IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags time travel

Reply
Old 25th October 2010, 06:01 PM   #1
StanBearclaw
Muse
 
StanBearclaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 967
Charlie Chaplin + iPhone + Fat lady = Time Travel Proof

Not much to say really. Just watch and be amazed.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
StanBearclaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:18 PM   #2
Ririon
Cool cat
 
Ririon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,059
Well, whatever it was, it was not an iPhone in 1928. "Can you hear me now? No? Dammit, no bars..."
__________________
Engineer by day, scientist by night.
Ririon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:27 PM   #3
OlegTheBatty
Scholar
 
OlegTheBatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 67
Time travel? Where are they getting that?

Obviously she's talking to the orbiting Mother Ship.
OlegTheBatty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:33 PM   #4
Brattus
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,290
Well for the sake of discussion let's say it's an Iphone. So who are they talking to and how are they talking to them? Did they time travel the satellites and cell towers as well?
Brattus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:36 PM   #5
JWideman
Graduate Poster
 
JWideman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,233
http://www.hearingaidmuseum.com/gall...iconmodela.htm
JWideman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:42 PM   #6
Brattus
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,290
You know on second thought if there was an Iphone in 1928 the last thing anyone would care about would be using it to call someone.
The real time video recording and play back ability alone would freak out anyone from that time.
Not to mention stereo sound and digital clarity music and the future music.

Just the fact that something so small lit up by itself with no wires coming out of it would freak out the masses.
Brattus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:43 PM   #7
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,754
The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 06:50 PM   #8
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
 
JohnG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Abandon All Hope
Posts: 6,808
Originally Posted by Brattus View Post
Well for the sake of discussion let's say it's an Iphone. So who are they talking to and how are they talking to them? Did they time travel the satellites and cell towers as well?

The Doctor gave it an upgrade?


Some old lady has her hand up to face and it has to mean she's holding a cell phone??

If you really want your mind blown man, play this clip with the sound off and Pink Floyd's "Us and Them" playing in the background! It syncs up perfectly man! It can't be a coincidence, man!

Seriously though, have you ever really looked at your hand, man? The lady in the clip certainly has! Open your minds...
__________________
Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand. - Baruch Spinoza
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. - Harlan Ellison
JohnG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 07:49 PM   #9
grayman
Happy-go-lucky Heretic
 
grayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,655
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.
Yeah, I remember when you told us that at Gettysburg.
__________________
Stupidity is a condition. Ignorance is a choice. - Wiley

All great truths begin as blasphemies. - George Bernard Shaw

God is evil. As soon as you accept that, it all makes sense. - Sledge
grayman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 07:55 PM   #10
Slimething
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,790
How dumb to assume it's a cellular phone. It could just be an mp3 player!
Slimething is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 07:55 PM   #11
Brattus
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,290
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.
Good rule!
Brattus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:01 PM   #12
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Well whatever she is doing, it did not look out of place to the guy who walked passed her
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:20 PM   #13
Ririon
Cool cat
 
Ririon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,059
Old lady mumbles:
"This is WORSE than the toothache, maybe I should have tried some of those newfangled painkillers... What are all these people doing here? Oh no, they're filming me... etc.."
__________________
Engineer by day, scientist by night.
Ririon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:22 PM   #14
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 90,601
Originally Posted by JWideman View Post
I had the same thought. Check to see what kind of devices people in the day may have had.

It's also possible there is something in his hand unrelated to the ear like a handkerchief, or nothing in his hand.


In case anyone doesn't want to listen to the boring guy on the video, skip to about minute 3:30 and play it long enough to show a couple enlargements. There is nothing else to see on the tape.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:23 PM   #15
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 90,601
Originally Posted by Brattus View Post
Well for the sake of discussion let's say it's an Iphone. So who are they talking to and how are they talking to them? Did they time travel the satellites and cell towers as well?
You really needn't go that far in your pondering.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:31 PM   #16
MrBooglemaumau
Critical Thinker
 
MrBooglemaumau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 364
Possibility 1,the woman's husband is walking in front of her,and she's shouting at him ...while listening to her hearing aid..Possibility 2.Ok..she's an old lady[or a disguised male actor]..and old folks have a habit of muttering to themselves..I know I do...Possibility 3.Dr Who in disguise..[not likely ]..I tend to prefer Possibility 2.....There is always a rational explanation,and the mobile phone is NOT one of them..sorry.
MrBooglemaumau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 08:34 PM   #17
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
 
