Jump to content

Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

287 replies to this topic

#241

ubi

ubi

    Stalker

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 4:39 PM

Ubi, it might be the same guy. He did look like he might be Persian/Iranian and he was convinced it was a ghost and he was not happy about it.

The apparition was light blue, right? I am guessing it is the same guy.

#242

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 4:43 PM

Yep, it was light blue because the camera was mounted to a blue wall and that made the bug look blue. The employees thought the place was haunted but there was no investigation into anything other than showing what caused the blue image on the security camera.

#243

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 9:46 PM

I would love to know the details of how this show works. Like at the very beginning when they are supposedly presenting their various cases for the very first time. Invariably somebody will say something like, "Oh, did you notice how that tree is perfectly straight? That's classic CGI." End of story. Do they really notice right then and there, or is it all rehearsed?


Yes, clearly rehearsed. And this last episode was so boring, it was hard to even make fun of. I think most of us could have solved both cases without leaving the "command center".

Gas station ghost? Bug on the lens.
Lizard Man? Fake.

Next?

#244

amyingeorgia

amyingeorgia

    Video Archivist

Posted May 27, 2012 @ 12:00 AM

I'm not sure why Leon of Lizardman needed subtitles?

#245

Forn

Forn

    Couch Potato

Posted May 27, 2012 @ 7:59 AM

So let me get this straight: if you debunk the photographic evidence presented to you, but a couple of your pieces of equipment move -- on a ship! -- then it is definitely evidence of the paranormal.

Is that right?

Lol, that seems to be correct.
So if someone else can reproduce a camera being moved on a battleship (or whatever it is), does that debunk their evidence?

#246

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted May 30, 2012 @ 4:32 PM

I am really getting frustrated with this show! They go all the way to England, can't exactly reproduce the weird looking creature and can't find it on their search, which could not have lasted more than a couple hours at most, so they debunk the whole thing as CGI. They didn't even bother to run the guy's statement that he did not hoax it through their lie detecting software.

Then, back to my state of Kentucky again - after quickly giving up on Bigfoot a few weeks back - and now they are looking for ghost cat. Despite the stories of other strange activity, like the ghost man seen sitting in a particular chair, all they do is figure out that a flashlight caused the strange image and then they go home without doing their usual night investigation.

#247

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted May 31, 2012 @ 1:37 AM

It's easy to see that it was CGI. Simply step through the footage frame by frame and watch how the "creature" turns its "head" -- it turns away in a single frame, turns back in a single frame, then turns away again in a single frame which matches the first frame. The creature was animated with three or maybe four still frames.

The "jump" was especially unnatural. After the jump the creature moves straight down at a very fast and constant rate instead of falling at an increasing rate. This was a single animation just panned down the frame.

But who needs CGI? For the second week in a row a mystery was caught on tape that was caused by a simple flashlight. They've got to stop chasing shapeless blobs of light.

#248

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted May 31, 2012 @ 5:56 AM

I don't understand why they travel to the locations if all they are going to do is say that something was CGI. They could do that from the comfort of their little gathering place. I liked the show better when they actually found a few interesting and mysterious things. Not much of that lately.

#249

ubi

ubi

    Stalker

Posted May 31, 2012 @ 8:06 AM

I got the feeling they ran out of good vidclips to investigate.

#250

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted May 31, 2012 @ 11:25 AM

Or maybe they ran out of clips that fit their way of investigating things for the show. The playground gargoyle was the only one this week that wasn't a shapeless blob.

The slightly dark Prosperity School blob was hardly visible but they didn't have the alleged other better footage. The Brazilian Spheres were just blobs of light in the sky that separate and recombine and apparently teleport. If not faked they were most likely bright birds that were lit by the sun and out of focus. Since they were only about the size of a pixel, they'll look sharp anyway. The cut right around the palm frond is the most difficult part to animate and was even worse than the still-frame animated gargoyle but it could also be a bird diving with the edge of its wings toward the camera. The thin profile combined with being out of focus will make it disappear until it turns its wings back towards the camera.

Fakes like the spheres and the gargoyle always have the mystery object passing behind a closer object. They hope this will fool people into thinking it's impossible to fake but it's just more work and many fakes have been exposed by doing this wrong. The California Drone was a good example of where someone worked very hard to carefully put their CGI creation behind a complicated power pole but made a single mistake that proved it had been faked.

Oh, damn another serious problem I just saw. As the camera is panning back to the creature early in the clip, in one frame the castle is completely motion blurred. It's nothing but a featureless gray rectangle. Even the background light below the castle has left a long horizontal trail. However the creature and its bright eyes are perfectly sharp. You can see the outline of its arm with no blurriness from the panning. Even its bright eyes are still pin points. They should be horizontal trails like the light below the castle.

