes, the ‘eyes’ ARE square. Very clearly so. The right eye is an almost exact square 9 by 9 block of pixels and does not look even remotely like a human eye. As for the ‘eyebrow bone’…huh ?…..isn’t that where eyebrows normally go ? Why does this ‘kid’ have almost pure white eyebrows ??

      The only thing ‘disturbing’ about the photo is the willingness of people to be disturbed by it.

  127. Lilly Says:

    Peter, you originally said it looked more like a man than a child. Go with your FIRST instinct, which is a ghost!

    • keet Says:

      are you saying that people cant change their minds? thats not very fare now, im sure you’ve thought of something then changed your mind.

    • Peter Says:

      The key phrase was ‘looked like’……in much the same sense that a smudge of Marmite on toast might look like Jesus.

      My observation was more that people see just exactly what they want to see. As an ILLUSION it looks nothing like a ‘child’….more like middle aged man. It’s fascinating watching the first person describe it as a child and then prime others to see it that way !

      Such illusions are extremely maleable in that way.

      • Peter Says:

        Actually there is one very clear scientific observation that all but proves it is not a human face.

        If that is a face, then it is tilted to one side..at a slight angle and not horizontal. HOWEVER…..almost every single component of that face is composed of structures that are clearly seen on closeup to be perfectly horizontal.

        The ‘eyebrow bone’ on the right, for example….is an exact horizontal line of 12 pixels. It is NOT tilted at the same angle as the face. The shadows under the eyes are again exactly horizontal. Same with the shadow under the ‘nose’.

        How can the face be tilted……yet the features of the face remain horiontal ???? Y

        The most obvious reason for the parts of the face each being horizontal is that each part IS horizontal…..and is a seperate object in another room.

  128. Lilly Says:

    Peter, well, people are saying it is a child becuz of the height.The face looks like a childs face. Are you saying it could be a midget man? Well, maybe it could be, but it is definitely NOT several pieces of furniture put together to make this image. Do you know how silly that sounds?You don’t believe in ghosts, do you? You are comparing this photo to seeing Jesus on toast? What about the blue shirt? Why would the lady have a “peeling” sticker” on the window? That’s even more ridiculous!

    • Peter Says:

      Lilly. I’ve spent long hours arguing on numerous sites with the ‘do you know how silly that sounds ‘ type. It’s a typical reaction from those with a vested interest in not fully investigating a phenomenon…….those who want to stop the ‘science’ before it exposes their pet theory and undermines their core beliefs.

      What I have suggested is not even remotely ‘silly’…it is a perfectly PLAUSIBLE explanation….made all the more so by the fact that I and others here have pointed out numerous inconsistencies in the image.

      In science one investigates ALL possibilities. To be honest….the theory ( and that is what it is ) that this is a ‘ghost’ is a lot MORE ‘silly’ as it requires the phenomenon to be explained by invoking something for which there is absolutely no ‘a priori’ scientific evidence whatever !! You are getting the scienfific cart before the horse….as it is down to YOU to prove that ghosts even exist BEFORE you can state ‘this is a ghost’.

      To me, science consists of looking for the most plausible explanation. It means you start taking a phenomenon apart and QUESTION every little detail…..and don’t immediately jump at ‘this is a disembodied spirit’ or ‘this is a space craft from Beta Reticuli’.

      I have suggested a very plausible explanation for the ‘face’, that it is actually an illusion generated by furniture in another room seen through a doorway. FAR from being ‘silly’ it makes perfect sense………..and does not require the entire known laws of physics to be violated or the introduction of phenomenon for which not one scrap of scientific evidence exists.

  129. Lilly Says:

    Peter, I agree, investigate all possibilities. But everyone seems to have several different possibilities, and no one can agree on one. When all is said and done, it all comes down to what you want to believe, becuz frankly, nobody seems to know what this image is. This could be a genuine capture of a ghost, but if you don’t believe in such things, you will reduce it to a piece of furniture, or a sticker. It is what it is.I believe it is an image of a small child. Also, the house is said to have paranormal activity. Did you see the disappearing head illusion? Is that where you got the disappearing ghost head theory?

    • keet Says:

      my flat has paranormal activity as well; a lot of strange things have been happening.

      • Lilly Says:

        Keet, I would start snapping pictures….

      • keet Says:

        im sorry but it doesn’t really. this was just proof that shouldn’t believe everything people tell you, especially on line.

    • Peter Says:

      No…what I personally happen to ‘believe’ has nothing to do with it whatever. The fact that you associate people’s responses to the picture as reflecting their ‘beliefs’ ( or lack of ) says more about you than about the picture.

      You agree to investigate all possibilities….yet your attitude is quite clearly one of deriding any explanation that does not fit with ‘ghost’.

      The fact is……it is up to those who ‘believe’ it is a ghost to prove that it is. It is not up to those who ‘don’t believe’ to prove it isn’t. There are any number of possible explanations that don’t require our entire knowledge of science and physics to be turned on it’s head !

      What people ‘believe’ should have nothing to do with it…..as that is a case of merely superimposing one’s own personal preferences. The minute one starts going down the ‘ you don’t BELIVE in xxxxx, do you ?’ road……..one is not talking science but vested interests.

      The scientific approach is to consider all the more plausible explanations FIRST…not last.

    • Peter Says:

      There are two vital questions that both have to be answered in the affirmative before one could even BEGIN to consider any ghost hypothesis :-

      1) Is what is being seen genuinely a person ?

      2) If so….is that person actually dead ?

      We have not even gotten as far as answering the first question affirmatively. I have grave doubts that what is being seen is even ( or ever was ) human in the first place. I would very much like to know if there is a door or even a mirror at the location of the face. That would be my basic starting point. Confirmation of a door or mirror at that point would considerably enhance my theory that what is being seen is either an entrance into another room ( and the furniture in it ) or a reflection of such in a mirror.

      THAT is the scientific approach.

  130. Lilly Says:

    Peter, Albert Einstein said that energy could not be created or destroyed. It can only be changed from one form of energy into another form of energy. That being the case, would explain the possible existence of ghosts. Try telling someone who has seen a ghost, that it was an illusion or their imagination… Science is based on objective thought, and you want physical evidence. Ghosts are not physical,so therefore cannot be proven scientifically.

    • Peter Says:

      No..Albert Einstein did not create the law of conservation of energy. It originates in various papers over 100 years earlier.

      Your argument actually contradicts itself. If you apply the laws of conservation, thermodynamics, etc….then you are arguing using physical laws. You cannot then in the same breath argue that ghosts are not physical yet try to use those physical laws to support their existence !

      • Peter Says:

        Plus I would very much like to know how something ‘not physical’ interacts with physical photons in the environment to create a physical reflection. Either something is not physical…..in which case it should have NO physical interaction with its environment ( hey….isn’t that called not existing ?) or it is physical in which case would it mind popping down to the nearest science lab for a few tests !

  131. Lilly Says:

    o.k. Peter, the image is a lampshade nose, table, piano keys teeth, whatever, all pieced together wearing a peeling sticker blue shirt. you win…

    • Peter Says:

      Actually no….now that I analyse the blue thing….it is quite simple the CARPET in the other room ! The ‘lapel’ is simple some item on that carpet.

      No wonder Lu Ann could not find anything blue near the window. The blue is nowhere near the window ! It is in another room…on the floor !

      Look at the window from just a few feet away and it is VERY OBVIOUS INDEED that what you are actually seeing is not a ‘face’. It stands out quite clearly as a view through a dorway into another room.

      I would quite happily place a bet that there is a door in that location and that it leads to a room with a blue carpet.

      Mystery solved.

  132. Lilly Says:

    What? A carpet in the other room? It went from a sticker to a carpet? Keet has looked at this photo for a long time now, and has come to the conclusion that it is absolutely a smudge on the glass. He also says the blue shirt is some sort of “object.”How can two people have two TOTALLY DIFFERENT opinions?

    • Mike Says:

      “How can two people have two TOTALLY DIFFERENT opinions?”

      Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so too is the interpretation of any given image… or picture.

      Keet (bless him for being so loyal to this thread) sees one thing but I and many others see something else. I do not and will not hold this against him by… and I would never ask him to change his/her mind based solely on my interpretations.

      The beauty (there’s that word again) of the individual is the same as having two (or more) minds to solve a single problem. That’s why I have argued so strongly here, on another thread, for the freedom to express one’s self freely.

      I think the image is genuinely otherworldly… Keet thinks otherwise. Between us (and you), perhaps we will someday find out that we were all wrong or even, that we were all correct.

      Who knows? Enjoy it!

    • Peter Says:

      .”How can two people have two TOTALLY DIFFERENT opinions ”

      lol ! Because unlike you we are not entrenched in the view that is has to be a ghost…..and our minds are therefore OPEN to explore the alternatives !

      DARE to see a doorway instead in that image ( it’s really not that hard )….or would that cause your entire belief system to come crashing down ?

    • keet Says:

      people have totally different opinions because we think for ourselves. we believe in investigating all the possibilities before we believe in something someone else says. you yourself have a totally different opinion from both me and peter.

  133. Lilly Says:

    Oh Gosh, here we go. Me and my big mouth! You misunderstand. I only meant to say is that Keet, bless him, sees something so totally different, than Peter..bless him too. Peter sees furniture, sticker/blue carpet. Keet sees smudge, object. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I to, am looking for answers, but there doesn’t seem to be one we can all agree on. Bless you too, Mike.

    • Peter Says:

      Well of course Keet and myself have different hypotheses. We are ( unlike the die-hard ‘believers’ ) testing alternative explanations….that is what science is all about !

      Nowhere did I disagree with Keet…in fact his idea sounds entirely plausible.

      To my mind, this is ONLY a ghost after one has excluded all other possibilities. I find it somewhat amusing that you consider it ‘laughable’ to conclude it may be merely items in another room..seen through a door……yet, you are quite happy to conclude it is some bizarre unknown phenomenon that defies all known laws of physics.

      That is the mind of the believer at work. Wild speculation that defies physics is OK..while simple down to earth explanations are crazy.

      • Lilly Says:

        Peter, I’m sorry…I wasn’t laughing that hard! It’s just that the “lamp shade” nose struck me as a little funny. sorry…

  134. Mike Says:

    Thanks, Lilly… it was just a little wit. I’ve been on the bottom of this bird cage with Keet already a time or two… in re to this picture.

    I disagree with him but still try to keep it fun :)

    Variety is the spice of life… or afterlife, s it were.

    • Peter Says:

      Mike.

      Actually to me it’s all a little frustrating, as I find myself having to put on my scientific hat and reject this picture as a ghost…….yet in fact as a cold hard sceptic I also happen to think there is a lot of extremely good annecdotal evidence for ‘survival’.

      I would love to see a genuine ghost picture. The trouble is, I do not think there is any way that any one picture could ever be ‘proven’ to be a ghost.

      I’m a little annoyed that we can spend billions on smashing atoms together at ever greater speeds….yet b***** all gets devoted to any proper scientific research of the paranormal.

      • Belinda Says:

        Actually, there is some scientific attempt going on at the moment to prove/disprove the continuation of consciousness after clinical death.
        One of the Dr’s involved in the investigation was on ‘The Big Question’ this morning discussing the oft experienced near death events – where the person clinically dies in a hospital, but seems to recall with remarkable accuracy what is going on around them after they are ‘dead’ (eventually they are obviously brought back to life to discuss the event).

