TIME TRAVEL: Strong evidence or major hoax???, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 89 times

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:35 PM by ucalien

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

I posted this picture of sunglasses from a 1940's movie named "double indemnity". The lady has very similar sunglasses on as the guy in the picture.

I don't think the both sunglasses have the same type of lens, despite they are black lens, but one seems to have reflexive mirrored lens and the other no. I may be wrong...

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:45 PM by AwakeinNM

The camera in question is not clear enough to be declared a certain model, IMO. It looks like it could be a camera from the 40s, It certainly doesn't look like those cameras could be eliminated by the lack of clarity in the photo.

As for the glasses, why would everyone necessarily have to be wearing something that they purchased from a store during their time? Perhaps this guy does some kind of activity that compelled him to fabricate the shades for the sides of his sunglasses. The glasses themselves look true to period, with the shades added to the temples. Kind of like glacier glasses that climbers wear. Maybe he's a vampire.. vampires are hot now, let's run with that theory.

Why does an old photo with one guy who doesn't fit in with the other people in the crowd have to be proof of time travel? Jeez louise.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:48 PM by Solasis

reply to post by ucalien

I'm not seeing much difference between the two, but I don't know a single thing about glasses lenses -- why do you think the alleged time traveler has polarized mirror glasses?

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:51 PM by Gimpychaos

Save the image and zoom into the highlighted. looks like a poor photoshop to me. or maybe something has wiped across it?

LOL just looked back at my creation sorry for what it looks like!!!

[edit on 24-3-2010 by Gimpychaos]

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:53 PM by Unnoan

The only issue I have with the photo is that his is the only ear that casts a shadow from the lobe to the top across his cheek. Makes me suspicious of the light source.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 01:59 PM by Faiol

the guy probably made the glasses

as they said, there are wings in it .. so its nothing like ours nowadays

nothing like

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:03 PM by williegreen

So we are advanced enough to send a time traveler back in time but not smart enough to put him in an outfit that wouldn't cause him to stand out? I mean come on, does that look like a scientist involved with top secret science projects? Bet if we had a wide angle shot we would see Bill and Rufus waiting by the phone booth ready to keep on their excellent adventure.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:04 PM by joscarfas

I have to admit, I have never heard of that Swiss watch found in a Chinese tomb. It sounds very interesting and a little bit of research is needed before I can comment on it.

However, I do have an opinion about that "time traveler" on the pic taken in 1940.

If you take a close look at "his" hands holding the camera you will come to the conclusion that it is in fact a decent photoshop job but not the best one.

See the original image here

You can clearly see that his image has been superimpose. The right hand holding the camera is not his, but belongs to the gentleman behind him.

If you look at his left hand, it looks kind of funny (bad photoshop job there). His superimpose image is obstructing the real left hand.

The person holding the camera is not him but the person behind him. The arm/hand proportion does not go with his body at all.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:05 PM by Risen

I brought this up in the other thread, but i think it bears repeating.

In the 40's it wasn't nearly as common for people to wear company logos or any kind of advertisement on their shirts. Unless this guy had his own silkscreen and really liked the letter M, that stands out as the most unusual thing about him.

The way we all do it so freely now might cause some people to gloss over that detail, but people weren't as naive about using their bodies as billboards back then. It's very much a recent thing.

[edit on 24-3-2010 by Risen]

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:13 PM by Gimpychaos

reply to post by joscarfas

picture now proven as HOAX? My picture and joscarfas observation pretty much proves that picture is fautly

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:20 PM by ucalien

reply to post by Solasis

why do you think the alleged time traveler has polarized mirror glasses?

I don't know if his sunglasses had polarized lenses. I pointed out the lens are reflexive, cos the reflection of something ahead him is seen in his lenses and looks kinda mirrored lenses, IMO. But I'm speculating, obviously.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:31 PM by ucalien

reply to post by joscarfas

You can clearly see that his image has been superimpose. The right hand holding the camera is not his, but belongs to the gentleman behind him.

Hmmmm, I confess his right arm is really disproportionate to the correct angle it should have, while he's handing the camera. His left arm is totally hidden by the lady aside. I don't think the camera is being hold by the guy behind him... If it's a photoshop job, the "time traveler" may be in the right place where should be another man. It's possible.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:37 PM by ucalien

reply to post by Faiol

the guy probably made the glasses as they said, there are wings in it .. so its nothing like ours nowadays nothing like

What are you talking about??? Here in Brazil, In the '80s people use to wear A LOT a squared welding goggles identical the one he's wearing in the picture. I remember the days of the album "Thriller" of Michael Jackson... The guys used to wear welding glasses. It was a fashion hype here.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:41 PM by Prokopio

nice post...

