... Did you see the video?
This wasn't exactly a small stimuli, you are seeing a kid-like figure doing kid-like running without breaking the illusion of being a kid-like figure doing kid-like running, for several seconds. Explaining what we are seeing here with pareidolia just has no place here, the object of motif is responding to a scrolling foreground and background realistically.
no, what you are seeing is a kid running, going out of view, and then seemingly jumping into a tree. Its two separate things that your mind automaticly connects, because you saw the kid running previously. The "thing" jumping into the tree doest even look like a kid, it could be anything. Your just making the connection to a kid because thats where he last was, despite the fact that if you actually looked at the video, it looks like the kid is running away from the Camera and towards the woods. Wouldnt it be more likely to assume that what you are actually seeing is a kid running into the woods, followed by 2 seconds later, a completly unrelated bag (or at least thats what it looks like) caught in an updraft?
That's nice - say - why aren't you addressing my argument? You write 5-6 lines and not one of them works to supports your initial theory of this being a case of pareidolia, instead you move on to advocate apophenia as if I ever took issue on that. :|
Because that was your arguement....or do you actually believe that was a ghost?:lol: