"The Thames Angel" Spotted while Filming for TV

Originally posted by pause4thought
(Nevertheless the debunking of that appalling etching suggests to me someone clutching at straws in an attempt to bury the subject.)

Or, the promoting of this phenomenon as something other than a publicity stunt could seem like clutching at straws.

Surely if this were such a historical and well know occurrence there would be at least as much info about it on the web as there is regarding Nessie or Big Foot, and yet there is nothing I can locate prior to the 2006 campaign itself. AFTER the campaign, there is a lot of web babble generated, so one would have to assume that had there been previous sightings, those would have generated some noise too.

After all, religious images on Cheetos and on Toast do, why wouldnt an Angel appearing to people on the Thames?

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Or, the promoting of this phenomenon as something other than a publicity stunt could seem like clutching at straws.

I was expecting someone to say this. You've misunderstood where I'm coming from, though I have said it more than once. I have no interest in 'promoting' this phenomenon: I posted it as it looked like it would be of interest & worthy of investigation. That's what ATS is all about!

If the subject is legitimately debunked I'm all for it. If there are loose ends I think ATS as good a place as any for getting to the bottom of the issue. It's as simple as that.

It's no skin off my teeth even if this thread gets moved to the 'Hoax' forum, as following careful examination of the facts it looks like the video was produced as part of a viral marketing campaign. On the other hand if additional reports of a less sensationalized local mystery come to the fore, which seems to be suggested by several web references mentioned earlier, there's no harm in examining them.

As regards the etching, my point ought to have been clear enough: if you debunk obviously silly evidence you've created a straw man; you certainly don't debunk an entire subject by such means.

Yet I agree with you that there's a lot of frothy evidence post 2006 on this one, and that previous evidence would be the only way forward.

I just thought this was an new and intriguing topic. If it turns out its ALL just a result of the video, fine. I'll be the first to pat the debunkers on the back.

*Can we shake on it?*

As some others have said this looks contrived to the point of being offensive to people that believe in this stuff. It stinks of viral or something, the slovakian reporter nailed it for me. That whole video was like the worst acting i have ever seen. It's a shame they have to do that.

October

reply to post by pause4thought


I also did some searching for the supposed historical sightings figuring that even if the recent stuff is viral marketing they might have based the concept on a historical/folkloric source but I haven't yet turned up any mention pre-2006.

Since two specific "sources" are mentioned in the Jemima Whatshername story (a manuscript in the British Library and Samuel Pepys' journal) I also downloaded a plaintext copy of Pepys' diary (available at Project Gutenberg) and searched the whole thing for the word "angel".

No reference to an angel apparition over the Thames anywhere, and the phrase used as a quote from Pepys ("that could only be described as an angel") never occurs at all.

edit for clarity


[edit on 6/30/2010 by americandingbat]

I found the original etching without the angel:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d8882714cc13.jpg[/atsimg]

This is the fake on the Angel's "fansite".

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fac89dc296dc.jpg[/atsimg]

So, to recap (and borrowing arguements from other discussion sites):

* The Slovak footage is clearly false: It's not STVs logo, the reporters name Richardazmov Burriničhovna doesn't even remotely resemble a name from any real Slavic language (except for the prefixes -ov and -ovna, both of which are used incorrectly), Grant is wearing the same clothes and the title picture is actually St. Basils in Moscow (nothing to do with Slovakia).

* Analysis of the Korean footage and the David Grant footage shows they were filmed literally a few metres away from each other and on days which sport the very same weather; by implication, it was filmed at the same time.

* Every website associated with this was registered in the second half of 2006.

* No references exist outside of these 5 or 6 new sites.

* The Grant footage was posted on YouTube by www.angelofthethames.com.

* www.angelofthethames.com contains a historical archive which prominently features an 1865 etching of the construction of the Thames Embankment. The Angel has been pasted onto the etching - the original image doesn't have it.

* Many of the photographic images pasted online could easily be produced using Photoshop filters - it's obvious in some shots and looks likely in others.

* 'Richard Morris' is the chap in the period clothing who claims to be secretary of www.angelofthethames.com. The site was actually registered by a Richard Delingpole of Worcester. Mr Delingpole is one of the 'Worcester Re-enactors' - they re-enact civil war battles etc. This would give him access to period clothing such as that adorned by Mr Morris. Is Richard Morris an invented personality? Perhaps - he's listed as 'Richard Morrison' on his own video titles!

