Psychic's predictions for 2012 -- From 30 years ago. [CONFIRMED HOAX]

It's probably a hoax. The timing is a little too perfect considering we just entered 2012. This will not be the first of these videos.

He supposedly had some earlier clear prophetic visions, yet this video doesn't become known until the year 2012? You have to question how he blatantly uses people's imagination to cause fear at the end of the video. If there isn't anything mankind can do to prevent an "alien invasion" why not give us more details to help us prepare? Instead he gets up and ends the video to create anticipation of fear. It's like watching a climax to a movie and than it's interrupted by a commercial or you have to wait for part 2. This is just another pariah fear monger jumping on the doom and gloom of 2012. Whoever made this video is hoping for notoriety and sitting back and getting a sick laugh.

Is it just me, or is that a CD case on the shelf behind him in front of the carousel box?

I find it funny that some people are wishing that it was fake because the information "scared" them.

It is not anyone's job not to "scare" you, if you are scared it is up to YOU to become stronger...

Make peace with the situation...


This video is not "proven" to be a hoax. Saying that it wasn't popular after 2001 or that there are not lines on the screen is not "proof" that is just "evidence".

I'm starting to think that people don't know the difference between these two words...

Until we have actual PROOF, I think it's entirely fair to keep discussing it.

That's being said, I don't have an opinion on whether it is real or not, but I do know that even if it's real there is no reason to be scared of aliens, the future can be changed and no psychic is 100% correct all the time. If they were then they would be a God and now a psychic.

Since the thread has been reopened, I will follow up with the transcription of the video.

Here's the link to the first 4:19 of transcript. Next are the speaker's view of 2012 and after.

"Le monde dans 100 ans... euh... alors, c'est à la fois un phantasme pour moi, ça m'amuse beaucoup j'essaie toujours d'imaginer mais le problème c'est que je ne vois rien pour ces années là parceque malheureusement, en ce qui me concerne,je ne vois plus rien après 2012...

Euh, je ne vois plus rien après 2012 parceque je n'ai pas de flash, pas d'images après 2012... Euh... Ce n'est pas pour rien si je n'ai pas d'images après 2012 alors que c'est quelque chose que j'ai depuis tout petit...

C'est soit, effectivement... ma propre mort... ce qui est probable, je ne me l'explique pas... Hum, hum Je-je... je ne l'espère pas!...
Euh, soit... ... Parceque le problème c'est que... je vois aussi le, euh... je vois aussi le... euh la, la-la rencontre de... euh... je n'sais pas comment vous dire ça, mais je vois aussi le, le-le hum... On va probablement rencontrer d'autres personnes.

Oui, euh... de rencontres, euh, de rencontres, euh... de rencontres extra-terrestre! Voilà, le mot est lancé!, et maintenant, si vous êtes là c'est pour qu'on puisse en parler, euh...

2012 pour moi c'est l'année de la rencontre.

Euh... Je sais pas si il faut vraiment parler de-de formidable...

Le problème, c'est que je pense qu'il seront tellement en avance sur nous, vous vous imaginer; ils viennent du fin fond... de la galaxie... Euh, pour l'instant nous on est allés sur la lune...

Mais heureuse!, mais heureuse!... non là, mais c'est un conflit, euh, vous, je, vous écoutez!, mais écoutez c'que j'dis!!! On-on va avoir la-la visite de gens qui seront bien plus puissant que nous! Euh...
Il y a des perdants et des, et des, et des, et des-des gagnants! Dans un conflit, nous serons les perdants!

Et je puis vous assurer que si je ne vois rien après 2012, c'est pour une raison bien claire; c'est que l'humanité aura disparue!

Bon... mais, hmmm, on-on va arrêté, là..."

End transcript.

First, I have to say that I've just noticed there WERE twisted lines at the bottom and the top part of the video. Anyone else notices it?

If this is acting, the guy is pretty convincing when he begins to talk about the aliens. Once the words were said, his voice became shaky, like nervous shaky...

