I'm pretty sure this guy is a complete *beep* nut case. I think he is only trying to cash in on it all. I dunno if he is putting it all on. Or his mind is completely *beep* up from being abused as a child or not. I dunno. But what really sealed it for me was at the end when he was asked to do a lie detector test and he completely raged out. He seemed a bit sus to me. What do you think?
shareI think he's telling the truth. He feels he should be taken at his word - this has been his whole life since 1975, and I don't blame him. If you spent the majority of your life trying to convince people that events that actually happened to you really did happen and all you were met with was constant criticism, how would you feel? I've read enough reports from various sources to draw my own conclusions, and I feel that there are enough corraborating factors to believe there was some entity tormenting the Lutz family at the time, which may followed them when they left. Demons are not bound to a single earthly place, they are free to wander; any demonologist can tell you that. I also believe that George invited these entities upon his family and was the cause of the majority of activity. Would you want to have to take a lie detector to prove yourself? What if the results were different from what you knew to be true? It happens; lie detectors are not infallable. I empathize with him and hope he is able to overcome his own personal demons.
Nons have ISSUES - the WM3 are INNOCENT.
"any demonologist can tell you that" - just curious, what scientific discipline does "demonology" fall under? As long as there are other people out there who believe this sort of nonsense folks like Mr. Lutz will never get get past the things he thinks happened and learn the truth. I feel so sorry for him beacause I'm sure he truly believes all the ghosts and demons gibberish is real.
share[deleted]
And you believe that it is not possible why? Because Richard Dawkins said so? Just cause you say it isn't true doesn't mean it isn't. It may be true...it may not. To say either way with 100% certainty is the sign of either a liar or a nut.
----------------------------------------
"Live every week like it's Shark Week."
so anybody can make anything up, and then it can't be proved to be fake? what a stupid argument. demonology... seriously? so dumb
share*Sigh* You didn't comprehend my post. I didn't say someone can make anything up and it can't be proven to be false...so your comment about my "stupid argument" shows your lack of comprehension. I was referring to this specific case regarding spiritual concepts. OF COURSE there are things that can be proven true or false...but when it comes to the spiritual realm it is usually not possible to prove one way or another 100%.
I have met very few "believers" who think they can't possibly be wrong about the whole issue...and I have never met an atheist who said they knew 100% that God is not real...people on both sides, if they are mature and level-headed will admit that they can't know if they are right 100% about their beliefs.
I'm sure, though that I'm wasting my time because you have proven yourself to be ignorant on this issue by what you have said. In your anger you resort to 1st grade name calling based on an assumption you made about my post because you failed to understand it...so I won't hold my breath for a measured and well thought out response from you.
----------------------------------------
"Live every week like it's Shark Week."
what am I supposed to understand from someone who gives credit to demonology and talks about the "spiritual realm"..?? those things are for movies, not real life. maybe you should go back to first grade, preferably in a non creationist/religious school.
shareRemember that modernity has lasted barely a century.
Remember that it was barely beyond two centuries ago that the majority were happy to argue that the earth was flat.
Now the majority are content to 'pooh pooh' anything which *modern science* has no explanation for, without also realising that modern science has a long way to go...
Fact remains that there are things which we cannot understand still, & plenty of them. It is abhorrent to those with inquisitive minds that so many can be so sure, so arrogantly sure, that science has (& particularly as we've barely trodden the foothills of the technological revolution) debunked every aspect of the supernatural realm.
Is it not better to realise the very real possibility (and I would argue: probability) that we have not the technology yet, properly to prove, or otherwise, beyond reasonable doubt, the existence of hauntings?
Secondly, I'd like to ask those who disbelieve Danny Lutz, to list please the 'tells' he must have given that his was an untruthful account. That is because *if* he gave no particular 'tells', when he is not a professional award winning actor, it's pretty fascinating indeed that there are those who still would not believe him.
[deleted]
I do not believe him because the original story has been deemed a hoax (even though the major participants never came out and said so).
