Charlie Chaplin + iPhone + Fat lady = Time Travel Proof

[StanBearclaw]

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

Y6a4T2tJaSU

[Ririon]

Well, whatever it was, it was not an iPhone in 1928. "Can you hear me now? No? Dammit, no bars..."

[OlegTheBatty]

Time travel? Where are they getting that?

Obviously she's talking to the orbiting Mother Ship.

[Brattus]

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?

[JWideman]

http://www.hearingaidmuseum.com/gallery/Carbon/Acousticon/info/acousticonmodela.htm

[Brattus]

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.

[Loss Leader]

The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.

[JohnG]

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?:duck:


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...

[grayman]

The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.

Yeah, I remember when you told us that at Gettysburg.

[Slimething]

How dumb to assume it's a cellular phone. It could just be an mp3 player! :boggled:

[Brattus]

The first rule of time travel: Never talk about time travel.

Good rule!

[MG1962]

Well whatever she is doing, it did not look out of place to the guy who walked passed her

[Ririon]

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.."

[Skeptic Ginger]

http://www.hearingaidmuseum.com/gallery/Carbon/Acousticon/info/acousticonmodela.htm

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]

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. ;)

[MrBooglemaumau]

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.:eek:

[Ladewig]

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.

[not daSkeptic]

He tells the audience in advance what they are about to see.
The person in question looks the tiniest bit off-color to me.
The guy presenting this is a filmmaker.

[elipse]

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!

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.

[not daSkeptic]

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.

[akenlon]

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
(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.

[marplots]

"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.

[Stray Cat]

Time travel?

There's an app for that.

[lionking]

Time travel?

There's an app for that.
Problem solved. Thread closed. ;)

[akenlon]

"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.

[Lord Emsworth]

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."

:eek:



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 ...

[jmontecillo01]

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).

[bluesjnr]

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."

[MetalPig]

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.

[Jack by the hedge]

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.

[jiggeryqua]

"it can't be an am/fm radio" he says, "because it's 1928."

Therefore it's a mobile phone. In 1928. Case closed.

[Careyp74]

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.

[jiggeryqua]

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...

[Starthinker]

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.

[Careyp74]

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.

[jiggeryqua]

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...

[akenlon]

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.

[aleCcowaN]

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)

[Starthinker]

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.

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.

[Halfcentaur]

It's simple.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v84/evilknick/s.jpg

[GreyArea]

http://www.hearingaidmuseum.com/gallery/Carbon/Acousticon/info/acousticonmodela.htm

Thanks for the tip. Next time I'm visiting the 1920's, I'll conceal my MP3 player in one of these.

Call it an "acoustIcon".

[bookitty]

My goodness! That's amazing, a modern film maker that does their homework and studies classic film from the 1920's! Almost too incredible to accept on such scant evidence.

As for the "phone," I see a hand with loosely curled fingers being held up near the ear. I don't see anything in the hand. I agree that it is probably one of the more probable explanations listed above.

Or simply that wigs itch and wigs slide under a hat. A wig that is starting to slide is adjusted with many small quick tugs from the opposite side, or subtly held in place until the wearer can get to a mirror. It was not uncommon for older women to wear a wig when their own hair started to thin, especially to an occasion like a film opening at the Chinese Theater. (Which, in 1928, would have been the equivalent of opening night at the Opera.)

[Big Les]

I'm saying nothing new here, but I did a rare reaction post on this the other day. It has to be shameless viral marketing IMO.

http://bshistorian.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/wheres-she-hiding-the-flux-capacitor/

[Sunstar]

a time traveller with a wireless connection 70 years before anybody else. Maybe there were more than one time traveller with mobile phones hanging around in 1928...

[tkmikkelsen]

There is a logical problem with this being a video clip of a time traveler. In order to explain this problem, I set the rule that no time traveler can ever be known public as that could have unforeseen consequences in the future.
If it is a time traveler then it would have to be a person from our future as we do not have the ability to time travel. What that means is that this person would in the future know of this film clip and can then take measures to not being filmed in first place. Meaning that then this video clip would never exist in our time and therefor we would not be able to see it on YouTube right now.
Therefor the fact that this video exist is the best proof that it is not a time traveler.

I personally go for the hearing aid theory as being the most plausible.

[jiggeryqua]

There is a logical problem with this being a video clip of a time traveler. In order to explain this problem, I set the rule that no time traveler can ever be known public as that could have unforeseen consequences in the future.
If it is a time traveler then it would have to be a person from our future as we do not have the ability to time travel. What that means is that this person would in the future know of this film clip and can then take measures to not being filmed in first place. Meaning that then this video clip would never exist in our time and therefor we would not be able to see it on YouTube right now.
Therefor the fact that this video exist is the best proof that it is not a time traveler.


Ah, but the fact is he is dressed as an old woman tends to indicate someone disguising their true identity, in all probability because he had stolen the time-travel technology and was on the run from the Chronocops. In the clip, he has clearly become aware of the camera and has, no doubt, worked through the same thought processes as you. That's why he's speaking into his voice-activated teleport device - you'll notice he fades out very soon after activating the teleport (I'm surprised nobody else has picked up on that!)

Obviously, the future law enforcers would be aware of this and seek to cover it up, so at least part of your hypothesis was reasonable if not quite accurate. However, the fact that this video does exist is actually proof that the film will go on to play some significant part in some future event, such that altering it in the past in any way would be disasterous for us all.

Luckily, the time police already know that our cynical age will shrug, shake their heads and say "It's a hearing aid, you looney". You're just playing into their hands...

[brenn]

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

I'm amazed.