        Personally, having had this very experience I think it is a good first step in examining the possibility of existence after death.

        As to this and all the other photos – I think they stimulate discussion and thought, but in all honesty, no conclusion can really be drawn from them – no matter how scientifically you investigate them (excluding photoshop/fraud obviously).

      • keet Says:

        i read about that as well and think that it was quite interesting. i am open minded about the whole life after death issue and do believe that there may be things such as ghost as i myself believe to have seen one. however there are many faked photos and many simple explanations due to light rays and photons that many people do not understand. i only know about the way light rays and photons work because i have study them at university whilst studying photography.

  135. Mike Says:

    Peter,

    Thanks for the reply.

    I imagine myself smart enough to avoid most… just most, mind you, of the purposeful games people play but at the same time, understanding that I am not nearly so smart to be capable of missing the real thing short of it coming up and smacking me in the face.

    My working theory is that what we think we know is a hundred million times less than what we actually don’t know. From that equation… and balancing on that precarious spot, making any absolute determinations based on that small sum seems entirely silly.

    I have examined that photo several times and I cannot tell you with any degree of absolute certainty that it is either a ghost or not. But I do find it really interesting and the more I dig, the more I find that fascinates me even more.

    In my way of thinking, it is that kind of approach that leads to discovery… or at the very least, more curiosity.
    :)

  136. Lu Ann Says:

    Hello Peter ~ I am the person who sent in this photo.There is a room about 15 feet from that window. It is asmall library.There are no mirrors in that immediate area. Also, the carpet is a light brown color, and there is no piano, but I would love one! Thank you for your interest in this photo, as it is quite unsettling.

  137. Spook Scientist Says:

    Have you noticed that there seems to be a larger person in the background? Wow, this is such a cool picture!

  138. Clare Says:

    I agree with you Spook Scientist, I too see several strange ghost like forms going on. My husband is a “burly” type guy, and he’s so afraid of this photo.

  139. MoonBeam Says:

    What scares me most about this photo are the eyes. Very creepy!

  140. Larry Says:

    I didn’t really believe in ghosts until I saw this picture…now I’m not sure.

  141. Mags Says:

    This “ghost child” looks puzzled or confused…may need help crossing over. Any EVP’s of a child’s voice? This home is a former parsonage? Aren’t some spirits attracted to “holy” places?

  142. tddddmac Says:

    I think it is a real live person in the house. That is a genuine blue shirt with a genuine collar and genuine name tag of some sort.

    • Lotty Says:

      The right shoulder isn’t gone, part of the child is standing behind the curtain. If it’s a reflection, where is it coming from?

      • keet Says:

        if part of this ghost is standing behind the curtain, then why can you see this ‘face’ through it and not the shirt?

  143. tddddmac Says:

    I’m going to be a sissy and change my mind. On closer examination, the right shoulder is completely gone from where it should be, which is to the left of the candle. If it’s a real person then the right shoulder is cut off. I wonder if the “blue shirt” isn’t a part of the candle decorum. And the “face” might really be a reflection or a smudge.

  144. tddddmac Says:

    The more I look at it the more I think the blue shirt is a bag of something, like coffee, with the top crumpled shut sitting inside the window on the ledge. The face looks like two different faces mashed together, like the comedy/tragedy deal. You’re on your own, I’m outta here, that’s the best I can do.

    • Clare Says:

      Er….you just said before that it was a genuine blue shirt, with a genuine collar and a genuine name tag. Now it’s a bag of coffee???

      • keet Says:

        the more tddddmac looked at it the more clearly he saw things therefore changing his theory. are people not allowed to change their minds on here?

      • tddddmac Says:

        Sorry, I was wrong again…
        It’s a Fart Gnome.

  145. Clare Says:

    Sure, he can change his mind! He just went from one extreme to another.

    • keet Says:

      the 2 theories arent extreme; just because they say it isn’t a ghost it doesnt mean theyre extreme.

  146. jellybean Says:

    hi all, this foto is undoubtedly creepy but i think of one person when i look at it… chucky from the childs play films… right down to the blue shirt, all thats missin is the dungarees..lol… however, on a serious note, i dont kno if this is a real ghost or if theres a reasonable explanation as im no photography expert….all i do kno is that if it is proven to be a real ghost, i would leave……immediately….!!!!!

  147. What I see Says:

    Its been messed with adobe when zoomed in back 2002.The main photo was CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 using IJG JPEG v62.So my conclusion is pretty good eye candy.

  148. Anonymous Says:

    wwww

  149. ruthie Says:

    Still think this is the most terrifyingly real photo of a spirit that i have ever seen……… Agree with victorie… can’t look at it too long……. i tried to see the table lampshade pictuers, but couldn’t stand staring at that creepy face that long……… And as i said way early on in this discussion, there are many mor spirits in the same window,,,,,,,, i believe a few others are now mentioning this…… really enjoy this topic of debate……

    • lilly Says:

      ruthie~ I agree, it has a very strange feel about it, and seems to frighten people to the core. I feel sad because i think it may need help. Could a medium look at the photo on this site and comment. that would be interesting.

    • keet Says:

      the reason other people are mentioning about these other so called spirits in the window is only because you said it in the first place. they dont know what they are, (distorted jpeg moire patterns) so they just believe what someone else says, because they dont like it if they dont know what it is.

  150. Jessica Says:

    Well it’s safe to say I shit my pants when I saw this.

  151. Anonymous Says:

    Looks like he is wearing an American Postal Union Shirt?

  152. anonymous Says:

    The Picture is Wrong the reflection of the candle is obscured by the boy in blue so you only see half the reflection in the window yet you can see through the boy to see the curtain photoshop i’m sure!

  153. Anonymous Says:

    Then it is a very bad scanned image if you look at the picture & what i wrote you will understand how i came to that conclusion! P.S Sorry if i Burst your Bubble. Creepy Picture Though!

  154. Anonymous Says:

    keet Says:

    July 12, 2009 at 6:01 pm
    if part of this ghost is standing behind the curtain, then why can you see this ‘face’ through it and not the shirt?

    On reflection you wrote what i wrote!

    • keet Says:

      how does that say it was photoshoped like you said? i gave a much more detailed explanation that people dont want to believe. i dont believe it was photoshopped at all.

  155. Anonymous Says:

    if you look at the reflection of the candle it is perfectly flat (UNDER THE CHIN) almost as if something has been super imposed on top of it look and you will see! DO YOU NOTICE NO LIGHT SOURCE REFLECTED ON THE CHIN YET ONLY SHADOWS!

    As you and everyone here i am fascinated by this stuff i noticed there was someone who used the same name as me Anonamous and caused arguments on other threads thats not me.

    I respect your belief in this stuff but i have seen photos on this site which i cannot understand yet i am allowed my oppinion on this one aren’t I?

  156. keet Says:

    yeah its perfectly flat and theres the candle light reflection which makes it appear to be a mark/smudge on the window pane; not super imposed.

    use another name besides Anonymous, it would only make sense if you dont want to be mixed up with someone else.

  157. Anonymous Says:

    Sorry keet sounds like i have Offended you i see no Smudge i wrote what i saw seems logical.

    i will write no more on this topic.

    Goodbye!

  158. keet Says:

    do you see this ‘face type mark’? that is the smudge.

  159. Mike Says:

    Still winning friends and influencing people, eh keety? What is it today, not a face but a loaf of bread? A toaster oven? (My apologies, it’s been a while since I looked in on this thread.)

    Cheers.

    • keet Says:

      influencing people? what they want to believe is up to them, i just explain reasons for my belief. i am sticking to my conclusion of light rays refracting against marks on the window. when a photo lab say its original, it only means they haven’t been adapted or manipulated, it doesn’t mean that it is actually a ghost.

      • Mike Says:

        keet Says:
        August 21, 2009 at 5:53 pm | Reply

        when a photo lab say its original, it only means they haven’t been adapted or manipulated, it doesn’t mean that it is actually a ghost.

        True enough and I will be the last one to try and convict you over your convictions.

        Healthy thing this dialogue and all, no? I am really surprised how long this thread has been active.

      • keet Says:

        it did go stale for some time but its come back in to play now.

  160. Mike Says:

    What I see Says:
    July 23, 2009 at 2:02 pm | Reply

    Its been messed with adobe when zoomed in back 2002.The main photo was CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 using IJG JPEG v62.So my conclusion is pretty good eye candy.

    ………………………..

    Okay, we’ll see if this site accepts a little basic coding on the comments.

    As for what the above quoted found, he was undoubtedly sampling the images presented here on this page that have, of course, been reduced in size from the original.

    The *CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 using IJG JPEG v62* is a fairly common format used by a number of processing programs like Gimp, Image Forge, etc. It doesn’t mean that that the image was fudged… it just means that someone either cropped or re-sized it using a fairly standard, easy to obtain program. What you read into it after that is entirely up to you.

    For the record, I have seen and have in my possession the original image and have had it analyzed by a friend who has a photo lab at her disposal. She says there is nothing in the image data itself that suggests that it was ‘messed with’.

    Now, since none of you know me (or are likely to improve that status in the foreseeable future), you have no reason to take my word for it but… that’s my story and I am sticking with it.

  161. Anonymous Says:

    you seen original Good enough for me Mike! terrible scanned image on this page did you understand what i was trying to point out with the candle & the chin having the light source missing from the it?

  162. Mike Says:

    # Anonymous Says:
    August 21, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    you seen original Good enough for me Mike! terrible scanned image on this page did you understand what i was trying to point out with the candle & the chin having the light source missing from the it?

    First, there are more than one ‘anonymous’ on this thread so I really can’t be sure what is yours and is not.

    I have a number of filtered versions I ran myself, both of the window figure and the ones in the front door. But I am not at liberty to share them without permission of the owner. Short of that, I can say that the image of what appears to be a human figure, extends beyond the edge of the curtain and is visible with certain filters and applications.

    Now, i could be wrong. There are no absolutes in this field. but
    I have been a graphics hobbyist since 1998, a blogger since 2005 who does his own web graphics, and have never seen anything that matches this one for sheer spookiness. I also understand that not everyone agrees with this view and I do respect their right to that opinion.

    In closing, I think we all owe the owner of this website a ‘thank you’ for allowing us to come here and examine the images and then, talk about them freely.

  163. Mike Says:

    Oh… and as an addendum to my last comment suggesting a ‘thank you’, I think it would benefit everyone to understand exactly ‘who’ our host here is…

    Prof Richard Wiseman is based at the University of Hertfordshire in the UK, and has gained an international reputation for research into quirky areas of psychology, including deception, humour, luck and the paranormal.

    http://www.richardwiseman.com/

    These are all quality traits in someone who is seeking a better understanding of the human condition. For these purposes, it is not entirely out of the range of possibility that we are all just so many lab rats in a haunted maze, to see how we react to certain stimuli.

    But one more time, for as much effort as I have personally put into this single subject, for nothing more than my own satisfaction, I cannot find that telling flaw that would expose him and this site as a part of that maze.

    If we are being played, then we may be sure that behind the microscope, there is the devil of genius.