In the next frame the camera pans up slightly, giving the real lights diagonal trails. The creature is still perfectly sharp, eyes still pin points.

The creature and the background don't match.

#251

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted Jun 3, 2012 @ 7:07 PM

Gargoyle? CGI. Next.

I'm surprised they didn't try a guy with a gigantic penis for the tail.

One of my favorite things about this show is how, every single episode, THREE investigators just can't WAIT to investigate Clip "A" and THREE of the investigators are just licking their chops to investigate Clip "B". Never four for "A" and two for "B" or one for "A" and four for "B". It is always a threesome on this show.

I'd love to see...

BEN: "I'd love to look into the theater ghost clip".
AUSTIN: "I'm really interested in the phantom lights".
JAEL: "Yeah, I'd like to check out those lights, too".
LANISHA: "Count me in on the phantom lights clip".
DEVIN: "I think the theater ghost clip looks really interesting".
BILL: "I'd like to examine the source of those phantom lights as well".

AUSTIN: "Hey, fuck you, Bill. In rehearsal we told you to go with the theater ghost".
BILL: "Yeah, well, that fucking theater ghost is obviously CGI, so I'm taking the phantom lights".
AUSTIN: "The phantom lights are clearly reflected headlights from cars on the highway, so go to the theater!"

#252

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 4, 2012 @ 10:53 AM

Don't forget...

JAEL: "The man who shot this footage speaks Spanish? I speak Spanish, but that won't influence my vote by giving me lots of camera time during the investigation."

The stupid gargoyle still bugs me. They step through the Brazil lights frame by frame and exclude it because of one frame. There were at least two frames in the gargoyle clip that strongly suggest it had been animated and at least two more frames that clearly prove the image of the gargoyle was not captured at the same time the image of the castle was. When a camera pans and the background leaves a motion blur trail yet the bigfoot/UFO/Mothman is still sharp, it's 100% fake. Animating motion blur to match the background is easy to do but the kids who work on fakes don't want to see their animation smeared.

I haven't found any discussion of the gargoyle anywhere. That suggests that FoF were the only people fooled by it.

#253

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted Jun 4, 2012 @ 5:01 PM

That suggests that FoF were the only people fooled by it.


I don't think they were fooled, I just think they needed something to investigate that ISN'T a ghostly apparition in a theater, a ghostly apparition in a hotel, a ghostly apparition in ship, a ghostly apparition in a hospital, a or ghostly apparition in a hallway.

#254

ubi

ubi

    Stalker

Posted Jun 4, 2012 @ 8:23 PM

Like I said earlier, they've run out of good footage to investigate.

#255

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted Jun 4, 2012 @ 10:01 PM

Next time on "Fact or Faked" the team is off to England to see if they can replicate this incredible photo of a suspected alien craft caught on camera by startled onlookers:

http://yafh.com/image/33d2ddc4-ufo.jpg

#256

elflady

elflady

    Channel Surfer

  • Gender:Female

Posted Jun 5, 2012 @ 8:41 PM

What did you guys think about the UFO case tonight? It was... interesting to say the least. I'm not sure what it was that they were seeing, but it was certainly the most interesting thing I've ever seen them catch

#257

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 6, 2012 @ 12:00 PM

Like I said earlier, they've run out of good footage to investigate.

Give it some time. These things go in cycles. The summer is when the hoaxes and fakes hit the Internet hard. Kids are out of school and at home playing with new CGI software. People are outside where they can videotape balloons with LEDs on them that hoaxers have released. Once one good fake hits the Internet, there will be people who will try to top it or at least pull off something similar.

What did you guys think about the UFO case tonight? It was... interesting to say the least. I'm not sure what it was that they were seeing, but it was certainly the most interesting thing I've ever seen them catch

The flying object (little more than a dot on the IR screen) was almost certainly a bird. It had the characteristics of a bird taking off, building speed, then gracefully flying into the trees.

The rest of the stuff... who knows? It bugs me is that they do everything they can to replicate and debunk existing footage but when their own night time investigations create new and more startling results they just shrug their shoulders and declare it unexplainable instead of investigating it like the original footage. The lights and flashes last night begged for more study and may have had simple explanations, but I guess they didn't have time for it.

Things like the whistling ghost a couple of weeks ago make them look like they were the victims of a practical joke. Far too many of their night time investigations catch spooky things. Most investigators not on television shows will study a place or an area for a week or longer and not get any results.

#258

ubi

ubi

    Stalker

Posted Jun 7, 2012 @ 12:05 PM

I caught a repeat of the playground gargoyle and ghost cat ep. I'm not sure if it was because my eyes were weary or my 12-year-old TV needs replaced, but I really couldn't see anything in the clips they pretended to review for investigation, even the one the guy reverse-colored and decided it was fake!

