Time Traveller Caught on 1928 Charlie Chaplin Film?

I find it pretty funny that anyone could believe it is a mobile phone. Mainly because there were no satellites in the sky in 1928. Plus, if you were a time traveler would you really want to walk around holding an object to your ear and talk to it? I mean to us it sounds sensible but people in 1928 would try to have you committed. I can't explain what she is doing but I highly doubt she is talking on a mobile phone.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


Karl gave you the vid because he didn't want to type the "We've already covered the tower/satellite issue, on page one - and page two - and page 3- and page 4 - and page 5......." thing 750 times!

He's smart, that one....

~Heff

Originally posted by Topsy_Cret
reply to post by KingKickass123

 

That could very well be true... But this was not a part of the movie, they were just filming outside of the theater where the movies was to be played. Why would the director say something to only this women walking by? The gentleman before her walks by like no one is there.

Who knows?
But if people want to keep believing it's a timetravelling witch keep on believing.
it's like talking to religious people.
I'll go for the sane explenation.

Originally posted by oooGIPPERooo
I find it pretty funny that anyone could believe it is a mobile phone. Mainly because there were no satellites in the sky in 1928. Plus, if you were a time traveler would you really want to walk around holding an object to your ear and talk to it? I mean to us it sounds sensible but people in 1928 would try to have you committed. I can't explain what she is doing but I highly doubt she is talking on a mobile phone.

So it isn't the "TIME TRAVEL" that gets you, because let's be honest, it is perfectly plausible. It is the fact that there were no cell phones back in the 20's right?

reply to post by Karlhungis


Im so glad someone else said this. I have been laughing through the whole thread because people keep saying " This is crazy... there are no cell phone towers in the 1920's" completely disregarding the whole time traveler part

Originally posted by KingKickass123

Originally posted by Topsy_Cret
reply to post by KingKickass123

 

That could very well be true... But this was not a part of the movie, they were just filming outside of the theater where the movies was to be played. Why would the director say something to only this women walking by? The gentleman before her walks by like no one is there.

Who knows?
But if people want to keep believing it's a timetravelling witch keep on believing.

it's like talking to religious people.
I'll go for the sane explenation.

edit on 26-10-2010 by KingKickass123 because: (no reason given)

and what is a sane explanation?

take 100 people survey them and you will find 100 different beliefs , what they think is sane...

This Post was very intresting and i though i would check out other pictures of time travellers caught on camera.
i came accross this pic at


moden dressed man who is sticking out like a swollen fingure (easy to spot) but then further down the artical there was a picture of Andrew Carlssin
he claimed he was from the year 2256 and suddenly vanished.

ok my point is that in the photo of the re-opening of the bridge a lookie-likie of andrew Carlssin can be seen on the left 3rd figure back with his arms crossed ok a little hair cut and slight style change but possibley the same guy.

let me know what you think.

Hi, just thought I'd throw this in. Such a great thread and some good fun on ATS.

If it was a time traveler, the original film at one point existed without the time traveler.

All you would have seen is the creepy guy and then no one.

If no one followed the creepy guy, this would have influenced the film editors decision as to how long that scene would have run.

The editor more the likely wouldn't have let the scene run that long with no one in shot.

Imagine this scene with the creepy guy, then no one following for the next 10 seconds.
No editor would let that happen.

Agghh my brain hurts. I love this thread.

Umm it was found to be a hearing aid


Hearing Aid Western Electric

In Response To: TIME TRAVELLER CAUGHT IN 1928 CHARLIE CHAPLIN MOVIE? (The_Fox)
Judy writes;

If you scrolled down on comments it was later figured out to be a hearing aid device:Western Electric 34A carbon hearing aid

Source Rumor Mills

reply to post by JJBB22


Well that makes no-sense what so ever... you would place one part in your ear and just cover the microphone with your other hand as shown in the original picture..mmmm i think not.....you would not be able to hear any thing.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


First off, I apologize if this has already been pointed out. ...I'm pretty sure a cell phone would not work because there would not be a carrier (e.g. at&t, verizon, t-mobile, etc.) to talk over. There would not be a satellite in the sky and there would not be cell towers anywhere for another 90 years or so. A cell phone requires an infrastructure of some sort to work. Perhaps the person is just talking with the voices in their head?