  164. Unique Says:

    Mike Says:

    August 21, 2009 at 8:39 pm | Reply
    # Anonymous Says:
    August 21, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    you seen original Good enough for me Mike! terrible scanned image on this page did you understand what i was trying to point out with the candle & the chin having the light source missing from the it?

    First, there are more than one ‘anonymous’ on this thread so I really can’t be sure what is yours and is not.

    I have a number of filtered versions I ran myself, both of the window figure and the ones in the front door. But I am not at liberty to share them without permission of the owner. Short of that, I can say that the image of what appears to be a human figure, extends beyond the edge of the curtain and is visible with certain filters and applications.

    Now, i could be wrong. There are no absolutes in this field. but
    I have been a graphics hobbyist since 1998, a blogger since 2005 who does his own web graphics, and have never seen anything that matches this one for sheer spookiness. I also understand that not everyone agrees with this view and I do respect their right to that opinion.

    In closing, I think we all owe the owner of this website a ‘thank you’ for allowing us to come here and examine the images and then, talk about them freely.

    I agree totally about the owner of the site respect goes to him or Her whoever it maybe! Many Thanks Owner! shame richard wiseman never placed the 300 images he was sent by the general public on this blog instead of the 50 he did even if the images had been fakes it would have been good for aspiring ghost hunters to know what to look out for with the fakes i have seen some very interesting photos on this blog i have a mist photo with a face in it but i would dislike the thought of giving it to the owner of the site then he decides not to view it.

    what you have done with the filters for this photo i did for the sitting priest photo there is deffinately someone sat there in the church.
    i am a believer in this subject but i also try to find a logical conclusion to such Anomalies.

    i will not ask for a copy of your photo of the boy in blue thanks for your detailed reply most decent of you. Goodluck with the Paranormal Finding!

  165. lilly Says:

    What does Prof. Wiseman think of this photo?

    • Mike Says:

      Good question.

      Professor Wiseman, would you like to come down here to the swamp and address the issue with your personal views?

  166. Anonymous Says:

    Prof Richard Wiseman is based at the University of Hertfordshire in the UK, and has gained an international reputation for research into quirky areas of psychology, including deception, humour, luck and the paranormal.

    http://www.richardwiseman.com/

    These are all quality traits in someone who is seeking a better understanding of the human condition. For these purposes, it is not entirely out of the range of possibility that we are all just so many lab rats in a haunted maze, to see how we react to certain stimuli.

    But one more time, for as much effort as I have personally put into this single subject, for nothing more than my own satisfaction, I cannot find that telling flaw that would expose him and this site as a part of that maze.

    If we are being played, then we may be sure that behind the microscope, there is the devil of genius.

    So you think we are lab rats in a maze ay mike!
    No disrespect wasn’t that the fella who was on most haunted and when he tried to debunk their findings they ganged up on him he looked like a Sheep among Wolves! Don’t Blame the Bloke the programs crap its for Morons!

  167. Unique Says:

    August 21, 2009 at 10:19 pm | Reply
    Prof Richard Wiseman is based at the University of Hertfordshire in the UK, and has gained an international reputation for research into quirky areas of psychology, including deception, humour, luck and the paranormal.

    http://www.richardwiseman.com/

    These are all quality traits in someone who is seeking a better understanding of the human condition. For these purposes, it is not entirely out of the range of possibility that we are all just so many lab rats in a haunted maze, to see how we react to certain stimuli.

    But one more time, for as much effort as I have personally put into this single subject, for nothing more than my own satisfaction, I cannot find that telling flaw that would expose him and this site as a part of that maze.

    If we are being played, then we may be sure that behind the microscope, there is the devil of genius.

    So you think we are lab rats in a maze ay mike!
    No disrespect wasn’t that the fella who was on most haunted and when he tried to debunk their findings they ganged up on him he looked like a Sheep among Wolves! Don’t Blame the Bloke the programs crap its for Morons!

  168. Mike Says:

    # Anonymous Says:
    August 21, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    So you think we are lab rats in a maze ay mike!
    No disrespect wasn’t that the fella who was on most haunted and when he tried to debunk their findings they ganged up on him he looked like a Sheep among Wolves! Don’t Blame the Bloke the programs crap its for Morons!

    Thanks but, no. I never said that we WERE rats in a maze. Can I assume you can read?

    This is a good example of why this sort of subject never gets a good, honest hearing. There are all these debunker types, dedicated to the disproving of theory that hasn’t even been proven yet. (It does seem a waste of time and breath, considering how short our lives really are.)

    Are you a member of the Flat Earth Society? If so, may I inquire as to where the edge of the world really is? I wouldn’t want to sail off the edge anytime soon.

    • Mike Says:

      Anon… I meant to add a ‘lol’ at the end of that last comment but it wasn’t there in the post. Please don’t be mad.

      I really didn’t even quite get the gist of what you were saying ;)

  169. Anonymous Says:

    Not Angry Mike i should have used paragraphs it does look angry from my point of view as well (Apologies) just quoting this line you wrote (it is not entirely out of the range of possibility that we are all just so many lab rats in a haunted maze.)

    what i mean’t by this below means:

    (No disrespect wasn’t that the fella who was on most haunted and when he tried to debunk their findings they ganged up on him he looked like a Sheep among Wolves! Don’t Blame the Bloke the programs crap its for Morons!)

    i thought the owner of this site had gone on tv show most haunted and as i wrote was just how i saw it knowing me probably wasn’t even him:)

    Wow the Earths Flat i didn’t know that! LOL

    Laters! :)

  170. Mike Says:

    With permission of the owner of the photograph in question, here’s a link to a little more information and a few results from my own examination of it…

    URL: http://www.angryblueskies.com/face_in_the_window.html

    NOTES:
    *As it stands right now, this page will only be available for a brief time.

    *The results support no conclusions but merely offer some more detail. You have to make up your own mind.

    **I would like to the Owner of the picture for allowing me to share this with you.

  171. Unique was Anonymous Says:

    Mike i wish to apologize for the way i wrote the bit about rats unintensional i’m sure. iwould like to Thank the owner for allowing you to show the Picture and also to Thank You for your detailed report on your findings for the Photo.

    i noticed in your detailed pictures of the boy in blue enlarged there seems to be a black rectangle on the boys chin this seems to be what is stopping the candle reflection from being a complete circular reflection that was the bit i could not understand was the reflection of the candle if you look closely it could infact be a black beard instead of a shadow it wouldnt have tendrils see if you know what i mean.

    did you notice on the new picture of the window opposite Pane of the boy in blue bottom left corner there is something which could resemble the Shoulder & torso nearly identicle shape to the boy in blue did you add this as a comparison to the original photo with your art package?

    to the owner of the Photgraph i originally thought it was done by photshop and i have changed my oppinion each and everyone of us who say it is a fake are Disrespecting your integrity the more we do this the less chance we have of anyone coming forward with unexplainable photos no one wants to be called a liar!

    Thank You Again!

  172. Unique Says:

    Credit Where Credit is Due!

    Mike posted this have you seen it?

    http://www.angryblueskies.com/face_in_the_window.html

    i don’t wish to freak you out but i swear did you notice on the new picture of the window opposite Pane of the boy in blue bottom left corner there is something which could resemble the Shoulder & torso if you look carefully you can see a Silhouette which looks like the boy in blue
    now that is trippy!

    And Thanks Lu Ann

  173. dmac Says:

    Here’s another deal. If this is a child wearing a blue shirt, ghost or alive, the neck would be too long. His/her head is way too high from the collar.
    The chin should be just a little above where that yellow flare reflection is.
    I still say that’s an bag of potpourri or something on the seal.

    • Mike Says:

      dmac Says:
      August 25, 2009 at 1:54 am

      If this is a child wearing a blue shirt, ghost or alive, the neck would be too long. His/her head is way too high from the collar.
      The chin should be just a little above where that yellow flare reflection is.

      Perhaps. But if we are indeed dealing with a ‘ghost’, then we must realize that we really don’t have a lot of reference material to the parameters of physical, or optical manifestations. We are in the dark, so to speak, to whatever physical or ethereal laws govern such an appearance. There may well be ‘glitches’ to what we see, especially if the apparition is based solely on some memory of the former physical body. Like in a dream, where things do not obey logic, this may well fall into an area where our physical reality is no longer in complete control.

      In my personal opinion, there are several steps to looking at this kind of phenomenon and coming away with anything worth while.
      The first is a temporary suspension of disbelief. If you go in with a closed mind, you will find the it closed still when making critical judgments.
      The second is that we must assume that what we know is far less than what we don’t know.
      The third is to understand that nothing unreal exists. There is no such thing as the paranormal or supernatural. Everything that truly exists, in whatever form it takes, is entirely natural.

      Those things… like ghosts and such, may well be just a piece of the natural landscape that we have not yet begun to understand. Remember, at one time, the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. At one time, heavier-than-air flight was simply impossible.

      Things change. You are either the hammer or the nail. Don’t be the nail.

  174. Anonymous Says:

    this was found on utube really scary

    turn your monitor up really loud so you distinguish the audible sounds
    from the poltergeist.

  175. dmac Says:

    I don’t appreciate that friggin’ condescending patronizing lecture. I’m 50 years old. Don’t be preaching at me like I just got out of third grade.

  176. Unique Says:

    dmac Says:

    August 26, 2009 at 1:12 am | Reply
    I don’t appreciate that friggin’ condescending patronizing lecture. I’m 50 years old. Don’t be preaching at me like I just got out of third grade.

    Hey Calm down Mate! utube clip was mean’t to be funny!

  177. Mike Says:

    dmac Says:
    August 26, 2009 at 1:12 am

    I don’t appreciate that friggin’ condescending patronizing lecture. I’m 50 years old. Don’t be preaching at me like I just got out of third grade.

    Excuse me, if this is indeed meant for me, I did not mean to seem either condescending or patronizing. If it means anything, I am older than you are. I can identify with your sentiments but again, it was not meant as a slam or an insult.

    I presented my views as honestly and as straight forward as I could.

    I offer you my apology if you felt I was over the top.

    Mike
    mfrankln@gmail.com

  178. Unique Says:

    Hi Mike i thought i anoyed someone else.
    was i right about the silouette of boy in blue in your photograph did you see it quite clear when enlarged did you add that to your photo yourself?

    • Mike Says:

      Unique,

      To be honest, things have been rather hectic here. I haven’t really had time to read all the day’s emails yet. Our youngest is in college and it seems beset by a number of swine flu cases. In short, we have been… otherwise distracted.

      I will have a look-see at what you mention as soon as I can, promise :)

      Mike

    • lilly Says:

      Unique, do you see another boy in blue? That video scared the pants off me! HaHa!!!

  179. Unique Says:

    No Worries Mate! Thanks again for putting ghost images on this page!

  180. Unique Says:

    lilly Says:

    August 26, 2009 at 2:12 am | Reply
    Unique, do you see another boy in blue? That video scared the pants off me! HaHa!!!

    Lilly get serious read what i said and check for yourself its there i tell you
    Honestly

  181. Anonymous Says:

    This Site would be Good if people wouldn’t keep takin the Piss!!

    i’ll scan the damn image how do i place it on this site seems to be a bit of a joke to me!

