Funny T-Shirts

Secretly control the TV,
anywhere, any time!

Well, I think that anyone with any objectivity and intelligence would see that they are clearly lens flares caused by the bright lights behind the menorah (and located along a straight line drawn from the angle of the "angels").
And the fact that it was published in "World Net Daily" is hardly surprising: that website likes to call itself "fiercely independent" and a watchdog for "government waste, fraud and abuse"; but it seems odd that it focuses on a very conservative agenda that constantly accuses government of destroying religion. It's certainly not a bastion of journalistic ethics nor investigative reporting.
Frankly, I'd pretty much automatically discount ANY story that appears on that site.

I must say that after reading some of her posts at goldbergmemorial.org she strikes me as a terribly bitter woman. Her writing reflects a deeply pained person who expresses her mourning in a passionate prose but very separated from the rest of humanity. She writes as if this happens to her and her alone. Her brother died, YOU don't know what that's like. I don't understand how this became so digressed. It's more than obvious that the hoax site is going to talk about things that look like hoaxes. She couldn't possibly have thrown those pictures out there "hypothesizing" angels and not expected a few people to say, "hey, that looks like... nothing."

Alex IS awesome, Cathy - He is a modern god, in the classical sense. But no one is prostrating, just enjoying the coolness.

Well, she obviously thinks that she's right and everyone is going to belive her. Personally, I think she's a little bitchy because she's saying "I'm right, you're wrong" without even attempting to listen to the other side. I don't think those photos were real simply because of the fact that the angels (while small) were so sharp and clear. If I were an angel (or devil for that matter) I would try to appear as fuzzy as possible. Proof demeans faith. To have true faith is to believe when all evidence points to something scientific and not supernatural. But now I'm off topic...

As for her degrees... Did you know that I too am a PI? At least I would be if I could have been certified at 14. I bought one of those 'get your degree' things at a garage sale, did all the work and would have sent it in if I haven't gotten board with it. Basically, you read a book, filled out some paperwork, and removed the technicolor from your working area.

Good lord. This dame is one can short of a 6-pack.

I, for one, don't even believe the blue flash (hardly a flash anyway!) is lens flare. I believe it was caused by a processing error. This has happened to me in the past with some film I had developed, and truthfully, it quite genuinely resembled the "angels" seen on her photo. It doesn't take much effort at all to scratch or damage film.

It's also very easy for lonely people to invent stories, no matter how absurd, to satisfy their extreme cravings for attention. Why, even I could chew a piece of gum, mold it into the shape of a penis, and put it up for bid on eBay under the heading, "PENIS OF RASPUTIN REINCARNATED IN WAD OF CHEWED DENTYNE ICE!!!!"

Carrie: get help. Get help NOW.

Whatever. Posting the mail exchange seems to have satisfied her that her point of view is being represented, which is a reasonable courtesy to extend to anyone.

Beyond that, insulting her does no one any favours, and belittling her beliefs seems - well, pointless. It can be taken as read that on a rationalist forum like this no one is likely to believe this picture is evidence of angels so for everyone to declare how ridiculous they find this position is a waste of typing energy.

As is this post, of course.

Kudos to Alex, though, for resisting the temptation to ridicule or flame her in their email exchange. His civilized approach is always a pleasure.

By "conversation facilitator," is she referring to the highly dubious practice of "helping" serverely autistic patients to write? If so, this is BS of the highest order.

If you want more information about "facilitating," go to randi.org where a site search should turn up some interesting reading for you.

Yes, it's very sad that she lost her brother (if indeed she did) but that does not make her ravings any less delusional. It may, however, explain her need to see "angels" in lens flares.

Let's all hope she gets the help she obviously needs.

What exactly does a conversation facilitator do? get coffee for the principals?

You originally identified this person as a "trained photojournalist". My first thought upon seeing the shots was "an experienced photographer would not be mystified or awed by strange lighting effects that appear in a frame; in fact, in many cases they would be annoyed". I have taken dozens of shots that had odd refractions that I couldn't explain; occasionally, these actually improved the shot and looked like an intentional special effect. In most cases, they simply ruin the shot. I would classify this one as the latter, advise her to get photoshop and remove them, and stop looking for divine providence in lens refractions.

Not to mention that a "trained photojournalist" would never shoot such an unbalanced photo composition, if they really wanted to depict the menorah and not the sky behind...

It's blue flashes in a photo. Thats it. Happens sometimes. About 1 in 100 of these photos gets taken by a person who doesn't appreciate this fact. These type of people who cant operate a video recorder, cant fix a puncture on their bike, and have no idea how to check oil level in their car. I seriously doubt their judgement.

