Time Or Dimensional Slips

Sid

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
279
Reaction score
373
Points
64
It was certainly one of the strangest things that has ever happened to me. And I don't think I'm particularly prone to Fortean phenomena.

The "hoverbus" story sounds intruiging. I also remember reading an account in the Unexplained of a family who were driving on a motorway when on the other side of the barrier, in the opposite direction, they saw a similar type of hovering vehicle with people looking at them from the windows with an alarmed expression on their faces.

One of the best accounts I've read was about a guy who was shopping in Liverpool with his wife I think. She'd just gone into a shop, or something and he suddenly became aware that his environment had changed and he found himself standing in the same street as it appeared several years previously.
His story was reported in a local paper and it turned out that several other people had had a similar experience in the same street.

I must look for this somewhere...

Perhaps we should start another thread as this has strayed out of the realms of ULs now!
"Talk about time-slips... " that's a bit of a coincidence!
I'd just started to read through your post ten minutes ago, (as above) then suddenly the penny dropped ~ 'BOLD STREET,' it was on last night's TV.
'In Search Of' (Channel 63) Blaze @ 9:00 O'clock. (repeat)
 

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
"Talk about time-slips... " that's a bit of a coincidence!
I'd just started to read through your post ten minutes ago, (as above) then suddenly the penny dropped ~ 'BOLD STREET,' it was on last night's TV.
'In Search Of' (Channel 63) Blaze @ 9:00 O'clock. (repeat)
Was it actually dealing with the time slip cases? Maybe they'll be repeating it some time.
 

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
I viewed that programme and it was quite interesting. The very serious gentleman describing a secret DARPA time travelling project sounded disturbingly genuine, although it is probably disinformation. The section on time slips was limited to the Liverpool cases and wasn't very good. The two Parascience people never actually quoted any specific cases (they claim to have info on 100 cases but on their site just describe 5 incidents plus what seems more like a conventional ghost case). They seem more interested in promoting the infrasound theory than collecting data. Slemen was not interviewed or even mentioned.
 

CuriousIdent

Not yet SO old Great Old One
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
1,316
Points
184
Location
Warwickshire, England.
I viewed that programme and it was quite interesting. The very serious gentleman describing a secret DARPA time travelling project sounded disturbingly genuine, although it is probably disinformation. The section on time slips was limited to the Liverpool cases and wasn't very good. The two Parascience people never actually quoted any specific cases (they claim to have info on 100 cases but on their site just describe 5 incidents plus what seems more like a conventional ghost case). They seem more interested in promoting the infrasound theory than collecting data. Slemen was not interviewed or even mentioned.

A shame. It does frustrate me when people settle on one theory (especially one which doesn't have a grounding in anything quantifiable) and start to block out testimony. Ultimately if we are to believe that Time Slips are a genuine, plausible, phenomenon, they are definitely one which cannot currently be quantified or explained by science, today.

If they could be (without any reasonable doubt) then they would have been.

So all that truly can be done is to lay people's personal experiences out in detail, question and investigate as thoroughly as possible, on the off-chance that at some later date we see a pattern.

Regardless of what that pattern may eventually be. :)
 

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
A shame. It does frustrate me when people settle on one theory (especially one which doesn't have a grounding in anything quantifiable) and start to block out testimony. Ultimately if we are to believe that Time Slips are a genuine, plausible, phenomenon, they are definitely one which cannot currently be quantified or explained by science, today.

If they could be (without any reasonable doubt) then they would have been.

So all that truly can be done is to lay people's personal experiences out in detail, question and investigate as thoroughly as possible, on the off-chance that at some later date we see a pattern.

Regardless of what that pattern may eventually be. :)
That's the best summing-up I've seen, and I agree totally. Belief is the enemy, as John Keel wisely said -- people can't discipline themselves to avoid picking a favourite theory, and just collect and sift the data and see what emerges.
 

Cecil Baargs

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
52
Reaction score
51
Points
18
True, but it's pretty pioneering to have the first 'serious' synth rock number one in the UK singles chart nonetheless.
Very interesting account, but "pioneer of electronic music" oh perlease!
He hadn't even been born when the pioneers of musique concrete started their experimentation, and was barely out of short trousers when the Krautrock pioneers picked up the baton!
 

gattino

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
2,035
Reaction score
4,129
Points
184
I’ve not heard of some of these Bold Street ones before. They really fascinate me. Why the 50s and the 60s and didn’t anyone in the 50s and the 60s see people in unusual clothes?
As ive doubtless said elsewhere in this thread the primary source for the claims about Bold Street is the wholey unreliable Tom Slemen, who as with all of his stories involve only first names and imaginative accounts of people's inner dialogue. As far as I'm aware none of the alleged experiencers of these time slips has ever been fully identified and certainly never interviewed. The case of Sean, the shoplifter, did apparently appear in the Liverpool Echo at the time, but with the same vague and anonymous details.