I'm amazed at how much of that video was taken up by that idiot talking - I can only imagine it would have been worse with my speakers on. Luckily the video is also available without him, on youtube, so I went there.

Having finally gotten past "the guy" I am amazed that people manufacture a cell phone ,in their imaginations, because the person's hand is in the right position, even with enlargements showing an empty hand.

I'm amazed that I, being simple-minded, only see a clear video of a man and woman walking along together (distance and matched pace at first), probably in California, in winter, in bright sunlight. The woman, who is holding one hand up to shade her eyes against the sun, pauses and possibly says something to the man - I'm guessing maybe a discussion of directions or where she wants to go, since she looks around a little at the same time.

I'm amazed that some retard in England thinks this is amazing.

[akenlon]

I'm amazed that some retard in England thinks this is amazing.

I'm not. For one thing, it is fun to look for anomalies like this. A large part of the fun is to look at the oddity and to comment on it. Even to the point of coming up with off the wall theories as to why the anomaly is there in the first place.

I myself would have said "WTF? What the flarn is she holding? Damned if that doesn't look like she's holding a mobile phone."

Then my friends and I would make the comments like it's Aliens in disguise talking to the mothership or to the other special operatives in the field. Time travel certainly would have come up. "Can you hear me now? Can you hear me a week last Tuesday? would have been spoken as an obvious parody of the Verizon commercials. Someone would have brought up the Men in Black since they have alien tech that eventually was released to the public.

But here is what separates people like me from people like the guy in the vid. After we got the silliness out of our system, we would have finally started looking for the plausible explanation and then moved on. Perhaps saving the video for a gullible friend of ours to have a little fun at their expense.

In the end, we would know that it is just an amusing anomaly and move on with our lives.

This guy seems to think he has found proof of time travel and will not let go of it.

Besides...if you were going to go back with that sort of tech...wouldn't you have hidden it with a bluetooth device? I'm sure you could make one that looks like the hearing aid of the time.

[jiggeryqua]

I'm amazed that some retard in England thinks this is amazing.

If you'd have had your speakers on you would have heard him say he was from Belfast. That's in Northern Ireland, so not in England or Great Britain, but (contentiously) it is part of the United Kingdom.

You might also have been more aware that he has product to plug, so perhaps his 'amazement' has been manufactured for personal gain. That's not so amazing. Indeed, I've been amusing myself by spinning some connected yarns, so even with nothing to gain, his 'amazement' might easily have a mundane explaination.

I'm amazed that some people still say 'retard'. Is retardation so common in Kentucky that the word is commonplace and unremarkable?

[Jungle Jim]

I'm surprised he assumes it is a time traveler. My first thought was that the person was communicating with a spaceship in orbit. Although I would expect the person would communicate by pressing on the broach pinned to her dress requesting to be beamed up.

[zerospeaks]

I found out what it was guys.
http://bttf.wikia.com/wiki/File:Docwalkietalkie.jpg


I started this same thread in science and mathmatics in hopes that it would become a "is TT possible" thread. Not knowing that this thread existed.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=189866

[Audible Click]

Obviously, the person filmed was Captain Kirk who was trapped, in disguise, in 1928. He's holding his communicator and begging to be beamed up because his girdle is way too tight.

[Robert Oz]

Unbelievable, that the time traveller could have chosen that particular date. It could mean that that point in time inherently contains some sort of cosmic significance. Almost as if it were the temporal junction point for the entire space-time continuum. On the other hand, it could just be an amazing coincidence.

I can read lips and can confirm that the time traveller is in fact saying, "Time circuits on, flux capacitor fluxing."

[INRM]

I think the Acousticon is the best explanation. It is weird why she is talking, but the ear-piece matches the Acousticon, and the rectangular thing held is apparently the battery.

[FattyCatty]

I think the Acousticon is the best explanation. It is weird why she is talking, but the ear-piece matches the Acousticon, and the rectangular thing held is apparently the battery.
I'm saying nothing new here, but I did a rare reaction post on this the other day. It has to be shameless viral marketing IMO.

http://bshistorian.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/wheres-she-hiding-the-flux-capacitor/I think the Lutz Ferrando Ear Trumpet and Etui from Big Les looks like a better bet. phisick.com/a7et82lutz.htm

[geni]

Eh if you dig through enough old photos you will run into stuff that sort of looks like time travel if you don't think about it too much. For example from 1941:

taken from http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/pm_v2.php?id=record_detail&fl=0&lg=English&ex=00000470&hs=0&rd=117666#

[bookitty]

Eh if you dig through enough old photos you will run into stuff that sort of looks like time travel if you don't think about it too much. For example from 1941:

taken from http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/pm_v2.php?id=record_detail&fl=0&lg=English&ex=00000470&hs=0&rd=117666#

Wow. That really does play tricks with the mind for a moment. Awesome example. Thanks!

[Sledge]

This isn't even a new idea. The film Timestalkers (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094154/) is a time travel flick based around someone from the future going back in time to the 1880s, but taking a Colt Python with him. A historian in the 1980s finds the picture in a trunk of old West junk and hypothesises the existance of time travel. Adventure ho!

[Azrael 5]

Never mind whats she's holding, look at the size of her feet! Is it even a woman?!

Pretty good footage for 1928,maybe shes looking at cameraman and thinking "Thats a SOny HD -Q V34532 what the fuuuu---" :D

[Mike!]

It's far and away simpler than all the things that have been mentioned so far. The answer is easy. The zebra has gas. As she walks by she's saying, "Somebody light a match!"

[steve s]

This story just made the NBC Nightly News. And yes, Brian Williams mentioned that it's probably just a hearing aid.

