- #1
- 36
- 0
http://www.fox8.com/news/wjw-ghost-story-exclusive-ss-txt,0,6557407.story [Broken]
Last edited by a moderator:
Debunk please: Ghost kid
- Thread starter Cowtipper
- Start date
Answers and Replies
- #2
- 380
- 3
debunk a story from fox - impossible
- #3
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Um, it's not a ghost? How do you debunk something like this? There's a kid chasing something. A tombstone obscures the child's actions. A squirrel or cat climbs a tree, then jumps out. The series of events might be odd, but I'm not sure where the ghost claim comes in.
Unless you rely solely on the fact that the image of the child was washed out (i.e. whitish). Although, in that case, that tree is a ghost too.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #4
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Cowtipper,
It would be useful for those of us trying to debunk this for you, for you to give us a quick description of why this video is so compelling to you personally. When you only post a URL it is difficult to guess why you find this particular video special.
I can't make recommendations as to how you post, but it would be helpful to me personally if you could include a description of the video with quick notes as to why it is important.
Thanks.
EDIT: In other words, it's tough to help you debunk something if you "let the video speak for itself" since many people would not view that video as anything special.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #5
- 2,820
- 22
I'd be more curious why the people walking past when the object moves up the tree and then drops from it, don't react at all. They just keep walking as if nothing's happened.
I'm also curious where the child goes.
If you watch the people walking with the push chair (the ones who don't react), as they enter, you notice the video jumps slightly. Although only brief (they appear to 'jump' at least a metre forward, from one side of the gravestone to the other), there's enough time for that running child to return back to them (assuming it's theirs), or move somewhere else. The tree issue is then something else that just happened to be a well timed coincidence.
It is the fact the video jumps that makes me sceptical here. It could be hiding anything and I'm surprised no one brought it up before.
I'd also note that person in the hooded jacket, prior to the jump is ahead of the man pushing the stroller and after it is behind. This could just be a difference in walking speed, but an inconsistency none the less.
Another issue, the hooded person appears to disappear as they zoom on the object dropping and then reappear just ahead of where they were. Again, nothing spooky, on further inspection it appears the other person does too. This tells me there are things there that aren't visible to the camera due to quality and contrast with the background, so the child vanishing becomes even less of a mystery.
I do agree though, you see something like that and don't keep filming? I'd have the camera on that spot right up until I got there. For some reason, people capture these 'amazing' bits of footage and stop filming.
I'm also curious where the child goes.
If you watch the people walking with the push chair (the ones who don't react), as they enter, you notice the video jumps slightly. Although only brief (they appear to 'jump' at least a metre forward, from one side of the gravestone to the other), there's enough time for that running child to return back to them (assuming it's theirs), or move somewhere else. The tree issue is then something else that just happened to be a well timed coincidence.
It is the fact the video jumps that makes me sceptical here. It could be hiding anything and I'm surprised no one brought it up before.
I'd also note that person in the hooded jacket, prior to the jump is ahead of the man pushing the stroller and after it is behind. This could just be a difference in walking speed, but an inconsistency none the less.
Another issue, the hooded person appears to disappear as they zoom on the object dropping and then reappear just ahead of where they were. Again, nothing spooky, on further inspection it appears the other person does too. This tells me there are things there that aren't visible to the camera due to quality and contrast with the background, so the child vanishing becomes even less of a mystery.
I do agree though, you see something like that and don't keep filming? I'd have the camera on that spot right up until I got there. For some reason, people capture these 'amazing' bits of footage and stop filming.
Last edited:
- #6
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Well, there could be an illusion of depth perception here. We see these people as being very close (on the z-axis) to the event, when in fact that could be more distant. If I tried to follow every running child in a cemetery I'd have whiplash! Oh... wait...
You never see the child after it goes behind the tombstone. Curious, I suppose. Although, if you hold your thumb at the appropriate distance from your face you can obscure entire galactic super-clusters from vision. Hiding a child behind a tombstone seems trivial (intentionally or unintentionally) in comparison.
It's possible that it's commentary on the type of person that finds these event to be significant. That is to say, only people who video tape ghosts seem to have the desire to stop filming said ghost. In actuality, it's possible to imagine the rationale behind it if you assume the videographer is a believer: "oh, it's another one of those stupid ghosts... better stop filming to save tape for something more important."
----------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to address an additional claim made in the video. Someone comments on "civil war attire." Has anyone been able to spot this in the video? It seems like it was a detail added independent of video evidence for the purpose of increasing the veracity of the claim. A civil war child sprinted to a tree to jump into it, only to fall down right after? I just don't know; it's really a nonsensical series of events.
Heh, also, the fact that they ran out and got the video copyrighted should tell you something about their motivations and intentions. I don't know what it should tell you, but surely it should tell you something.
- #7
- 2,820
- 22
Distant or not, something falls out of a tree within the vacinity of me and I'm going to at least notice (corner of the eye style) and possibly hear it.
The jump in the video around this point is what I don't like. If the child was to move away we'd have no way to know. There's a few seconds of video missing (I'd estimate 2), which gives plenty of time for the child to shift away, or return to the pram, or other such possibilities.
These people saw something weird, something their reaction on tape shows (the way he say's "oh wait" or something like that and heads over). Now they are flaunting it as a ghost tape and even copyrighted it. It's this "wow what have I just seen" reaction and then the non-continuining of the filming that makes me sceptical to these claims. A person who is truly amazed by what they have just seen suddenly stops filming, what a load of rubbish. But hey, I know I wouldn't, can't speak for others. Although for a true believer who sees a lot of this sort of thing, I would agree they may stop filming, but then for people who reacted in the way this guy did, I can't accept you'd just stop filming and not explore. Heck, perhaps they did and solved it, but then there's no money in that is there. Who knows.
