A floating translucent man at the caller's bedside at seventeen, and a warning five years later
[name withheld], calling from Grants Pass, Oregon, tells the host that at seventeen they woke in bed to a translucent man floating about a foot above the floor, who they say had been shaking them. They fled the house, and their mother told them it was a dream. Five years later, they say, the same figure came to them in a dream and warned that their boyfriend, their son’s father, would hurt them. The following day, they report, he choked them. They end by saying they would listen to the presence next time.
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 2007.mp3”, starting at 2:00:12). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
[name withheld], who gives their location as Grants Pass, Oregon, tells the host that when they were seventeen they became “really, really sick,” and their mother put them to bed with blankets over them. [name withheld] says they woke with the blankets over their head and felt someone shaking them. When they threw the covers off, they saw a man with blond hair, green eyes, a plaid shirt, and jeans. He was floating about a foot above the floor and was lit by an orange electric heater in the corner, which they say they could see through him. They pulled the covers back over their head and screamed for their mother. They heard no footsteps and got no answer. Then they walked through the hallway, past the kitchen and dining room, and into the living room, where the television was on and showing static. They found no one in the house, and the TV switched off. They ran out the front door to the next-door neighbor’s, where their mother was, and their mother told them it had been a dream. Five years later, [name withheld] says, the same figure came to them in a dream, took them to a room, and warned them that their boyfriend, their son’s father, was going to hurt them. [name withheld] argued with it, and it screamed “get out.” [name withheld] says they then found themself back in bed with it floating over them. They landed on their back on the floor beside their son’s father, as if they had bounced from the bed. The next day, [name withheld] says, the two of them argued and he choked them until they believed they were dead. They report hearing him slapping and speaking but feeling nothing, and that he said they had turned blue. They close by saying that if they ever saw the presence again, they would listen to it rather than argue.
Reported events, in order
- 0:34
At seventeen the caller was “really, really sick,” in bed, and their mother covered them with blankets.
- 0:43
The caller woke with the blankets over their head and felt someone shaking them.
- 1:08
Throwing the covers off, the caller saw a man with blond hair, green eyes, a plaid shirt, and jeans.
- 1:22
He was floating about a foot above the floor. The caller could see the orange electric heater through him.
- 1:34
The caller pulled the covers back over their head and screamed for their mother. The caller got no answer and heard no footsteps leaving the room.
- 2:07
The caller walked through the hallway, kitchen, dining room, and living room, finding no one. The TV was on and showing static.
- 2:32
The TV switched off, and the caller ran out the front door to the next-door neighbor’s, where their mother was. Their mother told them it was just a dream.
- 2:51
Five years later the same figure came to the caller in a dream and took them to a room.
- 2:54
He told the caller that their boyfriend, their son’s father, was going to hurt them. The caller argued with him, and he screamed “get out.”
- 3:23
The caller was back in their bed with him floating over them, then landed on their back on the floor beside their son’s father, [quote withheld]
- 3:46
The next day the two of them argued and, the caller says, he choked them until they believed they were dead. The caller heard him slapping and speaking but felt nothing, and he said they had turned blue.
- 4:29
The caller says that if they ever see that presence or spirit again, they will listen instead of argue.
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).
- observation· 0:43
The caller felt someone shaking them while they lay with the blankets over their head.
- observation· 1:08
The caller saw a man with blond hair, green eyes, a plaid shirt, and jeans beside their bed.
- observation· 1:22
The man was floating about a foot above the floor.
- observation· 1:51
The figure was translucent. The caller could see through him, yet see him clearly.
- observation· 2:16
The living-room television was on and showing static, and later switched off by itself.
- observation· 3:02
In a dream five years later, the figure warned the caller that their boyfriend, their son’s father, was going to hurt them.
- observation· 3:26
The caller came back to waking in bed with him floating over them and landed on their back on the floor beside their son’s father.
- observation· 3:57
The next day the caller’s son’s father choked the caller until they believed they were dead.
- observation· 4:07
The caller reports hearing him slapping and speaking to them without feeling it, and that he said they had turned blue.
- interpretation· 2:37
The caller says the figure in the dream was the same being that appeared when they were seventeen.
- interpretation· 4:35
The caller says they would obey the presence’s next warning rather than argue with it.
- hearsay· 2:37
The caller’s mother, told about the bedroom event the same night, said it was just a dream.
- host statement· 4:39
The host says a warning like that “means something.”
- host statement· 4:59
The host offers an ordinary reading: the mind produces such explanations as a protective measure.
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.
This is a detailed, consistent firsthand story with good sensory and sequence detail. But it rests on the caller’s word alone, contains nothing checkable, and the first episode fits ordinary waking-dream or fever explanations easily. That puts it above a bare [quote withheld] but well short of the band for detailed stories that weigh ordinary alternatives.
Evidence for and against
- Firsthand, self-reported experience throughout.
- Concrete sensory and spatial detail: the figure’s appearance, height off the floor, the heater visible through him, and the route through the hallway, kitchen, dining room, and living room.
- The sequence is coherent. The caller answers the host’s question about why they threw the covers off with a direct reply.
