Re: Scientific explanation?
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:53 am
Photographic proof is not good enough. And video is worthless.Apokryltaros wrote:Do realize that this is your opinion, also.Nitruswolf wrote:Now I will jump in here..
This is "your" opinion and point of view, and I would suggest wording your submit more erm.. as such to take into consideration that not everyone will think the same way as your self about the posibilty of something or the lack of therein.
For instance.. "I do not think it is posible for werewolves to exist.."
Is it just me, or am I some sort of broken record or skipping CD, in that I keep asking "CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SHOW ME PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF OF A PERSON ACTUALLY CHANGING INTO A WEREWOLF?"Nitruswolf wrote:Humans have for along time lost tuch with natural science or what I consider natural science. Natural science only proves how something exists or it's posibilities, it does not rule out possibilty no mater how improbable, and doesn't prove how something is not possible as there is always room for a chance something was missed that could allow the chance of posibility.
With today's photo manipulations and CGI, he can make it look like he is a real werewolf.
So the best proof is to have him stand right in front of you and change into a werewolf.