This is a very interesting clip.

I won't mention the cell phone tower issue that seems to keep coming up every 4 posts. Oops too late.

anyway,

Just a couple things that sort of draw my attention.

The feet, her feet a fricken huge or at least the shoes are.

Most of the others in the clip appear to be dressed less wintery(is that a word) They aren't wearin coats, just suits. But she looks like she's ready for arctic winds.

The nose, the nose is kinda big.

The way she is dressed, could easily be an outfit designed to conceal alot of crap. If so perhaps she is actually a skinny dude hiding a small city under that coat.

Her fingers are clearly in odd positions, which suggests to me there must be an object there. If she was just blocking the sun or holding a sore ear, I'd think her fingers would just be straight up.

Her lips do appear to be moving, but not in an exaggerated way like someone would do if they were speaking loudly to a person several feet away. But clearly very softly, as you might do when talking to yourself.

Why does she stop? The dude in front of her walks by like he is on a mssion, but she stops walking and then looks over without removing her hand from her head.

If there was nothing in her hand and she is just holding it to her head for whatever reason, then notices a film crew or cameraman, if she is surprised it, then her reaction should be to automatically drop her hand and look over.

If it was a hearing aid of some kind......... she is alone, walking on a street, whats the point of a hearing aid in that context.


Time travel? Cell phone? Other comm device? who knows,


But I bet if you showed this clip to 100 random non ATS subscribers, and asked them what they thought she was doing, they would tell you she is talking on a cell phone before they noticed the time period.

at first i thought it might be a walkie-talkie, but then i checked and found this:
The first radio receiver/transmitter to be nick-named "Walkie-Talkie" was the backpacked Motorola SCR-300, created by an engineering team in 1940 at the Galvin Manufacturing Company (fore-runner of Motorola).

Originally posted by oooGIPPERooo
I find it pretty funny that anyone could believe it is a mobile phone. Mainly because there were no satellites in the sky in 1928. Plus, if you were a time traveler would you really want to walk around holding an object to your ear and talk to it? I mean to us it sounds sensible but people in 1928 would try to have you committed. I can't explain what she is doing but I highly doubt she is talking on a mobile phone.

In addition to that, but people are crazy if they think we are anywhere close to Time Travel in present day. Time travel is barely at our limits of understanding. Even if time travel is possible, it probably won't be realized for millions of years. Rest assured, motorola and cell phones will be long dead and replaced with something waay cooler by then.

What's up with the "CELL TOWER REQUIRED" argument over and over and over again?? We've ALREADY progressed from cell towers to satellites (GOOGLE: Inmarsat Isatphone / Iridium 9555). What's to stop the future from progressing from satellite phones to multi-dimensional phones possibly with a "receiver" in each possible dimension?

Let me repeat (Otherwise I'm gonna see another no cell tower coverage post again) - We're in the year 2010. The most advanced PHONE is a SATELLITE PHONE. It's not a military technology or a prototype. It's a CONSUMER PRODUCT. They use it when out of coverage areas. They use it when the cell towers go down (During the Haiti Earthquake). They use it anywhere and everywhere on the planet. You can buy one for just over US$1000, or the price of 2 or 3 iphones and you get a phone number like everyone else. and it works through the SATELLITES in space over our heads RIGHT NOW.

Let me use a PICTURE since nobody gets it..


There! The latest model from inmarsat for 2010.

In summary, technology moved from CELL TOWERS (Covers a small area) to SATELLITES (Covers a large area, and with a network of it u cover the whole PLANET) and you cannot rule out the possibility of progressing from SATELLITES to whatever else (to cover every dimension..) in the future when time travel is possible.

