• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Uncanny (BBC Programme / Podcast)

Paul_Exeter said:
Yes, great show, I wonder if Mark Gatiss ever visits these forums? He mentioned time-slips and other Fortean phenomena...

The Sproatley alien in the window case got my attention and found some source information here that includes the alleged photo:

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/7914-clip-from-sightings/

It is a classic example of when the UFO phenomenon/paranormal focuses its attention on one particular household and includes poltergeist-type activity in addition to the craft and entity sightings. It has elements of other classic UFO cases, not least in that it was unpleasant for the family at the centre of it.

Does anyone have anymore on this case and the Hll UFO group? It is a really intriguing and Paul Sinclair has written about a similar, rather dark and distressing case from Yorkshire in the 1990s that involved a garage workshop, car mechanics, poltergeist-type activity some sort of UFO landing (https://truthproof.uk)
Click to expand...
Just found this video of Paul Sinclair discussing the Sproatley UFO as featured on 'Uncanny'. There are some new details and a better look t the 'alien' photo:

 
Tempest63 said:
Danny Robbins is on todays eerie Essex podcast.
Not one of my favourites but I might have a listen to see if DR has anything new to say.
Click to expand...

I've never listened to that podcast before. The episode was alright and Danny had some interesting things to say, but I wish the hosts wouldn't keep interrupting him! (particularly at the start).

Edit: After listening to that episode, I've booked an 'Uncanny Live' show in the autumn. :D
 
Last edited:
escargot said:
I looked at that link and had to click further to find out where the venue is. Not impressed.
There'll be a screaming woman there anyway.
Click to expand...
We have the option of London or Norwich, which is a trek either way. Why they couldn’t show at Chelmsford or Colchester is beyond me.
 
Yup.
I've listened to all the podcasts concerning it. I'd suggest that it's better to do that then read the article.
In my mind, the article doesn't really discuss the case, rather it debunks it with a blanket 'people imagine all sorts of things'.
 
Enjoyed the new episode last night.
However, I have questions.

The monks knew about the adult male ghost. Why didn't they know about the little boy?
Or if not, why didn't she tell them?
They were allowed to converse with the cook, at least in an emergency as when she collided with some while running shrieking along a corridor.

They'd surely act according to their religious practice and, one assumes, send him on his way with prayers.
 
Good to have 'Uncanny' back. Just listened to 'The Boy in Room 3'. Good case - but as always so many questions! The casual acceptance of the ghost monk by the other monks was intriguing. I wanted fuller descriptions of the ghost monk and the ghost boy too, especially as the monk had apparently been seen often by other people. The reported verbal interaction between Maria and the ghost monk is pretty unusual too, and definitely warranted rather more comment.
 
Last edited:
CharmerKamelion said:
Good to have 'Uncanny' back. Just listened to 'The Boy in Room 3'. Good case - but as always so many questions! The casual acceptance of the ghost monk by the other monks was intriguing. I wanted fuller descriptions of the ghost monk and the ghost boy too, especially as the monk had apparently been seen othen by other people. The reported verbal interaction between Maria and the ghost monk is pretty unusual too, and definitely warranted rather more comment.
Click to expand...
Just listened and so great to have these new episodes. Yes, the lack of describing features as regards the young boy is frustrating to say the least. Also, was she not able to go into the room next door at night to check out the sound?

In some ways I am slightly torn by the strength of the phenomena: talking to a ghost monk and receiving an answer, hearing a ghost all night, every night, and having such a vivid encounter with the boy. It throws up some challenging questions, such as would a crying child not call out for their mum and/or dad rather than just sobbing? And in what language given there possible explanation at the end? But nonetheless, a fantastic start.
 
Edit: I'm up before 5am all this week so wasn't up to explaining my point about Ampleforth earlier.

There's huge backstory we're not being told here. Ampleforth was a centre for child abuse.
Children were not safe there. This should have been mentioned.

My assumption is that the subject is both too uncomfortable to have brought up and easy enough for listeners to find when they Googled Ampleforth.

Guardian article from November 2020 -
New pupils barred from top UK Catholic school after abuse scandal

Scandal has surrounded the private school in recent years and an independent inquiry into child sexual abuse published a highly critical report in August 2018 that said “appalling sexual abuse [was] inflicted over decades on children as young as seven”.
Click to expand...

The name of the building 'Marie' stays in is 'Junior House'.
New staff don't stay long there because of the unsettling atmosphere.

People experiencing physical abuse, especially in repeated attacks, may dissociate.
Perhaps the crying boy is a tulpa unintentionally created by the continued suffering and consequent dissociation of one or more of the abused Ampleforth pupils.
 
Last edited:
escargot said:
Edit: I'm up before 5am all this week so wasn't up to explaining my point about Ampleforth earlier.

There's huge backstory we're not being told here. Ampleforth was a centre for child abuse.
Children were not safe there. This should have been mentioned.

My assumption is that the subject is both too uncomfortable to have brought up and easy enough for listeners to find when they Googled Ampleforth.