Shortly after the book came out defense attorney Weber(Ronnie Defaios lawyer) came out and said he and George Lutz concocted the story-even modeling it after The Exorcist. Why would a defense attorney risk his reputation and come out and say he helped make up one of the greatest haunted house stories in American history? Because he got screwed out of any money that was being made.
Even that aside the story was riddled with holes in logic that was later revealed. There were no other eyewitnesses outside of the Lutz family (despite the book claiming otherwise). Even the priest said he was never at the house.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/ghosts/amityville.asp
http://www.youtube.com/user/themisfitsmessiah?feature=mhee
It was a crap movie, cant say it was a documentary! My biggest question is, where were the other siblings? Too smart to participate in this? It appears that they were and declined to participate. After watching the entire thing, it seems Daniel has mental issues, maybe he should be committed. He says he can remember it all like it was yesterday, then gets defensive when there's talk about a lie detector test? And let's not forget all the clips of his crappy guitar playing. To sum it up, it's the story of an angry step-son ranting about his step-father with 0 facts. How the hell this made to Netflix I'll never know!
share>Remember that it was barely beyond two centuries ago that the majority were happy to argue
>that the earth was flat.
Really? I don't think anybody thought the Earth was flat in 1813!
>Now the majority are content to 'pooh pooh' anything which *modern science* has no
>explanation for,
People can't pooh pooh things that aren't known to have happened/exist in the first place. Science would only have explanations for things that are known to exist. This train of thought doesn't make much sense. People "pooh pooh" things that go against the sum total of human knowledge, such as "demons". There's no need to have an explanation for demons, because there is no evidence of demons in the first place. Meanwhile, everything once attributed to demons has been found to be epilepsy or mental illness. In the entire history of humanity, magical explanations have given way to rational, scientific, materialistic ones. Never, not even once, has a materialistic explanation given way to a magical one. Given those odds, it's quite proper to dismiss claims of the paranormal minus any evidence.
>without also realising that modern science has a long way to go...
And how far does parapsychology have to go? The first "parapsychological" research foundation was founded in the 1800s, yet here we are in 2013 and the discipline has so far failed to produce any tangible evidence that its subject exists! Meanwhile we went in 60 years from the first powered human flight at Kitty Hawk to walking on the Moon. We've gone from computers the size of rooms to computers in our pockets. We've gone from the discovery of DNA to mapping the human genome. In short, real science demonstrates advancements, achievements and progress.
People can't pooh pooh things that aren't known to have happened/exist in the first place. Science would only have explanations for things that are known to exist. This train of thought doesn't make much sense. People "pooh pooh" things that go against the sum total of human knowledge, such as "demons". There's no need to have an explanation for demons, because there is no evidence of demons in the first place.
Meanwhile, everything once attributed to demons has been found to be epilepsy or mental illness. In the entire history of humanity, magical explanations have given way to rational, scientific, materialistic ones... Given those odds, it's quite proper to dismiss claims of the paranormal minus any evidence.
Never, not even once, has a materialistic explanation given way to a magical one.
Right! Just like unicorns and werewolves and the Slender Man and the Matrix and that the moon is made of green cheese and Mars is inhabited by a race of telepathic marshmallow people might be true. Just because there’s absolutely no valid evidence whatsoever for something doesn’t mean we should doubt it! It might be true! Evidence doesn’t count for anything.
shareJust like unicorns and werewolves and the Slender Man and the Matrix and that the moon is made of green cheese and Mars is inhabited by a race of telepathic marshmallow people might be true.
Just because there’s absolutely no valid evidence whatsoever for something doesn’t mean we should doubt it!
Evidence doesn’t count for anything.
"He feels he should be taken at his word "
What person does not believe that he or she should be taken at his or her word?
"If you spent the majority of your life trying to convince people that events that actually happened to you really did happen and all you were met with was constant criticism, how would you feel?"
If he is telling the truth, why would he even care if other people believe him? And if he hates telling this story as much as he claims to, why would he be spending his life trying to convince people it was real.