Steve S

[Christian Klippel]

Hearing Aid:

Phonac Model C (http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/deafdisg&CISOPTR=142&CISOBOX=1&REC=3)

:)

Greetings,

Chris

[Lord Emsworth]

I still don't see any kind of object or device ... :confused: Could somebody point it out to me?

[Azrael 5]

This story led me to posts on another forum about John Titor. Haven't searched JREf for him at time of writing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

[Jack by the hedge]

I still don't see any kind of object or device ... :confused: Could somebody point it out to me?

Right at the last moment, as she turns her head and the picture fades, you can just see the end of something dark in her hand silhouetted against her cheek.

I think it's a hearing aid battery, and she's pressing the earpiece to her ear with the same hand.

[Lord Emsworth]

Right at the last moment, as she turns her head and the picture fades, you can just see the end of something dark in her hand silhouetted against her cheek.

I've attached an image (it is cropped a little) of one of the last few frames of the scene. Is this about right?

But in any case, I see no reason to assume that this is anything but the shadow cast by the hand and fingers themselves.

[PartialDerivative]

The is definitely 100% proof that time travel is possible! Anyone saying the opposite is just closed minded!

Edit: Also it's proof that the NWO is controlling everything, even time.

[Jack by the hedge]

I see no reason to assume that this is anything but the shadow cast by the hand and fingers themselves.

You may be right. It's pretty marginal, but it looks to me as if there's an object in her hand. The kink in the shadow may just be due to the curvature of her face, but with the film in motion it seemed to me to be from the corner of a dark object barely protruding from the heel of her hand. I take it to be a hearing aid battery, as previously discussed, and she's gripping it with her middle, ring and little fingers while pressing the earpiece to her ear with her index finger.

I could easily be wrong - it's just what it looks like to me.

[Uncayimmy]

Whatever she's holding is not black. It's red.

[Jack by the hedge]

Whatever she's holding is not black. It's red.

Does 1928 pre-date panchromatic film stock? (I guess that's what you're referring to.)

[Locknar]

I didn't realized I had been caught on film. Sad to say folks...in the future the iPhone still does not come in white, is still on AT&Ts network, and still only 3G.

Overall, I'd say just marketing...come across something odd, do a YouTube video on it and free publicity is yours for the taking; just what a aspiring film guy (he's what, a producer, director, etc.? I didn't watch the beginning of the video very closely) needs.

[Uncayimmy]

Does 1928 pre-date panchromatic film stock? (I guess that's what you're referring to.)

I was just making a smart-ass comment about his confidence that the device was black. How can you really tell when it comes to something that small on B&W film?

Back before Al Gore invented the Galactiweb, this would have garnered nothing more than, "Check it out? That lady looks like she's talking on a portable phone! WTF?" Nowadays some shrewd film producer uses it to garner publicity for his production company, and the Galactiweb jumps all over it.

[Ladewig]

I didn't realized I had been caught on film. Sad to say folks...in the future the iPhone still does not come in white, is still on AT&Ts network, and still only 3G.

Overall, I'd say just marketing...come across something odd, do a YouTube video on it and free publicity is yours for the taking; just what a aspiring film guy (he's what, a producer, director, etc.? I didn't watch the beginning of the video very closely) needs.

Well, the publicity may have been his goal, but he does a bad job of even that. He spends way too much time talking about how long he has studied it and how many people he has shown it to. He doesn't understand lighting, pacing, framing, or sound recording (or logic). Not the kind of guy I want working on my next project.

[Pixel42]

So she was (a) clever enough to somehow get hold of a cell phone from decades in the future and yet (b) so stupid she thought it would work decades before there was a cell network for it to connect to? :confused:

[CurtC]

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.

True that - they'd use it to play Angry Birds.

[commandlinegamer]

You know what, I think it's Ewan MacColl in disguise.

We need a lipreader to determine what (s)he's singing.

[NoZed Avenger]

Obviously, the person filmed was Captain Kirk who was trapped, in disguise, in 1928. He's holding his communicator and begging to be beamed up because his girdle is way too tight.

His friend, also shown, is obviously Chinese.

[Uncayimmy]

So she was (a) clever enough to somehow get hold of a cell phone from decades in the future and yet (b) so stupid she thought it would work decades before there was a cell network for it to connect to? :confused:

Argument for incredulity. It could have been left behind by time travelers and picked up by an ordinary person from that time period. If there was a message waiting, it would have been beeping or giving some other audible notification, which she was trying to hear.;)

[MikeSun5]

If it is a time traveler then it would have to be a person from our future as we do not have the ability to time travel. What that means is that this person would in the future know of this film clip and can then take measures to not being filmed in first place.

Nah, they already knew in the future that we dismissed their communicator as an old 1920s hearing aid. They knew it wouldn't be a big deal, so they let it slide.

:tinfoil We most definitely have Time Travelers in the future, but the TimeCops have specifically instructed them to avoid the late 20th and the entire 21st centuries because we're simply too unpredictably stupid to handle the truth. The people prior to the mid 1900s don't really know what to look for when it comes to 22nd century people, so it's easy for them to blend in with proper costumes.

This story led me to posts on another forum about John Titor. Haven't searched JREf for him at time of writing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

:D John Titor was actually pretty fun. I remember following it back when... That was some good stuff. Whoever came up with that whole thing put a LOT of time and effort into it. Oops! Lemme put the tinfoil hat back on....

:tinfoil The reason John Titor is no longer posting is because when he left our timeline and returned to his own, he got locked up not only for travelling to a forbidden era, but also for posting classified materials on the internet. The covert Time Cleanup teams attempted to portray the whole thing as an elaborate hoax, which seems to be working for now.

