Comments on: Ghostly Angel?

By: Jezebel

Jezebel — Wed, 23 May 2007 05:11:31 +0000

If you look carefully, the light is arrayed on several different pillars, and different depths and angles in the photo. It’s really nothing more then our brains associating several random shapes that happen to be squashed together as a familiar outline. Now, if the whole ‘ghost angel’ were floating in front of the pillars, or was on the floor or a flat wall, it would be quite different. We see what we want to see. Theres no use arguing about the direction of the light being impossible- it’s obviously comming from several different sources, and the angel is brilliant, otherwise it would look like several window-shapes next to one another. And if the ‘photo experts’ can’t figure it out, they are obviously not experts.

My Aunt tells a story of a friend of hers who took a picture of the clouds out of an airplane window. She got the pictures developed (back in the days when digital was just getting started) and when the picture came back, Jesus was standing in the middle of the clouds, plain as day, in vibrant, living colour. My Aunt later discovered that developers will occasionally add Jesus to cloud pictures as a running inside joke.

In any case, it’s certainly interesting and amusing to think that people will freak out over rays of light. Guess theres still some innocence in the world.

. . .And that’s what’s really neat about this picture

By: ted

ted — Fri, 18 May 2007 17:42:26 +0000

Also, the article’s misleading. The Pope has a separate building where papal audiences are held (right next to St Peter’s).

Maybe the Angel should have asked for directions.

By: Gellner

Gellner — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:05:20 +0000

Are you surprised? A cop took this picture…leave it to them to find the truth lol

By: Wendy

Wendy — Fri, 18 May 2007 00:44:27 +0000

It’s cute and neat. I like how people naturally look for shapes and patterns in things. To me the pattern looks like Tinkerbell! Thanks!

By: Bendy

Bendy — Wed, 16 May 2007 23:25:35 +0000

Ain’t no such thing as angels…

By: brayden

brayden — Wed, 16 May 2007 19:23:27 +0000

i dont know what you guys are talking about, its -obviously- tinkerbell.

By: ted

ted — Wed, 16 May 2007 17:50:08 +0000

Looks like a Vorlon to me.

By: Jiminy Smitts

Jiminy Smitts — Wed, 16 May 2007 17:25:52 +0000

To my untrained eye it appears to be am Ophanim, but could possibly be a Cherubim or even a Kyriotite!

By: Angela

Angela — Wed, 16 May 2007 15:39:18 +0000

Why would you link anything from the Daily Mail?? You know that newspaper is bull

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 16 May 2007 15:22:22 +0000

So it’s probably not an angel, and a perfectly reasonable explanation can likely be found for it. But why the inordinately hostile reactions to it. It’s a photograph that somebody thought was “neat”, and it got posted on Neatorama. Get over it, people.

By: Ruby on Rails guy

Ruby on Rails guy — Wed, 16 May 2007 14:16:50 +0000

Ive never believed in these things .. i think it is the sun..

By: sam

sam — Wed, 16 May 2007 14:06:38 +0000

ok, so it’s obviously not a sign from god or literally an angel or anything, but i think sometimes it’s neat when you see coincidental pictures in things like that. It’s like cloud watching and seeing things in the cloud, or a crumpled sock that looks like abraham lincoln. I think it’s kind of neat. thanks alex

By: L.B. Jeffries

L.B. Jeffries — Wed, 16 May 2007 13:47:14 +0000

I’d like to chime in and say that “stunning” isn’t quite the word I’d use for that image.

By: fluff

fluff — Wed, 16 May 2007 10:40:30 +0000

Bullshit. Why did you post that?

By: HollywoodBob

HollywoodBob — Wed, 16 May 2007 10:12:16 +0000

If you look closely the “bust” line of the “angel” conforms perfectly to the edge of the wall behind it. It’s obviously a reflection off of someone elses digital camera’s lcd screen. There’s a massive light source directly above the crowd. Cop must know some crap pro-photogs and not know the difference between the words “revealed” and “noticed”.

By: Aramax

Aramax — Wed, 16 May 2007 09:31:24 +0000

It’s true that we could do better. We should definitly post about all that BBC reporter who went crazy because a scientologist wouldnt let him talk or something like that.

Anyway… I guess that what mrgoodbar was trying to say is that “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”.

By: Nora

Nora — Wed, 16 May 2007 09:26:03 +0000

Sure is a dumpy looking angel. Reminds me of the dwarfs in World of Warcraft. Squat and not “awe inspiring” whatsoever.

By: mrgoodbar

mrgoodbar — Wed, 16 May 2007 09:17:24 +0000

A retired policeman? Rome? A photo? Wow! It must be real.

Seriously, how is this neat? It doesn’t even look like anything… just some sort of white smudge or reflection.

You guys have a bad habit of posting BS images usually with some sheepish explanation such as, “I don’t know if its real or not, but…”