* Richard Delingpole is a graphic designer, and went to the Bournville school of art, which would give him familiarity with Photoshop, and the skills to pull of a hoax.

* 'Global Angels' is one of the meta keywords in the page source. The Global Angels Charity logo is a V shaped Angel. In some of the pictures in the little cluster of sites, it appears that the logo graphic itself has been used to produce the effect, albeit extensively filtered. In addition, the charity was planning a live acoustic event to promote the work they do and raise money at the London Eye on the Thames, next to where most of the photos were taken.

* One of the other keywords on the AngelOfTheThames site is '360'. The name of the music event is the '360 degree revolution in Kindness'.

* One of the main stories on the site states that Jemima Waterhouse was referred to Samuel Pepys diary by her university professor, Dr. Miriam Hayles, for evidence of a previous sighting: No reference to an angel apparition over the Thames is made anywhere in Pepys diary, and the phrase used as a quote from Pepys ("that could only be described as an angel") never occurs at all.

* A whois on angelofthethames.com yields a registrant named Marksteen Adamson. A look at his profile on LinkedIn reveals he's a branding and marketing expert. His company is ASHA (www.ashawebsite.co.uk...). On their website, in the 'about us' section, one of their specialities is listed as 'viral marketing'

I'd say that's busted

reply to post by balkris

Well done. That research gave you a star my friend.

Good work Ballkris, though in my experience your post will largely be ignored by those with no objectivity here...

One thing that dosent really add up is the claim that still are being held back due to the threat of litigation. The implication was that somehow the clip we saw in the OP was after the sighting and the cameraman did indeed capture it on film. If so why would this clip be released? Dosent this add upto more potential embarassment for the presenter without the publication of the supporting images?

The whole Slovakian reporter thingseemed terribly fake to me.

Furthermore the Korean singers clip is definately filmed at the same location, from about 5 ft to the right of the original piece. The boats in the background are in exactly the same places, the only difference being the foreground boat is no longer there. The 2 boats in the background, one almost under the bridge and the other with some sort of flag on it being the same in both clips. The lighting conditions are startling similar in both clips also.

Originally posted by Munji
This seems very contrived. He changes from wow did you see that to we must not talk of this ever again way to quickly.

Almost like hes playing oout a script.

Plus, there was nothing there.

^ That

And also on the www.angelofthethames.com... website there is another film of a slovak film company trying to interview him and his rection looks badly acted and like a cringey school improvisation...

Also [I speak Czech & Slovak] the narative before and after are 'odd' not natural or 'lets get ready to do this' .... more 'lets act normal'

The Thames River Angel is real. I have new photos of the little thing near Big Ben. I was there on vacation and I took a river boat tour that took us pass Parliament and Big Ben. Unknown at the time I was taking photographs - three of the photos had something strange in them - this was May 5, 2006.

This month, December 2010, I had moved into a new place and while unpacking I came across my old photos when I notice odd white lights on the photo that I never noticed before. I had the photos enlarged to 8X10 and I can clearly see the little Angel floating near the roof of Parliament and then down along the Thames.

Here is the link to the film of my pictures:

www.youtube.com...

There are two know people in London that have pictures or eyewitness it also in 2006. I hope they can confirm this is what they saw. If you are or know Jemima Waterhouse, 16 at the time, lives/from Sheen, she spotted the Angel in May as she wandered down the South Bank.
And if you are or know the TV reporter/singer David Grant who saw it in September of 2006. Please send me an email via my YouTube channel.

Thank you all and Merry Christmas!

Luis J. Soria

Video is a guy talking. That's it. There is NOTHING to talk about here.

I could never get the (video) posting right on here. Anyways, @ balkris, I have read your review/investigation on this Angel issue. Sounds good, but somebody has seen something there on the Thames time past.

Angel or whatever it is, there is something there.

I'm trying to post my video here so you don't have to go to YouTube to see it. I don’t have the original camera from '06 but I still have the original negatives as shown in my video.

If that’s not solid proof, what is?

Luis J. Soria

www.youtube.com...