It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Flying Brick video

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 2 2010 @ 12:44 AM
It was not a brick at all. It was just a really small UFO from the cockroach planet. What gets me about all the ghost shows it that they are filmed at night. I want to see ghost shows filmed in the day light. Ghost do not care if it is day or night. They are dead and once you die you kind of stop carirng about such things. It is just easyer to fake things at night. And it makes things more scary to film them at night. I call fake.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:31 AM

Originally posted by fixer1967
And it makes things more scary to film them at night. I call fake.

Fake, indeed, I agree. I don't know who discovered several years ago that night-vision cameras make people look creepy — it wasn't in America, it was in Europe, I believe, where the night-vision effect started to appear in "paranormal" entertainment — but whoever it was probably made a lot of money selling the effect.

At least, I hope they made a lot of money. I wish I'd been the one who started it.

As you sagely observed, ghosts and spirits don't give a damn what time of day it is — it's people who are afraid of the dark, and it's that fear that these bogus ghost-hunting programs are selling. And they use the stupid night-vision cameras to heighten the creep factor.

Nothing "scientific" about it... Which is why these goofy programs appear on the SyFy Channel and other areas of the sensationalized Discovery Network.

If real scientists went into these locations with the most sophisticated gear and sat there all night without a peep, you wouldn't have a show.

So, these entertainment networks bring in high-strung, emotional characters, dress them up with ridiculous gear, record everything in night-vision, and add mood music. Now that's a "product"... Of course, the longer this preposterous fad goes on, the less interesting it becomes — so, they start adding the slamming doors and the infrared after-images and the scary mists and, finally, the flying bricks.

If it WAS a brick. How do they know? Are you telling me these gay "investigators," after scrambling away screaming and pissing in their pants, went back to see that it was a brick?

I call bogus.

— Doc Velocity

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:37 AM
I watched the original episode of the GA crew when it came out. The analysis was a astounding "No Hoax" scenario.
If you are so interested in this footage, why didn't you put up the vid of tehm capturing a full body apparition walking behind Nick Groff? That as well was proven to be a "No Hoax" scenario.
Ghost Adventures is quite authentic, both in their dedication to the viewer's and teh tangible evidences they have ubcovered thus far. I am still anxiously waiting for the new series to come out, but I keep watching the old episodes to keep me sharp!!

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 01:39 AM
umm I dont think its fake.. This isnt the first time they caught activity on cam..this show do things others dont which is piss off angry spirits, yellin and cursin at them to get reactions which is something you dont do...

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:25 AM
Yet — and this is my biggest problem with "ghost hunting" shows — there is no effort made to return to the most active locations and SIT ON THEM indefinitely, which is what a (well-funded) scientific research team would do.

I mean, if a crew of scientists walked into a "haunted house" and recorded an instance of poltergeist activity — as distinguished from a mere ghostly haunting — and they witnessed a flying brick with their own eyes, they would SIT ON THAT LOCATION for months, trying to record a repeat performance.

Because, baby, if you can't get a repeat performance, if you can't repeat the experiment and get the same results, then it aint Science.

You don't see serious science being done on paranormal activity precisely because you cannot reliably obtain the same results time after time. And let's be honest, scientific research aint cheap... You need a government grant to take on new projects, and there simply is not a lot of grant money out there for ghost hunting.

So, when the money runs out, lights out, the research is over.

Seriously, when we were doing the psychology study at Texas A&M (regarding "paranormal activity"), we were basically paying for everything out of our own pockets, and you know that doesn't last very long. By the end of the year we were broke.

But, with these ghost hunting TV programs, they have a lot more cash on hand than a group of university researchers. So, WHY DON'T THE TV GHOST HUNTERS JUST SIT ON SOME OF THESE LOCATIONS FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS and capture REAL evidence of a repeating nature?

Instead, these TV ghost hunters hit a location, get their "sensational" footage in one night, and then move on to some other location a thousand miles away. Which makes no sense. If you're getting sensational evidence, you don't just walk away from it. I'm serious, why aren't these ghost hunting shows devoting a whole season to one location?

Because that's the only way to gather irrefutable evidence.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 5/2/2010 by Doc Velocity]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:38 AM
There was a flying brick in that video? I did not see it. Can somebody take a screenshot and highlight it for me?

There is a reason all these paranormal shows run around with flashlights. It is because you will not see what is not in the flashlight beams. Paranormal activity happens in the daytime and when the lights are on just as well as it happens in the dark.

It is charlatans and fakers who prefer the dark.

[edit on 5-2-2010 by groingrinder]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:43 AM
lol..well the guy sure fooled them!!! He wasnt scared..coughs..

Dont know if this is real or not..dont care...

All I can say is.."spirits" , dont be afraid
..some of them like to pull pranks..just like us in half irish..if I didnt do something mean to my friends..they'd think i was braindead!