Ladewig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 28,268
So at 6:00, he says, it could be a time traveller or it could be a crazy person talking to him/herself. Yet at 0:50 he says that nobody can give an explanation for what you are about to see. If only the guy at six minutes could travel back in time and tell the guy at forty-five seconds that it could be a crazy person.
__________________
I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.
Ladewig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 09:07 PM   #18
not daSkeptic
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,913
  1. He tells the audience in advance what they are about to see.
  2. The person in question looks the tiniest bit off-color to me.
  3. The guy presenting this is a filmmaker.
not daSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 09:50 PM   #19
elipse
Master Poster
 
elipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,470
I also like how he says "it's not an am fm radio, obviously, because it's 1928" as a rationale for believing it to be an iphone. Obviously it's a phone and not an am fm radio...it's 1928, after all!

Quote:
1. He tells the audience in advance what they are about to see.
2. The person in question looks the tiniest bit off-color to me.
3. The guy presenting this is a filmmaker.
I thought about that, but wouldn't a filmmaker make a less boring film? This thing is a snooze.
__________________
either elipse is innocent, or is playing the shrewdest, ballsiest scum I've seen to date.--ZirconBlue
elipse is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 10:05 PM   #20
not daSkeptic
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,913
4. He pitches his own films at the very start of the video.
5. One of the films he pitches contains, very prominently on the DVD cover, himself.
not daSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 10:23 PM   #21
akenlon
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 27
Ok, there is an anomaly there. I'll grant you that in the same way as I believe in UFO's I see something in the air, it is flying. If I see it, it is an object (even if that object is simply an optical anomaly). If I don't know what it is...it is unidentified. Hence UFO. I however do not believe that the UFO's are alien spacecraft.

But back to this anomaly.

1. We're not hiding our face from the camera as some people are prone to do. They usually use their whole hand held flat and not with knuckles bent.

2. It does appear that she is holding an object. Dark Colored, roughly the size and shape of a mobile phone. However that is not conclusive as there are many things shaped like a mobile phone.

3. She is talking to someone (even if that someone is herself)

4. There are devices that are available in the time that would resemble a mobile-phone shaped device. The battery of a hearing aid of the time comes to mind.

5. The wires on said device are too short to really fit into a pocket. And women's clothing of the time rarely had pockets. That was what the purse was for (and I did not see evidence of a purse on that side of her body. So she would have to hold it in her hand.

6. The hearing aid devices of the time were not as well designed as the ones of today. They tended to pick up too much information. They would often amplify the voice of the wearer to an uncomfortable level. She may have been holding her hand over the device to block out some of the surrounding sounds and/or her own voice. Perhaps she was taking to the man who walked in front of her and didn't want to blow out her own eardrums with her own voice. Or as someone said, the elderly often talk to themselves. This would require again the adjustment of the hearing aid to keep the levels to a comfortable level.

From the Randi.org encyclopedia
Quote:
(The rule was originally stated by Occam as, “Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.”)

In effect, this rule states that if there exists more than one answer to a problem or a question, and if, for one answer to be true, well-established laws of logic and science must be re-written, ignored, or suspended in order to allow it to be true, and for the other answer to be true no such accommodation need be made, then the simpler——the second——of the answers is much more likely to be correct.
So which is more likely? That someone figured out how to travel back in time and once doing that, figured our how to travel through space roughly 886,973,634,480 miles (based on the Galaxy's speed of approx 552 Km/s and the travel of 82 years and not counting leap year days or current time vs time that the shot was filmed)? And mind you, that's not counting in the orbital speed of the Sun in the Galaxy (220 Km/s) over that time.

-or-

That someone of advanced age (and possibly diminished hearing) is wearing and holding onto a hearing assist device of the era?

I know which one I'm putting my money on.
akenlon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2010, 10:34 PM   #22
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
"No one can give me an explanation." = "I'm not convinced by the explanations I have heard."

It's a lost cause. Explanations abound, but the challenge is to convince this guy who already thinks he's got something amazing.

Her hand looks empty to me when she turns toward the camera. So maybe she's adjusting the hair pin that's supposed to keep her hat from slipping down? All we need now is someone to find a blurry image of Jesus in that clip and we have a winner!