Nothing you are saying to back him up makes any sense. If it bugs him so much to tell the story and he knows the story has 1. already been told hundreds of time and 2. many people don't believe him, why is he putting himself through the trauma to tell this story yet again? The same people who do not believe him will not believe him. He's not going to change minds so why is he traumatizing himself? Because he wants attention.
And since you claim that any demonologist will tell me a demon is not restricted to haunting a house and can follow a person around, could you provide me with names and contact information for all these demonologists you know that will tell me this? I mean you must have known them or read their information to come to this conclusion, right? Or are you just recycling the plot of "Paranormal Activity."?
I also emphasized with Daniel a lot during the documentary and can relate to the frustration that results from people not believing something extraordinary that happened to you. I grew up in a haunted house and to me it was 100% real and that was that. But to everyone else, they either think I'm a flat out liar or had an active imagination. You almost feel like they pity you for being the way you are, which is basically attention-seeking or misguided. I won't go into details about my own experience because that's not why I'm here, but I just wanted to say that I can definitely relate to the frustration of carrying something from your childhood over into your adult life and having no one believe you other than the people that were there. It's rare to find someone that doesn't make you feel like total crap about it, so guys (assuming you're male) like you are rare and very much appreciated by people like me. Thank you for having an open mind and not writing someone off just because they were young and/or because you don't personally believe in the existence of the supernatural. I wish I knew more people like you. Thanks, RHPSVegas.
share[deleted]
I think that what Mr Lutz is talking about was and still is very real - to him. It is not unreasonable to think that being a child brought up in that would ultimately believe it all and especially with the parents reinforcing his belief by telling the world. Mr Lutz comes across as a jerk yes, but also a little bit sad. He has accomplished little in life and this is all he has, and the people who made him like this are long gone so there will never be an end.
shareHe clearly has emotional issues. I think the end of the film clearly illustrates the dilemma. When talking to the therapist, he touches on just wanting to be believed. Wanting anyone to believe his story, and he mentions several times he never got to say his part as a child. What this indicates to me is that George Lutz was possibly a very abusive person, and Danny is trying to tell people George is not the nice guy people think. So Danny himself is now twisted into the paranormal stuff when what he really wants/needs is closure on the neglect and abuse from both his parents and possibly the boarding school he was left at while his parents went on tour. And since all anyone asks him about is the paranormal story, he's now resentful and angry and doesn't know how to separate the stories himself. So when Danny is speaking of supernatural stuff, deep down he's trying to say George.
shareI do believe in God, demons, ghosts and paranormal events, even the Warrens I think they are honest people. But Danny boy and this documentary is full of crap. the guy has serious mental and behavior issues....
shareI think the point I got from the whole thing was that the real horror for him was an abusive, controlling nutcase of a parent (or two) and the damage it can do to a kid - who turns into a damaged adult. I mean, wether or not those things happened (probably not IMHO), they are, to him, real. They could have been coping mechanisms, etc. When you're a kid and f--ked up *beep* is happening, your brain will do whatever fit has to to go into self protect mode. I feel sorry for the guy, really. As for cashing in, working in the field, subjects don't get paid for interviews in doc world. If they do, it's rare and the filmmaker is considered to have questionable/biased motives. These filmmakers seem credible. Maybe he was paid for food and transportation, but that's about it. Wether or not he decides to go on the talk show circuit is another story but I haven't really seen him in too many other places.
------
Fasten your seatbelts....
It certainly points to what you're saying. If he wasn't trying to make himself a star he wouldn't have insisted on the shots of him playing guitar and put his songs all over the film. I was skeptical going in, but when he casually dropped the "I saw George levitate items in the garage" (I'm paraphrasing) in a "oh, yeah, by the way..." fashion I knew it was total bull. That's not something you suddenly remember and mention sixty minutes into a movie. Also, the whole scene with Lorraine Warren was laughable. People suckling the teet of The Conjuring should watch this movie to see what a whacko she is in real life. Claiming to have the hair of saints and her cameras being the only ones to pick up images of ghosts... yeah, keep telling that story, sister. Daniel acting like he was going to murder the crew members who didn't believe in her mumbo jumbo is the typical reaction of a Christian, too.
share