[zerospeaks]

"The reason John Titor is no longer posting is because when he left our timeline and returned to his own, he got locked up not only for travelling to a forbidden era, but also for posting classified materials on the internet. The covert Time Cleanup teams attempted to portray the whole thing as an elaborate hoax, which seems to be working for now."


His best friend came back to our time on a separate mission later and started posting too. http://www.bautforum.com/archive/index.php/t-9843.html

Can't find the originals he was posting for months and gave all sorts of equations and explanations about time travel and even claimed he was using an "upgraded" model of the device. Oh and that in his time, John had died of the flu.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Again, all wonderful points that demonstrate the unlikelihood of it being a cellphone.

Gee, ya think?

[marplots]

They asked for my theory of time travel... and then they poo-pooed it.
They asked me to give specific predictions about the future... and then they said it was all lucky guesses.
They asked for photographic evidence... and then they explained it away.

I'm fed up with you ancients and all your nay saying! It's back to the future for me. I'd honestly rather get shot at by mutants and robots than put up with this.

[Whiplash]

Footage of a REAL time traveler:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=85302&title=nudist-future-shock

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I've attached an image (it is cropped a little) of one of the last few frames of the scene. Is this about right?

But in any case, I see no reason to assume that this is anything but the shadow cast by the hand and fingers themselves.

I see 3 guys on a grassy knoll. Is that a muzzle flash?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So she was (a) clever enough to somehow get hold of a cell phone from decades in the future and yet (b) so stupid she thought it would work decades before there was a cell network for it to connect to? :confused:

How do you know there wasn't a cell network? You've seen cell towers, but have you ever actually seen on being put up? I haven't.

[Ron_Tomkins]

In addition to everything that has already been said about this moronic video and this very unskeptical, bored-to-his-wit individual, I must add one more thing: he even goes as far as making the erroneous conclusion that what she's holding in her hand (already assuming she's holding something) is black. How do you know this? Because it looks black? Hellooooo black and white footage anyone? Everything looks either black or white!! It could be any color! And as it has been mentioned before, there could actually be nothing there. The image quality is just too poor to tell.

It amuses me, though, that he specifically believes that what she's holding is an Iphone. Why not a Blackberry? Why not a cheap Motorola? Which leads me to the conclusion that he's making publicity for his film, and that Iphone is his sponsor.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

It amuses me, though, that he specifically believes that what she's holding is an Iphone. Why not a Blackberry? Why not a cheap Motorola? Which leads me to the conclusion that he's making publicity and that Iphone is his sponsor.

Don't be an idiot. Blackberry wasn't selling phones back then. :rolleyes:

[Lord Emsworth]

You may be right. It's pretty marginal, but it looks to me as if there's an object in her hand. The kink in the shadow may just be due to the curvature of her face, but with the film in motion it seemed to me to be from the corner of a dark object barely protruding from the heel of her hand. I take it to be a hearing aid battery, as previously discussed, and she's gripping it with her middle, ring and little fingers while pressing the earpiece to her ear with her index finger.

I could easily be wrong - it's just what it looks like to me.

I'd rather stick with Occam's razor here, i.e. if I cannot decisively make out any object (going by the shadows is pretty weak), and if it is not needed to explain anything, I am not going to assume that there is something there. No battery, no spactacle case, no you-name-it.

[geni]

Journalistic standards? what are those:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11646933

Although it's the northern Ireland section which explains a lot.

[zerospeaks]

This pretty much sums it up.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/254819/insanely-good-sense

[MikeSun5]

Edited response to moderated post.

The cell phone thing is pareidolia, plain and simple. Seeing someone walk around like that is so commonplace today, what else would a boneheaded 21st century digital boy think it was?

:tinfoil Of course the odd size and shape of the (wo)man coupled with the weird walk does suggest something in a human-costume. Possibly like the creatures in those Men in Black movies. The "cell phone" would then obviously be an unknown alien technology.

[Rrose Selavy]

Eh if you dig through enough old photos you will run into stuff that sort of looks like time travel if you don't think about it too much. For example from 1941:

taken from http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/pm_v2.php?id=record_detail&fl=0&lg=English&ex=00000470&hs=0&rd=117666#

Sorry I am missing something here. What's so weird about that picture?

[dlorde]

Sorry I am missing something here. What's so weird about that picture?

The young man with the shades & no hat is said to look and dress in too modern a fashion for the times - and maybe he's holding a Canon SLR :rolleyes:

[tuoni]

I feel practically embarrassed to post this, to be honest. But, I have had a challenge - I have had a good friend of mine hint that this is paranormal. I feel even more embarrassed that the BBC (even if only a branch) seem to find this "newsworthy"!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11646933

As far as I'm concerned, it's a bloke jibber-jabbering away for quite a while, then a repeated clip of a woman with a hand to her face. I don't claim to be any expert on "human expression" or anything, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who's ever used random hand gestures whilst being alone... let alone walking in front of something which "steals your soul" ( ;) )

[tuoni]

note to self: check before posting ;)

[INRM]

Geni,

Eh if you dig through enough old photos you will run into stuff that sort of looks like time travel if you don't think about it too much. For example from 1941:

Nice shirt for the time...

[OnlyTellsTruths]

My post from the sister thread in the Science sub-forum:

Is the person that walks in front of the person in question wearing a mask (a bandanna like a robber perhaps)? ...and what is he reaching into his breast pocket for... I want to know. :(

He's way more intriguing than the person in question walking behind him and holding up her collar.

I demand answers!

[applecorped]

Seimens hearing aid, 1924 model

Just google "seimens hearing aids history" and then click 1924

[marplots]

Sorry I am missing something here. What's so weird about that picture?

