Skeptics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for scientific skepticism. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

There are a lot of videos posted by mellowb1rd user on youtube about poltergeist activity in his home. This is one of them. He has good good rating on almost all of his videos? Are his videos real, if fake, how are they fake?

share|improve this question
Well, there is no proof that it's anything better than some simple special effects... – Sklivvz Nov 4 '11 at 0:06
He has good good rating on almost all of his videos? Is this a question? Why don't you look it up yourself? – user unknown Nov 4 '11 at 0:47
all of the objects could have easily been moved by someone outside of the field of view - there are two entrances to the kitchen, most of the activity happens near these entrances, and the chairs could have easily been moved from underneath the table. – Catherine Holloway Nov 4 '11 at 2:07
"Random dude on youtube using cheap effects to "prove" ghosts" hardly qualifies for a widespread claim. How do you expect us to answer it with sources ? Let's draw a line somewhere. Voting to close as too localized. – user288 Nov 4 '11 at 5:50
just because someone has a high youtube rating doesn't make him a reliable source (the reverse is more likely the case, sensationalism is very popular). – jwenting Nov 4 '11 at 12:17

TL;DR: This is poor evidence of poltergeists. It is (almost certainly) a fake.

We need to consider which of the following two conjectures to believe:

1) The user MellowB1rd is completely honest. He is showing an accurate recording of poltergeist activity. That poltergeist recording demonstrates direct contraventions of our best understanding of the universe - including straight-forward physical laws like Conservation of Linear Momentum. The poltergeist theory also directly contravenes our understanding of Physicalism of the Mind. Despite these results overturning so much of what we know about the universe, they can only be observed through an anonymous person's kitchen, via their camera on YouTube.

2) That user MellowB1rd is a top-grade troll. He uses any of a number of plausible special-effect techniques which have been proposed by his critics on YouTube (Here as some. MellowB1rd himself summarises a few), from as sophisticated as CGI or compressed air lines, to invisible wires and kicking over chairs from behind the camera.

(I couldn't say which techniques he uses, but I notice that his own rendered logo on YouTube implies he has more experience with CGI than his claimed occupation might suggest.)

As skeptics, we can see that there has been a lot of high-quality evidence gained over the years for the physical laws. Anyone claiming they are wrong is making an extraordinary claim and needs to provide extraordinary evidence to the point that believing that there is no such things as poltergeists would be more obtuse than believing there is no such thing as Conservation of Momentum. Easily faked YouTube videos does not constitute such evidence.

We should provisionally accept that MellowB1rd's videos are fake.

share|improve this answer
option 3: he's honest but is mistaken in believing the observed activity is a poltergeist. Farfetched maybe, but possible. – jwenting Nov 4 '11 at 12:18
@jwenting, I confess I did consider that option, but I just couldn't see how it could apply. Come up with a plausible scenario in which (for example) his mates are pulling a spectacular prank on him, and I will happily edit it in. – Oddthinking Nov 4 '11 at 12:31

This is Fake

  1. I arrived on this conclusion after another answer pointed out his channel logo which is quite sophisticated and needs some good graphics work.

enter image description here

  1. Then I looked at this video which seems like apparently produced for fun. certainly produced for fun. Notice that the drawer in the back slow opens when the glass is about to break. Typical brain teasing phenomena to fool people, who do not think it could be created just to food them.

  2. Then I looked at the original video I posted in question. I noticed there is nothing extraordinary there. It is just destruction, falling things and throwing things. Once you learn to simulate one, you can simulate 10 more.

Then I looked at this other videos, In this video, two cameras are used to shoot a scene. From the way the doors opens in the bottom right camera, it has to be somewhere in right side in the top video camera, but that angle does not make sense.

I will improve this answer a long the way, this is incomplete yet. Or anyone can improve it, I have made it wiki.

share|improve this answer

This answer is based on original data analysis or non-verifiable data. It is up to the answerer to provide valid, verifiable and potentially replicable evidence. Answers which are wholly based on "original research" are generally downvoted and may be deleted. See FAQ: What constitutes original research?

This answer doesn't actually say anything yet. The drawer opening when the glass breaks shows nothing, either way. That all the activity is destructive shows nothing either way. – Oddthinking Nov 4 '11 at 23:31
Drawer opening is quite easy, can be easily done, simulated. – Believer Nov 4 '11 at 23:33
Yes, that is true, but all you mention is its timing. In any case, you still haven't explained the smashing glass. (shanghai or BB gun? Contraption behind mobile phone? I don't think Bologna bottle, but maybe. A confederate off-camera would explain his awkward counting in the effect.) – Oddthinking Nov 4 '11 at 23:52
In all honesty, having done quite a bit of CG myself, that logo is not sofisticated at all, a 14 year old with a week of vacation from school can come out with the same result. As for the video, it is a well-done fake, but there's sure better around. – nico Nov 5 '11 at 8:08
We do not do original research here. The good answer should include references to published material on this subject (i.e. random dude from youtube and his ghosts) or at the very least - published material on techniques the guy obviously uses. – user288 Nov 5 '11 at 17:52

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.