I wonder what makes a guy like Randy go into all that trouble. The only thing he could hope to prove was that the pictures were forgeries. The most evident proof of that is the fact that they display fairies, unless you assume that it is possible to take pictures of them. In trying to reveal the presence of strings he was tacitly assuming that it would be a stronger proof of forgery than that of the fairies, which is equivalent to saying that it is more probable to photograph a fairy than it is to successfully conceal strings, but that is an absurdity even if you leave out any consideration about the reality of fairies. I don’t know if they have been named, but there certainly are vicious fallacies lurking in the task of proving something that you are convinced of to begin with.

(Reply) (Thread)

Those strings were, if digital artifacts, substantially less real than the pinned-up pictures of fairies-- which is ironic.

Makes me think of trying a story where the fairies actually live now in our computers and manifest themselves by subtly altering our images...

(Reply) (Thread)

Hi Jerry,

I always enjoy your posts. Besides having a feeling of grandeur after reading these posts, I always come to the initial self-realization stage where amazement and contentment come to me. Do you know why? Because I really like the fact that in spite of being, let's say, corporeally distant; this platform is just fabulous. I can read your notes anywhere and everywhere. Thanks so much for sharing all that you know. Waldo says hello :)
Victoria

(Reply) (Thread)