There's a zebra wearing a saddle.

OK, so I know you can't see it in every frame; AND the film is in black and white: AND it could be a donkey painted -- but by the fish-smelling beard of Odin, it LOOKS like a zebra wearing a saddle.

And this is in the 1920s!!??

[Explorer]

The young man with the shades & no hat is said to look and dress in too modern a fashion for the times - and maybe he's holding a Canon SLR :rolleyes:

The guy is wearing a typical college T-shirt of the time, i.e. the 1950s, with the college letter "M" for Michigan clearly showing on the front. He is also holding a folding camera typical of that period.

The only thing that makes him stand out from the rest of the crowd, is that he is not wearing a hat, and he has a hair style that is consistent with today's youth culture. Nothing amazing in that, as style comes and goes around in cycles constantly.

[Ausmerican]

Clutching a Psalm book and muttering Hail Marys would be a tiny bit more likely than an iPhone. Only a tiny bit tho.

[Cuddles]

Derail removed to AAH. If you wish to discuss the use of various words, please do so in an appropriate thread.

[Rrose Selavy]

The guy is wearing a typical college T-shirt of the time, i.e. the 1950s, with the college letter "M" for Michigan clearly showing on the front. He is also holding a folding camera typical of that period.

The only thing that makes him stand out from the rest of the crowd, is that he is not wearing a hat, and he has a hair style that is consistent with today's youth culture. Nothing amazing in that, as style comes and goes around in cycles constantly.

That's what I thought. He's simply younger and dressed informally compared to the others, carrying a camera of typical size for the period. Nothing remarkable in that.

[Light23]

I'm amazed that some retard in England thinks this is amazing.

Woah, woah, woah! That guy is from Belfast. He's our retard. I refuse to share him with England.

[Starthinker]

I wonder if one of the motions I've done on video will be seen by future generations as proof of time time travel.

"He tapped his chin! He's obviously a time traveller activating his autotooth tongue scraper!!"

[Hitch]

Before checking some of the links in this thread did not know that there were small, hand held, rectangular hearing aids in 1928. I guess the guy who made that video didn't either.

I just saw the clip for the first time about 15 minutes ago and immediately came here, sure there would be a thread about it. I'm pleased to see there was and that it contained enough information for a rational explanation. Once again, putting the "e" in JREF.

[Dave Rogers]

So she was (a) clever enough to somehow get hold of a cell phone from decades in the future and yet (b) so stupid she thought it would work decades before there was a cell network for it to connect to? :confused:

Of course, the whole idea is absurd. After all, if you were a time traveller visiting 1928, would your best idea of fun be to visit the set of a Charlie Chaplin film and pretend to do something technologically anachronistic just to screw with the minds of people far enough in the future to see the discrepancy?

... actually, that's not that great an argument. I think that's exactly what I would do.

Dave

[Drewbot]

I think it is a cell phone. Except it would have been described as a mobile telephone, which via an antenna tower, linked directly to Doc Savage's 86th floor headquarters.

That is Lt. Colonel Andrew Blodgett Mayfair in drag.

[followmycaravan]

Hey everyone,
I just watched a video and I found it pretty amazing, see it for yourself.

I can't post a link here cos I'm so new so just go to youtube and type Charlie Chaplin the circus time travelling.

[bozman]

No mas! :mad:

[Freethinker]

Amazing? No.
Proof? No.
Evidence? No.
Lame? Yes.

[Ladewig]

thread already exists

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=189674

[shemp]

Book him Danno.

[Rrose Selavy]

It's a tedious plug for a medicore film maker and most of the the media, including the BBC, fell for it.
Thankfully I can't even remember the guys name, company or any of his productions so he failed on that score though it might have been me fast forwarding through the youtube video to get to the actual two second clip.

In other shoddy sensationist scientific non news on the BBC a "dream recording device is possible" say researchers,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11635625

[Fast Eddie B]

I must add one more thing: he even goes as far as making the erroneous conclusion that what she's holding in her hand (already assuming she's holding something) is black. How do you know this? Because it looks black?

This thread has gotten really silly, laden with idle speculation.

Its clear from the video that:

1) The item in the woman's hand is white, and...

2) It's clearly a white iPhone from the future.

Zoom in and its unmistakable:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1091/5125621413_b1ccc98402.jpg

[Darat]

It's a tedious plug for a medicore film maker and most of the the media, including the BBC, fell for it.
Thankfully I can't even remember the guys name, company or any of his productions so he failed on that score though it might have been me fast forwarding through the youtube video to get to the actual two second clip.

...snip...

I have to say I was amazed that it was being covered as anything other than a story about a clever marketing campaign.

[paiute]

Hey everyone,
I just watched a video and I found it pretty amazing, see it for yourself.

I can't post a link here cos I'm so new so just go to youtube and type Charlie Chaplin the circus time travelling.

She had just popped in out of the wormhole and was stalking Chaplin after mistaking him for Hitler:

http://www.abyssandapex.com/200710-wikihistory.html

[patchbunny]

Book him Danno.

Can't. He's dead. (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39893712/ns/today-entertainment/) :(

[Monster Machine]

One has to wonder who she was talking to. Oh, and did all of the communications equipment required to use the thing go back in time with her?

Questions, questions, questions....

Monster

[bozman]

And shouldn't she at least try to hide it or something?

[Abe_the_Man]

When I first heard this story it reminded me of when I was 20 and working at Wal-Mart unloading trucks. One day I got in major trouble with a manager for talking on a cell phone. The manager didn't believe me when I told him I had never owned a cell phone and hadn't been using someone else's. He "SAW" me on the phone and I got written up for it and for insubordination because I was arguing with him about it. I tried explaining that I was only scratching the side of my head but he was certain there was "no possible way" that he could mistake someone scratching their head with someone talking on a cell phone.

