This Irish film maker, George Clarke, believes that he has spotted a time traveler in a Charlie Chaplin film called The Circus. This woman or man in drag as George likes to point out several times within his video, is walking on the side walk and clearly talking into some device that she is holding up to her ear.
Now, it says the most popular rational theory is it is a Siemen's hearing aid device developed in 1924. I think that could be very plausible.
However, this is kind of exciting and it's Friday. You guys tell me your thoughts and theories on this.
Keep in mind this was filmed at a studio. So I doubt there would be someone that mentally impaired just walking around.
I thought this was outside the premier? Or it could have been part of the movie that was filmed in the street.
Either way its not a phone or a time traveller. With the power of suggestion you see a person holding their hand to their ear and think "yeah! it is a phone!" but as mage says, we are taking the movement from a modern perspective and it really looks like the hand movement of someone talking into a mobile. I also agree that there is nothing in the hand that we can see. I saw the video yesterday or the day before and came to the same conclusion. I saw it slowed right down and there are points you can clearly see that the bit that could look like a phone is in fact, two fingers.
Ok lets just go on the assumption that they person is not crazy or just doing something weird and has a cellphone. Lets just think about it for a second, were is the person getting their reception from?
Seriously, it's someone either playing with a hearing aid or scratching their head/ear. As you can see in the close-ups, and what was already pointed out, the parts that appear to be similar to a phone are fingers. So unless in the future we implant phones in people's fingertips then it's not a communication device.
Read this on Slashdot. As Mage said, this interpretation is called pareidolia, where you perceive something differently because of its familiarity to something else - a colon and bracket is instantly recognised as a smiley face for the simple reason that the two punctuation marks together resemble the eyes and mouth. We now take holding your hands to your ear as the sign of a mobile phone, just because it is something we're used to in everyday life.
Note how she's wearing a scarf. If we are to presume she's in a cold environment she would probably be holding the scarf closer or higher up her face to keep it warm (and that was probably done a lot by people of her social class).
Moreover, in 1929 there would not be a single radio mast to receive or send signals. The chances of a time traveller being stupid enough to walk straight onto a film set with a handset that doesn't work are tiny. You'd instantly recognise your approximate point in time and would therefore know that the phone isn't going to bloody work.
My last snippet of evidence against this is the shading. When the camera zooms in on the lady's face in the full-length video there is zero contrast between where the top of the telephone would be and the rest of her face, leading me to believe she has nothing in her hand.
this is all bullsh*t. a cellular phone could not possibly call anybody in the 1920's
Thats not why its BS tho.
If someone could travel back in time we would have no hope of knowing the tech they had. So its a moot point to talk about network avalibility being non existent etc...
Its BS cos if you look closely you see the white object is the first and middle finger of the hand cupped around the top of the ear.
