Time Traveller Caught on 1928 Charlie Chaplin Film?

Originally posted by sajuek
If he is using a mobile telephone, where are the transceivers and satellites to facilitate his call?

tell that to a spy:

" if he's taking pictures , then where is his camera ? "

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85

Originally posted by sajuek
If he is using a mobile telephone, where are the transceivers and satellites to facilitate his call?

tell that to a spy:

" if he's taking pictures , then where is his camera ? "

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by davethebear
This has been on ATS for about a year now and nobody has come up with an answer to it.....still intrigues me......

edit on 14-10-2011 by davethebear because: (no reason given)

If you read the thread the answer furnished itself about 100 times. If you jump in 50 pages later and say there is no solution, thats just silly.

I totally disagree with you regarding an answer being found to this thread. I have followed this thread since it began and there has been no defining answer given regarding the film footage and what the person in the film is actually doing with his/her left hand........

If you believe that the solution has been given, then can you please enlighten me, obviously I must have missed something, somewhere..

Please let me know, then I can let go of this thread as I find it most intriguing......

cheers

You guys do realize that by the time we figure out time travel, we will be way past figuring out how to alter our genetic code to the point where we aren't fat or ugly anymore. So everyone who thinks this guy is a time traveler must also think he/she has put on a fat ugly suit just to go back in time, which is crazy. Why is it crazy? Because there are plenty of attractive people to begin with to blend in enough to not have to have a fat suit.

On top of that, apparently time travel back in time is magnitudes harder than forwards time travel, which means we would have already figured out how to travel faster than the speed of light, or figured some type of wormhole to do the equivalent which is equally impressive. Now by the time we have figure out that, we will have been well past the singularity and will have computers powerful enough to simulate any time in the past in a near perfect virtual reality. Therefor we would have little to no need to go back in time just to see the making of a Charlie Chaplin film.

Now, if you tell me that has been said before, and that I need to read through 20 or more pages I am going to freak.

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki
You guys do realize that by the time we figure out time travel, we will be way past figuring out how to alter our genetic code to the point where we aren't fat or ugly anymore. So everyone who thinks this guy is a time traveler must also think he/she has put on a fat ugly suit just to go back in time, which is crazy. Why is it crazy? Because there are plenty of attractive people to begin with to blend in enough to not have to have a fat suit.

On top of that, apparently time travel back in time is magnitudes harder than forwards time travel, which means we would have already figured out how to travel faster than the speed of light, or figured some type of wormhole to do the equivalent which is equally impressive. Now by the time we have figure out that, we will have been well past the singularity and will have computers powerful enough to simulate any time in the past in a near perfect virtual reality. Therefor we would have little to no need to go back in time just to see the making of a Charlie Chaplin film.

Now, if you tell me that has been said before, and that I need to read through 20 or more pages I am going to freak.

Still not good enough, I'm sorry.................No, only joking.......You may be well right in what you say about time travel and why would somebody who has travelled in time dressed in the way that they have and was caught on film dressed in such awful clothes. And if they did go back in time, then why did they choose to go to the opening of a movie? I don't know if it is a time traveller or not, it probably isn't, but the question of what the person in question is doing with their left hand and why are they talking is still up for scrutiny. There still hasn't been a true reason given as to what can be seen on film and the person in question...

reply to post by davethebear


I believe I said they had hearing aids that looked almost exactly like modern cell phones, and that you had to hold them to your ear. So, that's most likely what she's holding, and she's talking to nobody because she's senile, lol. Problem solved, and not a single paradox to boot.

I'm awesome. Next theory please.

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki
reply to post by davethebear

 

I believe I said they had hearing aids that looked almost exactly like modern cell phones, and that you had to hold them to your ear. So, that's most likely what she's holding, and she's talking to nobody because she's senile, lol. Problem solved, and not a single paradox to boot.

I'm awesome. Next theory please.

No, I don't buy that, there is more to it than that. Well that's what I think anyway.........I don't think it's an earing aid and as for the senile talking to yourself bit........Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

Ive downloaded this video and been through it frame by frame and i cannot tell what it is he/she is holding.

This is truly a mistry.

I just wish someone would suss this time travelling thing so I can go back and chat up Edgar Allen Poe.

didn't this get debunked during the first few pages of this thread?

well, the hearing aid explanation is good enough for me.

Originally posted by lacrimosa
didn't this get debunked during the first few pages of this thread?

well, the hearing aid explanation is good enough for me.

Wow, you are easily pleased...hahaha

Originally posted by davethebear

No, I don't buy that, there is more to it than that. Well that's what I think anyway.........I don't think it's an earing aid and as for the senile talking to yourself bit........Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you messing with me? Why would you choose to believe someone from the future went back in time to see a Charlie Chaplin film you can watch without going back in time, dressed up in an ugly old lady suit, started using a cell phone that couldn't possibly have worked, talked on the cell phone in PUBLIC for everyone to marvel at the future technology that couldn't have existed (and yet no one seems to notice), and just happened to walk by a camera (which would probably be rule #2 in time travel rule book, right behind not killing your grandfather), but yet you refuse to believe that it's just a hard of hearing senile old lady?

Psst, in case you didn't know, old ladies are hard of hearing and senile all the time, just take a look at your grandmother, then imagine what she would be like without all her pills she takes thanks to modern medicine.

I sort of thought maybe I did solve it. It doesn't seem like many have read my post and one would only need to go back to page 79 to read it. Basically I made a case that the scene in question was not filmed back in 1928 but was rather filmed in the modern era (long after cell phones came into common use) for inclusion in the DVD set. I don't know if anyone before my post did, but no one since has even tried to provide a reason to believe that the scene was actually filmed anywhere near as far back as 1928. Keep in mind, despite the title of this thread, the scene was not part of any Charlie Chaplin movie, but was rather supposed (or implied) to be a scene from outside the theater for the opening of a Chaplin film back in 1928. Therefore, no one can turn to a particular Chaplin movie and say that the scene has or has not always been there.

reply to post by QtheQ


Well if the guy/girl was an actor, and they were trying to re-create the opening of the film and pass it off as real footage, don't you think they would have had the guy NOT be on his cell phone while acting out the footage? I mean, they went to all the trouble to get a period camera, period costumes, and a period set of the theater, and then they have the guy walk into the frame with a cell phone?

I don't think that's the case, sorry.

There is literally nothing stopping anyone from acting strange, on camera or not. There could be hundreds of reasons why this lady is acting like this, many have been pointed out in the thread already. It's important to notice we don't actually see a cellphone or any out-of-time technology in this video- just something that looks to us to be out of place. Nobody in their right mind would consider this evidence of time travel.

reply to post by JohnnySasaki


The directors may have intentionally introduced the anachronism of a cell phone in a 1920's setting just for the humor of it and to see if anyone would catch it.

Originally posted by wirehead
There is literally nothing stopping anyone from acting strange, on camera or not. There could be hundreds of reasons why this lady is acting like this, many have been pointed out in the thread already. It's important to notice we don't actually see a cellphone or any out-of-time technology in this video- just something that looks to us to be out of place. Nobody in their right mind would consider this evidence of time travel.

Why not?Why not? Outside the box, outside the box..........I love it.....

WOW, awesome thread!!, Im so fascinated with this now, Thanks OP for sharing!

My theory is that she sees the camera, and tries to cover her face while walking by.



Keep in mind.... no cell phone towers during this time. It would be totally useless even if it was a phone.

reply to post by Scales


Hey you never know 1000 years in the future they may not need cell towers lol, think about it, if you told someone in the 20's that we would have something called the internet or the I PAD they would call you a witch and burn you at the stake, wait that was salem never mind lol