The playground gargoyle was so dark and muddied that I could barely make it out, save for the eyes. My initial thought was "CGI" and when they observed how it jumped down in an "unnatural motion", I figured they'd conclude what I had suspect, but noooo... they had to rig up an overly-complicated pulley system to yank it to the ground. And then they wandered into the nearby woods for a couple hours to investigate, which was just silly.

The ghost cat was interesting; at least I didn't immediately realize it was a flashlight beam and I thought the stunt cat looked pretty close, if only its path had been a little lower so the legs weren't in frame...

#259

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted Jun 7, 2012 @ 12:27 PM

I agree that they should have devoted a few more days to the UFO footage that they recorded. I guess somebody else will have to back to that location and try to figure out what they saw!

#260

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 7, 2012 @ 12:37 PM

The playground gargoyle was so dark and muddied that I could barely make it out, save for the eyes. My initial thought was "CGI" and when they observed how it jumped down in an "unnatural motion", I figured they'd conclude what I had suspect, but noooo... they had to rig up an overly-complicated pulley system to yank it to the ground.

They also never explained how they animated gargoyle could have disappeared right after it jumped. The playground castle was open (you could see the trees through it) so we should have seen the shadowy figure fall to the ground behind the castle. Instead it vanished right after it jumped. I'm dumbfounded that they stepped through one clip and dismissed it due to a single questionable frame, yet chose to investigate a clip that had several frames that were probably or certainly faked.

My cat is also fooled by flashlights! :)

#261

Quilt Fairy

Quilt Fairy

    Fanatic

Posted Jun 7, 2012 @ 11:53 PM

There are so many statements made on this show that make me weep for the future of the country, such as "Well, this area is known to be a UFO corridor", "Many people believe this (obviously CGIed floating sphere) to be evidence of alien technology", and my favorite, "Many people believe this (optical illusion) to be the planet Miraboo, whose appearance foreshadows the destruction of the Earth in 2012." Stuff like this is said over and over. How many is 'many'? Is it really that many? Have we lost all our native scepticism and critical thinking skills and become a totally credulous society? I don't know how many times I've yelled at the TV "It's just lens flare!" or "It's just a bug!" or "It's just boat lights!"

Their statements about the house in Colorado were also misleading/illogical. First, the family has lived there for 30 years, so things couldn't have been that bad. Second, there really was no time element involved. Even if the family moved out, the house was still going to be there and could be investigated. The slant the show puts on most of the investigations bugs the hell out of me. (Note to self: Why am I still watching this show? I can't figure out what they expect to prove in most of these cases.)

#262

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted Jun 8, 2012 @ 12:46 AM

There are so many statements made on this show that make me weep for the future of the country, such as "Well, this area is known to be a UFO corridor"


You know, I bristled at that statement initially as well, but after a little thought...

"UFO" most certainly refers to objects that are not identified, not necessarily alien craft. If there was a corridor in that particular area where there were numerous UFO reports, even if they were later identified, I would say that Bill's statement would be a fair one. I think any stretch of populated area where there are numerous UFO reports could be considered a "UFO corridor".

After thinking about it I didn't take this particular statement in the same manner as "Finding Bigfoot" where they declare that a particular area is definitely home to the mythical creature.

#263

ubi

ubi

    Stalker

Posted Jun 8, 2012 @ 4:39 AM

Something the "investigators" on Finding Bigfoot do with alarming regularity.

Edited by ubi, Jun 8, 2012 @ 4:42 AM.


#264

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 8, 2012 @ 11:54 AM

There are so many statements made on this show that make me weep for the future of the country, such as "Well, this area is known to be a UFO corridor", "Many people believe this (obviously CGIed floating sphere) to be evidence of alien technology", and my favorite, "Many people believe this (optical illusion) to be the planet Miraboo, whose appearance foreshadows the destruction of the Earth in 2012."

They are correct that there are "many" of them but fortunately they're a small fraction of the people who post on forums that cover paranormal topics. They are completely immune to any form of logic and are just desperate to believe in anything. Weep only for them because they must live difficult lives.

I think FoF is far better than other shows. There's some Ancient Aliens show that is rehashing the old "ancient astronauts" crap that lots of folks in the 70's fell for until it was completely debunked. I've never seen it but apparently they went through all of Von Däniken debunked books and are rehashing the same silly conclusions that he got rich off of. Every bit of "evidence" the show presents is straight from the old books and is easily explained by those who went through the ancient astronaut craze. Nevertheless the show has created a new generation of true believers who are certain aliens built every crude ancient structure on Earth.

(Note to self: Why am I still watching this show? I can't figure out what they expect to prove in most of these cases.)

The format now is first to prove that the existing footage has been faked... then create their own footage which they do no real investigation of to make sure the viewers are left with some exciting mystery to hold onto. I suspect that if every episode simply debunked everything, very few people would continue to watch it.