Look..I have things happen to me..every day..soap flies off the soap dish..things fly off my computer desk when im all comfy in bed..."they" know!!

So..i just yell at them..."yea..real cut it out so i can go to bed"..and they do..

Honestly...we need some FEARLESS ghost hunters..

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 03:34 AM
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

These guys chanted a voodoo curse in a old slave work house!

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by Doc Velocity

DV I apologize for my remarks to you last night. There is no excuse for my acting like a pretentious prick regarding your opinion. If I offended you please accept my apologies. Was not my intent.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:06 AM
reply to post by GreenBicMan

I like GA, mainly because they run and scream, lol

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:07 AM

Originally posted by Haydn_17
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

These guys chanted a voodoo curse in a old slave work house!

Yea, I would have done that.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 12:09 PM
As with anything, you can not make an intelligent synopsis of the people or the show after only watching 2:44 of video.

Ghost Adventures has captured some compelling evidence and visted exclusive locations such as Poveglia Island. They have also returned to 'hot spot' locations such as the Washoe Club where they initally captured a full body apparition. They returned after other paranormal investigators captured several EVPs calling out specifically to the GAC team: "Nick...Groff" "Hate...Nick" "Zak...Nick...they are coming"

Ghost Adventures also uses cutting edge technology to attempt to capture additional evidence including a camera which shows the full spectrum.

My opinion of why GAC continues to capture more evidence then other paranormal shows is the time they spend during an investigation - from sundown to sunup. As well as Zaks provoking, and if you watched the show you would see he has respect for those who have passed and states that - his harsh provoking is directly and intentionally aimed at negative entities. He's even left flowers for a nurse who was killed and toys for a young girl. For my entertainment time, this show far exceeds the rest.

Admittingly, I am a fan but I go back to my first sentence of this post and request to focus on the evidence presented vs attacks on the GAC members or the show, unless you've actually taken the time to watch more then 2 minutes of video.

Edit to add: I was just reviewing some of Aaron Goodwin (GAC camerman) vlogs on youtube, which are hilarious and came across this vlog where at the very end Zak discusses, with obvious embarassment, the one time they ran from an investigation - the clip in the OP.
Aaron Vlog

[edit on 5/2/2010 by Whisper67]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:13 PM
I make no claims regarding authenticity of video. HOWEVER, regarding the "Video Analyst guy" He said: "I am using a Vectorscope to enhance the video."

I have worked in the video industry for 30 years. In laymans terms and simply put: a Vectorscope measures the amount of Color information in a video signal. It is not an enhancement tool. Perhaps he simply chose his wording improperly but I felt it worthy of mention.

Deatiled Info on Vectorscope

Sometimes an array of video equipment and terminology can be impressive though.

Personally, I tend to worry more about living people harming me than dead ones. That is not to say I don't find the video interesting and didn't jump at end.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

I'd probably be screaming too.

The bigger guy that accompanies Zach (not the camera guy) always seems to get picked on as well and he usually doesn't instigate like Zach.

Like I said, if any are actually legit I would like to this GA would be. Has he ever stated what he saw in the past that made him get into this? I know he says something about it in the intro of every show but haven't heard the full story.

I am surprised no one from this site has ever ran into these guys??

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 02:20 PM
I think if this is faked, the guy who screamed certainly didnt know about it, he s*** himself! I have to discredit these types of programmes though, because of the fact the television is a source of entertainment, now more so than ever, therefor these programmes are made simply to entertain. If it showed three guys walking around an old house for an hour with absolutely nothing happening, no one would watch. So add in a flying brick, dont tell one of the guys you are doing it, film his reaction, suddenly you got a show. Also, the analysis video said that if it was pulled on a string it would follow a straight line. Yeah, but not if it was tugged once real hard it wouldnt. Not a very useful analysis at all, making it more dicredited in my opinion.

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by Haydn_17

You sound like a PR guy for the show. No ouija boards, psychics, mediums... But that isn't true. They use psychics, mediums and other investigators on many of their specials. And by not having stationary cameras they often have a lot of unverifiable evidence. Like the brick. Could have easily been faked.

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 03:23 PM

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Because, baby, if you can't get a repeat performance, if you can't repeat the experiment and get the same results, then it aint Science.

Wouldn’t absolute proof of paranormal activity defy modern science? If you have a scientific mind there is always a logical explanation. Right? IMO nobody will ever prove “scientifically” that ghosts are real, scientist and skeptic alike will always say it’s psychological or fake! I know it’s real I have seen it and no I haven’t any proof. “Cant say about the video though” would have had to been there.

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 04:46 AM
Im not gonna comment on the validity here... but that is some seriously good acting if its fake lol...

But as usual like mentioned anything on TV is a little hard to believe.

But, at the same time, just because its on TV doesnt make it fake now does it?

Another thing i found interesting is that the brick looks almost like it disappeared.
If anything, i think this was CGI.

But the acting is just very real.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in