    And Lilly you got Prblems if your a Woman & you Wear Underpants!! LOL

  182. Lizzie Says:

    IT WAS A GHOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  183. Unique Says:

    Where Where i Missed it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  184. Unique Says:

    Where Where i Missed it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  185. Anonymous Says:

    Where Where i Missed it!!!!!!!!!!

  186. Anonymous Says:

    Mike on reflection to your Photographs uploaded by your self i now question the validity of the original Photograph reason being what i said was in the new photograph!

    (i don’t wish to freak you out but i swear did you notice on the new picture of the window opposite Pane of the boy in blue bottom left corner there is something which could resemble the Shoulder & torso if you look carefully you can see a Silhouette which looks like the boy in blue
    now that is trippy!)

    is Photoshop i know this because of the two grey colours blended into the Curtain deffinately wrong to the rest of the curtain must admit some of the best trickery i ever seen i can do this myself maybe not as good as yourself but you are a graphix artist after all!

    Bravo had me fooled for a short while:)

  187. Mike Says:

    “is Photoshop i know this because of the two grey colours blended into the Curtain deffinately wrong to the rest of the curtain must admit some of the best trickery i ever seen i can do this myself maybe not as good as yourself but you are a graphix artist after all!

    You know, I see this all over the web. Whether it be gost images or that of UFOs or Nessie or Big Foot, people will immediately jump up and start hollering ‘Photoshop!’ or ‘CGI!”. Do they know something that the rest of us don’t? Or are they simply worried that to lend an ounce of possibility means the chance of someday being proven wrong?

    I have been hobbying in web graphics since ’97 and yes, I could probably cook up a pretty dandy fake… if that was what I wanted to do. But the real fun is in digging into all those images and videos and soundtracks that already exist. If I am satisfactorily convinced that there is a chance of authenticity, I have no real issue saying that it ‘could’ be real because I am not nearly smart enough to say for sure one way or the other. Beyond that… where’s the sense of mystery and discovery if I dismiss everything that cross my monitor screen?

    Oh yes, there are some fakes that are so obvious… but certainly, not all and not the majority.

    …………………………………
    OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER: This comment is not meant to be mistaken as preaching. It is merely one person’s attempt, my own, to share some thoughts in hopes of stimulating a few more in some other heads, yours.
    …………………………………

  188. Anonymous Says:

    you telling me you don’t know what i’m talking about?

    My advice to you is check your own photo again might be important!

    Amazing Website you created Mike wish i could do a site like that!

    am i allowed to edit your picture 1 pain of glass only then upload it to photo bucket then copy url to this page so you can view what i saw?

    photo copyrighted better ask owner forgot about that.

  189. Unique Says:

    Mike Says:

    August 27, 2009 at 11:57 pm | Reply
    “is Photoshop i know this because of the two grey colours blended into the Curtain deffinately wrong to the rest of the curtain must admit some of the best trickery i ever seen i can do this myself maybe not as good as yourself but you are a graphix artist after all!

    You know, I see this all over the web. Whether it be gost images or that of UFOs or Nessie or Big Foot, people will immediately jump up and start hollering ‘Photoshop!’ or ‘CGI!”. Do they know something that the rest of us don’t? Or are they simply worried that to lend an ounce of possibility means the chance of someday being proven wrong?

    I have been hobbying in web graphics since ‘97 and yes, I could probably cook up a pretty dandy fake… if that was what I wanted to do. But the real fun is in digging into all those images and videos and soundtracks that already exist. If I am satisfactorily convinced that there is a chance of authenticity, I have no real issue saying that it ‘could’ be real because I am not nearly smart enough to say for sure one way or the other. Beyond that… where’s the sense of mystery and discovery if I dismiss everything that cross my monitor screen?

    Oh yes, there are some fakes that are so obvious… but certainly, not all and not the majority.

    …………………………………
    OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER: This comment is not meant to be mistaken as preaching. It is merely one person’s attempt, my own, to share some thoughts in hopes of stimulating a few more in some other heads, yours.
    …………………………………

    Oh and bytheway i have the Greatest Repect and Admiration for people like yourself who have such dedication for the search to answers for the Paranormal (we are like minded more than you realize Comments mean Nothing Thoughts behind the Comments are Important!) Check other things i wrote on other Pictures then you’ll realize i ain’t no Debunker!

    “Ghost on the path”

    Unique Says:

    August 25, 2009 at 3:08 pm | Reply
    Stop using the word Fake People its disrespectful granted not all photos are ghosts so try using the words Real or Unreal doesn’t question the Sendees Photos in such a Negative Manner!

    Honest People send these Pictures in for our oppinions without these pictures being sent in this blog would not exist Think about it!

    this Picture is strange because the Photo is in focus with the Cars and Vans but the Ghost image is out of focus would expect this anomally if the character was running or sprinting but the feet & legs resemble someone walking Fascinating Picture!

    “The face”

    Unique Says:

    August 25, 2009 at 3:34 pm | Reply
    I like this Picture i have one simular to this one i smoke but not at the time i took the photograph it was cold could be anomally from breath but i don’t think so!

    Photos like this are very hard to create with any artpackage even photoshop these photos are amazing Anomalies in respect that they just appear to happen did anyone notice the the lone Orb in the Background?

    if something dosn’t seem right it ain’t you have to percieve it as your mind allows you to!

    A Rare Anomally!

    “Ghost behind the wall”

    Anonymous Says:

    August 20, 2009 at 11:47 am | Reply
    Optics the eyes see what they want to see thats why some can see the head & some can’t! the Head is actually quite strange because if you notice the Brickwork to the house in line with the nose has a shadow under it i would expect to see a continuation of that shadow through the actual face but it is not there very strange indeed!

    “Investigation into world famous Castle ghost”

    Anonymous Says:

    August 19, 2009 at 9:46 pm | Reply
    Very interesting recreation of the Photograph but as Ghost Hunters i would have thought you would have a before and after Picture of the Window with a with & without the Ghost!
    That way the light source mentioned may be seen and to see how it effects the rest of the window

    Grid Reference for Ghost hunters head 6×6

    Grid Reference for Ghost head 4×4

    Interesting!

    See not just a Debunker!!!!!!!!

    • Mike Says:

      Actually, I was not at all suggesting you (or anyone) were a debunker. The ‘Obligatory Disclaimer’ was actually a sort of tongue in cheek way of saying not to jump my monkey because I wasn’t trying to make anyone mad or preach or… call anyone a debunker.

      Anyway… as for one of those threads you pointed back to, I got into something of a minor altercation defending our right to use the word ‘fake’… even as much as I dislike its application on these subjects.

      I think I had better just try to single paragraphs and less depth. It’s safer that way ;)

      (NOTE: I did the winky-smiley… which means it was meant humorously).

  190. Unique Says:

    Apologies if it seems i write angry its not intensional i’m not a literary man and forget to add smilies!

    Mike you write how you want to!

    Anyway… as for one of those threads you pointed back to, I got into something of a minor altercation defending our right to use the word ‘fake’… even as much as I dislike its application on these subjects.

    Oops didn’t know that!

    Richard Wiseman is a lucky man to have someone so dedicated to this Site as you are Keep up the Good Work answer about editing your Photograph would be handy ;)

  191. Anonymous Says:

    No wonder you didn’t answer me its already on your website but the problem is the image exists on the outer frame of the window and you should know that isn’t possible the frames don’t seem to be P.V.C Windows and there not White frames? rough picture you got there but still shows you what i’m writing about one last point before i make your head blow up with anger left side of frame has reflection no reflection on bottom part of frame rethink this if i was you! ;)

    • Mike Says:

      but the problem is the image exists on the outer frame of the window and you should know that isn’t possible the frames don’t seem to be P.V.C Windows and there not White frames? rough picture you got there but still shows you what i’m writing about one last point before i make your head blow up with anger left side of frame has reflection no reflection on bottom part of frame rethink this if i was you!

      Are you talking about the far, lower right area in the second/later picture? The one that is located near the bottom of this page?

      http://www.angryblueskies.com/windowghost/house.html

  192. Unique Says:

    just started to understand this was written for me!

    (Not to say it is impossible, though it may well be. But between a mirage and a ghost, your odds are equally as desperate and just as fleeting as the phenomenon you’re chasing.)

    A Thanyou would have been enough for Spotting it!

    to much to as for!

  193. Anonymous Says:

    Mike Says:

    August 28, 2009 at 2:05 am | Reply
    but the problem is the image exists on the outer frame of the window and you should know that isn’t possible the frames don’t seem to be P.V.C Windows and there not White frames? rough picture you got there but still shows you what i’m writing about one last point before i make your head blow up with anger left side of frame has reflection no reflection on bottom part of frame rethink this if i was you!

    Are you talking about the far, lower right area in the second/later picture? The one that is located near the bottom of this page?

    http://www.angryblueskies.com/windowghost/house.html

    Yes the reflection of whoever it is would have to be outside their arm continues on the frame but how can it not be you if you took the photograph and why isn’t the person in shot of the camera range?

    • Mike Says:

      The outer, single panel insulation/storm window frame extends to cover this area. The reflection is on the outer glass and it does cover the area of the inner sash.

      I don’t have any place to upload a copy of the whole area so I can’t detail it any better than that. The window has the inner sash with the small window panes and then, a one-sheet glass plate that is in a narrow frame on the outside that fits into the window case.

  194. Anonymous Says:

    Ok your the paranormal expert not me i can’t see what your trying to say (it does cover the area of the inner sash.) i cannot see how this is possible as the frame does not seem to be transparent but as i said your the expert not i (you know your onions). i will waste no more time looking at that second picture to me that is more of an enigma than the boy in blue!

    P.S Will take a look at the Photo of the front door. ;)

  195. Anonymous Says:

    Lu Ann Says:

    April 18, 2009 at 2:17 am | Reply
    I am the person who sent the Ghost in the house photo. The candles are electric and there was nothing blue in the window. If you have a specific question about the photo, you may contact Jeff Danelek at ourcuriousworld.com.

    To Lu Ann

    I Wish to Thankyou for allowing me to view your Ghost Photos i found another Boy in Blue 2 i do not understand copyright so i hope i havn’t made a Mistake by doing this but i created a url to show you.

    I apologise in advance if i have done something wrong.

    [IMG]http://i29.tinypic.com/s5wzeg.jpg[/IMG]

    i believe there was no way of even trying to explain my findings after the Fiasco with the person in your Window.

    wish i knew how to put pictures up on this site!

    Hope it works!

    Thanks Again & Goodbye!

  196. Unique Says:

    Anonymous Says:

    August 28, 2009 at 2:43 pm | Reply
    Lu Ann Says:

    April 18, 2009 at 2:17 am | Reply
    I am the person who sent the Ghost in the house photo. The candles are electric and there was nothing blue in the window. If you have a specific question about the photo, you may contact Jeff Danelek at ourcuriousworld.com.

    To Lu Ann

    I Wish to Thankyou for allowing me to view your Ghost Photos i found another Boy in Blue 2 i do not understand copyright so i hope i havn’t made a Mistake by doing this but i created a url to show you.

    I apologise in advance if i have done something wrong.

    i believe there was no way of even trying to explain my findings after the Fiasco with the person in your Window.

    wish i knew how to put pictures up on this site!

    Hope it works!

    Thanks Again & Goodbye!