So there it is in French, the original of what has been said on the video. For those who can't see it yet, there was a lot of editing between what is said because he was answering the interviewer. I didn't think of pointing it when I made the first part, so for consistency, I kept second part similar. I could arrange it if the needs be to keep on investigating this.

Now, I take a break and go read some previous posts that were made while I typed this one...

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
Since the thread has been reopened, I will follow up with the transcription of the video.

There's no point, it's either a hoax, or part of a marketing initiative. Either way, it's not authentic.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Bah, it was fun doing it!

reply to post by RUSSO
I think HOAX to so he got lucky with one thing he was at least a decade off for the car. Didn't bother to watch the rest of him.

With just a couple clicks with the stock filters that comes with Apple Motion (some of which are in Final Cut Express), we can take a short clip of an ATS Recap (recorded in HD with an excellent camera), and make it appear as though it was shot with a 1960's era black-and-white TV studio camera, on analog tape.



Back to the most-important point... if the sources was 1980's analog and recently digitized, YouTube would not offer 720 and 1080 versions after upload and conversion.

Originally posted by arpgme
I find it funny that some people are wishing that it was fake because the information "scared" them.

It is not anyone's job not to "scare" you, if you are scared it is up to YOU to become stronger...

Make peace with the situation...


This video is not "proven" to be a hoax. Saying that it wasn't popular after 2001 or that there are not lines on the screen is not "proof" that is just "evidence".

I'm starting to think that people don't know the difference between these two words...

Until we have actual PROOF, I think it's entirely fair to keep discussing it.

That's being said, I don't have an opinion on whether it is real or not, but I do know that even if it's real there is no reason to be scared of aliens, the future can be changed and no psychic is 100% correct all the time. If they were then they would be a God and now a psychic.

That is my take as well. I lean towards hoax, but love working on the nail for that, and also keep looking for someone else to place that nail. It is a puzzle, it is fun to solve puzzles because there is only one of 2 solutions, hoax or real. You give credence to the creator for giving it enough legs to stand this long and try and find the proof that must be there somewhere that vindicates him or damns him. Like everything else in the world!

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

I agree if it was a direct native conversion, however, if I were going to take a 16mm film and transfer it to digital, I would use the most lossless method. Not using a screen converter, but equipment that does it frame by frame, and manufactures an in-between frame which is the average of the one before and after. This is how a lot of 16mm and 35mm documentaries are digitized for television production. The output format would be 1080p, but then down converted to other formats like .flv or .avi from a digital master. Very expensive equipment, but not out of the reach of a media lab in a large university. Just IMHO.

So I take it the 'official' explanation of the video being a hoax is that it has been unequivocally been proven to be filmed recently? I do believe that this is a viral marketing competition of some sort, but have failed to read any compelling evidence to verify this.

Video quality is too high of course. Notwithstanding without the proper evidence to prove it.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Yes you maybe able to do that but you still don't have the blurry piece at the base of the video shot as the video in question does. This looks like it could be faked only because of a small room with furniture picked up at a salvos or garage sale to make this setting.

If this is a marketing ploy could be interesting but doubt it. There could be a good reason he can't see anymore after 2012. I like the fact he says the people will pick a president for peace who do you know this year who is running with that sort of real campaign? Ron Paul anyone?

So if he can't see past 2012 it could be for this reason maybe he can only see this dimension maybe we ascend to another dimension and because we are not there and he isn't either he can't see it. Maybe when we choose peace we are visited and helped to ascend and shown peace is greater than war. That would be fantastic

Originally posted by charlyv
however, if I were going to take a 16mm film and transfer it to digital,

The visual artifacts indicate whomever concocted it intended for the viewer to believe the original was video tape, not file. A digital transfer of film would look very different.

i have opted to make an attempt at bringing big guns to the video technology portion of this discussion. It is beyond my technical expertise to take my evaluation on the origin of this video any further.

I have asked Dr. Bruce Maccabee, if he would analyze the video in question and possibly be able to tell how it was rendered. This is a big request, and if he is interested, I am sure he will give his input, although I cannot guarantee it.
His is , by far, one of the best of the best, so let's hope he sees the value in this puzzle the way all of us here do.