My second thought was "who would you talk to in 1928 on a cell phone?"

My third thought was "whoever believes this has no idea how cell phone infrastructure works".

If it really was a time traveler wouldn't they be a little more discreet about it than walking down the street in the middle of a movie shoot on their iphone?

[zerospeaks]

"who would you talk to in 1928 on a cell phone?"

Other time traveler(s)

[CJW]

In addition to everything that has already been said about this moronic video and this very unskeptical, bored-to-his-wit individual, I must add one more thing: he even goes as far as making the erroneous conclusion that what she's holding in her hand (already assuming she's holding something) is black. How do you know this? Because it looks black? Hellooooo black and white footage anyone? Everything looks either black or white!! It could be any color! And as it has been mentioned before, there could actually be nothing there. The image quality is just too poor to tell.


No No No, the film is in color, it's the world that was black and white back then. The world didn't turn color until the 1930s and it was pretty grainy color for a while too.

[kittynh]

That is totally me in about 20 years time. I expect that even as a fat really old person I will qualify as a time traveller (hey, no NASA standards here) and I would totally go back in time to a Charlie Chaplin film opening! Though, I like Buster Keaton better and if I had to do a Chaplin film it would be "The Gold Rush". Still, I could fit this opening in my schedule.

Sure killing Hitler as a baby would probably be a better use of my time travel, but I put Charlie Chaplin premiers before that.

[Vortigern99]

No No No, the film is in color, it's the world that was black and white back then. The world didn't turn color until the 1930s and it was pretty grainy color for a while too.

What about paintings from before 1930 that are obviously in full color? The Sistine Chapel comes to mind...? ;)

[kittynh]

OH and yes, I expect I am dumb enough to be filmed while talking on my cell phone.

What upsets me is this woman in the 1920's has an iphone and I still don't!

[CJW]

No No No, the film is in color, it's the world that was black and white back then. The world didn't turn color until the 1930s and it was pretty grainy color for a while too.

What about paintings from before 1930 that are obviously in full color? The Sistine Chapel comes to mind...? ;)

Well, a lot of great artists were insane.

[kittynh]

No No No, the film is in color, it's the world that was black and white back then. The world didn't turn color until the 1930s and it was pretty grainy color for a while too.

What about paintings from before 1930 that are obviously in full color? The Sistine Chapel comes to mind...? ;)

silly person.

Science invented color. Eventually physicists from MIT and Stanford worked together to bring color to the entire world. Before then it was just geniuses like Leonardo that could make color happen on paintings and such. The Catholic church tried to suppress color, since it proved the Pope was really an alien (don't ask how, read Dan Browns new book about it).

[Uncayimmy]

silly person.

Science invented color. Eventually physicists from MIT and Stanford worked together to bring color to the entire world. Before then it was just geniuses like Leonardo that could make color happen on paintings and such. The Catholic church tried to suppress color, since it proved the Pope was really an alien (don't ask how, read Dan Browns new book about it).

Science didn't invent color. People did. See the history of words for color in language. It's quite interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_term

What they don't tell you is that people couldn't actually see those colors for centuries. God decided to grant color perception in a piecemeal fashion throughout our 6,000 year history.

[Vortigern99]

This thread is getting weird, and you people are all crackpots. :D

[dudalb]

I think it is a cell phone. Except it would have been described as a mobile telephone, which via an antenna tower, linked directly to Doc Savage's 86th floor headquarters.

That is Lt. Colonel Andrew Blodgett Mayfair in drag.

One of the fun things about the Doc Savage Stories is how much actual cutting edge (for the 1930's) technology Lester Dent used in the stories. Like Doc having a telephone answering maching in 1936 (protorypes actually existed, although they were way too expensive to be anything other then prototypes.)

[dudalb]

It's a tedious plug for a medicore film maker and most of the the media, including the BBC, fell for it.
Thankfully I can't even remember the guys name, company or any of his productions so he failed on that score though it might have been me fast forwarding through the youtube video to get to the actual two second clip.

In other shoddy sensationist scientific non news on the BBC a "dream recording device is possible" say researchers,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11635625

By medicore filmmaker I hope you are referring to the idiot in Belfast, and not Chaplin.....

[zerospeaks]

Sure killing Hitler as a baby would probably be a better use of my time travel

Changing the future is dangerous. You could inadvertently set the stage for an even worse evil to rise.

[Ririon]

Changing the future is dangerous. You could inadvertently set the stage for an even worse evil to rise.
Or you can make the world a better place. Why is it that in SF, every time somebody changes the future, it gets worse? It should be equally likely that it gets better, right? At least equally likely if you remove something horrible from the equation.

[phiwum]

Or you can make the world a better place. Why is it that in SF, every time somebody changes the future, it gets worse? It should be equally likely that it gets better, right? At least equally likely if you remove something horrible from the equation.

That seems reasonable enough, but would make for lousy story telling. Compare:

Sgt Carter and PFC Pyle go back in time to prevent WWII by killing Hitler. They do so, and everything is just great thereafter.

Sgt Carter and PFC Pyle go back in time to prevent WWII by killing Hitler. They do so, but change the future in unpredictable and detrimental ways. Hilarity/heroism ensues.

[brenn]

I'd like to respond, but my use of the word "retard" in the other thread about this not-very-amazing video upset some delicate types. Unfortunately, "retard" is absolutely essential to my post.