What I can say is that Bold Street's reputation as a centre for time slips exists soley on websites like ths one and is wholey unknown to the people of Liverpool at large. I've been down the street a million times and the only thing reminiscent of another era is me.
 

GerdaWordyer

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
929
Reaction score
1,319
Points
139

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
As ive doubtless said elsewhere in this thread the primary source for the claims about Bold Street is the wholey unreliable Tom Slemen, who as with all of his stories involve only first names and imaginative accounts of people's inner dialogue. As far as I'm aware none of the alleged experiencers of these time slips has ever been fully identified and certainly never interviewed. The case of Sean, the shoplifter, did apparently appear in the Liverpool Echo at the time, but with the same vague and anonymous details.

What I can say is that Bold Street's reputation as a centre for time slips exists soley on websites like ths one and is wholey unknown to the people of Liverpool at large. I've been down the street a million times and the only thing reminiscent of another era is me.
I have to disagree with your blanket rejection of Tom Slemen's time slip cases. Yes, he has included quite a few dubious stories, but most of them strike me as fairly reliable. Your point about identifying witnesses is important, and that is what I have tried to do. Obviously some witnesses don't want their names published, but where Slemen quotes the full name(s) of witnesses, I have checked the genealogical records. Most of the cases that I have regarded as reliable turn out to confirm that persons of the correct name and age were indeed present in the records, born either in Liverpool or surrounding areas. However, alleged witnesses named in the more dodgy stories -- especially those which are written with extensive dialogue which nobody could have remembered anyway, and presented in a fictional style -- don't match the records. I think most of these occur in his later books, suggesting that his commitment to preparing 30-odd books on paranormal stories from Liverpool led him to pad out the later ones with fanciful stuff.
Regarding other sources -- Slemen has published over 100 time slip cases, the local Parascience group say they have 100 cases on record but have published only 5, and I have found a further dozen or so from personal posts and accounts. So the city centre at Liverpool has indeed generated far more time slip cases than any comparable area anywhere.
 

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
I’ve not heard of some of these Bold Street ones before. They really fascinate me. Why the 50s and the 60s and didn’t anyone in the 50s and the 60s see people in unusual clothes?

https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2019/11/mysterious-time-slips-on-a-liverpool-street/
Quite a few of the Liverpool cases do mention Victorian time slips. As for why witnesses in the 50s and 60s might not have worried too much about seeing people in unusual clothes, I think it was because Liverpool was for a long time the centre of pop culture and witnesses might not have thought anything of it. Some of the cases do suggest the possibility of identifying possible witnesses, e.g. the Imogen incident at Mothercare, but Slemen has never (so far as we know) made the effort.
 

CuriousIdent

Not yet SO old Great Old One
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
1,316
Points
184
Location
Warwickshire, England.
I’ve not heard of some of these Bold Street ones before. They really fascinate me. Why the 50s and the 60s and didn’t anyone in the 50s and the 60s see people in unusual clothes?

https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2019/11/mysterious-time-slips-on-a-liverpool-street/
Interesting. Though possibly not for all of the right reasons.

(As a side note I don't think that I would ever choose to describe Bold Street as 'Posh'.)

I find it a little frustrating that the writer has provided no sources for the majority of the experiences he is describing here. Even the story which was relaid to him has no individual attached to it by name. It's still an anonymous tale.

There are obvious quirks in this for British readers (the fashion in which High Street stores are referred to as if they were tiny curious independent retailers) but what I find of most interest is that once again we return to our old friend 'Frank's' Bold Street tale. Only here several key details differ.

For example Tom Slemen's telling of this story refers to the bookshop in the story as 'Dillons'. Which in this 1996 account would be correct. The Dillons chain was operated by Thorn EMI back in the 90s, who would later acquire the HMV Group, and then the Waterstones chain in 1998. After that point they started to rebrand Dillons stores as Waterstones, but at the time of the original account it would very much have been 'Dillons the Bookseller'.