I'm just wondering why this guy isn't doing the JFK film? Is that one overdone?

And what's with the zebra with a saddle on it? They weren't riding zebras back then... surely that, at least, is evidence for time travel (and human stupidity).

Watch someone scratch their head and you will likely see that same finger position. We magicians use the 'curl' when we are palming objects for just that reason, it's 'natural'. The modern cell phone was probably designed with this in mind -- to fit a comfortable and normal grip of the hand. The 'dark object' looks like a shadow to me, it would match the other shadows in the clip.

Last edited by marplots; 25th October 2010 at 10:45 PM.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 01:00 AM   #23
Stray Cat
Philosopher
 
Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,829
Time travel?

There's an app for that.
__________________
It's only my madness that stops me from going insane!
Stray Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 01:02 AM   #24
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 48,081
Originally Posted by Stray Cat View Post
Time travel?

There's an app for that.
Problem solved. Thread closed.
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 01:04 AM   #25
akenlon
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
"No one can give me an explanation." = "I'm not convinced by the explanations I have heard."

It's a lost cause. Explanations abound, but the challenge is to convince this guy who already thinks he's got something amazing.
therein lies the problem. He has it in his mind that he has something amazing. I actually lost faith with him when he said that bit about time travel. To me that means that his mind is fixed and it'll be a cold day in a core of the Sun that he'll change his mind.

I have an anomalous photo myself. I have had people give a number of explanations and then say "but that doesn't seem likely because..." in the same breath. It's a photo where you can see through the subject's shirt and see the details of the house behind him. As if he were fading out.

"It could be photoshopped but you can't see any artifacts that indicate it could be photoshopped"

"It could be Chroma-Key (bluescreen) but there is someone else with the same shirt that isn't see-through"

"It could be double exposure from a previous photo, but the photo snapped before that was taken an hour ago and at a location 5 miles away and the camera is digital"

"It could be a reflection off another object, but anything reflective is behind the camera and shouldn't have caused that"

And many, many more. All ending with "but..."

So I do not say that the photo is anything other than an as yet unexplained anomaly. Even Vivitar (the maker of the camera) can not explain the shot. So until someone can say that it could be something without saying "but it couldn't be because...", that is how it is going to stay.
akenlon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 01:18 AM   #26
Lord Emsworth
Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves
 
Lord Emsworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,997
But isn't anybody besides me concerned by the much more obvious oddity in that short clip? The woman just dissolves! Now you see her, and now you don't. And if you lip-read very, very carfully you can even make out what she is saying: "Beam me up, Scotty."





Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Her hand looks empty to me when she turns toward the camera. So maybe she's adjusting the hair pin that's supposed to keep her hat from slipping down? All we need now is someone to find a blurry image of Jesus in that clip and we have a winner!

...

Watch someone scratch their head and you will likely see that same finger position. ... The 'dark object' looks like a shadow to me, it would match the other shadows in the clip.
I agee that the hand appears emtpy when the woman turns.

And with respect to anything that people see a some dark object ... I don't really see it. Anything dark is either shadow or hair (just think of the shortish, wavy 1920s hairstyles).

But that is just boring ...
Lord Emsworth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 01:25 AM   #27
jmontecillo01
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 256
As an schizophrenic, we conduct outings/get together every week. We have a fellow patient who talks to his cigarette lighter and reports everything he sees. (He has this delusion that he is some sort of a James Bond).
jmontecillo01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 02:23 AM   #28
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Home.
Posts: 8,955
I go with the adjusting the hair/hat explanation. She is NOT talking to anybody until she turns to the camera (her hand position adjusts at this point) and seems to be responding to somebody off camera.

"Watson - hand me my violin we have an early finish on this case."
__________________
bluesjnr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 02:25 AM   #29
MetalPig
Illuminator
 
MetalPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 22, Acacia Avenue
Posts: 3,320
Originally Posted by jmontecillo01 View Post
We have a fellow patient who talks to his cigarette lighter and reports everything he sees.
Can he do both time travel and shape-shifting? That would explain the footage.
__________________
Just drive.
MetalPig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 04:24 AM   #30
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 11,803
Why would someone with a time machine be using a chunky 1990's mobile phone, particularly since there was no cell infrastructure in 1928 to make it work?