- The caller does not overclaim. They describe what they perceived and frame the second encounter explicitly as a dream.
- The first episode fits an easy ordinary pattern: the caller was “really, really sick,” in bed with blankets over their head.
- The caller’s mother, in the house that night, told the caller it was a dream.
- No name, date, address, document, or other checkable detail is offered.
- Two lines are missing from the automatic transcript and may contain part of the caller’s opening.
- The labels showing who is speaking are smoothed in places, so a few words may belong to the host rather than the caller.
- No date is given, so the two episodes cannot be placed in time.
- 0:34
- 1:51
- 2:37
What the model inferred (not said on air): Component judgments: source closeness 20 (firsthand direct witness, kept to the cautious end of the 20 to 25 range); specificity 13 (strong sensory and sequence detail, nothing checkable); internal consistency 15 (coherent, no self-contradiction found); alternative explanations 6 (an illness or waking-up reading fits the first episode well); calibration 8 (the caller reports the second episode as a dream and does not assert a cause). Sum 62.
This rests on the caller’s word, with claimed participants who do not testify and no objects. It sits at the bottom of the scale rather than in the “checkable specifics given” range, since nothing in the transcript could be verified even in principle.
Evidence for and against
- The caller’s own account covers both episodes.
- The caller mentions other people in the events (their mother, and their son’s father at the later assault) whose accounts are not heard.
- No photograph, recording, document, name, date, or address is offered.
- The only other person reported as present on the night of the ghost is the caller’s mother, who is said to have called it a dream and who does not speak on air.
- No second witness speaks on air for any part of the story.
- No outside check was done. The hard cap of 50 is not approached.
- 3:26
What the model inferred (not said on air): The presence of the caller’s son’s father during the later assault is a real-world event, not backing for any paranormal claim, so it does not raise the score above the level for a bare assertion.
The story combines a bedside intrusion, an empty-house sequence, and a reported strangling with near-death details, with no closure. That is well into frightening territory, though it is not sustained dread or graphic horror throughout.
Evidence for and against
- Intrusion into a bedroom while a sick seventeen-year-old is under the covers, with physical shaking.
- A translucent figure floating a foot above the floor beside the caller’s bed.
- The empty house, the static television, and the set switching itself off.
- A dream warning followed by an actual strangling, a near-death experience, a blue color, and the caller hearing without feeling.
- The ending is unresolved. The caller says only that they would listen if it happened again.
- The first episode ends with the caller running to their mother, and the encounter is brief and nonviolent.
- The tone is matter-of-fact, and the telling ends with a practical resolution to listen next time.
- It is clear enough whether the strangling passage is part of the same story or told in compressed form, but the automatic transcript breaks the passage into very short fragments.
- 1:22
- 3:57
- 4:07
What the model inferred (not said on air): Rated on story content and structure only, not on the caller’s delivery or emotion, which the scoring guide excludes.
The setup is familiar (bedside ghost, prophetic warning dream) but carries distinctive details: seeing through the figure yet seeing it clearly, the heater as backlight, the same figure returning after five years, and the claim that it warned of real violence by a living person. This is a provisional score pending comparison with the rest of the archive.
Evidence for and against
- The figure is described precisely: floating a foot up, seen through, in a plaid shirt and jeans, lit by an orange heater.
- The same ghost is said to return five years later inside a dream warning about the caller’s partner, and the story then reports real violence the next day.
- The caller reports landing on the floor [quote withheld] rather than rolling.
- A bedside figure, a translucent ghost, and a warning dream that comes true are all familiar ghost-story elements.
- The sequence of waking, seeing a figure, and being told it was a dream recurs widely in the genre.
- No comparison with the rest of the archive was available when this was written.
- 1:45
- 3:38
What the model inferred (not said on air): This is a provisional model score. The published value is computed against the archive and should be treated as provisional at this archive size.
Scoring confidence 0.68 · analysis confidence 0.76 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s firsthand story only; Claimed participants who do not testify: the caller’s mother (who said it was a dream) and the caller’s son’s father (present at the later choking); No photograph, recording, document, name, date, or address offered. The originality score blends the model's score (55) 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.
- A waking hallucination from fever or illness. · The caller states they were “really, really sick” and lying under piled blankets just before the experience. Waking hallucinations or fevered dreams are common in that state.
- Imagery while waking up, or a vivid dream on waking. · The caller describes waking in bed and feeling a presence physically shaking them. Later the caller describes a dreamlike sequence in which they are carried off and then seem to bounce from the bed to the floor. These features are reported in experiences while waking up and in sleep paralysis.
- Ordinary television behavior (set left on, signal loss, standby timer). · The caller reports a television left on and showing static, which then went off. This needs nothing unseen to explain it.
- Suggestion from a family member’s explanation. · The caller’s mother, who was in the house, told the caller the same night that it had been a dream.
What stands out
The story pairs a ghost at the bedside with a later dream in which the same figure warns the caller about a living partner. The choking that follows is blamed on that living person, not on the ghost, so the ghost acts as a warning rather than a threat.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.