It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ghost Rides Rocking Horse (Video)

page: 23
92
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Sorry, it's been a busy weekend.

I can confirm that it still sounds like a whisper to me. The audio does not seem to have changed a bit since the day I first watched the video. I watched it again while posting this just to make sure, and it sounds like the exact same audio to me as day one. I have zero suspicion that the audio has been altered in any way since the original post. We've already established how much of an expert I am in that realm though




posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Pimpish
 


Thanks for the confirmation Pimpish


I think we can put that particular theory to bed now.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarrsAttax
reply to post by MethosWare
 


I think I also hear your dad say the word 'liar' at 1:05 and this might be strecthing it but I think I can hear you say it back to him at 1:59



That's exactly what I heard.

What I find interesting is that your recording was not 100% clear? Is that right. I've heard other people say something similar: that some people can hear it as clear as a bell, and other's are not so sure. :/

Hmmm. What's going on?? Is it technical, or is something else?

Because I remember listening very closely to the audio the first time, because I wasn't able to access Youtube for several days because of the country I currently reside in.
So my first listening was memorable because I had absorbed all the commentary and was probably in a better position (arguably) to be aware of the contentious points of the recording.
Anyway, what I am saying is that I remember MethosWare parroting rarewings on the recording very clearly.

Strange that it was so clear for me. ;/



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Could possibly be down to different hardware - better sound card, headphones something like that.

I also wanted to err on the side of caution as I'm aware that it's possible for the mind to impose patterns on what is otherwise noise like that whole so-called 'Reverse Speech' phenomena (my apologies if you set any store in that
)



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I've been meaning to join up here and this topic pushed me to do so.

Not trying to call anyone a liar straight out of the gate so I'm just going to point out things that puzzle me and leave it at that.

1. Reason stated for setting the camera up was to catch son rocking on horse after mom and dad heard the horse squeaking late at night.

Here are the problems with that.

A. The average run time for video camera formats in 92 was 2hrs. You of course could use lp or slp to gain a 4 and 6 hour record time but the resulting lack of quality made this useless and most consumer cams didn't even give you the option. The reason I point this out is if they had wanted to catch their son sneaking in after they had went to sleep then why not wait until the son was down for the night? It made no sense to turn the cam on that early. They admit the father and son were playing and by the sounds recorded that is what it seems to be.

B. We can clearly hear the sounds of the family outside of the room yet they fail to hear the very loud sounds the horse made which was what prompted this to begin with.

2. Camera was left unattended.....

A. Early into the vid the camera seems to be disturbed a few times and even seems to have a weird auto focus glitch. Since in 92 auto focus was not available on many consumer cams and those that did had a very primitive form to me it looks like the out of focus then refocusing was caused by slight movements of the cam.


3. Validity based on poster's rep and troubling aspects of the family.

This is a hard one and I'm aware it may seem as though it's an attack but all evidence must be reviewed.

In her original post she makes these telltale statements

"It dates back to 1992 but just became digital as far as I know."

As far as she knows? It's her nephew who posted it on youtube and since she has contact with him certainly she should know more.

"This video has long been a topic of conversation around campfires when the ghost stories come out."

If such a hot topic then why would the other stories that seem to surprise her about her nephew having ghosts have not been told?

The original poster and her nephew strangely have the same writing style. The nephew in his first post even uses the word peace at the end as did the Aunt. After his initial post the word is not used(as though recognizing the mistake?) by either for the next few replies and maybe the rest of the thread....not sure about the latter.

I am not the grammar/spelling police but when someone is touted as an A student in college I would expect better of both from them.

The stories of the nephew's "ghosts" if true, sound more like a kid with a temper who might have been given to much benefit of the doubt when it came to breaking mommies things when he got mad.

As someone who seems to be familiar with this site she too quickly brushes aside any debunking in a response to her nephew. If they were so sure of the video's authenticity then ignoring the debunkers instead of pointing out the flaws of said debunk would make no sense. Especially since up to the point where she wrote that no one had actually went after the video hardcore. Making her statement even more of an overreaction.

The nephew never really seems as sure of himself or his explanations.

As someone else mentioned, the horse never has any downward movement as though being sat on. You would expect any entity that could interact with matter in that way would also have the same effect as though someone was actually riding it.

Could the video have been manipulated after being digitized? Yes but it shows no signs of that. My guess is that it was a physical effect using wire since the head of the horse seems to be pulled down before it starts rocking.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to phantomDX

1. Close but not quite this was just a test run to see how long it would record how long the battery would last how good the video would be and etc.
a. ^
b. He could have heard it but not noticed or cared or he was busy playing with his son...