Dear members of ATS, I really do apologise that it has taken me this long to respond to this thread, but, you see, it has been such tremendous fun perusing all your many and varied speculations about what it is that I was up to on that gloriously sunny day in January 1928. It is, of course, utterly understandable, and therefore forgivable, that so many of you have seen fit to posit explanations of the footage that refute the time traveller scenario. After all, in your time, at the closing of the first decade of the twenty first century, such concepts seemed outlandish and mired in the perverse territory of the insane, the delusional, or the optimistic conspiracy theorist. Let me say now that you are all enchanting and that your ideas are a constant source of delight to us, your progeny, after all.
Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Mrs. Myra Snoil, and it's true I am no oil painting, but you must keep in mind, and as one of your brethren has already pointed out, the aspect ratio of this footage does indeed do me a disservice, especially with regard to my shoe-size and my distended girth. You techno-savvy people of the pre deca-dimensional age really should know better!
My husband, Oswald, is a renowned historian, anthropologist and, above all else, an insufferable mischief maker. One day, last July, he was trawling through his archives and happened upon your wonderful thread. Since you all were so baffled and failed to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion to this anomaly he came up with the magnificent idea that we should dig out the old time machine - which had been collecting dust in a corner of the museum vault - and have a little fun. Now Oswald has always been a great fan of Mr. Chaplin, though he is little known to most of today's society. He thought that it would be highly amusing to send me back to that balmy day in January and have me fulfil the remit of your footage. Hence, donning the heavy, organic apparel of the period, I did indeed make my way, heading West down the old Hollywood Boulevard, holding to my ear the newly released iPhone 4G - (we found one in the vault). We thought it amusing that I should hold it in my left hand as a reference to the "Grip of Death" controversy that we understood to be so important to you at the time. Alas, none of you made reference to this. Oswald was insistent that we should keep the manifestation ambiguous and, therefore, shortly after the crossfade, I exited the shot - hence the crossfade.
The gentleman preceding me, by the way, is of no import. He was truly of his time. Once the shot was over he did turn to me and demand that I account for my peculiar behaviour. I told him that I was a prankster from the future, whereupon he assailed me with language so profane that I was forced to terminate him with the newly rolled out Spigmanek 66000.2
Oswald would be furious with me if he knew that I was addressing you in this antiquated manner, but then again, Oswald is not the only one who is an enthusiast of mischief.
Please forgive us both, and indeed receive this missive from your future as approbation for your pioneering thought. We are both great fans of your site, and often resort to it for a spot of late, bedtime reading. You are all so very quaint, and it pleases me very much that we have been such a source of speculation and wonderment to you all, if only for those/these brief few days.

Yours

Myra Snoil

PS Don't worry so much. It will all be alright in the end. One hint: Get rid of that Mr. Cameron of England. He is no good for anyone. I know you will.

reply to post by Scramjet76


Even if we move to something cooler for "local dimension" communications.. I'm guessing that cross-dimensional communications would still lag behind the local versions.

Case study: Current generation mobile/cell phones tend to be cool like the iPhone, HTC, Samsung, etc. and none of these require the big fat and ugly ANTENNA sticking out anymore. However, current generation SATELLITE phones still require some form of extended/external antenna for improved reception. That being said, Inmarsat has made their latest model's antenna "hideaway" unless the user wants to slide it out but nevertheless, it is there. Satellite phones also do not offer all the bells and whistles of a regular cellphone and they only provide VOICE/SMS/EMAIL capability for the most part (No facebook, no youtube, etc.).

reply to post by myrasnoil


Whilst I fully believe you Myra and your husband Oswald (Glad those names come back into fashion) I do have to query what happens to your posts so that Oswald never sees it?

I mean you can delete yours but mine mentioning of Oswald's time machine being picked up and dusted off prior to you packing a Spigmanek 66000.2, to kill a man, back to the past would surely stop him from letting you do it.

Also mentioning the pre deca-dimensional age should help as it's this time period has never been called that.

I'm going to have to call you deluded Myra and say that your claims are hogwash.

Enjoyable hogwash but hogwash none-the-least!

-m0r

Thank you sir, for that post - you do indeed have a point. I have therefore, in the past few minutes, travelled back to last Thursday and struck darling Oswald over the head with an enormous, cast iron wok, (yes, we still enjoy a stir fry in this day and age, and why shouldn't we?) - we will miss him very much. Thank you for your concern. People like you made us who we are today - Myra