While some of the investigations are clumsy and irritate me, it's good to be able to analyze the investigations and find the flaws. They generally do a good job of showing common hoaxing techniques and often get spectacular results. For me that makes it worth watching. I had no idea you can buy a silver balloon that's the shape of a classic flying saucer.

#265

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 14, 2012 @ 12:52 PM

This week wasn't so bad. The truck stop was fun. The video is difficult to arm-chair debunk because we don't know if the jumpy motion of the ghost exists in the original footage or is an artifact of 24 frame per second production of the show. If it isn't an artifact of that the something fishy was going on since its motion wasn't fluid. It jumped several times unlike in the replicated footage where it moved smoothly. Of course they ignored this. The blob did look great with a bright "head", great transparency, and a pixelization pattern which matched the background.

The night time investigation was silly. Austin was walking the basement and something fell from the unfinished ceiling. The thing to do was look at what fell and see what it might have fallen off of. Remember that Lanisha is right above him with a lot of equipment. It's likely that this deteriorating abandoned place hasn't had this many people walking around in it for a while so loose stuff is likely to fall from the ducts and conduit hanging from the basement ceiling. I didn't see the second thing that was supposedly thrown at him. I also didn't hear the footsteps or crash they claimed to have heard. The "Get out of here!" voice they supposedly recorded could have been anything, like someone's jacket sleeve rubbing on something.

The NASA graveyard thing was excellent. They matched the originals perfectly. They immediately looked like long-shutter light drawings to me. The best shot appeared to be a lucky lightening strike in the background. Best of all, they didn't spend a night in a graveyard jumping at every noise. For a location that reportedly had screaming and disembodied voices, it's odd that they passed on doing a night time investigation of it.

#266

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted Jun 20, 2012 @ 9:29 AM

The Oregon vortex was fascinating. I've seen the height thing on Decoded when the team went to Alaska. It was the exact same effect and also an area that caused planes to lose the ability to fly with instruments.

Did they actually explain the height difference other than the 2% incline? What about the horses not entering that zone? Really cool stuff.

#267

scowl

scowl

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 20, 2012 @ 11:19 AM

I grew up in that area. My high school science class went out to this tourist trap back in the 80's to do some investigation.

If I remember right, we measured something closer to a 10% incline where we stood. I think their level was messed up or maybe they've changed the area. Also where the "shorter" person stood, the ground was so uneven so you felt very uncomfortable standing straight up with your feet together. You naturally want to hunch a little. Viola... you're now shorter.

Back when I was there, they had a pendulum set up that worked differently than what we saw on the show. It would start swinging in one direction and eventually start swinging in a direction 90 degrees from where it started, then it would go back. The vertical string to the pendulum was hanging from another string loosely tied horizontally in the direction of where the pendulum starts. Eventually the energy from the vertical string would transfer to the horizontal string which would cause it to swing perpendicularly from the vertical string. You can duplicate this effect anywhere. Pendulums with single strings swung normally.

I guess people wised up to what was happening with that two-string set up so they came up with a new parlor trick for the pendulum. I like the buried magnets idea but I guess all their equipment to detect magnetic fields was with the ghost hunters in England and they didn't know how to use their compasses.

The house is pure optical illusion. It was very easy (and also disappointing) to prove that they were simple magic tricks.

As for the horses, they should have covered their eyes to see if they were being spooked by something they saw or something else. Horses are sensitive creatures and most will not go places they don't feel safe.

The ghost in England (another overseas trip?) was a bug on the camera. You didn't have to invert the video to see it was a bug. Didn't they do this once already? Nice of them to figure that out after their trip.

#268

PattyorSelma

PattyorSelma

    Video Archivist

Posted Jun 20, 2012 @ 12:15 PM

Very interesting, scowl. Optical illusions always amaze me. I would enjoy a trip to that tourist trap. If nothing else, it's a beautiful area.

They sure pack up and go to England a lot. I still laugh about the stuff they just happen to take with them.

I live near a farm in the Bluegrass of Kentucky that many locals won't go near because of all the paranormal activity. Most won't drive down the road, which is about a mile from me. I need to try to get some activity on video so they will come here!

#269

AgingGoth

AgingGoth

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 20, 2012 @ 1:42 PM

and take pictures ...... lots and lots of pictures.

#270

misterbfd

misterbfd

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted Jun 20, 2012 @ 9:41 PM

I cannot believe that these idiots actually went to investigate a mystery spot. There's nothing mysterious about it. It is pure optical illusion. I've never been to Oregon and I can tell you that. It is not a phenomenon.

When I was a kid, here in Florida, there was a theme park called "Six Gun Territory" which is long, long gone. I went there. It was a western-themed attraction, and they BUILT a mystery house inside the theme park and it had ALL the same illusions. Water ran uphill, billiard ball rolling uphill, height change illusion, etc...