This dress stuff is a load of rubbish. The video quality is far too poor ascertain any detail of that level.
These people are either looking for a company to pay for the video rights or a copyright violation allowing them to sue. It's all about money.
- #8
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
I take issue with the idea that Civil War-era ghost children are somehow predisposed to sudden fits of tree climbing.
- #9
- 2,820
- 22
Well I suppose there was little else to do back then. Why break the habit of a lifetime?
- #10
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Well I suppose there was little else to do back then. Why break the habit of a lifetime?
Also, on a more serious note, the gray "blob" that is created when the "child" leaps into the tree is still present even after the "child" leaps out. I had to watch it a few times, but I'm actually fairly confident that the "up" and "down" motions might not even be related.
If you did a Rorschach test on the "blob" jumping into the tree and the "blob" jumping out of the tree, I'd be willing to guess that you would get "creamed corn" before anyone suggested it was a child.
I'd like to propose that the "child jumping out of a tree" is actually the woman pushing the stroller gathering a blanket from the lower right side of the stroller and swinging it up and into the baby-compartment (for lack of a better term).
- #11
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Woah! Crazy find! This should help!
Watch closely for the "jump out of the tree." Two figures walk towards the tree. One pushing a stroller (we will call her "mom") and short hooded one (we will call her "Britney Spears").
Immediately after the blob leaves the tree, don't look at the stroller or mom. Look at the tree between mom and Britney. There is a third person there wearing a black sweatshirt who stops dead, turns his face directly towards the stroller, and leans forward.
I cannot find this person in any other part of the video.
(EDIT: Timestamp is between 1:32 and 1:34. This website lists remaining time, so it reads about -2:06 to -2:04 on the right hand side (total video time of 3:38).)
(DOUBLE EDIT: It's easier to see if you don't expand the screen size. The limited resolution creates artifacts when stretched.)
Watch closely for the "jump out of the tree." Two figures walk towards the tree. One pushing a stroller (we will call her "mom") and short hooded one (we will call her "Britney Spears").
Immediately after the blob leaves the tree, don't look at the stroller or mom. Look at the tree between mom and Britney. There is a third person there wearing a black sweatshirt who stops dead, turns his face directly towards the stroller, and leans forward.
I cannot find this person in any other part of the video.
(EDIT: Timestamp is between 1:32 and 1:34. This website lists remaining time, so it reads about -2:06 to -2:04 on the right hand side (total video time of 3:38).)
(DOUBLE EDIT: It's easier to see if you don't expand the screen size. The limited resolution creates artifacts when stretched.)
Last edited:
- #12
- 2,820
- 22
This is what I meant by "there are things there that aren't visible to the camera due to quality and contrast with the background".
They only show up when interacting with other objects in the video. "Britney" disappearing just as the thing jumps in the tree, she is clearly walking behind something which we can't see. The head of the black figure "appearing" at that point you marked.
From simple fact that you have all of these little problems arising it highlights that not everything in the video is as straight forward as it appears.
They only show up when interacting with other objects in the video. "Britney" disappearing just as the thing jumps in the tree, she is clearly walking behind something which we can't see. The head of the black figure "appearing" at that point you marked.
From simple fact that you have all of these little problems arising it highlights that not everything in the video is as straight forward as it appears.
- #13
Evo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
- 23,958
- 3,249
There is man dressed all in black behind the child. Something appears to go up and to the right toward the tree, a piece of cloth is thrown and the man bends forward to pick it up. Just focus on that tree. Nothing ghostly.
- #14
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 429
- 8
Actually... I'm kinda' starting to lean towards aliens on this one.
Anyway, I would say this is safely debunked at this point. There seems to be an event that is happening around the tree irrespective of the passersby. This invent includes a child, a man in black, and an object. The video is of too poor of quality to determine the details of this interaction, but there seems to be no need to resort to paranormal or supernatural explanations.
Cowtipper, would you agree, at this point?
- #15
- 36
- 0
It's not particularly notable or compelling, but someone was claiming it was real. I know it's not real, but I don't exactly know just what is happening in the video. Hence, I posted here. Sorry for the lack of details.
EDIT:
If I were to guess, the child ducked behind the tree and ran away (or stayed there), though that action would have been hidden by the tombstone in front of it. His presence frightened an animal into the arbor, and the animal for whatever reason jumped down shortly after jumping up. That's my theory.
- #16
- 43
- 0
I was wondering who needs two years to get a copyright?
It takes six to eight weeks - unless that is you read the two pages of instructions really really slow.
There's your supernatural element - all that cash they imagine the copyright is going to cause to materialize outta thin air after everyone who saw this uploads their ghost tape to youtube et al.
They sit at home in front of the computer gnashing their teeth as the tally increases:
"oh no, three more in the last hour! It's up to 537 now! Dammit, we got to get youtube to cease unauthorized uploads of our ghost tape!'"
It takes six to eight weeks - unless that is you read the two pages of instructions really really slow.
There's your supernatural element - all that cash they imagine the copyright is going to cause to materialize outta thin air after everyone who saw this uploads their ghost tape to youtube et al.
They sit at home in front of the computer gnashing their teeth as the tally increases:
"oh no, three more in the last hour! It's up to 537 now! Dammit, we got to get youtube to cease unauthorized uploads of our ghost tape!'"
- #17
- 2,820
- 22
It's actually beneficial to get unauthorised uploads on YouTube now. You can report them (as the owner) and get a portion of the ad revenue from those videos.
It's one of their new-ish ways of trying to ease the problems of illegal uploads.