Tom Slemen describes Frank as "an off-duty policeman from Melling". The MU piece however states that Frank "... was supposedly an ex-Policeman". This may be a UK-US language divide misinterpreting of 'off-duty' as 'no longer a copper', possibly. Or it may well be that at the point Brent Swancer of Mysterious Universe heard of this account Frank was retired (or had left the Force of other volition) and he has assumed that he was also 'an ex-policeman' at the time of the incident in 1996.

While the Mysterious Universe account does not mention arriving via Central Station, but it does basically start in the same place. Where we differ more specifically is in what follows that. Both state that wife Carol goes to the bookstore. But whereas Tom Slemen tells us that Frank went up to a "record store in Ranelagh Street to look for a CD " the MU account has Frank bumping into an unnamed acquaintance and then chatting while his wife went over to Dillons.

Here things diverge slightly further. Slemen's account specifically refers to a timescale of 20 mins and Frank returning to Bold Street after walking up "the incline near the Lyceum". MU do not state a timescale or state that Frank left the vicinity of Bold Street at all. That account simply says that he finished having his conversation with this unnamed acquaintance and appears to still be on Bold Street at that point.

In the MU version Frank's response to the initial experience is that "he had the sudden and odd feeling that he did not recognize where he was". That it was "a very disorientating feeling". The general tone here seems to suggest almost a sense of disorientating bewilderment in Frank, which is not echoed in Slemen's piece. There he is portrayed as somewhat more rational. It's hard to tell of this is dramatic license or different understanding of events.

In Slemen's account the scene is described as "somehow [entering] an oasis of quietness". The background volume and ambiance is not really addressed in the MU piece. Nor the calmness Slemen's 'quiet' version implies

A note here: If you are one of those who has previously criticised Tom Slemen for embellishment? May I point out that Slemen's decription of "...this really unnerved him" seems positively restrained next to the MU's description of "... his growing confusing and creeping sense that something was definitely wrong". :)

Both pieces describe the people Frank sees in the vicinity as being dressed in clothing from the 1940s or 1950s. But only Slemen's version states that "He realised that he had somehow walked into the Bold Street of forty-odd years ago". That conclusion is not made in the MU piece.

The 1950s 'Caplan's' van beeping at Frank appears in both accounts. But in MU it is beeping for him to get out of the way. In the Slemen piece it is "beeping as it narrowly missed him" because Frank is walking down what he knows as a pedestrianised road, where a van was unlikely to be driving unless delivering goods. I do wonder if pedestrianisation is a thing in the US. Maybe that's why it doesn't get a mention here. I'm not in a place to really know.

In Slemen's version Frank crosses the road to find that the bookstore is no longer a bookstore, but a store "with the name 'Cripps' over its two entrances". In the MU version Frank looks for bookstore but is unable to locate it. The result is Frank becoming confused and he "began wandering around to see if he could get his bearings straight". Again the effect the experience is having on Frank underwrites him as not being 100% with it.

In relation to 'Cripps' Slemen's version says "He looked in the window of Cripps and saw no books on display, but womens' handbags and shoes." Whereas the MU version "... and in the windows were not books, but rather women's dresses and shoes of a similarly vintage design as the people walking along all around him ..."

Both accounts reference the girl Franks spots in more modern clothing. But only Slemen's version actually describes her appearance in any detail ("a girl of about twenty, dressed in the clothes of a mid-1990s girl; hipsters and a lime-coloured sleeveless top. The bag she carried had the name Miss Selfridges on it, which really reassured the policeman that he was still somehow partly in 1996.")

The MU piece describes the girl as "... standing at the entrance of the store looking just as confused as he was". At no point is she described as looking confused in the Slemen account, merely that upon seeing something more familiar Frank "smiled at the girl as she walked past him and entered Cripps".

In the MU account both Frank and the girl enter together, with "quizzical looks on their faces". Once they cross the threshold Frank sees that inside they are back in Waterstones, and nothing is amiss. The girl looks "... around in shock", and expresses confusion that "it wasn’t the clothing store she thought it would be". This is quite a different tone to the Slemen article.

But in Semen's account Frank follows the girl into Cripps. As he does the interior in front of him changes "in a flash to the interior of Dillons Bookshop". The girl is then on her way back out of the store and Frank grabs her by the arm. He asks "Did you see that then?" and "the girl calmly said, "Yeah. I thought it was a new shop that had opened. I was going in to look at the clothes, and it's a bookshop"." Note that there is a lack of shock in this account. It notes that she's calm, as she responds. Slemen then notes that "The girl just laughed, shook her head, and walked out again. Frank said the girl looked back and shook her head in disbelief. " A very different tone. No shock. No concern. Actual laughter at something odd just having happened.