Did some tinkering with my corel photoshop (zoomed in at 2936 dpi and adjusted the image) and whats funny is that both hands of the two guys; the one holding the camera and the other one holding the videocam, was I think, superimposed but both the camera and the video camera itself is not. Makes you think that they did it on purpose for it to look like that it was photoshopped, hence easily classified as false. Try also to look and zoom in at the sides of the glasses and you could see some sort of an "oakley like" logo which makes me wonder if there were already designer glasses back then which were sold commercially?

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:45 PM by highlyoriginal

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by ReelView

skeptics like you dont understand how the world is run by.
nice little speech doesnt effect my stand.

I will say this the Government has the time travel tech which is been hidden from the public.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. You are quick to jump on the band wagon simply because it gets your panties in a bunch, but you have no proof to add to the so called 'evidence' that anything shown in the OP is actual proof time travel has occurred.

And you know the government has time travel capabilities how? Please share your information, don't hold out on us now! Or can you not share anything because it's simply all in your head???

Originally posted by ucalien
The camera that guy is handing WAS NOT manufactured before 1950. And he really looks out place.

Really? Because that picture is so clear, and your zoomed in picture is VERY clear isn't it? You can tell by looking at it very easily that it must be a digital camera!!! //sarcasm//

The picture is simply an ordinary picture - and nothing else. OK the guy does look out of place, but that is it! Someone else made a good comment in the other thread regarding the picture which I'm going to restate:

If you take some 'hipster' from this generation, and place him/her in a crowd of older folks, take a picture of them, and then show the picture to someone 50-60yrs later I'm sure it would look just as out of place as the picture in question.

Simple as that. Everyone claiming these pictures have to do with time traveling people are really stretching it here... I mean common! This is no proof whatsoever! Get something concrete and we'll talk.

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 02:48 PM by Realtruth

My opinion.

The watch issue = very cool and interesting

The photo of the man in the 40s = dilution of the original story.

[edit on 24-3-2010 by Realtruth]

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 03:02 PM by JustJoe

The guy is most certainly out of place for the 40s...Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure sunglasses were not as popular back then and most likely would have had a more regular glasses look, as in like a pair of spectacles. Plus he is wearing a shirt with a screen print on it. Now I'm no Screen Printing History Buff, but a quick GOOGLE of the history says its been around forever, but only became popular in Mainstream culture after some guy named Andy Warhol did a screen print of a nice Lady named Marilyn in crazy tripped out colors back in the 60s.

As for the Ring Watch...WOW!!! How random...talk about out of place artifacts!

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 03:10 PM by sstark

Originally posted by joscarfas
I have to admit, I have never heard of that Swiss watch found in a Chinese tomb. It sounds very interesting and a little bit of research is needed before I can comment on it.

However, I do have an opinion about that "time traveler" on the pic taken in 1940.

If you take a close look at "his" hands holding the camera you will come to the conclusion that it is in fact a decent photoshop job but not the best one.

See the original image here

You can clearly see that his image has been superimpose. The right hand holding the camera is not his, but belongs to the gentleman behind him.

If you look at his left hand, it looks kind of funny (bad photoshop job there). His superimpose image is obstructing the real left hand.

The person holding the camera is not him but the person behind him. The arm/hand proportion does not go with his body at all.

I also think something fish is going on with this picture. I separated the 'time traveler' and the man behind him, it wasn't apparent to me until I looked for it.

You can also see that the 'time traveler' has gloves on.

[edit on 24-3-2010 by sstark]

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 03:16 PM by Reign02

reply to post by ucalien

LOL you say that the "skeptics" can't debunk these photos. Can you prove anything?? No you can't and therefore you cannot debunk our debunkings

[edit on 24-3-2010 by Reign02]

reply posted on 24-3-2010 @ 03:17 PM by highlyoriginal

reply to post by sstark

He has gloves on? It looks like he may have one glove on, which would be on his left hand. His right hand you can see his thumb if you actually look at the picture. Not that it matters though, I don't see what relevance having gloves on has to him possibly being a 'time traveler'...