  197. Lu Ann Says:

    Unique~ Yes, I do see that. Thank you!

  198. Unique Says:

    My Pleasure Hope it helps!

  199. MANDY Says:

    tHIS PHOTO IS AMAZING. IT IS THE SCARIEST IMAGE i HAVE EVER SEEN!

  200. Dr. Egon Spengler Says:

    I thought at first the “face” image had line patterns the same as the curtains.

    But on closer inspection there are other areas on the window with horizontal lines of condensation , this is the only part of the window with the candle which is why diffused light is illuminating the condensation PATTERNS from inside and causing this illusion!

    • sasha Says:

      If that’s the case, wouldn’t the image show up again in the second photo? It is not condensation. Where did the blue shirt come from? Condensation???

  201. bruce Says:

    scary pic…who is that?

  202. Spook Scientist Says:

    Is that a second ghost I see?

    • Honey Says:

      I remember this house but for the life of me cannot think of where in Ravenna it is, anyways I thought I saw her too it looks like a mom standing and holding something like a tray in the middle of the same window

  203. Lulu Says:

    Has anyone asked the obvious question: why was her son taking a random photo of the front of the house?

    I always think a “random” photo-op behind a ghost story is a red flag.

    • Mike Says:

      It’s just an opinion but… I kind of think that fortune favors the random event.

      Some people will spend tons of money buying lottery tickets and never win a dime while the person who buys a single ticket for the only time in their lives will win a jackpot.

      The same goes for this kind of thing. You can go out looking for some paranormal event and find nothing while… a happenstance photo turns up a curiosity.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Lulu~ When my son bought his iPOD touch, he took a picture of the front of the house to set as an e-mail contact for his iPOD’s e-mail.

  204. Omega1664 Says:

    I don’t mean to be mean but… come on Ruthie !!! At least 4 apparitions?? What have you been smoking! And then to say that because it was a parsonage that they loved the preacher!?!? Oh okay, wait… I see The Queen Mum, Little Lord Fauntlerroy, Tom Mixx and some half crazed axe murderer chasing the little ones about. Seriously, I suppose you’re psychic too?Hmm?

  205. Omega1664 Says:

    Okay, I’m sorry Ruthie. Just had a bad day is all. No hard feelings?

  206. Lalala Says:

    This is too creepy. I’m starting to think that maybe it really is a ghost. I can’t see how it would be a smudge or condensation or any of those things. I really can’t look at this picture for too long. It gives me the creeps.

  207. joann12 Says:

    The blue item in this picture looks to me like a small bad of pet food. The top is folded over which makes it look like a collar. As for the face, well I can’t explain that one as easily.

  208. J-Deezy Says:

    I grew up in Ravenna and believe EVERYTHING in Ravenna is haunted….because, it’s freakin’ RAVENNA! If you want to see “creepy,” go look at a house off of Cleveland Rd. that they call “The Terrace.”

    p.s. Does that ghost have on a Ravenna Ravens polo shirt? Yep….that seals the “haunted” dealie for ME……..I’m just sayin’….

    • Anonymous Says:

      hey i remember that house i was always told the under ground railroad ran under that house i cant believe its still there . but for real u want scary go through the alotment at night or skills but the alotment is scarier lol

  209. Si Says:

    I also spot a gnu looking out of the top window, second from left. Does that mean they keep a loadbeast in their bedroom, then? Or that a gnu once died in that house in tragic circumstances? Or could it be – and I’m going out on a limb here – that these shapes are… reflections?

    • Clare Says:

      Si, Are you saying the image of the child in blue is a reflection? If so, where is the reflection coming from? That is no reflection. I believe this is a genuine ghost caught on film, and the best I’ve ever seen.

  210. Mike Says:

    Looks like a small Muslim man with a beard and mustache.

  211. sserpx Says:

    I looked at it, and thought it looked a bit creepy, but i think it’s a Halloween mask… it’s dark in the room, witch makes the “mask” look more bright.

  212. Mike Franklin Says:

    Even after looking at it for so long, this is one of the most interesting ghost images I have ever seen.

    Just as an update for this thread… and for anyone who has not yet seen it, here is another page for info/opinion on this picture:

    http://www.angryblueskies.com/windowghost/house.html

    • keet Says:

      on ‘the window’ page, the picture on the right has a blue/puple/violet line down the left side of the candle. that is not a continuation of a ‘shirt’ but an occurrence of colour fringing. it happens when adjusting contrast, colour, saturation, hue, levels, curves etc. this can also be occurring in image 1 and 2 on the left. in no way does this appear to be clothing, just the occurrence of colour fringing.

      • Mike Franklin Says:

        Yes dear.

      • keet Says:

        is that a bit of sarcasm there? is it because you can’t think of anything else to prove this fact wrong? do you understand how colour photons work with a digital sensor?

  213. Clare Says:

    keet, I do not agree with your colour fringing theory. Even if it were, how do you explain the whole ghostly image? Where did that whole image come from? It is clearly there in the window. You can clearly see a head with features, the clothing it is wearing, and amazingly, it is in colour! It is looking out of a window, and looks to me to be sad or quite distressed about something. The face is pale and looks child-like. This photo is chilling to the bone.

    • keet Says:

      the face can be defracting light revealing marks on the window pane, the blue object could be something by the window. if you look at other photos on this site, very similar things have occurred yet proven to be light rays and other objects. its how your mind translates it, UFO’s seen revealed to be weather blimps, flashing lights being airplanes, etc

      • Clare Says:

        keet, the lady of the house said that there was nothing blue in the window. Marks on the window pane? No way. I have never in my life seen “marks” on a window pane that look like that! At the distance the photo was taken, “marks” on the window would be impossible to see. This photo is very unique, and not like the others you speak of.

      • Dijetlo Says:

        The shadow on the right side of the figures head begins at the edge of the right “eye” and leaves the remainder of the head in darkness. The problem is the electric candle is to the right of the figure, suggesting that if someone was peering around the curtain that portion of their head should have been illuminated by the candle.
        It doesn’t have a mouth either, just a black line that begins with some pixels that resemble lips and then trails off into the shadow I mentioned on the right side of the face.
        The blue “shirt” is compelling, more so if it didn’t have a little ID badge visible over the right breast pocket, and the shadow on the collar seems to match up with the available lighting so at a guess I’d say the shirt is a reflection from someone passing by off camera and the face is either a smudge in the glass or the reflection of Blue shirts faces distorted by imperfections in the glass. For all appearances, the lighting and shadow seems to indicate the image is not coming from the same side of the glass as the candle is on.

  214. Mike Franklin Says:

    Just a few notes to update this thread from my personal perspective…

    First, Keet is what I consider a respectable (and respectful) skeptic and I have nothing against healthy skepticism or him/her. In fact, it is that degree of skepticism that keeps this crazy world in balance.

    Yes, I do poke fun at him in our exchanges but he/she has always been up to the challenge so I don’t feel as if I am being unfair.

    I have hobbied in photography and web graphics since 1997 so, I am neither expert nor novice. The website I link back to is not meant to prove anything one way or another. It is offered merely as an additional source of opinion and information. Nothing more, nothing less.

    The owner of the photo and the home where it was taken has been very open and forthcoming and I would like to thank her here once again.

    I do think that this photo is unique among those of its type and is worthy of the debate.

  215. Brian Says:

    A black line for the mouth? No way. I disagree with you. The face has distinct features. The blue shirt is someone passing by? From where? So you’re saying the face is a “smudge” that just so happens to line up with the blue shirt, which is a reflection? This photo is the most chilling I have ever seen. It appears to be a child, which makes it even more creepy. The candle light probably wouldn’t light up the face. That bulb probably is a nite light. It wouldn’t lite up much of anything in broad daylite anyway.

  216. Dancers In The Dark Says:

    It is not a rare thing for ghosts to live in a house. Often they died there, or close to there, and think that it is still their house. If you can overcome your fear, they can make great friends. If you want them to leave, provide them with another residence. If you want to learn to communicate with them, and detect their presence, try Dancers In The Dark, a site devoted to communicating with the unseen.

  217. Mr Thomson Says:

    The blue “shirts” looks like a Thomsons directory with the front cover folded.

  218. Tammy Says:

    Why would someone have a directory in the window? This photo gives me the creeps!

  219. Lorenza Palomino Says:

    The little girl at the window, is she holding a candle? She looks sad.

  220. Lorenza Palomino Says:

    I went back to look at the ghost in the house photo, there’s another image of a person at the window to the right of the little girl, An image of a partial face and chin. Is this correct?

  221. Thomas Says:

    If you look at the left of the ghost, you can see a lamp. Also, if you look closely, you can see the blinds shown, which are white compared to the curtain and the lamp. It is obviously not a ghost.

    • Clare Says:

      What is your point? Those are not blinds. That IS obviously a ghost!

    • Belinda Says:

      There does appear to be some sort of slats type appearance on the curtains – very oddly.

      I’ve also notice that in the top right hand window, there appears to be another questionable visual (another ghost type figure)

      There are some strange light contrasts in the picture (wispy) on the door and the steps too, amongst other areas.

      If it was an old photo, I’d be tempted to wonder if there was a double exposure.

      • Brian Says:

        It says the photo was taken in 2008. There is something looking out of that window, that looks human, but strangly not of this world. The eyes frighten me to my core.

  222. Mr Thomson Says:

    The “ghost” has no arms. Get a grip people, there’s no such thing as ghosts.

    • Clare Says:

      How do you know the ghost has no arms? Part of it is behind the curtain. With so many ghost sightings throughout the ages, All of these people cannot be wrong! I say it’s a ghost child caught on film.

      • keet Says:

        all of these people that agree with one persons judgement. so many ghost sightings over the ages but so many proven to be fake or later given a normal explanation. just because theres a majority on here believing it to be a ghost, it does not mean it is a ghost.

  223. Mr Thomson Says:

    The “face” is very obviously a reflection of someone or something standing outside the house as you can see the reflection not only on the darkness of the window but also on the curtains.

    Another factor that seems lost on the deluded believers is that the story quite clearly states that this woman’s son took the photo when she wasn’t present. So we’re supposed to trust a kid to tell us the truth about this “apparition”. It’s probably a reflection of one of the boy’s friends or something and they’re no doubt having a massive laugh at having fooled so many gullible fools into believing them.

  224. Lu Ann Says:

    Mr. Thomson, I am the person who sent this photo to Professor Wiseman. You are in error, as I saw my son take this photo. I was peering through the ivy wreath on the front door. My son and I were the only ones home. No friends were present at that time. My husband was in the nursing home recovering from brain surgery. A team of paranormal investigators came to my home upon seeing the photo. An EVP of what sounds like an adult male voice was captured. There were no adult males present in the home. Thank you.

  225. ziplock Says:

    does anyone know if there is a screen on the windows?

    • Mike Says:

      I believe the windows have a large, single outer pane for insulation that is over the smaller paned sash.

      As far as screens? I don’t believe so.

      (Lu Ann… you still reading this thread?)

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hello~ Yes Mike, you are correct. There are no screens or blinds on those windows. Thank you~

  226. wolf mechanics Says:

    # Lu Ann Says:
    October 19, 2009 at 9:36 pm | Reply

    Lulu~ When my son bought his iPOD touch, he took a picture of the front of the house to set as an e-mail contact for his iPOD’s e-mail.

