Possible sprog abuse for attention on the net

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/michigan-couple-claims-captured-ghost-nanny-cam-baby-appears-deep-scratches-face-230651374.html

Couple claims to have seen a ghost on Sprogcam and now says the kid has scatches on her face. Commenters seem to be hoping it is a ghostie and no one yet has mentioned that this is more than likely an attention game

Well, we know parents actually exist, so I'd start the blame there.

I do believe in ghosts and I do believe in things like violent spirits causing physical harm to corporeal beings, BUT I notice that the paranormal investigator they called in to confirm the house is haunted didn't reveal their name. Surely someone worth their salt in the field would want everybody to know that they diagnosed a house with a poltergeist, right? Yeah, the "investigator" is probably some amateur who thinks that because they saw some dust in a photo and called it an "orb" that they're on par with Ghost Hunters.

The footage looks like it could be legitimate and I have heard that little kids are more capable of seeing ghosts because they don't know how to deny they exist yet, or something, which would explain why it caught the kid's attention. It's very possible the video has been tampered with because it's very easy to do that now, and to be honest, that ghost looks pretty fucking solid. See that little black strip of something or other right above the left side of the playpen? I think it's furniture in the background peeking out just above the edge of the pen. The "ghost" completely obscures that very dark detail. Ghosts aren't that opaque on film. The cynic in me guesses that they caught the kid just standing up suddenly on camera because reasons and edited in a ghostly blob sauntering across the room. Because the kid bolts right up before the thing even goes near it rather than after it passes by.

Even if it a real video of a ghost, that absolutely does not mean the ghost was the one that scratched the kid. Hauntings by troubled/violent spirits are very, very rare and while I have heard of angry restless ghosts harming new children in the house, I think if they had a pissed off ghost on their hands, it would have started hurting the kid much sooner.

Yeah, odds are these people probably saw a video on Youtube about poltergeists and figured they could get their 15 minutes of fame by scratching their loaf's face and either blaming it on the ghost or making a ghost to blame it on. Because ghosts captured on tape are pretty common findings and since these people wanted to make sure their proof stood out, and what better way to make headlines than going on about how a ghost hurt their baybee?

Yeah, I agree with Cambion. The 'ghost' looks way too solid on that camera. I believe in ghosts as well, mainly because of my own personal experiences with them. Unfortunately, a lot of the net is clogged with fake films and pics of ghosts now, so I don't usually believe anything I see on there anymore.

Didn't mean to insult anyone here. Just meant the likely explanation is the parents suck.

I have a very open mind about ghosts, spirits, and psychic phenomena. But I am also very cynical about the human race. Everybody I've ever personally met who claimed to be psychic has come off like a total attention whore who will do or say anything for attention.

It is certainly possible there are spirits that can physically harm people. It is even possible this could be caught on camera. But the far more likely explanation is the parents are abusing their kid for attention.

No worries, I don't think you insulted anyone. Seems we have lots of believers in the paranormal here, but we also understand the value of looking at more rational conclusions instead of leaping right to OMG IT'S A GHOST like some folks do.

Not to mention that if this were an honest to goodness malevolent spirit, it would be doing more than this. The voices and noises the Moo allegedly heard are typical signs of a haunting that could easily be researched and lied about, but something that wants to hurt someone in the house will usually harass the inhabitants of the house much more, like knocking shit over, knocking on the walls, banging cupboards, injuring the people in the house more frequently and generally being a real dick to them.

This kid is at an age where it's likely mobile, so there's also a good chance the kid scratched itself somehow as part of typical fall-down-go-boom toddler behavior. How come they didn't show images of the alleged injury? Because it would look too much like human fingernail marks, maybe?

Quote
kittehpeoples
Didn't mean to insult anyone here. Just meant the likely explanation is the parents suck.

Nah, you didn't insult me at all! And as mentioned above, I suspect there is a rational explanation for what happened.

Ah, good. Glad I didn't offend anyone here; the only ones I meant to insult were the parents.

Quote
kittehpeoples
Well, we know parents actually exist, so I'd start the blame there.

I don't think this is going out on a limb and agree. The people living with the child have had a few more opportunities to scratch (or to look away for a second while the kid is scratched due to an accident) than a curious ghost. Just glad they don't have a cat because if they did then that may be the next one on the list 1. ghost 2. kitty 3. bogeyman 4. random stranger who breaks into house to scratch face of kid 5. neighbor 6. Santa Claus 7. Easter Bunny .......10000. parent(s)