BELFAST – Irish filmmaker, George Clarke,  spots a time traveler using a mobile phone in an old Charlie Chaplin film.

George Clarke, of Belfast, Ireland bought a box set of old Charlie Chaplin films.  He studied the films carefully and saw a few frames that caught his eye.   There seems to be a woman, or a man in drag, walking on a street talking on a mobile phone.

The “phone” is clearly held up to her ear int he film.   There is no other logical explanation for this clip, except that the person was a time traveler.

Stephen Hawking recently said he believed in time travel, BUT you could only travel into the future because if you could travel into the past there would be all these people from the future walking around amongst us.

Hawking was asked about this video.  He said that while humans can only travel forward in time, objects can travel into the past.  Therefore, he believes that the person in the film was actually using a mobile phone (circa 1991).  “The mobile phone traveled back in time and landed on the set of Charlie Chaplin, who was known to be a person who dabbled in time-space experiments.   I believe this to be concrete evidence of time travel.”

By the way, Hawking added that animals could not travel either forward or backward through time.  They can only travel through space – going from one continent to another in the blink of an eye  (more on that later).

In the meantime, watch the video.  What do you think???



  1. She could be trying to avoid the camera with her hand. But yes it does look like some one caught on the mobile phone as they turn around.

  2. Am sorry as much as i would like to believe if we as a species are capable of time travel we would be so far advanced i think somehow mobile phones would be obselete. Who knows what mobile phones would be like in the future and the technological advancements in that field are astonishing however she looks like she is holding a brick of a mobile phone, a nokia from the 1990s, so i suggest it is something other than a mobile phone, and the logical answer is probably so innocent….. quiffy

  3. It's very possible that the person talking on that device could've been someone already in that dimension and got caught temporarily in that stage for a short period of time and you can see the person and the shadow slowly vanish from the picture, no one around him or her can really notice that the person is talking, is like an image of matter in a few frames, but no sound.

  4. My view is that the hat is not right. The frount and the crown are probably mole skin, the norm for a very to do person, but the back is a different material with a different reflective index. The hat as a whole is to long for the head and has about four inches extra that could be used to hide something. Also if a vacume tube pack was to be consealed then a large breasted desgize was used as it was easyer to stop from getting seen or brocken on the frount than in a bag on the back. CC was ritch and had friends in high places and its not suprizing if the government wanted to keep a tag on him. Maybe wickapedia can unearth some old government doc to suport this lol. Alien i dought it.

  5. I am really inspired together with your writing abilities and also with the layout on your blog. Is that this a paid theme or did you customize it your self? Either way keep up the nice quality writing, it’s rare to look a nice blog like this one today..

  6. Receivers usually features a squelch circuit to cut off the audio output from the receiver when there is no transmission to listen to. This is in contrast to broadcast receivers, which often dispense with this.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.