The Ghostie Boy photo thread

General Discussion About Anything Amityville And Other Paranormal Topics
User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:24 pm

That's true. Missy claimed it was the little ghost boy she played in the house with. She never said that the ghost was one of the DeFeo children. But yes, she also didn't say it was Paul Bartz.

Missy was 5 years old at the time of the haunting.

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Tue Oct 09, 2018 12:31 pm

Dan the Damned wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:24 pm
That's true. Missy claimed it was the little ghost boy she played in the house with. She never said that the ghost was one of the DeFeo children. But yes, she also didn't say it was Paul Bartz.

Missy was 5 years old at the time of the haunting.
Well, when I was five years old I had a memory and knew how to recognise people. I dare say most people did so it's fair to say Missy wouldn't have got that wrong.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:32 pm


User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:37 am

Dan the Damned wrote:
Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:32 pm
That won't debunk this case. Missy remembered it as the kid she played with full stop.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Exmortis
Amityville Member
Posts: 9
Location: Ottawa Canada

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Exmortis » Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:33 am

It's Paul you can see his shirt through the railing posts.

This photo has been debunked over and over.

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:36 pm

Exmortis wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:33 am
It's Paul you can see his shirt through the railing posts.

This photo has been debunked over and over.
I don't believe so. What you are falling for is disinfo. Missy identified it as the little boy who used to live in the house.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:32 pm

"Disinfo"??? Are you suggesting that I (a friend of George Lutz) am intentionally pushing a false narrative in an effort to discredit George's story???

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:26 am

Dan the Damned wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:32 pm
"Disinfo"??? Are you suggesting that I (a friend of George Lutz) am intentionally pushing a false narrative in an effort to discredit George's story???
Did George say it was a fake pic?
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:29 am

No, he didn't. But he also was not presented with the evidence that we had gathered.

And just because the photo is likely that of Paul Bartz does NOT mean it is "a fake." This wasn't a case of Paul Bartz bending down to pretend he was a ghost (which is what is inferred when someone dubs the photo "a fake").

At least as far as the Lutzes go. In their case, especially after what they've been through, I think it's a natural mistake to assume it was a ghost. However, the Warrens should have (and I think did) know better. I think it shines a bad light on the Warrens...

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:57 am

Dan the Damned wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:29 am
No, he didn't. But he also was not presented with the evidence that we had gathered.

And just because the photo is likely that of Paul Bartz does NOT mean it is "a fake." This wasn't a case of Paul Bartz bending down to pretend he was a ghost (which is what is inferred when someone dubs the photo "a fake").

At least as far as the Lutzes go. In their case, especially after what they've been through, I think it's a natural mistake to assume it was a ghost. However, the Warrens should have (and I think did) know better. I think it shines a bad light on the Warrens...
I think you are massively confused. I've been saying the ghost pic is real so not sure where you think I'm discrediting anyone.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:33 pm

You are mixing up two different posts.

When I mentioned the word "discredit," I am referring to your accusation that I am deliberately spreading mis-information regarding this photo. I wrote "Are you suggesting that I (a friend of George Lutz) am intentionally pushing a false narrative in an effort to discredit his story?".

In other words, I am not Ric Osuna or Ryan Katzenblech. I do not have an agenda to push. I call things as I see them. Your accusation of "disinformation" is insulting and is also a cop-out on your part.

Now, on to the second post. I obviously know that you feel the photo is real. However, you asked me, "Did George say it was a fake pic?".

By using the term "a fake pic," you are misrepresenting my position on the matter. I do not think that the photo is "fake." I just don't think the image it contains is that of a ghost.

Do you understand the difference? Because it matters.

A "fake pic" is a photo that has either been manipulated or staged (like maybe Paul putting a white sheet over his head and posing for the photo, pretending that he was a ghost).

That is NOT what I am claiming is happening with this photo. I am claiming that the photo has captured Paul either kneeling or sitting in that doorway, and that some people mistakenly believe it is the photo of a ghost.

Now please, let's carry on without accusations of me lying to push a false narrative and without misrepresenting my position on the subject at hand. I am here in an attempt to uncover the truth, no matter where it leads...