2. You want someone to stand there and hold it all night just to test it?
a. I dont notice so idk.

3. As far as she knows because Im at college and shes about an hour away we only recently got in contact because im doing some web design and i gave her my site which had the video on it as a reference. Other stories arent as cool and werent video taped to make such a good legend but we prolly told them she just didnt want to say the wrong thing and have people jump all over her case.

3.5 (ish) I did say peace on my first one for who knows what reason prolly from reading her post and replying; wanting to reply in a manner acceptable to this forum. But if anyone else has noticed I use a lot more internet slang than she does since im a bit nerdier =). Im a college student but I didnt know I had to use exactly correct spelling and grammar while posting on the internet. If this is being graded I might clean it up a bit

4 (or what im going to call it). Im unsure about my explanations because I was young at the time and cant recall any of it so I just have to go by what others tell me. And besides that I dont particularly believe in ghosts or the such (im not opposed to them either) so I cant say absolutely that its a ghost.

5. Whos to say the ghost is technically riding it instead of just pulling the handles and if it were to ride it whos to say that it has weight?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Well if it is a ghost it is pulling the nose down... like a fishing line... notice light level ... notice there is no load on the rear spring... so - not a ghost - more than likely its staged. 2% real - 98% fake, too many errors to over come to convience me.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by BornPatriot
Well if it is a ghost it is pulling the nose down... like a fishing line... notice light level ... notice there is no load on the rear spring... so - not a ghost - more than likely its staged. 2% real - 98% fake, too many errors to over come to convience me.


Exactly. You can almost see the line ffs. Are you sure you want to go as high as 2% BornPatriot?

Methosware, c'mon give it a rest OK? You guys were successful in getting a few of the gullible to take the bait. The rest of us know its a hoax.

Like I said, karma payback can be a real bitch. Wonder what yours will be.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astrobee

Exactly. You can almost see the line ffs. Are you sure you want to go as high as 2% BornPatriot?

Methosware, c'mon give it a rest OK? You guys were successful in getting a few of the gullible to take the bait. The rest of us know its a hoax.

Like I said, karma payback can be a real bitch. Wonder what yours will be.


lol I dont believe in karma =), believe what you want tho Im not here to stop you just to answer questions

Edit: How exactly does one 'almost' see something?

[edit on 10-3-2009 by MethosWare]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by MethosWare
 


I'm sorry. The test run bit doesn't hold water. No one who bought a camcorder around 92 would not know exactly how long the machine would record. Most back then actually had the record time printed on the camera along with battery life. Which is funny since why would he not use the ac adapter?

You say he might not have heard the noise the horse made. Even more improbable. The noise was loud enough to actually cause a few dropouts in the recording. Then you said he might not have cared. Why would you go through the trouble of setting the camera up and even doing a so called "test run" just to ignore the very thing that had prompted you to do so in the first place? Especially since you knew your son was not in the room.

I never implied that someone should have been holding the camera I implied that it seemed at times that someone was actually off cam trying to adjust the camera slightly which would explain the weird in and focus and jumps.

You seem to make light of your other ghostly encounters but your mother didn't. Even going as far as to say the ghosts broke things whenever she got mad at you or vice versa. Add that to the video and she should have been telling everyone. Your Aunt claims to know your mother so well that one is given the impression that they are very close but yet you speak of just reconnecting with each other. You seem to never know exactly what your father's reasoning was or what he was thinking........Why not ask him? Do you need to reconnect with him as well?

I'm really aware how this can become an attack on your family but since you guys were using your family as a basis for your claims then it to becomes reviewable along with the video.

There are two things in this world that I am very good at. One is film/video production and the other is reading people and knowing what they are about. This video and the claims behind it screamed to me that something was not right. Had the video been posted with a "you decide" flavor instead of all the additional hoopla and tossing family out there as proof of the claim then maybe it would not have been so closely scrutinized. This smacked of going overboard.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
All I can say is WOW!! I'm not going to even attempt to give a logical opinion here because this is scary,scary,scary!!!



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to phantomDX

1. Ok well it never hurts to test drive a car before hand either... not to mention he didnt know how much was left on the tape as you know you cant tell exactly just by looking to see how much tape is on one side.

2. They went to 'catch' it multiple times to no avail, plus why would he need to run and check in the middle of dinner or playing with me if he already had it on video?

3. Really no arguement to that one since i dont notice and your the first one to notice it after 23 pages. but why would you need to adjust it it looked fine to me.

4. I make light of them because again i dont particularly believe in ghosts, so i cant make a big deal of something falling down the stairs... My aunt does know my mom well they talk on the phone a lot and etc, but again im in college dont go home to see my mom much let alone the rest of the family. Last time i saw my aunt was around xmas and i just recently gave her my website info. Lol again at college so i dont talk to my dad a lot just during breaks and an occasional phone call or when he comes up to visit, and i dont have time to call him and parrot it all to you guys he can just answer it at his leisure.

5. Slightly yes but im not too concerned thus far everyone has been respectful and if i feel like not answering a question i can do so.

6. I again cannot fully say i believe in ghosts so i can say it is a you decide flavor too it my aunt,mom, and dad seem to think it is something paranormal tho.

[edit on 10-3-2009 by MethosWare]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by phantomDX
reply to post by MethosWare
 


I'm really aware how this can become an attack on your family but since you guys were using your family as a basis for your claims then it to becomes reviewable along with the video.

There are two things in this world that I am very good at. One is film/video production and the other is reading people and knowing what they are about. This video and the claims behind it screamed to me that something was not right. Had the video been posted with a "you decide" flavor instead of all the additional hoopla and tossing family out there as proof of the claim then maybe it would not have been so closely scrutinized. This smacked of going overboard.



At least you are aware when you attack and we are not "using" the family as a basis for our claims or whatever you call it.

Oh...and the two things you were good at - reading people and knowing - oooops - you just failed. The video is real.

What hoopla - I brought you a video - you all had questions I didn't have the answer to - members of my family did - so I invited them here to answer questions. We aren't trying to prove to you or anyone else that this is real. We are merely sharing something that happened to be captured on tape a long time ago. Your response is most unwelcoming to people who came here to try and help explain the video. They did not join ATS out of any obligation to prove to some random person on line or to applaud YOU and you alone who finally figured out some imagined hoax.

Honestly - get over yourself a little. You claim fake without any proof either - and yet you expect people to believe YOU just because. The best I can say it this video is real. If you are so convinced it's a hoax then feel free to move along to another thread anytime you like. We're not here to convince you only to share with those who are interested.

Let's leave the family bashing out of it though because the family is as real as the video - and you are being rude. Being digital is not an excuse for being rude to my nephew as are others on this page. I REPEAT - WE ARE NOT HERE TO CONVINCE YOU - WE ARE HERE TO SHARE WITH THOSE INTERESTED IN WHAT THIS MIGHT BE.

(I'll leave the Peace off just to keep it interesting)


edit to add: hi nephew - saw you were on here earlier - peace to you.


[edit on 10-3-2009 by DancedWithWolves]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by phantomDX
The original poster and her nephew strangely have the same writing style.


Yes they both use 'words' and English words at that! Come on you can't seriously be claiming they have the same writing style because they use one word in common. By that logic anyone who uses LOL in their posts should be under suspicion of being the same person.

They clearly have different styles. MethosWare's post are much looser and casual and typical of someone his age whereas DancedWithWolves' posts use a much more formal type of written Engllish.


Originally posted by phantomDX
You would expect any entity that could interact with matter in that way would also have the same effect as though someone was actually riding it.


Actually I would have no expectations about the attributes of something that is a complete unknown. Lots of people have used this fallacious argument. It's akin to saying 'the video must be a hoax because ghosts rattle chains and I can't hear any chains'.

[edit on 11/3/2009 by MarrsAttax]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astrobee

Originally posted by BornPatriot
Well if it is a ghost it is pulling the nose down... like a fishing line... notice light level ... notice there is no load on the rear spring... so - not a ghost - more than likely its staged. 2% real - 98% fake, too many errors to over come to convience me.


Exactly. You can almost see the line ffs. Are you sure you want to go as high as 2% BornPatriot?

Methosware, c'mon give it a rest OK? You guys were successful in getting a few of the gullible to take the bait. The rest of us know its a hoax.

Like I said, karma payback can be a real bitch. Wonder what yours will be.


Your 'knowledge' is actually pure belief. You have absolutely no evidence that this was hoaxed, only supposition.

I could just as easily say 'You can almost see the ghost ffs.'

It would be nice if you could stick to arguing facts instead of flinging rude and baseless accusations about.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
After seeing this video i felt like i needed to join your site and inform some of you whom may not know whats going on here. When the nephew asks the father "who's that?" He as a young kid can see auras much easier due to the fact that his central vision is not yet damaged like ours is. What does this have to do with ghosts you ask? Well People are able to see other people who astral project in the real-time zone, which is a realm above our phsyical realm by having better auric sight and/or knowing the person very well. It is my conclusion that ghosts may be other projectors or a different type of energy manifestation.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Wether its a HOAX or not none of us will know, but just remember anything is possible.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
While I have no intention of inciting a war I must stress some points.

The family and it's dynamics wasn't something that I brought to the table. Anything someone uses as a basis for proof is subject to scrutiny. If you fail to take into consideration the human factor of any claim then you are a blind believer. I made mention each post to the fact that the family was a tricky thing but I didn't introduce them into the equation and I tried to be as tactful as possible under the situation. While it's easy to understand what I am implying, I never turned it into a name calling rant.

I've been doing the message board/blogging thing a long long time and as anyone who has you learn to be skeptical when two agreeing posters have similar writing styles. If you haven't learned to watch for those then you are fairly new to the game. I never went as far as to say it was the same poster but that certain elements made it worth exploring.

Now for my retort to the nephew......




2. They went to 'catch' it multiple times to no avail, plus why would he need to run and check in the middle of dinner or playing with me if he already had it on video?


That sentence right there says more than it was meant to.

You say they had tried to catch "it" multiple times. Yet supposedly at that time they were under the assumption that it was you not a ghost. This actually fits into the story better as to explain why the father was taping even though his son was with him. So the original story that it was to catch the son was not correct.

Why would he need to run check it if he already had it on video?

You're right. I mean you just caught a ghost on tape, it's not like it was possibly one of the most astounding pieces of video proof of the afterlife that there has ever been. We should all be as lucky as you to have a father who saw playing with his son as more important than the video that if real could have netted you big bucks, was almost proof positive that spirits exist and so.

By the way, if the nephew distances his self any further from the video which he has gradually done since his first post then he is gonna start claiming it isn't even him at the beginning of the tape.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by phantomDX
While I have no intention of inciting a war I must stress some points.

/SNIP

While it's easy to understand what I am implying, I never turned it into a name calling rant.


No need to dance about, come right out and say what you think: they are all liars, hoaxers and cheats - well how about asking a mod to confirm if they are using the same IPs? If not an apology is in order. You admit to attacking their credibility, but just not 'name calling'...


I've been doing the message board/blogging thing a long long time and as anyone who has you learn to be skeptical


... you're not the only one either. When a new member appears on a site, only posts in one thread over a period of days with the admitted agenda of calling the family's credibility into question one has to wonder if this poster is purely seeking the downfall of this video for whatever reason.

Jealousy?
Personal problems with one or all members of the aforementioned family?
Failure in their own hoax attempt?
Government agent out to disprove the paranormal?
Who knows?

I wouldn't go so far as to name-call though, but these points need to be stressed.

By the way is there any news on the higher-quality video? Not rushing or anything, just curious.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by phantomDX
 


To be fair to you I think it was clear you weren't intending to offend. When a case such as this relies so heavily on the reliability of the witnesses it makes it difficult to question it without seeming to call the witnesses's integrity into question.

I'm sure you are able to see the other point of view though. If you assume for a moment the OP's story is true as she has told it you can understand how calling the story into question can seem like a personal attack even if it wasn't meant at such.



Originally posted by phantomDX



2. They went to 'catch' it multiple times to no avail, plus why would he need to run and check in the middle of dinner or playing with me if he already had it on video?


That sentence right there says more than it was meant to.

You say they had tried to catch "it" multiple times. Yet supposedly at that time they were under the assumption that it was you not a ghost. This actually fits into the story better as to explain why the father was taping even though his son was with him. So the original story that it was to catch the son was not correct.



The original story was posted by the aunt who was relating the story third hand. It's reasonable to expect she would be unclear on some of the details.



Originally posted by phantomDX

Why would he need to run check it if he already had it on video?

You're right. I mean you just caught a ghost on tape, it's not like it was possibly one of the most astounding pieces of video proof of the afterlife that there has ever been. We should all be as lucky as you to have a father who saw playing with his son as more important than the video that if real could have netted you big bucks, was almost proof positive that spirits exist and so.



Rarewings has stated in his Tech Q & A thread


Test run.... I was not a camera expert, didn't know how long it would run, if it would stay in focus. I had batteries only no AC power so I was giving it a test, then was going to show the wife and see what she thought.


so he wasn't expecting for anything to happen during this run. It was a test so that they could try and catch the son playing later on or at least try and find out the cause. It sounds like he had no expectations that he would capture anything paranormal.


Originally posted by phantomDX

By the way, if the nephew distances his self any further from the video which he has gradually done since his first post then he is gonna start claiming it isn't even him at the beginning of the tape.


I seriously doubt that is going to happen. You must accept that his testimony is second hand, he is relaying the story as told to him by his relatives.



new topics

top topics



 
92
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join