The video dates back to Jan 16, 2008 and has been seen 2.3 million times. Using his camera, a man wanders around his home in search of a strange disturbance. Notably, his pet dog “Feebie” seems to be really scared, the dog can be seen crawling under the bed clearly shaken up over something there with them.
Quickly, the man notices his dogs reactions, even filming under the bed where his dog was. After this, he then wanders into the hallway where another dog he has is there.
His cat in the kitchen also is seen hissing and acting kind of odd. He then makes his way to the pantry, off from the kitchen, where a thumping noise is heard. From then on, things take a turn for the worse.
This man then opens the door, climbing up the small staircase into the attic above. It is there where he himself experiences something from out of the ordinary.
In the comment section of the video on YouTube, someone named Okori Inaka made some rather compelling comments. It really makes one wonder about how legit this video might be.
This is what they said:
Sorry, people, but you ‘debunkers’ are in for some BAD news about this video. It’s real. Here’s why:
“First and foremost, the canine ‘Feebie’ (such a cute dog) was scared witless. I’ve volunteered enough time with the SPCA to know when a dog is scared, and she was petrified.
Following her eye-tracks as she was backing up, trying to discover what she’s looking for and making a basic 3-D print-up of the man’s section of house, Feebie was undoubtedly looking at the closet, not his hand, which is…
1. …not where his left hand was (he was holding the camera with his right hand, leaving his left hand free, which is where she would be looking if he was holding a directing device she would have had to be trained with), and…
2. …also where the disturbance was coming from. The other animals weren’t freaking out completely, because they aren’t as disturbed by the activity. Some animals react. Others don’t. Feebie did, and…
3. Feebie stayed moderately steady-eyed looking towards the closet for a few seconds, while he moved. Her head would have moved if he were using a directive device. She stared solidly at the attic door for about 3 seconds while he moved.
Secondly, the model camera type he’s using has automatic light adjustment, a model known to ‘glitch’ the recording slightly when adjusting to light levels via auto-focusing, accounting for much of the ‘glitching’ people are reporting.
The man does indeed have his leg shaking, but as a person who also understands biology, especially neurology, there is a point where a person can stand to balance, and the leg can shake slightly, just due to nerves firing. This does not constitute him as ‘standing on a string tied to his foot’, because the whole thing would have come down with him, as fast as he fled the attic.
Third, I slowed down the footage. The canister was undoubtedly denting from being struck in front by an unseen force somewhere between the camera and the canister itself; the force being directed from something NOT behind the pillar.
If an object was ‘pulled by a string’, there would be a fraction of a second of acceleration before striking the broom-handle, which also got struck second to the canister. Also, the other boxes between the canister and his own feet would have been disturbed, and they were not.
So, the canister was STRUCK SUDDENLY to create the force necessary for the sudden ‘jerk’ in its first movements, free-fell for a fraction of a second, and then got pushed again, by an unseen force, still from a direction that was in front of the camera.
Fourth, there is a way to have light-bulbs light in just the way it had. There are light-bulbs that are built as 100/75/50 Watt bulbs for just that lighting purpose; a light that’s set to two switches, one that feeds 50 Watts of power, one that feeds 100 Watts of power.
I’ve built them personally. The downstairs switch activates the 50 Watt Circuit, so that just a little light is present, and the main pull-chain provides a full 100 Watt, is the set-up his attic has. You can even hear and see the effects of BOTH switches being handled, and the light corresponding to each motion.
Fifth, something NO ONE has caught, is that in the second jerk to the camera, when it was being disturbed, there is part of the shadow of a hand, but not a normal hand as we all know of a hand.
It was definitely not a human hand being shadowed on the box where the camera rested, and certainly disappeared faster than most could see. I’m not talking ‘disappeared’ as in ‘moved off screen’, I’m talking ‘disappeared’ as in it went see-through almost immediately.
Lastly, when I checked the audio, it was not tampered with, other than compression, which happens with uploads. With the audio restored and cleaned up, the sounds were then separated, amplified and stripped?…
It proves that while he was downstairs in the immediate vicinity of Feebie, he was completely alone in the house. Beyond his own breathing, there was something else up there in the attic ‘breathing’ with him very softly; something… human-like, most likely masculine. However, that was only upstairs.
His psychological profile shows he’s a bit of a pet-lover, and was likely trying to film his pet’s strange behavior, and thus, was trying to verbally document things. With the strange occurrences, there is no doubt he was curious, wanting to document more, but unsure about what to say or how to express what was going on or the fear he likely went through.
His profile as a generally rational individual and status in society based on his general looks also shows that he would indeed take a week to regain the courage to go get his camera from the attic.
How would I know all of this?… I was in the Military, and roomed with a Profiler / Interrogator, and was often helping him practice his skills after hours by being his ‘target’, we’ll say. You gain FAR more experience in the Military than just your own M.O.S., but I digress.
In all, with theses views and knowledge’s supporting what is displayed, in a beyond rational model of evidence? With what is now displayed? I believe this case can now be reopened as ‘unknown’.
At this point, I think it’s safe to say, the debunkers lose to the empirically knowledge d.
So, what did happen there?… What I can say, is that it’s clear nothing was faked. What I have to say, is that I don’t know, but it’s impressive evidence that shouldn’t be ignored.”
Most certainly, this video can be argued about being real or not. It is another example that some things out there can’t simply be explained. There is so much in the world which we have no real answers for. Perhaps this location really is or was haunted.