    Rofl

    There are plenty of iPhone/iPod Touch apps which “hilarious” people can use to create such images… for example GhostCam http://www.appstorehq.com/ghostcam-iphone-13355/app or Ghost Capture http://www.appstorehq.com/ghostcapture-iphone-79452/app, which was used to create the following photo: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=164422

    Also, your “ghost” looks rather similar to the one in the old chestnut of a photo used in the post below this one. Madam, your son is shitting you.

  227. LOOK AT ME I CAN WEED Says:

    here’s another homework assignment kids, you’ll need a digital camera and someone to operate the camera, ok this is simple but the end result will freak you out (if this picture freaks you out) ok first you need to position yourself to get out of the frame quikly (like inside a window, behind a short wall or for an even creepier photo behind a large tombstone) now timing is everything so your friend will have to signal you when they hit the button to take the pic when they do so wait about 8 seconds and hide out of the frame (i.e. behind the wall, headstone you get the picture)

  228. skulluminatus Says:

    The Fairies

    Up the airy mountain
    Down the rushing glen
    We daren’t go a-hunting
    For fear of little men;
    Wee folk, good folk
    Trooping all together
    Green jacket, red cap
    And white owl’s feather.

    Down along the rocky shore
    Some make their home
    They live on crispy pancakes
    Of yellow tide-foam;
    Some in the reeds
    Of the black mountain lake
    With frogs for their watch-dogs
    All night awake.

    High on the hill-top
    The old King rests
    He is now so old and grey
    He’s nigh lost his wits;
    With a bridge of white mist
    Columcille he crosses
    On his stately journeys
    From Slieve League to Rosses;
    Or going up with music
    On cold starry nights
    To sup with the Queen
    Of the gay Northern Lights.

    They stole little Bridget
    For seven years long
    When she came down again
    Her friends were all gone
    They took her lightly back
    Between the night and morrow
    They thought that she was fast asleep
    But she was dead with sorrow.
    They have kept her ever since
    Deep within the lake
    On a bed of flag-leaves
    Watching till she wakes.

    By the craggy hillside
    Through the mosses bare
    They have planted thorn-trees
    For pleasure here and there.
    Is any man so daring
    As dig them up in spite
    He shall find their sharpest thorns
    In his bed at night.

    Up the airy mountain
    Down the rushy glen
    We daren’t go a-hunting
    For fear of little men
    Wee folk, good folk
    Trooping all together
    Green jacket, red cap
    And white owl’s feather!

  229. Possum Trot Press » Blog Archive » The only thing we have to fear, is… Says:

    [...] story of the image, ‘Ghost in the House’, can be found at Prof. Richard Wiseman’s blog, The Science of [...]

  230. penelope kim(Korean)(김경림) Says:

    hmm it’s cool

  231. Daniela Says:

    I’m not sure about this, but it’s wierd….

  232. Brian Says:

    What the heck? That house needs a ghost buster! Who is that and why is it there?

  233. Misty Says:

    well, it kinda looks like mabey when the picture was taken that someone was mabey outside on the street walking by so that when he snapped the picture the reflection of that person could be seen in the photo

  234. Tams Says:

    I would have a hard time living there with that child spirit roaming around!

  235. Kaley Says:

    HOLY CRAP. I got frickin goose bumps looking at that.

  236. Tammy Says:

    What the????? That house needs some serious ghost busters! Has anyone done any research on the photo? If not, why not????

  237. Andrew Ladies Says:

    I have nothing to say.
    The boy is really thrilling.

  238. Todd Says:

    If I had something like that roaming the halls, I’d move in a hurry!!! This is the creepiest ghost image I’ve ever seen!!!

  239. Nathan Says:

    It is well known that ghosts appear in “pieces” sometimes. Some people refer to the mouth on this image as being deformed a bit or a small part is missing. Rarely do people see fully formed ghosts. Sometimes the legs are gone, or even the head is missing. I say this photo is genuine and it’s a remarkable photo indeed!!

  240. smriti Says:

    i swear whatever youre doing is useless

  241. BrianM Says:

    I’ve been there. It’s quite scary at time when all alone…

  242. Todd Says:

    The thought of a child ghost walking around the house is bone chilling. The eyes are quite spooky, and very sad looking.

  243. doomed Says:

    It’s just a blurry pic of a kid standing in a window, I mean you can see his blue shirt, like one of those polo ones with a colour, looks like a school uniform. Nothing supernatural about this one. Sometimes we see what we want to see, instead of actually seeing what is really there.

    • Mike F Says:

      Sometimes we do see what we want to see. Maybe some of us want to see a ghost… maybe other just want to see a kid in a blue polo.

      • Lu Ann Says:

        Hello Mike, I don’t think you are receiving my e-mails. I am using the e-mail address I have always used. ~

      • Mike F Says:

        LuAnn, I am going to email you from a new addy… keep an eye out for it :)

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Hello~ I am the person who sent in this photo. I assure you, there were no children in the house when this photo was taken. The face of this image is most disturbing to me, but the blue colored shirt is the most baffling.

      • Anonymous Says:

        The bright blue part on the bottom left of the “shirt” appears to be a butterfly sitting on the bush.
        At least from my perspective.
        I couldn’t come to a conclusion about the rest of what is being perceived as a shirt though.

  244. Nat Says:

    This is either a very good photoshop or the best ghost photo I have ever seen. It gives me chills to look at it!

  245. clara jayne Says:

    Lens flare from the bright candle, But still looks pretty impressive

    • Todd Says:

      Lens flair from the bright candle????? It’s broad daylight, and those kinds of electric candles have very low wattage. How do you explain the blue coloured shirt????

      • clarajayne Says:

        That’s not a ‘shirt’ that’s something in the windowsill next to the light, If there’s a light source shining directly into the camera no matter how powerful it may be will always cause a flare unless you attach a beak to the front which stops that from happening.

  246. Clare Says:

    The lady said there was nothing blue in or near the window. The photo is too clear to be lens flare or something on the windowsill. This photo scares my friend so bad that she can’t look at it too long. There is something “unworldy” about that photo. The eyes are scary.

  247. josh Says:

    this image is really scary. Is anyone looking into this one? My friends are afraid.

  248. AnG3l* Says:

    Now if u had a pic of your son around this time to compare to this kid in the window then it would be easier to rule this out… But For all we know you took this pic and your son is in the window crying cause he could not go outside ??

  249. Amy Says:

    That is no human child in the window…it looks as if it is deeply sad, and has been crying, but that is not of this earth! The eyes are frightening.

  250. BobaMilkTea Says:

    It looks as if it was photoshop if you look closely at the candles and it seems to me greyish paint. The fire from the candles doesn’t look right to me…if you look at all the other candles they have that glow around it, but that one doesn’t and what is that greyish pain there?

  251. Giles Says:

    anyone considered that it is actually a boy… a real human living boy… and the photographer knew he was there?

  252. Lu Ann Says:

    Hello, I am the person who sent this photo in to Professor Wiseman. There were no children inside of the house when the photo was taken.

  253. Nat Says:

    I believe in ghosts. This photo is chilling.

  254. Al Says:

    This photo is so scary. Who or what is in the window? I believe this is real. Someone should look into this.

  255. Leslie Says:

    I have walked passed this house in Ravenna at night and I can tell you it sends chills up my spine. Something really strange was in one of the upstairs windows as I walked by. I think this house is haunted.

  256. Danilo Says:

    Brazilian portuguese – Com uma exposição alta uma pessoa olhou pela janela antes da foto e se movimentou durante a fotografia, gera esse efeito

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      Poor Portuguese – Mais ao ponto, por que conjuram um resultado falso que seja analisado por aqueles que podem dizer a diferença?

      Explaining how it COULD have been done, is not in itself an explanation. Only a theory.
      :)

  257. ZeroCorpse Says:

    I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

  258. Crystal Says:

    I think this is either a genuine ghost photo or Photoshop. There is no way it’s just a trick of the eye. Strangely enough I think it’s real. It looks like a very grey, dead child. A bit spooky really.

    • Randy Says:

      This is clearly something very weird. If photoshop is ruled out, then what is it? To say this is a “reflection” is absurd. More research should be done on this one. It creeps me out.

  259. silvia dunstan Says:

    some people dont whant to admit that paranormal has existence,same peaole are optimists.they are not many left.

  260. Cesar Says:

    São apenas folhas.

  261. brooke Says:

    the house could belong to a family a long time ago and they got murdered or some thing science hasnt proved that they are real :) :(

  262. Mike Franklin Says:

    Lu Ann,

    Have tried emailing you twice. Have important question re the photo.
    Please email or call me when possible.

    – Mike

  263. Dom Says:

    I am a skeptic but have also experienced events that have baffled me and still do to this day. I looked carefully at this photo and although I am not a photography expert, I am sure of the following: the ‘face’ is not a reflection of anything outside the house; nor is the image created by light illuminating a smear on the window ( it is too clear an image and it would be an amazing example of matrixing ); Lu Ann, whose son took the photo, absolutely states that there was no one in the house and that there was nothing blue on the window sill; there are no other images in this photo in any of the other windows. Anyone who is seeing other images is most definitely matrixing. Of course, none of this proves it is a genuine photo of a ghost. It is but a photo that most likely does show the image of a ghost but we will never be able to prove it as someone will always say otherwise. Let’s just say that it is a photo of extreme interest and is a complete mystery.

    After reading some of the comments on this thread, it is the idiots who wrote them that I find most puzzling.

  264. 613photo Says:

    Well I have taken this image into photoshop. Unfortunately the resolution is poor, but my opinion is that it’s not a ghost. The “face” is a lamp. If you look at it closely you can see why it looks like a face, and you can also see why it is not. Some of the features of the face just don’t make sense. If I could upload a photo to this thread an annotate it, I’d do that, but I can’t. People will just have to save it on their machines and zoom in themselves. The blue thing, I believe, is a paper sack sitting in the window. The “name tag” is simply a label on the sack. I do not know what the sack is for, but I’d describe it as the type you’d buy coffee in. Glossy paper and rolled up at the top. This forms what looks to be a collar.

    In short, the “boy” has no chin. The mouth shows no lips and the shape isn’t right. The candle is a bright enough (totally blown out) light source that it should illuminate some detail in the eye socket if it were a real face inside the window. If anything, the left side of the “face” is darker than the right side. Also the the forehead area is not shaped like a forehead when you look closely. The “head” is a bit too far above the torso, and appears a little out of line.

    Finally I’d like to point out that this camera has terrible optics. In the frame surrounding the window pane that the “boy” is in, there is significant chromatic aberration, a type of lens distortion.

    Now, onto the person who is commenting saying she’s the one who sent this in. I hate to be this way, but we don’t know if she really did send it in. We don’t know who took the photo. We don’t know what’s inside the house behind that window. Even if she is the one who sent it it, people make mistakes all the time. We see this with eye witnesses in courts of law. I firmly believe the blue object to be a paper sack.