User avatar
Exmortis
Amityville Member
Posts: 9
Location: Ottawa Canada

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Exmortis » Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:06 pm

Amit Y Ville wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:36 pm
Exmortis wrote:
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:33 am
It's Paul you can see his shirt through the railing posts.

This photo has been debunked over and over.
I don't believe so. What you are falling for is disinfo. Missy identified it as the little boy who used to live in the house.
No I deduced it all on my own.

This was taken the day the Warrens were there and the ghost boy borrowed Paul's shirt.

You can believe it's a ghost all you want and that's fine.

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Sat Oct 13, 2018 3:20 pm

Dan the Damned wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:33 pm
You are mixing up two different posts.

When I mentioned the word "discredit," I am referring to your accusation that I am deliberately spreading mis-information regarding this photo. I wrote "Are you suggesting that I (a friend of George Lutz) am intentionally pushing a false narrative in an effort to discredit his story?".

In other words, I am not Ric Osuna or Ryan Katzenblech. I do not have an agenda to push. I call things as I see them. Your accusation of "disinformation" is insulting and is also a cop-out on your part.

Now, on to the second post. I obviously know that you feel the photo is real. However, you asked me, "Did George say it was a fake pic?".

By using the term "a fake pic," you are misrepresenting my position on the matter. I do not think that the photo is "fake." I just don't think the image it contains is that of a ghost.

Do you understand the difference? Because it matters.

A "fake pic" is a photo that has either been manipulated or staged (like maybe Paul putting a white sheet over his head and posing for the photo, pretending that he was a ghost).

That is NOT what I am claiming is happening with this photo. I am claiming that the photo has captured Paul either kneeling or sitting in that doorway, and that some people mistakenly believe it is the photo of a ghost.

Now please, let's carry on without accusations of me lying to push a false narrative and without misrepresenting my position on the subject at hand. I am here in an attempt to uncover the truth, no matter where it leads...
If you watch My Amityville Horror several reporters said there were no children in the house at the time of that photo.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Dan the Damned » Sun Oct 14, 2018 1:49 am

Yes. And Paul Bartz was not a child. I don't think this is a photo of a child. I think it is the photo of a young man, possibly in his 20s, who goes by the name of Paul Bartz, and who was working with the Warrens in the Amityville house the night this photograph was taken (and who appears in other photos from that same night, etc, etc).

Some have mentioned the "freakishly long arm" of the ghost boy. Well, it's not "freakishly long" if you realize that the figure is not that of a child after all.

Have you read the Ghostie Boy Thread on here, where we talk about all this stuff?

User avatar
Amit Y Ville
Amityville Addict
Posts: 479

Re: Lorraine Warren: Keep your hauntings in the fiction section

Post by Amit Y Ville » Sun Oct 14, 2018 4:11 am

Dan the Damned wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 1:49 am
Yes. And Paul Bartz was not a child. I don't think this is a photo of a child. I think it is the photo of a young man, possibly in his 20s, who goes by the name of Paul Bartz, and who was working with the Warrens in the Amityville house the night this photograph was taken (and who appears in other photos from that same night, etc, etc).

Some have mentioned the "freakishly long arm" of the ghost boy. Well, it's not "freakishly long" if you realize that the figure is not that of a child after all.

Have you read the Ghostie Boy Thread on here, where we talk about all this stuff?
Yeah I've read it during my 10 or so years here. But I've had a change of heart having learnt so much about this case over the years. The Paul Bartz thing isnt a valid explanation for this and he's not said it was him when asked. If you can get him to admit it was him in camera then that might change my mind.
"Everything's sliding into place. Just ONE more sacrifice Lisa."

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by Dan the Damned » Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:22 am

My goal isn't to change your mind. But I will defend my position when I feel like it.

I have merged these latest posts to the Ghostie Boy Thread, itself, since that is what we're talking about.

And maybe you can read this thread again, since you keep misrepresenting my position on the matter (either intentionally (in an underhanded manner) or due to a lack of knowledge about the Paul Bartz theory).