I think it would help to put things in perspective if everyone took a look at the website that Carrie gave.
http://www.goldbergmemorial.org
Take a glimpse at her brothers seven orphans and then see if any of this lens flair explanation has any value at all when stood up next to their families loss.
Yes, alone the photo can be explained, but what is compelling to me about it is that SHE took it, and it‰Ûªs her story that is inexplicably linked to the photo.

Oscar: Yes, but what does any of that have to do with calling someone who doesn't believe as she does an accessory to her brother's murder? Most suicide bombers--typically being religious fanatics-- believe just as devoutly as she does in the existence of angels. In fact, it was probably a fellow believer (albeit, a believer of a different stripe) that murdered her brother, not a scoffing, non-believer as her email seems to imply. Why are religious nut jobs always blaming skeptics, atheists and agnostics for the casualties of their own religious in-fighting? When was the last time a non-believer launched a jihad? Seems to me it's usually the faithful that run around indiscriminately killing each other.

But then, as others have pointed out, this whole discussion is probably a waste of time, since "religious feelings" are more important to some people than the common sense God gave them. So that's the last I'll say about it.

Stork, I didn't mean Alex isn't awesome - I just thought it was insane how that lady did a complete 180. One minute she thinks he was involved in a murder plot against her brother, and the next minute he's "awesome." That's what was crazy. It's almost like she has split personality disorder.

Certified crime information analyst? All I can say is I hope I'm never a victim of a crime she gets to analyse.
If she truly is a crime information analyst she of all people should understand the importance of questioning things thoroughly and not taking them at face value.
She's entitled to her beliefs, but I agree with everyone else here who said her accusation that Alex questioning her beliefs makes him no better than the people who killed her brother is a bloody long stretch, entirely inappropriate and shows a lack of interest in true, open dialogue. Which of course as a 'conversational facilitatorl she would deny...

No matter how much of a nut-jobber you are, a hoax is a hoax (of course, of course).

And only a total nut-jobber would think that they had 'won' the 'angel' side of the e-mail conversation. If she wanted the world to think that she was a thick-headed blind idiot, well, she just got her wish.

Well,her mental state is nothing I can say anything about,I realize it must be traumatizing to lose a relative in the horrible way she did.But accusing someone like she did is pretty serious,even if it was probably something she just said without meaning it.Sheå«s indeed not the only person in the world who has lost someone near and dear,not even the only one who has lost someone in a terrible tragedy.Far from it.
Well,Iå«m even more convinced now that beliefs shouldnå«t be discussed.Let her believe itå«s angels,for whatever reason.We all handle grief in different ways.

Hey! Not all people that are religious are wacko!

I received this message from Carrie clearing up the mystery of why so many candles appeared to be lit on the menorah:

I am glad they ask. What the readers are seeing in the pic posted is the
menorah with nine representative glass globes in place. It is an
aesthetic thing. Two flames are lit the first night of Chanukah. The
middle flame, known as the shamash, the servant flame used to light the
candles each night. The second night, three flames are lit until the
last night when nine flames are lit, one for each day commemorating the
length of time the oil lasted at the time of the Second Temple
destruction and new oil could be made. The mitzvah or positive
commandment of lighting the flames, one additional per night for the
eight nights, would not be fulfilled if the flames were blown out. These
flames, outside in the elements, rather than guarded inside four walls,
are protected by globes shaped like candle flames, allowing the flame to
burn itself out, as commanded in the religious practice. If it was an
electrical menorah in ones home, it is set out with all nine "flames" in
place, and each night another one is tweaked on so it lights when the
connections click.

The attached photo will be more explanatory. Rabbi Ba'al Shem Tov from
DC Chabad and his guests have the globe of the first candle off,
preparing to light it from the torch. The second and third night glass
globes are transparent so the readers can see there was no flame lit.
The first night only the globe, in the pic you posted, to the far left,
Washington Monument side was to be lit. And that was after I walked
around back of the menorah through security on the right and able to
take pics of the Rabbi, facing him in the cherry picker.

Hope that assists people understanding lighting the menorah on Hannuka.
best
Carrie


(click image to enlarge)

Alex, you certainly seem to have a way with women. What is it about you that draws the crazy ones?

I've seen these blue flashes many times. They are cause by static electricity in the camera. Sometimes they appear as ball-shaped, sometimes as lightening strikes. They always look mysterious.