    And lastly, most of you know about matrixing. I’ll suggest a way to distinguish things that really are in a photo from things our mind sees as a recognizable pattern. First, walk away from the computer for a while. When you come back to the computer, open the image in an editor without giving it much thought. Don’t look closely at anything in it. Next, rotate the image until it’s upside-down. Then zoom up. Better yet, do all of this and then have someone else who hasn’t seen the photo take their first look at it.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      I am the person who sent in this photo. My son took the picture and this image is what appeared in the window. There was no lamp anywhere near the window, and I assure you there was no “paper sack” sitting in the window sill as you have suggested. This house is a former parsonage and the paranormal activity in my home is just as disturbing as this photo. I was the only person in the house when the picture was taken. I was looking through the window on the front door, watching my son take the picture.

      • 613photo Says:

        I’d really like to take a closer look at copy of the original photo, if you wouldn’t mind sending it to me. You can click on my name to find my website, and in the “about” section there’s an email address. If it is what you say it is, then a better quality original will show it’s NOT what I think it is.

        The lamp looks to me to be on the interior wall opposite the window, so it could be more than 12 feet away. And I think that this area in particular would be easier to see in its original resolution. If I see it and it no longer looks like a lamp to me, I’ll have no problem admitting that. If it looks like a ghost, I will have no problem admitting that, either.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Thank you for your interest in the photo. I would be happy to send you a copy of the original. Could you please post another email address here, one where you do not have to sign in? Thank you. ~ Lu Ann

      • 613photo Says:

        Sure. I’m going to break it up so spam-bots won’t get it. Email is dustin
        at 613photo dot com.

        I look forward to having a look at it.

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      “Finally I’d like to point out that this camera has terrible optics. In the frame surrounding the window pane that the “boy” is in, there is significant chromatic aberration, a type of lens distortion.”

      I spent a little time examining this image. Along the way, I discovered that this home has inner and outer windows as insulation. The distortion is not the camera but the combined reflections of the panes reflection outwardly and against each other. The result of the latter is akin to a lightbox effect.

      I have seen the original and find the resolution about on par with most off the shelf personal digital cameras.

      • 613photo Says:

        The red areas around the window pane is definitely a clear-cut example of chromatic aberration. It’s extremely common.

      • Mike Franklin Says:

        “The red areas around the window pane is definitely a clear-cut example of chromatic aberration. It’s extremely common.”

        It is not my intention to argue. I was merely sharing my own experience with this image.

        Since first encountering it and this thread, I have heard it called everything from a sack of ground coffee to a Photoshop hoax. I spent an entire month with it… and while I am not smart enough to say exactly what it is, I am sure it is not simply a reflection or an aberration of lighting/exposure… or even Hugh Hefner in a blue housecoat.

        But you gotta calls ‘em as you sees ‘em.

        PS – I’ll share some of my own results with you should Lu Ann authorize such an exchange. She knows how to contact me.

        Cheers :)

      • 613photo Says:

        The areas where the ghost appears to be isn’t where the chromatic aberration is. It’s nearby…it’s seen as a red fringing. I brought it up only to demonstrated that the lens on the camera this photo was taken with wasn’t exactly setting any optical standards.

        I think I’m the one that said it looks like a little shopping sack, something like you would buy coffee in at the grocery store. At web resolution it’s just hard to tell. I’m really looking forward to seeing the original because, frankly, it is the best photo of a ghost I think I’ve ever seen. Whether it’s really a ghost or not, I don’t know, but it sure is captivating.

    • Nathan Says:

      Who says that a ghost should appear all intact and perfect? Most ghosts pictures I have seen appear to be missing a head, legs or arms. Have you ever heard of an incomplete manifestation? If I did see a photo of a ghost, and it looked “perfect” then I would be less likely to believe it.

      This is a darn good catch, if there was no Photoshop. I looks like what it is…a child looking out of a window. My friends are freaked out by it.

      • 613photo Says:

        Well, if you are ready to believe things at face value just because it looks like a ghost to you, that’s fine. It looks like a ghost to me, and that’s why I’m so happy that Lu Ann has offered to send me an original copy of the photo for closer examination. I’m skeptical of EVERYTHING. And I mean everything. I’m skeptical of the Warren Commission’s report and I’m just as skeptical of the conspiracy theories…that’s just the type of person I am.

  265. Glenn S Says:

    It’s a freaking television. Look at the rectangular area around it. Debunked. Case dismissed. Next post.

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      Another expert deskpert photoshop analyst?
      Where have you been all our lives?

      (Sorry… but that just sounded too much like denial for the sake of denial.)

      • 613photo Says:

        He was terse but with the photo that we have to look at right now, it being a television is a more likely explanation than it being a ghost. Again, I will be happy to receive a better copy of the photo…perhaps I’ll be able to tell.

      • Glenn S Says:

        I didn’t say I was an expert. I said it was apparent from the photograph that it was a television or, at least, as 613 says, more likely a television than a ghost.

        And when does denial sound like denial not for the sake of denial? Should I have come up with a more convoluted explanation?

      • Mike Franklin Says:

        “Debunked. Case dismissed. Next post.”

        Your words.

        Debunked by whose standards?
        Case dismissed in whose court?
        Next post?

        “And when does denial sound like denial not for the sake of denial?”

        When the denial doesn’t sound rusty and mechanical.

        “Should I have come up with a more convoluted explanation?”

        Actually, no. I think you’ve painted a pretty clear picture now.

        Thanks.

      • Glenn S Says:

        I’m not sure what you’re arguing here, so I’m going to leave you to it.

  266. Jodi Says:

    I went to Thomas editions birthplace in Milan Ohio and got a picture of someone looking out the window at me It was soooo cool, and inside the museum I could feel someone breathing on my neck and felt like some one was cold on my back. I didn’t want to leave,

  267. james fraser Says:

    Pareidolia as the body is incomplete.

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      “Pareidolia as the body is incomplete.”

      Curiously, so is that avatar/silhouette image next to our posts.

      It is far easier to tag off as nonesuch… the image in the window at least appears to have eyes, a nose and a mouth. Those little boxes that represent us don’t even have arms… or fingers or a keyboard…
      :)

  268. James B Says:

    This is not pareidolia, isn’t pareidolia pictures in clouds and in trees?

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      It suggests that we see what we want to see, and can also thereby discount any theory or concept about what is/was being seen.

      That we can picture things in the clouds… a uniquely human trait, so far as we know, is basically turned back against us.

      Pareidolia, rather than being a positive, is applied as a negative.

  269. Thomas S. Says:

    This photo is difficult to wrap my brain around. It scared my whole family!

  270. Habeeb Jamar Says:

    هذه الصورة يحير لي إلى ما لا نهاية. يجعلني تريد استشارة صديقي الدهاء خوارق.

  271. Maryann Says:

    why would anyone live in a house that is obviously haunted by a spirit child?? Certainly one of the most oddest ghost photos I’ve seen yet.

  272. Harry James Jr. Says:

    This creature looks sad. What a pity. Possibly a negative entity.

  273. Deb/Boston Says:

    I don’t know why but this just seems too, much like a living child.. especially if you’ve been living there 15yrs. I wasn’t there I don’t the situation, but to me it looks faked, but maybe I’m wrong.. fun to look at though thanks ;)

  274. Melvin Byrons Says:

    What in God’s holy name is that? If that’s a ghost, I would get the Hell outta there! ASAP

  275. Leon Grayson Says:

    Can anybody tell me if this is legitimate? Like is this site about REAL ghost photos/sighting? I really want to know.

  276. Karen Says:

    Iv’e seen this house in person, and it’s creepy at night.

  277. 613photo Says:

    Earlier this Summer, Lu Ann was kind enough to get me a copy of the original JPEG, and I have done some extensive (though not quite exhaustive) analysis.

    I don’t think it’s a ghost. There’s a lot going on in the photo, and it does look really weird, but I don’t think it’s a ghost. It’s also not a fake. In my opinion it just looks like something that it isn’t.

    Soon I’ll post examples of the kind of work I’ve done on the image. There was a limit on what I could do, though. The camera sensor quality was very poor and created a noisy, low resolution image. The optics on the camera were very poor. Obviously the quality of light within the house was poor because the camera exposed for the house’s exterior. A lack of light will magnify any shortcomings a camera may have, and in this case it has caused a severe lack of context for the interior of the home.

    It could still be a ghost; I’m not 100 percent certain either way, but I am leaning pretty heavily toward “no”.

    • 613photo Says:

      http://imgur.com/a/4soX7

      About a year ago I received a copy of the original image. I took it into photoshop and did various things to it. The album contains my results. Unfortunately I don’t remember my specific methods but it was curves and stuff by the looks of it.

      I still maintain that it was an image from a television and glare/reflection on the window.

      • Mike Franklin Says:

        Over the years, this image has endure all manner of of obstacle. In the end, here to today, the best we can do is make guesses…. as in, it is a TV reflection on the window or a sack of coffee beans, whatever.

        Whenever we step into a subject that falls under the quasi-definition of ‘paranormal’, we are walking into a minefield where certainty is hardly ever available and personal opinions carry the weight of an Albert Einstein blessing.

        We cannot fear being taken by a charlatan or we will eventually deny everything just to save our pride. But we can apply the best resources available to us and then, understanding the peril, offer up what we think. beyond that… it’s all a crapshoot.

        On the side – A big smile and hello for LuAnn… if she still keeps up with this thread. Think of you often :)

  278. Crimson'N'Clover Says:

    Glenn S., How do you know it’s not real? Did you do research on it? Calling people gullible for thinking that it could be a ghost is being very close-minded. There are things that we just can’t explain in this world, accept it.

  279. Glenn S Says:

    Actually, Crimson, there are a whole range of explanations that require LESS assumptions than ‘the supernatural’ for this photo.If your desire to believe in the supernatural leads you to reject more likely explanations, then it is your mind that is closed.

    • Crimson'N'Clover Says:

      I have already looked at many of the explanations, and frankly, I don’t really agree with any of them. A plumber with a beard? The owner said that there was nobody in the house but her. A cat running by the window? Not very likely. A bag rolled up on the window? That’s just laughable. By the way, what is your explanation?

      • Glenn S Says:

        As my post which you were responding to said, I have posted above my explanation. I recite it now for your ease of reference:

        “It’s a freaking television. Look at the rectangular area around it.”

  280. Mike Franklin Says:

    Supernatural is simply a term for those things that would be otherwise entirely natural… but that we just aren’t smart enough yet to understand.

    At one time, powered flight would have been magic.

    And to be sure, to assume that our current understanding of the universe is the be-all and end-all of possible knowledge, is to display the closed mind.

    The closed mind is the one that automatically dismisses because it thinks it already has all the answers.

    • Lu Ann Says:

      Hello Mike. It was so nice to see your post. I believe that the image in the window may be responsible for some of the strange and sometimes disturbing occurrences in my home. I don’t know why some spirits try to contact the living. As much as I am still trying to find answers for this strange photo, I do not believe it is a smudge or a reflection. Thank you so much for your interest and for your on going hard work on this photo. ~

  281. Paul Says:

    it looks pretty real to me i know one thing i would of moved out thats for sure lol if i knew something like that was working around my house it would scare the life out of me!! this site is pretty cool im really interested in ghost’s just too scared of them to watch the programs ha,

    Paul From
    short breaks to paris cheap hotel in paris.