[demonunderyourbed]

i dont see anything in her hand.it could be a concealed flux capacitor, i just see her scratching her head with her middle finger..maybe she's trying to get up to 88mph so she can return home..
its a bit silly to really suggest she's on a mobile phone..

[Zanders]

Please tell me this is trolling.

[Towlie]

I'd like to respond, but my use of the word "retard" in the other thread about this not-very-amazing video upset some delicate types. Unfortunately, "retard" is absolutely essential to my post.I have just the thing for you: I thoughtfully started a separate thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=190031) yesterday in Social Issues & Current Events just to talk about how retarded this is while the folks in this forum debate about whether it's true or not.

[MikeSun5]

No No No, the film is in color, it's the world that was black and white back then. The world didn't turn color until the 1930s and it was pretty grainy color for a while too.

:D That's so funny that I recognize where that punchline is from. :calvin::hobbes:

[catsmate1]

Hey everyone,
I just watched a video and I found it pretty amazing, see it for yourself.

I can't post a link here cos I'm so new so just go to youtube and type Charlie Chaplin the circus time travelling.
This is at least the third thread on this matter.
Oh and it's complete nonsense.

Can't. He's dead. (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39893712/ns/today-entertainment/) :(
Nope he's been resurrected (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_Five-0). Or rebooted.:D

[Patricio Elicer]

Seimens hearing aid, 1924 model

Just google "seimens hearing aids history" and then click 1924


Here's one possible, likely, mundane explanation:

WwTbUfaPcLo&feature=player_embedded

[yomero]

:idea:

Nobody ever invented the cell phone. All cell phones in the present are replicas of the device evident in the film. One of the phones from the present was (is being, will be?) transported to 1928, it will be seen in Chaplin's film, and the never ending time loop will be closed.

:idea:

[MattusMaximus]

Time travel?

There's an app for that.

Yep, but it's only a one-way time travel app... into the future.

Just wait awhile, you'll see what I mean ;)

[Stray Cat]

Yep, but it's only a one-way time travel app... into the future.

Just wait awhile, you'll see what I mean ;)

We are all time travellers... It's just that we're all travelling in the same direction at the same speed. :)

[bluesjnr]

:idea:

Nobody ever invented the cell phone. All cell phones in the present are replicas of the device evident in the film. One of the phones from the present was (is being, will be?) transported to 1928, it will be seen in Chaplin's film, and the never ending time loop will be closed.

:idea:

Time paradox alert!

[Rrose Selavy]

By medicore filmmaker I hope you are referring to the idiot in Belfast, and not Chaplin.....

Er...well,, now you mention it I'm not a great fan , more into Laurel & Hardy.

Anyway if it was an iPhone, wouldn't it be Charles Aplin instead?:duck:

-

[Fast Eddie B]

It's just that we're all traveling in the same direction at the same speed.

Well, more or less...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

[Patricio Elicer]

Well, more or less...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation


Those living in equatorial latitudes age more slowly than those in higher latitudes, because they travel faster.

[Towlie]

Those living in equatorial latitudes age more slowly than those in higher latitudes, because they travel faster.Also, I'm told that your age doesn't increase during the time you spend fishing.

[Whiplash]

Also, I'm told that your age doesn't increase during the time you spend fishing.

But oddly enough, it triples for any time spent in a church.

[Uncayimmy]

Those living in equatorial latitudes age more slowly than those in higher latitudes, because they travel faster.

But since the earth bulges at the equator, they are farther away from the point of max gravity, and thus they age more slowly. I wonder if these two cancel each other out?

[Horza]

Omg it worked!!!

[Horza]

I've been tinkering with a time machine myself and where better than this thread to give it a test drive? For starters I'll stick with something easy - I'm only going to go back a few seconds. I'll be sure to let you skeptic types know how it goes.

[zerospeaks]

heehee, lol!

[MikeSun5]

I've been tinkering with a time machine myself and where better than this thread to give it a test drive? For starters I'll stick with something easy - I'm only going to go back a few seconds. I'll be sure to let you skeptic types know how it goes.

Fly here from Japan. You'll go back a whole day -- it's bonkers.

And I just finished building a time machine that moves forward at regular speed.

[Towlie]

I've been tinkering with a time machine myself and where better than this thread to give it a test drive? For starters I'll stick with something easy - I'm only going to go back a few seconds. I'll be sure to let you skeptic types know how it goes.I think I prefer my version of that gag that I posted last Tuesday (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=6484904&postcount=58).

[MikeSun5]

I think I prefer my version of that gag that I posted last Tuesday (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=6484904&postcount=58).

Doesn't count. You're a towel.

[Questioninggeller]

Other time traveler(s)

Who built a cell phone tower and related technology in order to communicate through a phone network?

[Jack by the hedge]

Who built a cell phone tower and related technology in order to communicate through a phone network?

Actually you just need to give the phone a quick burst from your sonic screwdriver and it'll work pretty much anywhere in time and space. I'm fairly sure I saw a documentary about that.

[Whiplash]

Actually you just need to give the phone a quick burst from your sonic screwdriver and it'll work pretty much anywhere in time and space. I'm fairly sure I saw a documentary about that.

It's too bad the lady in the video wasn't a young, slender blond. That would be perfect.

[Frying Dutchmen]

I watched apart of a "report" on the video on the Australian show Weekend Sunrise. They had the film maker on and some other crank on. Although the hosts didn't believe the story. They still let the idiots talk nonsense for about three minutes.

[zerospeaks]

Who built a cell phone tower and related technology in order to communicate through a phone network?

ONCE AGAIN! For the slow ones on this thread....