Guardian article from November 2020 -
New pupils barred from top UK Catholic school after abuse scandal



The name of the building 'Marie' stays in is 'Junior House'.
New staff don't stay long there because of the unsettling atmosphere.

People experiencing physical abuse, especially in repeated attacks, may dissociate.
Perhaps the crying boy is a tulpa unintentionally created by the continued suffering and consequent dissociation of one or more of the abused Ampleforth pupils.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for posting this information, yes I agree that Danny will have perhaps anticipated listeners do a bit of their own research
 
Last edited:
I'd like to say that if I were hearing what seemed to be a ghostly child crying every night I'd get stuck RIGHT in with the amateur investigating.
However, she didn't, and also seemed to get used to it quickly, so why is this?

- Was she just too tired after work each day? Catering is a grind; lots of mauling and scrubbing.
- Did she think she might see the child, which she'd find scarier that hearing him?
- Was investigating it dangerous, like rocking the boat? It might decide to snuggle down with her instead!
- She was already stressed up after her recent life events. Maybe she did think it was all in her head.
- However, as other staff had been known to decamp in a panic, she might have thought 'Well, if this is all it does, I can deal with it.'
and so on.
 
escargot said:
I'd like to say that if I were hearing what seemed to be a ghostly child crying every night I'd get stuck RIGHT in with the amateur investigating.
However, she didn't, and also seemed to get used to it quickly, so why is this?

- Was she just too tired after work each day? Catering is a grind; lots of mauling and scrubbing.
- Did she think she might see the child, which she'd find scarier that hearing him?
- Was investigating it dangerous, like rocking the boat? It might decide to snuggle down with her instead!
- She was already stressed up after her recent life events. Maybe she did think it was all in her head.
- However, as other staff had been known to decamp in a panic, she might have thought 'Well, if this is all it does, I can deal with it.'
and so on.
Click to expand...
Good points. Who knows how you might actually react when faced with something spooky that seems to be easily investigatable? I would like to think I would be straight in there, on the basis that even though it seems spooky, it might well prove to have a mundane explanation. But I guess the idea would be in the back of your mind that maybe you would blunder into something best left alone. Your view of the world and 'reality' might never be the same again!
 
Last edited:
CharmerKamelion said:
Good points. Who knows how you might actually react when faced with something spooky that seems to be easily investigatable? I would like to think I would be straight in there, on the basis that even though it seems spooky, it might well prove to have a mundane explanation. But I guess the idea would be in the back if your mind that maybe you would blunder into something best left alone. Your view of the world and 'reality' might never be the same again!
Click to expand...
Yup, it's like when you receive a letter you've been waiting for, and until you open and read it you don't know if the news is good or bad.
So it might sit on t'mantel for a day or two...
 
I'm a bit torn about poltergeist cases and phenomena. In theory they should be excellent cases to investigate, as they often go on for a period of time and have multiple witnesses, but for some reason I find it a bit difficult to get on board with them (maybe they seem a bit unbelievable at times?) I can't help but think that the family were becoming a bit hysterical, but of course it's easy to say that when it's not happening to you!

I preferred the sceptic to the one they often have on, and he made some good points about the way we perceive sound. As a side note, is it just me or is 'Evelyn Hollow' a weak case of nominative determinism? Purely for Sleepy Hollow and Halloween. Perhaps a bit tenuous! I wonder whether it's her real name or an adopted one.
 
Cloudbusting said:
I'm a bit torn about poltergeist cases and phenomena. In theory they should be excellent cases to investigate, as they often go on for a period of time and have multiple witnesses, but for some reason I find it a bit difficult to get on board with them (maybe they seem a bit unbelievable at times?) I can't help but think that the family were becoming a bit hysterical, but of course it's easy to say that when it's not happening to you!

I preferred the sceptic to the one they often have on, and he made some good points about the way we perceive sound. As a side note, is it just me or is 'Evelyn Hollow' a weak case of nominative determinism? Purely for Sleepy Hollow and Halloween. Perhaps a bit tenuous! I wonder whether it's her real name or an adopted one.
Click to expand...
Ha ha, yes, a certain 'Scottish-glen-at-twilight' about it :)

Well I found this case and the previous one both a bit dark, unsettling and less convincing. Both suffer from being single-witness cases, and thus play into the skeptic's hands, but there was something else, too. At first I couldn't put my finger on it and then I realised that the 'Room 611' and Luibelt' cases featured witnesses with quite rich, distinguished voices, that is people with gravitas that you felt you could trust. Which is unfair, but certainly for me I found myself feeling uncertain about these new witnesses and I can't help but feel that in both cases - and especially the second one - they were more suggestible, in a heightened state, let fear take over and began to interpret anything as poltergeist activity.

We shall see what part two of this latest case throws up, but personally I'm hoping the series turns back towards multiple-witness cases that challenge the skeptics and also some sort of classic UFO case again.
 
I've heard about half of the poltergeist one. Saving the rest for bedtime! :chuckle:

I'm up to the discussion, where the totally convincing proposition is put forward that the creature on the stairs sounds were made by next door's dog or summat.

Can confidently assert that none of this haunting would bother Techy or me. We'd laugh our socks off. :nods:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top