For instance, you responded to one of my points by asking if George Lutz said the photo was faked (when you should know damn well that this isn't a case of the photo being "faked" -- it is simply a matter of mistaken identity).

And now you bring up the point that there were no children in the house that night, when you know damn well that this has absolutely NO bearing on Paul being in the photo (Paul wasn't a child, he was a man).

User avatar
Brendan72
Forest Giant
Posts: 3020
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by Brendan72 » Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:58 pm

I am not sure if this helps, it probably may well do. I came across this article on the 'Ghost Boy Photo' and it covered the Paul Bartz angle. It turns out that Bartz was approached regarding the Amityville case and specifically the photograph in question.

“I am the same Paul Bartz that took part in the séance in the Amityville home some 32 years ago.

The image in the photo you mention does resemble me and I know that Ed (now deceased) and Lorraine went on record (including national tv) stating it was a ghost. Because I have great respect and admiration for them, I will say no more on the issue, allowing the legend of the most haunted house in America, to continue.”

This probably won't answer Amit Y Ville's question regarding Bartz and his response as to his involvement and whether he could shed any light on the validity of its theory, or if it does then if it is the answer expected.

The article is located here: https://theresashauntedhistoryofthetri- ... graph.html

I am guessing he was asked about this question back in the 'Noughties' as he references "32 years ago" to when the Amityville investigation took place and could definitely be on or after 2006 when Ed Warren passed away (asked and answered!). Whether the quotation in the article is a direct one I cannot comment. He still seemed at the time that he was loyal to the Warrens - whether it still remains (one can assume it does) he probably would not have changed his position.
- Brendan72

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
- George Carlin. Comedian. (1937-2008)

User avatar
Dan the Damned
Lost Soul
Posts: 11827

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by Dan the Damned » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:25 am

Thanks for the link, but they got all their info straight from this board. It was our own Maxwell Smart (msmart112) who tracked Paul down and got in contact with him. Max posted about it here.

Max sent him that email in 2008.

And there is a lot more evidence in this very thread. But I suspect some people will want to believe what's in their heart rather than what the evidence seems to show. That's okay. But it doesn't make it true.

User avatar
DC Fan
Amityville Addict
Posts: 343

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by DC Fan » Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:15 am

I've always thought that of all the DeFeo children this image most resembles Allison. That was her bedroom there and I don't know if either of the boys had hair that long. Maybe once Missy stated it looks like the boy she played with it was always interpreted as male if a child, but none of us ever really had to follow that lead.

User avatar
Brendan72
Forest Giant
Posts: 3020
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by Brendan72 » Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:57 pm

Dan the Damned wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:25 am
Thanks for the link, but they got all their info straight from this board. It was our own Maxwell Smart (msmart112) who tracked Paul down and got in contact with him. Max posted about it here.

Max sent him that email in 2008.

And there is a lot more evidence in this very thread. But I suspect some people will want to believe what's in their heart rather than what the evidence seems to show. That's okay. But it doesn't make it true.
I really did not know their source was this board. Is hard to believe it is ten years since Max's email to Paul Bartz. How time passes quickly.
- Brendan72

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
- George Carlin. Comedian. (1937-2008)

bobbo
Amityville Addict
Posts: 158
Location: NorthCentral Texas
Contact:

Re: The Ghostie Boy photo thread

Post by bobbo » Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:39 pm

What it IS, is one of the first widely accepted photographs of a supernatural entity. Perhaps incorrectly so, but you can see why this has been so widely discussed.

The photo is notable, it's a bit jarring--considering our first reaction to it.

I've tried and dispelled as "goofy" many attempts at rationalizing, explaining, or debunking the photo on the basis of the viewer's preconceived ideas of the Lutz haunting, and certainly the claim that the flannel shirt and glasses make it undeniably possible that the subject is the Warrens' pageboy, or whatever. Scaled down and sitting on the second step without his knees concealing his face? Well, heck. I guess, maybe.

My timeless reaction mimics that of my initial reaction to the photograph in question, to put it as simply as I can.

Is the subject human? That's the question that's at the bottom of our toolboxes when attempting to assess the article of record.
What the Hell are we standing here listening to?

Post Reply