  282. Crimson'N'Clover Says:

    Glenn, here’s a link I’ve found from another blog post by Dr. Wiseman. Scroll down close to the bottom and read a comment by a Mr. Brian Parsons: http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/another-creepy-ghost-photo/#comments

    • Paul Sorenson Says:

      hi everyone, i went to this house a few weeks ago, because I live near there. I stood right on the path where the photo was taken; you can see the tv at the left hand side through the window, right where the ghost looks to be. Spooky stuff though! I wonder what they were watching!

  283. Jeff G. Says:

    If that isn’t some dude wearing a blue shirt looking out the window, then it would appear that whoever took this photo has a ghost has problem in their house. Most haunting encounters I have experienced “Felt” benign, however several that I have had gave me a morbid sense of “Dread” (that’s the word that comes to mind when I try to describe it), and I left the areas as fast as I could without looking back.

  284. kelly Says:

    kelly…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  285. Richard Says:

    Richard…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  286. Ghost Video Says:

    We’re a group of volunteers and starting a brand new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with useful info to paintings on. You’ve done an impressive task and our entire neighborhood can be thankful to you.

  287. Hello Kitty Shot Glasses Says:

    Hello Kitty Shot Glasses…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  288. Best and cheapest Mobile Application Development Company in India Says:

    Best and cheapest Mobile Application Development Company in India…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  289. Anonymous Says:

    Hi, its understandable piece of writing along with this YouTube video; I can�t think that one can not understand this trouble-free article having with video presentation.

  290. australian dog tags Says:

    australian dog tags…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  291. Shaggy Says:

    Amittyville Horror is played out. There’s no money in it anymore. Try selling oranges on the street. Is that a bag of sugar?

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      I don’t see anyone trying to sell anything with this story. But I do occasionally see trolls hawking insults and sarcasm looking for someone to pat them on the back.

      Here, let’s try this:
      What a witty comment! Haw-haw, hee-hee!

      Paid in full.

      • 613photo Says:

        I totally dropped the ball on posting my results. I’m going to try to get to that tonight.

      • Shaggy Says:

        Thanks Mike for my 15 seconds of fame and the pat on the back. I’m sure your a believer in most anything and well respected for it. I’ll let you get back to your Dungen’s and Dragons.

  292. Josh Says:

    If you look closely, I believe that is not a pocket on the shirt. there is the reflection of the candle light on the window, and it looks like a stem and leaf of a flower making it look like a pocket. The overall photo is scary as hell and would be hard to photoshop. I believe its something very bizarre caught on film.

  293. steve Says:

    I am a photographer myself and am always debunking before I can say true or false, I have enhanced this shot just like others have and in my opinion there is a lot going on in this window and not just the face in the blue shirt. has the homeowners complained of any unsettling activity? merry christmas everyone.

  294. daisy Says:

    it looks like chucky.. who wanted to play =)))

  295. Anonymous Says:

    this is so not ordinary and so spooky………not quite friendly she seems though.

  296. Alph847 Says:

    Has anyone ever really dug into this photo? It’s a bit unnerving to say the least…

  297. hacksrumblehackshacksexploitshackshacksnexonmaplestorymaplestoryserverdragonhackscaratbossmode Says:

    hacksrumblehackshacksexploitshackshacksnexonmaplestorymaplestoryserverdragonhackscaratbossmode…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  298. Chad Vukelich Says:

    I think you need to look closer. I see three ghosts. If you look just to the right of the boy up between the certains you will see the face of a tall man. you can make out the mouth, nose, eyes, and hairline of the face. Then look behind the boy and you will see a womans dress. ( colonial style). You can make out the figure of the woman and her arm. See if you see it also.

    • Anonymous Says:

      They are what you call the moire effect, this can occur on bayer sensors such as the CCD and CMOS. Most compact cameras have a CCD sensor.

  299. Imagize Ultimate Free Image Hosting Says:

    Imagize Ultimate Free Image Hosting…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  300. Travis Says:

    The candles are obviously electric. If you look at the other windows with candles, you can see curtains behind them. This would not be wise with real candles. I cannot rule out the possibility of someone stand to the left of the camara’s view. The face, at least, appears to be a reflection in the window.

  301. The House Professional Says:

    The House Professional…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  302. Ignacio Jergenson Says:

    Ignacio Jergenson…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  303. jesus, jesus valera, valera, mercadeo, maturin, politica, @valerajesus, monagas, venezuela, politico, marketing Says:

    jesus, jesus valera, valera, mercadeo, maturin, politica, @valerajesus, monagas, venezuela, politico, marketing…

    [...]Ghost in the house « Ghostly photographs from Hauntings[...]…

  304. Horny Narwhal Says:

    The thing is that the ghosts face kind of goes in front of the curtain which could back up an idea of a window smudge etx

  305. Lis Says:

    It’s a curious photo, the only one where I’ve felt moved to comment. The enlarged part of the pic shows several areas where distortion appears to have taken place – it would be natural to blame camera shake but the pic as a whole appears sharp. There’s a spot of light (the reflected candle flame?) where the ‘neck’ should be’, a strange ‘effect’ just to the left of the face, and the curtain to the right also has an odd discolouration. The face is monochrome and fuzzy while the ‘shirt’ is sharp and vibrant. There is no apparent light reflecting from this window, unlike the dormers above. I wonder if somehow the pic has become overlaid on another… I can imagine the ‘face’ being explained by the human tendency to see faces in everything but the shirt fascinates me, oddly. If there was nothing blue in that window, what was it?

  306. Yana Says:

    Omigod I so think that’s a real ghost! I just wanna know was there some kind of little girl’s death in that house? Do you know anything about her – age, name? Possibly a past family member or previous servant or resident?

  307. visit us Says:

    Hey! I know this is kind of off topic but I was wondering
    which blog platform are you using for this
    site? I’m getting sick and tired of WordPress because I’ve had problems with hackers and I’m looking at options for another platform. I would be great if you could point me in the direction of a good platform.

  308. Lis Says:

    Having looked at the photo a number of times I think we are seeing two separate objects – block off the face, and you will see the blue item is likely a small package with a label – the edges and angles are too sharp for a shirt, and it appears to be in front of, rather than behind the curtain. Block off the blue item and it seems likely the face is on a tv screen inside the room, and behind the curtain – also at a slightly different angle to the blue item. It’s our minds that are connecting two separate things.

  309. Anonymous Says:

    it is a funny

  310. Anonymous Says:

    Face is much to blurry while shirt looks crisp. Fake

  311. Damien Says:

    This is so scary. Should be researched more.

  312. Mike Connor Harvotha Says:

    Such an odd photo. Creepy indeed. There is something very weird about this pic.

  313. Winifred Says:

    I loved as much as you will receive carried out right here.
    The sketch is attractive, your authored material stylish.
    nonetheless, you command get bought an nervousness over that you wish be delivering the following.
    unwell unquestionably come more formerly again as exactly the same nearly a lot often inside case you
    shield this increase.

  314. wso software Says:

    Thank you for sharing your info. I truly appreciate your efforts and I am
    waiting for your next post thank you once again.

  315. becky proctor Says:

    my daughter and i are both very curiuos , this pic seems genuine very scary

  316. becky proctor Says:

    my daughter can see loads of ‘entities’ in the other windows too

  317. Source Says:

    It’s a pity you don’t have a donate button! I’d without a doubt donate to this outstanding blog! I suppose for now i’ll settle
    for book-marking and adding your RSS feed to my Google
    account. I look forward to fresh updates and will share this site with my Facebook group.

    Talk soon!

  318. mark Says:

    The face portion of the image can be seen continuing through the curtain, the very bright image representing what appears to the shirt does continue through the curtain. In my opinion, whatever is blue is not a shirt.

  319. SallygGirl Says:

    Anyway, someone should analyze this photo once and for all.

    • Mike Franklin Says:

      This image has been scrutinized for years now. I hobby in web graphics and spent months myself looking at every little pixel. I have been in personal contact with the home owners, as well.
      In the end, all we have is opinions…

  320. cabinet door Says:

    It’s amazing designed for me to have a web page, which is useful in favor of my know-how. thanks admin

  321. Anonymous Says:

    Why shall there be a ghost? I think it is just a person in a bad mood looking out the window. In front of the person, near the window, there is a package of milk or something like that and it looks as if it was the person´s clothing.

  322. Lu Ann Says:

    Yes, I do have it but cannot access it at this time due to a new computer tower.

  323. Halloween-Rätsel: Der Geist am Wohnzimmerfenster @ gwup | die skeptiker Says:

    […] stammt die Aufnahme aus dem Jahr 2008 und wurde auf der Webseite Can you explain these photographs schon lebhaft diskutiert (derzeit 568 […]

  324. Shweta Says:

    A Must see 4 ghost enthusiasts: http://realghoststories.in/

  325. hosting en venezuela Says:

    Its like you read my mind! You seem to know a lot about this, like you
    wrote the book in it or something. I think that you can do with some
    pics to drive the message home a bit, but other than that, this is excellent blog.

    A great read. I will definitely be back.

  326. Anonymous Says:

    THIS pic sure is beating the test of time and still going!!

  327. Pam Says:

    This was my childhood home from 1978 to when the current owner bought the house (1986 I think). Me and my family experienced ghost activity the entire time we lived there. Despite the haunting, we loved that house.

    I happen to be an expert in PhotoShop and I do not see any indication that this photo was tampered.

  328. Lu Ann Says:

    Mike…wow. I would love to speak with Pam about what she and her family experienced in this house.

  329. L. Says:

    I agree with one of the earlier comments that it’s a just dude in a blue uniform, probably a plumber or an electrician, sitting on his knees about two to three feet behind the window.

    Look really closely . . . The guy appears to be African-American with a goatee. I read the explanation about that being a blue bag in the window, but it looks too much like a worker’s uniform with a white badge. The collar is folded over and you can even see the button seams toward the middle of the shirt.

    Looks like another “spooky” case of mistaken identity, but who knows? I may be wrong!

  330. Boris Gardy Says:

    If you desire to grow your experience just keep visiting this web page and
    be updated with the hottest news update posted here.

  331. Kit Coney Kelly Says:

    the one with the candle near in front of is fake but the 2 ghost one over her left shoulder is real and the one to her right is real both men – lived pn the grounds but NOT in this house they are far too old to be in this house.

  332. Kit Coney Kelly Says:

    oops i reversed the man is standing behind her on the right not left and the other is the off the left side -sorry for the mess up

  333. Anonymous Says:

    Odd..I have seen this exact face in other “Ghost Photos” This is a fake.

    • Anonymous Says:

      My son captured this very bizarre image in the window years ago. How very distressing when some people just label this photograph a “fake” when they have not analyzed it. This photograph has been researched and I can assure you it is authentic. Our home is a former parsonage and has a history of paranormal activity.

  334. Bruce Wright Says:

    What a fake. This is the same exact face in the “Does Anybody Know These People” photo. Compare them. On the web page they are in order, just scroll back and forth…you’ll see it!

    • Lu Ann Sicuro Says:

      My name is Lu Ann Sicuro and I sent this very disturbing photo to Professor Wiseman years ago. I can assure you that the image in this photograph is not faked. The photo has been analyzed many times and it is genuine and untouched.

  335. Anonymous Says:

    Mike, your expert opinion would be greatly appreciated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 121 other followers

%d bloggers like this: