0
Newguest Posted 16 years ago
Vocabulary
Unrelated to ...
Hi
Our video recordings showed us a great deal of globule activity in the home - in other words , the presence of balls of light that seemed unrelated to any other source of illumination.
--- I'm not sure I understand the last part. Does it say that these balls of light (globules) existed independently without any other illumination which would help to see them? So they were just shining?
Our video recordings showed us a great deal of globule activity in the home - in other words , the presence of balls of light that seemed unrelated to any other source of illumination.
--- I'm not sure I understand the last part. Does it say that these balls of light (globules) existed independently without any other illumination which would help to see them? So they were just shining?
Top answer
It means that the globules were not a result of any other source of illumination. Their existence is apparently a result of the poltergeist activity.
- It means that the globules were not a result of any other source of illumination.
- Their existence is apparently a result of the poltergeist activity.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
It means that the globules were not a result of any other source of illumination. Their existence is apparently a result of the poltergeist activity.
00
IvanhrIt means that the globules were not a result of any other source of illumination.
Hi
I understand it this way: Those globules didn't need a light coming from something to be visible. For example they didn't need the light of the sun to be visible, because they're visible without it, they're visible out of themselves, they're shin
00
Ok, I did understand the globules were sources of light so they didn't need any other illumination to be seen. I assumed they were related to the poltergeist activity you mentioned in one of your previous posts. Silly me
00
IvanhrOk, I did understand the globules were sources of light so they didn't need any other illumination to be seen.
That's what I think it means. ***** of light so they don't need an illumination to be seen. Do we agree on this, cause I'm not sure now?
00
Is this a description of some supposed supernatural phenomenon?
The way I understand it, it's saying that these visible ***** of light -- these so-called "globules" -- did not seem to be mere artefacts (e.g. reflections) of known sources of illumination (e.g. light bulbs). They seemed to be real, independent, and presumably unexplained, sources of illumination.
The way I understand it, it's saying that these visible ***** of light -- these so-called "globules" -- did not seem to be mere artefacts (e.g. reflections) of known sources of illumination (e.g. light bulbs). They seemed to be real, independent, and presumably unexplained, sources of illumination.
0
Related Questions