Time Traveller Caught on 1928 Charlie Chaplin Film?

Originally posted by Project-Sign
Wasn't that film called Timescape.? I remember it well. 'Grand Tour.?'

2.

Your are right, check out this link!


en.wikipedia.org...(1992_film)

reply to post by Rising Against


It was a joke. Never heard of this before in my life.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


Then who was this woman talking to? Unless they brought the network with them, they had no service.

reply to post by harrytuttle

 

What we have here is a case of cultural projection. We don't actually "see" anything in the person's hands, but because we are conditioned to conclude that someone with their hand to their head must be talking on a cell phone, some people think they see just that.

Definitely looks like an object to me.



In reply to Ziggy, I've never even heard of a "hearing horn" before tbh, so I'm not sure if that's what it could be from looking at the image above but it sounds plausible. ..Well, more so than a mobile.

reply to post by Balkan


I know you was, that's why I posted a wink and the funny tongue face lol...

Originally posted by rushunt
reply to post by Ouroborus2012

 

your avatar scares me alot!

ha ha I was thinking the same thing!

Hmmmm....interesting.

I was fully ready to come into this thread and try to debunk it...but the footage is so odd...I just don't know what to make of it.


But to all the people asking "who is he/she talking to?" or that the phone would have no reception. If the goal of the "time traveler" was to get on film and drop a little easter egg....they don't have to be talking to anyone. Anyone before this time period, where seeing people walk down the street with a cell phone talking isn't part of their reality, would really think nothing of this person. They might think it is odd if they noticed it...but it wouldn't look out of place (out of time)...it would just look odd and make no sense.


So assume I am mr. time traveler...and I want to say "Hi" to this generation...how would you do that? I think becoming an extra on a movie and pretending to talk on a cell phone would be a fantastic idea.


I still don't know what to make of the video...but I don't think the thought of "who could she be talking to" or "she would have no signal" debunks anything.

reply to post by zazzafrazz
I just showed my son(15) the video without telling him what it was about. I asked him to tell me what the person was doing?he said it's a guy talking on a cell phone,which is impossible because cell phones didn't exsist.

Originally posted by Nightchild

Originally posted by harrytuttle
What we have here is a case of cultural projection. We don't actually "see" anything in the person's hands, but because we are conditioned to conclude that someone with their hand to their head must be talking on a cell phone, some people think they see just that.

To further scrutinize this guy's hypothesis, no one holds a cell phone in the manner the person's hand is displayed nor in the way the young man demonstrates in his own video. People hold cell phones with the ends of their fingers, not with their fingers wrapped around the phone.

In short, this guy is using his imagination to come to his conclusion, not observable fact.

Well then look again, at the slowdowned clips with the closeup, and you will see that it DO indeed look like an actual object inside the hand.
It is not only the position of the hand that gives off an illusion of that it has to be something inserted in it, so to speak, but it acually DO look like an actual object in itself.

The only explanation I can see if it is not an actual object, is that it is a very solid shadow that is formed at that exact place in the hand/face, but I somewhat really doubt that.

on the close up just as he turns you can see part of it sticking out

As much as id like to believe its a time traveler...

The most likely explanation in my mind is that the person in question has a small hand cranked music box up to her ear and she is listing to it and possibly signing on humming along with the music.

props.stcimprov.com...

Originally posted by Mactire
I don't know if that's proof of anything. The shadow matches the shape of her hand. She could be walking while b!tching about a toothache. There's just no way of knowing, but I doubt a time traveller wandered onto a film set, and was dumb enough to appear on camera.
Isn't being non-influentual, invisible, and to NOT BRING ANYTHING FROM YOUR TIME BACK!!! kind of the three basic rules of time travel? Not that it may affect the future, but that it may create a destructive alternate universe.

I doubt she's walking and "b!tching" about a toothache. She doesn't appear to be in pain or discomfort. You're correct when you say there's not way of knowing. However, time travelers would still be human. And we humans make a LOT of mistakes. It's not a matter of being "dumb enough to appear on camera" because we can't control when someone else might whip out a camera and snap a shot. You and I and our piers make a lot of daily mistakes, and if we happened to have traveled back to the Renaissance, it doesn't change who we are and our level of innocent mistakes. It is very possible this is a time traveler.

As far as rules about time travel go, well, we have rules about camping in National Parks and caves, too. And, as we are human, many of us break or ignore the rules. We leave garbage in the caves. We feed the bears.

This could be evidence of time travel. OR, it could be evidence that Tesla had succeeded in some of his wireless tech experiments.

After much pained work I think I have utilized lip reading to at least partially decipher some of what was said. So far I have...

"Spock, for the love of God, beam me up. I look horrible in drag...."

~Heff

EEEEEeee its eeire!

Haha, that's a good one!

Eire or not, though, I have to say it's quite a stretch to suspect "time travel". Don't forget, people do all sorts of things, all the time. It's just that TV, the single greatest source of influence today, tends to present a homogenized view of the world.

When I was little, I saw a woman talking on the "phone" via something that seemed very much like a dead bird (or maybe a toy bird - I hope!). In a busy street of a huge city, where everyone could see her. (And this was before the advent of cellular phones.)
I have also seen lots and lots of other things.

Like I said, people do all kinds of things, and in Chaplin's movies doubly so.


EDIT TO ADD:

I think the hearing aid device is the most likely explanation, too.

Originally posted by ziggystar60
Just a suggestion, but perhaps the old woman was holding a "hearing horn"? I think they were still in use when the Chaplin movie was made.

"London Hearing Horn":
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5f7b41f19e54.jpg[/atsimg]

Brass with black finish, marked "3", denoting the larger of three sizes. 3 1/2" long, 2 1/8" diameter perforated end plate. Good condition, with worn finish.

www.americanartifacts.com...

I have to side with the folks that say "Ear Horn". But in stead of the "London" model, I think it was this one, Larger Celluloid Ear Trumpet (Ear Horn)




www.hearingaidmuseum.com...

As to who she was talking to, well, most likely it was the gentleman she was walking behind.

reply to post by zazzafrazz

Time traveller?
Old man from the future dressed like a lady so no one will notice but yet talking on is mobile phone out loud in front of the camera? lol , why not a lady with some tooth problem with a ice bag for the pain?

RA thanks for the still shot hun
DO you mind if I edit it into my OP?

OS, agee mobile netwrok to time travellers mean nothing...aaaand I too was hoping to debunk this lol

Ret Great find on that portable music box...but still looks too big when we consider RAs still enhancement.

Originally posted by Rising Against
Definitely looks like an object to me.



In reply to Ziggy, I've never even heard of a "hearing horn" before tbh, so I'm not sure if that's what it could be from looking at the image above but it sounds plausible. ..Well, more so than a mobile.

All we see is a head, a hand, and shadows. You can't make out any actual object in the hand. You are concluding there is an object because the hand suggests it, but you don't see it.

That being said, if she's holding an object in her hand up to her head, then the only reasonable explanation is that it was an earhorn, as previously suggested. Even so, we don't see an earhorn.

reply to post by Gloster

POssibly...but ice wasnt that common...freezers weret abound in 1928.......

reply to post by harrytuttle

I see a object clearly from the still....

The only thing I can really add to this is...

Wouldn't a time traveler be able to spring for a bluetooth?

By the way, who could she be talking to, there were no cell towers in that day and age. No way for the signal to be picked up and delivered to another device.

Great thread zazzy