Host retells a listener’s account of voices audible only at one moving spot
The host retells, from memory, a letter he says a male listener sent him. The man wrote about indistinct voices that woke his small children at night and could be heard only from one precise spot in the house. According to the retelling, the spot where the voices were audible moved about an inch or two each day. Over several months it went out of the house and across the backyard. The host says the man ruled out RF from a nearby radio station. He offers his own guess about a [quote withheld] The story ends with the spot still moving.
This clip comes from the source recording. AI chose where it starts and ends, so it may start or end a little early or late. The word-for-word transcript is not published. You can hear the source recording on the Internet Archive (file “Ghost to Ghost 1998.mp3”, starting at 2:16:19). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The host tells, from memory, a story he says a listener sent him. He states he did not save the letter and gives it only “roughly.” According to the host, the man is technically knowledgeable and an amateur radio operator ([quote withheld]). The man’s wife slept in one room and his small children in another. The children were reportedly awakened in the middle of the night by indistinct, busy-sounding voices. The host compares them to voices carried on the wind from a neighbor’s house. The voices were loud enough in the children’s room to wake them. The man went into the children’s room and found he had to stand on a chair, and to be in one particular spot, to hear the voices. He heard them not clearly, but with enough volume to be bothered. The host says the man monitored the voices for months. The spot where they could be heard moved about an inch or two every day. Eventually it left the house and crossed the backyard, until the man had to stand on the brick block wall at the back of the house to hear the voices “chattering away.” Months later they had moved, as the host puts it, 50 or 60 or 70 feet and, as far as the man knew, kept going. The host asks listeners what the man was hearing, says the man ruled out RF from a nearby radio station, and guesses at [quote withheld] No names, locations, or dates are given.
Reported events, in order
- 0:00
The host says he is about to retell a story a man sent him, describing the man as technically knowledgeable and an amateur radio operator.
- 0:19
According to the retelling, the man’s wife slept in one room and his small children in another, and the children were awakened in the middle of the night by indistinct voices.
- 0:51
The voices were loud enough in the children’s room to wake them at night.
- 1:06
The man went into the children’s room and had to stand on a chair to hear the voices.
- 1:17
He had to be in one particular spot to hear them. The voices were not clear but loud enough to bother him.
- 1:19
The host says the man monitored the voices for months.
- 1:33
The spot where the voices could be heard reportedly moved about an inch or two every day.
- 1:41
The audible spot left the house and moved across the backyard. The man had to stand on the brick block wall at the back of the house to hear the voices chattering away.
- 2:07
Months later the voices had moved 50 or 60 or 70 feet and kept going.
- 2:17
The host says the man ruled out RF from a nearby radio station and asks listeners what he was hearing.
- 2:29
The host guesses at a “rip” or [quote withheld] and says that as far as the man knows the spot kept moving.
Claims
Each claim is labeled as something the person telling the story noticed (observation), what they made of it (interpretation), something others told them (hearsay), or something the host said (host statement).
- hearsay· 0:51
The letter writer’s small children were awakened at night by indistinct voices in their room.
- hearsay· 1:06
The man had to stand on a chair in the children’s room to hear the voices.
- hearsay· 1:17
The voices were audible only from one particular position.
- hearsay· 1:33
The location where the voices could be heard moved roughly an inch or two per day.
- hearsay· 2:07
Over months the audible spot moved out of the house and some 50 to 70 feet across the backyard.
- host statement· 2:27
The host states the man ruled out RF from a nearby radio station as an explanation.
- host statement· 2:29
The host guesses the sound could be a tear in the continuum or something from the past.
Scores, with reasons
An AI model gave these scores using a fixed set of scoring rules (scoring-v1). They are editorial judgments and rough guides, not the odds that anything paranormal happened. How scoring works.
A secondhand story reconstructed from memory, with coherent physical detail but nothing checkable. An ordinary sound explanation fits the “one particular spot” detail well and is not addressed.
Evidence for and against
- Concrete physical detail: standing on a chair, one particular spot, inch-by-inch movement.
- The host addresses one ordinary possibility and says it was ruled out.
- The host cannot reproduce the source: [quote withheld]
- Presented as an approximate recollection: [quote withheld]
- No names, dates, or locations.
- Retold from memory, so wording and detail may not reflect the original letter.
- No names, dates, or locations to check.
- The number of children and the geography are unstated.
- 0:13
- 0:19
- 1:06
- 1:17
- 1:33
- 2:27
What the model inferred (not said on air): Component scores: source proximity 5/25 (host retelling an unnamed listener’s letter from memory), specificity 10/20 (concrete physical detail but no names, dates, or places), internal consistency 13/20 (coherent sequence; hedged as a memory reconstruction), alternative explanations 6/20 (audibility that depends on the spot is typical of sound effects, which the host does not address; only RF is ruled out), calibration 9/15 (frequent hedging, but escalates to a [quote withheld]).
The host’s word only. He explicitly says he no longer has the original letter.
Evidence for and against
- [quote withheld]
- No names, dates, or places are given.
- The original letter was not kept. Nothing checkable is supplied.
- 0:13
What the model inferred (not said on air): No names, dates, locations, records, or physical evidence are offered, and no second witness speaks on air.
Mildly to moderately unsettling: nighttime voices waking small children, with an unresolved ending, but no threat or harm.
Evidence for and against
- Voices wake small children at night.
- The spot keeps moving, and the story ends unresolved.
- No menace, contact, or injury reported; voices are “indistinct.”
- No threat, harm, or physical contact is described.
- 0:51
- 2:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): The intrusion into a children’s bedroom at night and the unresolved, slowly moving nature of the sound raise unease, but the voices are indistinct and not threatening.
A familiar “indistinct voices” setup with an unusual detail about where the voices are heard and how that spot moves.
Evidence for and against
- Voices audible only from one precise spot.
- The spot reportedly moved an inch or two a day and left the house.
- The voices themselves are a common ghost-story element.
- The score is provisional. The comparison with the rest of the archive is not available for this story.
- 1:33
- 2:07
What the model inferred (not said on air): A familiar setup (indistinct voices in a house at night) combined with a highly distinctive, rarely reported detail: a small area where the voices can be heard that moves steadily over months.
Scoring confidence 0.60 · analysis confidence 0.70 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The host’s retelling from memory of a listener’s letter or story (the original is stated not to have been kept).; No names, dates, locations, documents, recordings, or photographs.; No witness on air; no second voice heard.. The originality score blends the model's score (78) with how rare the story's details are across the archive. This method is still provisional.
Ordinary explanations to consider
These are possibilities only. None is a finding about what happened.
- Sound reaching the room by a path that makes it audible only at one narrow spot (for example, a reflection or interference effect, or a duct, vent, or gap in the structure carrying sound). This would explain why the man had to stand on a chair and in one particular spot. · The story’s own emphasis that the voices were audible only from one precise position and were “not clearly” heard.
- Sound from a distant source outside the house (neighbors, traffic, machinery), audible only where it is focused or where a quiet path exists. · The host himself compares the sound to [quote withheld]
What stands out
The distinctive element is not the voices themselves but where they were reportedly heard. They could be heard only from one precise spot, and that spot is said to have moved about an inch or two a day, out of the house and across the backyard, over a period of months.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.