Just to add to some of SO's info ... University film students have been handing in faux VHS/grungey 8mm footage assignments for the past decade to the point I think it should actually be made illegal and punishable with open handed public face slapping. A great majority of media lecturers with tell you (with tears streaming down their face) that they don't want to have to sit through another screening of fake 8mm/VHS horror footage.

It's also often first or second years that do this with no VFX or comp training, so it's really not difficult. There are piles of tutorials, and the result can look very convincing especially when not under scrutiny. The bend at the bottom is nothing more than a few filters/nodes snapped together.

You tube example of such work:

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

 

I agree if it was a direct native conversion, however, if I were going to take a 16mm film and transfer it to digital, I would use the most lossless method.

If this was 16mm film and it was being scanned, it wouldn't have the tape style artifacts at the bottom.

I think it's too easy to make excuses for work like this when really those excuses should come from the uploader/creator of the video. Especially when the initial evidence is quite vague, and vague initial evidence is always a big plus when defending a hoaxed creation. Why would anyone professionally upscale an old interview tape? So it could have been restored and sync filtered and blah blah blah ... It's just filling in gaps with guesses which only falls right into the trap set for you. If I did professional upscaling on a tape, I would say so when I uploaded it.

There's always going to be people that say SO's example isn't like the original, and there's always going to be the 'arm chair experts!' crowd. Really, if you want to decide this for yourself, then do the research so you can understand the information given to you by others. It would be nice if people did this before dismissing others as armchair experts.

At least I think it's our first big silly hoax of the year which is cause for celebrations. /

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by charlyv
however, if I were going to take a 16mm film and transfer it to digital,

The visual artifacts indicate whomever concocted it intended for the viewer to believe the original was video tape, not file. A digital transfer of film would look very different.

I see that, and hold you totally in technical reverence. My evaluation thinks that this may be the same kind of effect, however it is manufactured by the down converting process that is frame and field referenced. In essence , converting digital to an analog counterpart which needs this information to track frames or produces it because it has no other choice. Like said, it is beyond me and I have asked for external professional help. I hope it plays out.

Originally posted by charlyv reply to post by SkepticOverlord I agree if it was a direct native conversion, however, if I were going to take a 16mm film and transfer it to digital, I would use the most lossless method. If this was 16mm film and it was being scanned, it wouldn't have the tape style artifacts at the bottom. I think it's too easy to make excuses for work like this when really those excuses should come from the uploader/creator of the video. Especially when the initial evidence is quite vague, and vague initial evidence is always a big plus when defending a hoaxed creation. Why would anyone professionally upscale an old interview tape? So it could have been restored and sync filtered and blah blah blah ... It's just filling in gaps with guesses which only falls right into the trap set for you. If I did professional upscaling on a tape, I would say so when I uploaded it. There's always going to be people that say SO's example isn't like the original, and there's always going to be the 'arm chair experts!' crowd. Really, if you want to decide this for yourself, then do the research so you can understand the information given to you by others. It would be nice if people did this before dismissing others as armchair experts. At least I think it's our first big silly hoax of the year which is cause for celebrations. \0/

reply to post by Pinke


Just not so my friend. When it comes to translation and emulation, each environment needs to see what is expected in that realm, it is like nothing was converted . To the target source, it is like "so show me what I am expecting to see, otherwise I will give you a screen full of garble"
You just need to be in the industry to understand that emulation is a simple process," just produce the information you are translating into the format that I have been built to display, and no problem."

These kind of hoaxes play to peoples fears, never are they factual and we always seem to give the better ones too much effort to debunk.

I say Hoax with absolutely nothing more than a superficial glance at it -> FAKE.

How do I know I'm right ? because all the rest were as well.

Originally posted by sam_inc
Anyways, i really don't care rather the video is fake or not all i know is that you all better be prepare for it. Major changes are definitely coming

This is exactly the point darkest4 made - it fits in with your existing world view and so you WANT it to be real - all rational thought and objectivity then ceases to exist.