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091012013847/bttf/images/c/c4/Docwalkietalkie.jpg

[Undodog]

Well it's obvious that George is very deluded.
I don't believe for a second that he is a Film Maker.

[Cuddles]

But since the earth bulges at the equator, they are farther away from the point of max gravity, and thus they age more slowly. I wonder if these two cancel each other out?

I'm fairly sure the gravitational effect is larger. That was definitely the case for the experiments with clocks on aeroplanes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Velocity_and_gravitational_time_dila tion_combined-effect_tests), which is a similar situation.

[headscratcher4]

http://gizmodo.com/5678591/cell-phone+using-charlie-chaplin-movie-time-traveler-debunked

[StanBearclaw]

http://gizmodo.com/5678591/cell-phone+using-charlie-chaplin-movie-time-traveler-debunked

This is nearly as moronic as saying it's a cellphone. There's not enough information to determine she's holding ANYTHING, let alone figuring out which non-timebending device it is.




I really hate the viral phenomenon. I'm ashamed I started a thread about it.

[Bell]

I'll bet she was pretty pissed when she found out she had no reception.

[Ririon]

I really hate the viral phenomenon. I'm ashamed I started a thread about it.
This is why I only start threads about unpopular and boring topics. :o

[marplots]

I really hate the viral phenomenon. I'm ashamed I started a thread about it.

You, my friend, are patient zero. Congratulations.

[Doc Daneeka]

I absolutely love the way that the original 'theorist' says that it can't be a radio, because they were not yet invented.

Facepalm.

[Avatar49]

When I go to my downtown now for business there are all sorts of people walking around and talking to themselves. They do not even need a cell phone as they perhaps have chips implanted in their brain. I wonder how far in the future they come from and I think next time I see one I will ask them. I saw one going to the bathroom or maybe he just was getting a fax.

Really do you think someone who could time travel would carry a cell phone? I think if someone can travel through time they would not have a cell phone or invented something a little more hi Tech.

[headscratcher4]

I absolutely love the way that the original 'theorist' says that it can't be a radio, because they were not yet invented.

Facepalm.

Indeed...Marconi would have been very disapointed.

[phiwum]

I absolutely love the way that the original 'theorist' says that it can't be a radio, because they were not yet invented.

Facepalm.

I don't recall him saying that radio hadn't been invented. He said it couldn't be an AM/FM radio because it was 1928 (or whatever year).

Surely, it is true that there were no FM radios and no handheld AM radios way back then, so this handheld device couldn't be a radio. (Correct me if I'm wrong about the size of 1920s radios.)

ETA: His exact words were "It is not an AM/FM radio, 'cause obviously it's 1928." This seems correct to me.

[Pixel42]

ETA: His exact words were "It is not an AM/FM radio, 'cause obviously it's 1928." This seems correct to me.
I think the point being made is that "It is not a cell phone, 'cause obviously it's 1928" seems equally correct.

[Bell]

ETA: His exact words were "It is not an AM/FM radio, 'cause obviously it's 1928." This seems correct to me.

From which can be concluded that...?
It must have been a cell phone? In 1928?

[headscratcher4]

So long as were on the topic, why do we assume she is human? She very well could have been an alien or someone from the Star Ship Enterprise....

[StanBearclaw]

Correct me if I'm wrong about the size of 1920s radios.

Popular Mechanics, May 1922 (http://books.google.com/books?id=HdoDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA710)
http://imgur.com/7txFn.jpg

[phiwum]

Popular Mechanics, May 1922 (http://books.google.com/books?id=HdoDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA710)


Thanks for the correction.

A garter radio. I don't know what to say.

[Jack by the hedge]

Thanks for the correction.

A garter radio. I don't know what to say.

It's just a crystal set. You have to have a wire run down to your shoe to make a ground connection and have a coil of wire in your hat as the antenna. No amplification, just turn received radio energy into audio.

The story above about lion taming mishaps is more fun.

[marplots]

I believe she was listening to the lion taming mishap on her crystal radio set.

[rjh01]

Here is another youtube debunking the youtube in the OP
si6EmFi8ZUM

[Lord Emsworth]

Still just rampant speculation. Looks OK only if contrasted with the mobile phone claim.

[Big Les]

The point is that ANY historically plausible explanation is more likely to be the case than the time travel claim, as that is truly an "extraordinary claim" requiring proportionately extraordinary evidence.

It clearly isn't possible to fully debunk the video, as we can NEVER know precisely what she's doing, and with what.

[demonunderyourbed]

Changing the future is dangerous. You could inadvertently set the stage for an even worse evil to rise.

how can you change something that hasnt happened yet??? unless you travel back with someone from the future who has come back in time and takes you back with them..so you would be travelling through their past..then you could change something er i think lol ow my brains hurting

[MikeSun5]

how can you change something that hasnt happened yet??? unless you travel back with someone from the future who has come back in time and takes you back with them..so you would be travelling through their past..then you could change something er i think lol ow my brains hurting

hmmmm.... this makes me think... The word "future" is a lot like the word "tomorrow," in that it's more conceptual than actual. You can never be *in* the future, you can only be in the present. So if you were to time travel forward, no matter how fast you moved through time, you'd always be in the present. You'd be in the future relative to where you started, just like I'm in the future right now relative to the 1980s. I think. Great. Now my brain hurts, too.

[Sledge]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/kayak.png

[elipse]

So this has been a five page thread the upshot of which is:

Discovery News is bull ****.

Wow! This was certainly worth it!


Oh, wait. Just read the comic strip. THAT was worth it. :D

[Towlie]

That comic reminds me of a story where someone invented a time machine that could jump into the future any desired amount of time. The catch was that it took the entire Universe along with it so that there was no way to tell.