Of course the answer is that they're actually using a futuristic time-agile galactic communicator, which coincidentally looks exactly like a 1920's hearing aid.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 05:02 AM   #31
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
"it can't be an am/fm radio" he says, "because it's 1928."

Therefore it's a mobile phone. In 1928. Case closed.
jiggeryqua is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 05:09 AM   #32
Careyp74
Illuminator
 
Careyp74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,432
I delivered the paper as a child, one of my customers was a crazy old couple, hoarders that didn't socialize. I saw her outside a lot, collecting dog poop in case it became valuable in the future. She talked to herself a lot, and would hold her hand up to the side of her head when she did it. Reminded me of someone that got slapped a lot. This could be a similar case. Maybe she was a relative of Howard Hughes.
Careyp74 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 05:20 AM   #33
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Careyp74 View Post
I delivered the paper as a child, one of my customers was a crazy old couple, hoarders that didn't socialize. I saw her outside a lot, collecting dog poop in case it became valuable in the future. She talked to herself a lot, and would hold her hand up to the side of her head when she did it. Reminded me of someone that got slapped a lot. This could be a similar case. Maybe she was a relative of Howard Hughes.
Obviously she too is a time traveller (though I don't discount the possibility that she is the same old woman - didn't consider that, didya?!). And of course she was mad, nobody suggested she'd deliberately planned to time travel!! Are you suggesting you wouldn't go mad if you were suddenly and inexplicably transported out of your own time? Naturally, the first thing you'd do is try to connect to Facebook to update your status to 'I have been mysteriously shifted through time' and the mere fact that that didn't work would be enough to snap whatever fragile connection to reality was left after the experience of finding yourself in a monochrome past world. Picking up dog poop and talking to yourself would be the least of it, I'm sure. I'm not even sure the dog poop thing is insanity, she clearly came from a future where it will be valuable, or else why was she picking it up, huh??

And you people call yourself thinkers...
jiggeryqua is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 05:25 AM   #34
Starthinker
Philosopher
 
Starthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,011
I took a more scientific approach to this. I dressed up as a woman and then walked behind a zebra. I did this several time holding my hand up to my head as the woman in the film did. I didn't get a shot that looked like the one presented until I had an itch behind my ear.

If you look, I think around 4:08, where there is an extreme slo mo closeup, right at the fade out the fingers move apart, leading me to think she isn't holding anything at all and was probaby either holding/adjusting a clipon earring or, you know, just scratching her head. If you look close, you can see she's wearing a glove as well. If I had to put it on paper and sign my name I'd say:

She was walking, earring was slipping, she was trying to adjust it but the bounce of her waddle was too much, especially since she had gloves on, so she paused to get a really good fix on it and that's when the scene faded.


I also just wondered, if he's a film maker, wouldn't he have the tools to manipulate this digitally, and not just point a camera at a tv? Not that that has anything to do with anything, just wondered.
__________________
|¦¦|¦ |¦||||¦|||¦||¦¦|¦|||||||¦|¦¦¦¦|¦¦¦¦||¦|¦|¦¦|¦ |¦¦|¦
He who doubts victory has already lost the battle.
Below the navel there is neither religion nor truth.
Starthinker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 05:50 AM   #35
Careyp74
Illuminator
 
Careyp74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,432
Originally Posted by Starthinker View Post
I took a more scientific approach to this. I dressed up as a woman and then walked behind a zebra. I did this several time holding my hand up to my head as the woman in the film did. I didn't get a shot that looked like the one presented until I had an itch behind my ear.

If you look, I think around 4:08, where there is an extreme slo mo closeup, right at the fade out the fingers move apart, leading me to think she isn't holding anything at all and was probaby either holding/adjusting a clipon earring or, you know, just scratching her head. If you look close, you can see she's wearing a glove as well. If I had to put it on paper and sign my name I'd say:

She was walking, earring was slipping, she was trying to adjust it but the bounce of her waddle was too much, especially since she had gloves on, so she paused to get a really good fix on it and that's when the scene faded.