The MU version does not mention that Frank relayed this incident to his wife Carol, or that she hadn't noticed anything strange. It does however follow up that "It would not be until later that Frank would figure out that “Cripps” had been a popular, historical traditional dressmaking shop that had opened in 1848 and closed down in the 1970s, and that the name on the van “Caplan’s,” was also a delivery business that had closed down long ago".

I would genuinely be interested to know what account Mysterious Universe's Brent Swancer was drawing from, as while both accounts broadly describe the same event there are enough differences in the two to raise further questions.

Both Swancer and Sleman are of course telling a story with a specific audience in mind. But are we simply looking at a difference in tone or have they been told slightly different stories.?
 
Last edited:

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
29,142
Reaction score
31,190
Points
309
Location
HM The Tower of London
I have to disagree with your blanket rejection of Tom Slemen's time slip cases. Yes, he has included quite a few dubious stories, but most of them strike me as fairly reliable.
Why should anyone believe someone who's a proven fabricator? Catching people lying in daily life makes you disbelieve anything else they say. It's the same for a writer. As Slemen's output is full of what you've charitably called 'dubious stories', I for one don't trust a word he says.
 

CuriousIdent

Not yet SO old Great Old One
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
1,316
Points
184
Location
Warwickshire, England.
Why should anyone believe someone who's a proven fabricator? Catching people lying in daily life makes you disbelieve anything else they say. It's the same for a writer. As Slemen's output is full of what you've charitably called 'dubious stories', I for one don't trust a word he says.
I think it's probably a little unfair to tar him entirely. I certainly believe that Slemen embellishes. He is a writer addressing a very specific audience, ad he does so in tried and tested fashion. But, as I say above, comparing his version of the account to Brent Swancer's version the one thing that (and believe me, I never expected to utter these words) surprises me is that in comparison Slemen almost appears to undrembellish. No fear. No sense of dread and anxiety laden confusion in his account. Plenty in this more recent one.

I cannot say with certainty that Tom Slemen categorically *doesn't* make stuff up. But that's also why I'd love to know how Brent Swancer came by this.
 

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
29,142
Reaction score
31,190
Points
309
Location
HM The Tower of London
I think it's probably a little unfair to tar him entirely. I certainly believe that Slemen embellishes. He is a writer addressing a very specific audience, ad he does so in tried and tested fashion. But, as I say above, comparing his version of the account to Brent Swancer's version the one thing that (and believe me, I never expected to utter these words) surprises me is that in comparison Slemen almost appears to undrembellish. No fear. No sense of dread and anxiety laden confusion in his account. Plenty in this more recent one.

I cannot say with certainty that Tom Slemen categorically *doesn't* make stuff up. But that's also why I'd love to know how Brent Swancer came by this.
You either believe a writer's telling the truth or you don't. It's fiction or fact. If Slemen wants to write Liverpool-based ghost fiction he should get on with that and stop trying to pull the wool.
 

CuriousIdent

Not yet SO old Great Old One
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
1,316
Points
184
Location
Warwickshire, England.
You either believe a writer's telling the truth or you don't. It's fiction or fact. If Slemen wants to write Liverpool-based ghost fiction he should get on with that and stop trying to pull the wool.

I don't disagree. And again, this is why it would be great to get some kind of sources out of him. To help confirm or deny. But I think that a second person recounting this story, with enough differences to suggest that it could have come from a source other than Slemen, interests me.
 

Carl Grove

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
918
Reaction score
1,024
Points
139
Location
Bury St Edmunds
Why should anyone believe someone who's a proven fabricator? Catching people lying in daily life makes you disbelieve anything else they say. It's the same for a writer. As Slemen's output is full of what you've charitably called 'dubious stories', I for one don't trust a word he says.
I can see your point although that implies that you don't believe any of our politicians either...
 

MorningAngel

Justified & Ancient
Joined
May 14, 2015
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
1,595
Points
159
Interesting. Though possibly not for all of the right reasons.

(As a side note I don't think that I would ever choose to describe Bold Street as 'Posh'.)

I find it a little frustrating that the writer has provided no sources for the majority of the experiences he is describing here. Even the story which was relaid to him has no individual attached to it by name. It's still an anonymous tale.

There are obvious quirks in this for British readers (the fashion in which High Street stores are referred to as if they were tiny curious independent retailers) but what I find of most interest is that once again we return to our old friend 'Frank's' Bold Street tale. Only here several key details differ.

For example Tom Slemen's telling of this story refers to the bookshop in the story as 'Dillons'. Which in this 1996 account would be correct. The Dillons chain was operated by Thorn EMI back in the 90s, who would later acquire the HMV Group, and then the Waterstones chain in 1998. After that point they started to rebrand Dillons stores as Waterstones, but at the time of the original account it would very much have been 'Dillons the Bookseller'.

Tom Slemen describes Frank as "an off-duty policeman from Melling". The MU piece however states that Frank "... was supposedly an ex-Policeman". This may be a UK-US language divide misinterpreting of 'off-duty' as 'no longer a copper', possibly. Or it may well be that at the point Brent Swancer of Mysterious Universe heard of this account Frank was retired (or had left the Force of other volition) and he has assumed that he was also 'an ex-policeman' at the time of the incident in 1996.

While the Mysterious Universe account does not mention arriving via Central Station, but it does basically start in the same place. Where we differ more specifically is in what follows that. Both state that wife Carol goes to the bookstore. But whereas Tom Slemen tells us that Frank went up to a "record store in Ranelagh Street to look for a CD " the MU account has Frank bumping into an unnamed acquaintance and then chatting while his wife went over to Dillons.

Here things diverge slightly further. Slemen's account specifically refers to a timescale of 20 mins and Frank returning to Bold Street after walking up "the incline near the Lyceum". MU do not state a timescale or state that Frank left the vicinity of Bold Street at all. That account simply says that he finished having his conversation with this unnamed acquaintance and appears to still be on Bold Street at that point.

In the MU version Frank's response to the initial experience is that "he had the sudden and odd feeling that he did not recognize where he was". That it was "a very disorientating feeling". The general tone here seems to suggest almost a sense of disorientating bewilderment in Frank, which is not echoed in Slemen's piece. There he is portrayed as somewhat more rational. It's hard to tell of this is dramatic license or different understanding of events.

In Slemen's account the scene is described as "somehow [entering] an oasis of quietness". The background volume and ambiance is not really addressed in the MU piece. Nor the calmness Slemen's 'quiet' version implies

A note here: If you are one of those who has previously criticised Tom Slemen for embellishment? May I point out that Slemen's decription of "...this really unnerved him" seems positively restrained next to the MU's description of "... his growing confusing and creeping sense that something was definitely wrong". :)

Both pieces describe the people Frank sees in the vicinity as being dressed in clothing from the 1940s or 1950s. But only Slemen's version states that "He realised that he had somehow walked into the Bold Street of forty-odd years ago". That conclusion is not made in the MU piece.

The 1950s 'Caplan's' van beeping at Frank appears in both accounts. But in MU it is beeping for him to get out of the way. In the Slemen piece it is "beeping as it narrowly missed him" because Frank is walking down what he knows as a pedestrianised road, where a van was unlikely to be driving unless delivering goods. I do wonder if pedestrianisation is a thing in the US. Maybe that's why it doesn't get a mention here. I'm not in a place to really know.

In Slemen's version Frank crosses the road to find that the bookstore is no longer a bookstore, but a store "with the name 'Cripps' over its two entrances". In the MU version Frank looks for bookstore but is unable to locate it. The result is Frank becoming confused and he "began wandering around to see if he could get his bearings straight". Again the effect the experience is having on Frank underwrites him as not being 100% with it.

In relation to 'Cripps' Slemen's version says "He looked in the window of Cripps and saw no books on display, but womens' handbags and shoes." Whereas the MU version "... and in the windows were not books, but rather women's dresses and shoes of a similarly vintage design as the people walking along all around him ..."

Both accounts reference the girl Franks spots in more modern clothing. But only Slemen's version actually describes her appearance in any detail ("a girl of about twenty, dressed in the clothes of a mid-1990s girl; hipsters and a lime-coloured sleeveless top. The bag she carried had the name Miss Selfridges on it, which really reassured the policeman that he was still somehow partly in 1996.")

The MU piece describes the girl as "... standing at the entrance of the store looking just as confused as he was". At no point is she described as looking confused in the Slemen account, merely that upon seeing something more familiar Frank "smiled at the girl as she walked past him and entered Cripps".