I also just wondered, if he's a film maker, wouldn't he have the tools to manipulate this digitally, and not just point a camera at a tv? Not that that has anything to do with anything, just wondered.
I was wondering the same thing. First thing that should be done is getting a hold of the original film.
Careyp74 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 06:09 AM   #36
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Starthinker View Post
I also just wondered, if he's a film maker, wouldn't he have the tools to manipulate this digitally, and not just point a camera at a tv? Not that that has anything to do with anything, just wondered.
At the risk of miring myself in my earlier satire, a furniture maker needn't necessarily have a computerised lathe. They might be a foot-powered bodger. Similarly, a film maker might just make film, with no digital interest at all. Granted, you might wonder why, but that's irrelevant. Also, bear in mind that the film festival he runs could only muster 100 people to look at this film, so it probably wasn't Cannes. But he's still a film maker.

More to the point, if he had manipulated it digitally, the kneejerk skeptics would be dismissing it because he had manipulated it digitally...
jiggeryqua is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 06:30 AM   #37
akenlon
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 27
Again, all wonderful points that demonstrate the unlikelihood of it being a cellphone.

It could be digitally manipulated, but I tend to go with the simpler theory that we have someone recorded in a position that looks like a modern person holding a cellphone of some sort.

Something may or may not be in the hand. Heck for all we know she was shielding her eyes from something and had a horrific accident involving a meat carver and she's missing a few finger tips.

I still say that it is a real image unless someone can show me the original (or at least the DVD...it is available on Netflix for Physical rental FYI). I also say that it just a coincidence that she is holding something that is the same rectangular shape as a cellphone, or that she is adjusting something and it looks like she is holding something.
akenlon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 06:30 AM   #38
aleCcowaN
imperfecto del subjuntivo
 
aleCcowaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,460
Always the cliché "nobody could explain"

He screened it for a hundred people and nobody could give him an explanation (his words).

1) they weren't talking about that footage, or ...
2) he omitted "...that I could accept", or
3) ...

My hypothesis:

1) something for a toothache (little rubber ice bag inside a handkerchief)
2) hearing aid
3) she's hearing Dempsey-Firpo fight in a radio Spika miraculously transported 25 years into the past, probably because she wished it
4) she traveled into the future and is holding an universal translator device from an ancient UFO crash (the coat covers long body hair common in paleolithic women)
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated, or covfefe your soul!These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out.
I got tired of the actual schizophrenics that are taking hold part of the forum and decided to do something about it.
aleCcowaN is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 07:31 AM   #39
Starthinker
Philosopher
 
Starthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,011
Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
At the risk of miring myself in my earlier satire, a furniture maker needn't necessarily have a computerised lathe. They might be a foot-powered bodger. Similarly, a film maker might just make film, with no digital interest at all. Granted, you might wonder why, but that's irrelevant. Also, bear in mind that the film festival he runs could only muster 100 people to look at this film, so it probably wasn't Cannes. But he's still a film maker.

More to the point, if he had manipulated it digitally, the kneejerk skeptics would be dismissing it because he had manipulated it digitally...
As I said, it doesn't have anything to do with anything, I just wondered.

Originally Posted by akenlon View Post
Again, all wonderful points that demonstrate the unlikelihood of it being a cellphone.

It could be digitally manipulated, but I tend to go with the simpler theory that we have someone recorded in a position that looks like a modern person holding a cellphone of some sort.

Something may or may not be in the hand. Heck for all we know she was shielding her eyes from something and had a horrific accident involving a meat carver and she's missing a few finger tips.

I still say that it is a real image unless someone can show me the original (or at least the DVD...it is available on Netflix for Physical rental FYI). I also say that it just a coincidence that she is holding something that is the same rectangular shape as a cellphone, or that she is adjusting something and it looks like she is holding something.
I don't think anyone is disputing the footage is real, it's just that there are a hundred reasons a woman may have her hand to her ear and this guy won't accept any of them. I think sometimes you just have to accept things at face value, that a woman had her hand on her ear. In 1928. Really, who cares? I don't see her lips moving so I don't think she was even talking. The guy in front of her had his hand in his pocket, but no one is expending energy to find out what that is all about. This is really a case of trying to make something out of less than nothing.
__________________
|¦¦|¦ |¦||||¦|||¦||¦¦|¦|||||||¦|¦¦¦¦|¦¦¦¦||¦|¦|¦¦|¦ |¦¦|¦
He who doubts victory has already lost the battle.
Below the navel there is neither religion nor truth.
Starthinker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2010, 09:22 AM   #40
Halfcentaur
Philosopher
 
Halfcentaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,620
It's simple.
Halfcentaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.