In the MU account both Frank and the girl enter together, with "quizzical looks on their faces". Once they cross the threshold Frank sees that inside they are back in Waterstones, and nothing is amiss. The girl looks "... around in shock", and expresses confusion that "it wasn’t the clothing store she thought it would be". This is quite a different tone to the Slemen article.

But in Semen's account Frank follows the girl into Cripps. As he does the interior in front of him changes "in a flash to the interior of Dillons Bookshop". The girl is then on her way back out of the store and Frank grabs her by the arm. He asks "Did you see that then?" and "the girl calmly said, "Yeah. I thought it was a new shop that had opened. I was going in to look at the clothes, and it's a bookshop"." Note that there is a lack of shock in this account. It notes that she's calm, as she responds. Slemen then notes that "The girl just laughed, shook her head, and walked out again. Frank said the girl looked back and shook her head in disbelief. " A very different tone. No shock. No concern. Actual laughter at something odd just having happened.

The MU version does not mention that Frank relayed this incident to his wife Carol, or that she hadn't noticed anything strange. It does however follow up that "It would not be until later that Frank would figure out that “Cripps” had been a popular, historical traditional dressmaking shop that had opened in 1848 and closed down in the 1970s, and that the name on the van “Caplan’s,” was also a delivery business that had closed down long ago".

I would genuinely be interested to know what account Mysterious Universe's Brent Swancer was drawing from, as while both accounts broadly describe the same event there are enough differences in the two to raise further questions.

Both Swancer and Sleman are of course telling a story with a specific audience in mind. But are we simply looking at a difference in tone or have they been told slightly different stories.?
I wonder if the changes are to avoid plagiarism (being as they aren’t proper cited quotes) and add some more atmosphere.
 

CuriousIdent

Not yet SO old Great Old One
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
1,316
Points
184
Location
Warwickshire, England.
I wonder if the changes are to avoid plagiarism (being as they aren’t proper cited quotes) and add some more atmosphere.

Entirely possible. The downside of that can be that it creates a Chinese Whispers effect. Where in enough details are changed in the more creative retelling that it begins to distort the original.
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
17,155
Reaction score
22,547
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
Talk about time-slips, what about that plane that took off from Brazil in 1946 that ended up missing only for it to land, 46 yrs later in 1993, at the Bogota, Columbia airport? ...

I have to do more look-ups on this story to check its veracity. :cooll:

Update: It's a hoax.
Yep ... This is an often-recycled tale that's been making the rounds in various paranormal, conspiracy, and UFO circles for decades.

It always seems to involve an airline and / or airports in South America. Some versions of the story claim the mystery airliner landed carrying nothing but skeletons, whereas other versions claim it was a non-fatal time slip of decades into the future.

The earliest documented source for this tale (that I know of ... ) is the infamous tabloid Weekly World News. They first published a version of the story in 1985, citing the flight as "Pan Am 914."

The same tabloid republished the story with different details and pictures twice more - in 1993 and 1999. In these later versions the airliner was "Charter Flight 914."

In turn, the Weekly World News accounts seem to have drawn their inspiration from a 1961 Twilight Zone episode - "The Odyssey of Flight 33."

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/flight-914-reappears-37-years/

A more recent version of this story (with the skeletons on board) appeared again this month. In this case the flight was called "Santiago Flight 513."

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/santiago-flight-513-wormhole/
 

Trevp666

It was like that when I got here.........honest!!!
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
1,843
Reaction score
4,293
Points
169
Location
Welwyn Garden City (but oddly, not an actual city)
I think I remember seeing the Twilight Zone episode you mention and IIRC it had scenes in it where the passengers were looking out the windows at dinosaurs, or wars from decades previously, and other such Bill&Ted type stuff.
I also recall seeing a film where a pilot from WW1 landed at a modern airport. And also a story about someone flying through some strange clouds then seeing an RAF airfield with old planes painted pink (which was the colour of the planes of the predecessor to the RAF).
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
17,155
Reaction score
22,547
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
... And also a story about someone flying through some strange clouds then seeing an RAF airfield with old planes painted pink (which was the colour of the planes of the predecessor to the RAF).
That would be the Victor Goddard / Drem airfield story. It's mentioned earlier in this thread, and it has its own dedicated thread:

The Victor Goddard Time Slip Case (Drem Airfield; 1935)
https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...dard-time-slip-case-drem-airfield-1935.66181/
 
Top