Noises and cold chills in an old house in Chattanooga (part 1)
A caller who gives their location as Chattanooga, Tennessee, tells Art Bell that about ten years earlier, when they were around eight, they moved into an old house with their mother and brother after their parents’ divorce. The caller says they found the house creepy from the start and that noises and cold chills occurred there. They have just begun describing one night alone at home with their mother, while they were in the bathtub. Art Bell cuts them off for a station break before any specific incident is described in this part of the broadcast.
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 2010.mp3”, starting at 1:55:55). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller, who gives their location as Chattanooga, Tennessee, tells Art Bell in a short, interrupted call that their experience happened about ten years earlier, when they were around eight years old. The caller says that right after their parents divorced, they, their mother, and their brother moved into what the caller calls “this old house.” The caller says that from the moment they moved in they [quote withheld] and that [quote withheld] The caller says [quote withheld] which the caller describes only as “little odd things.” The caller states that nothing concrete happened until one night when they and their mother were home alone and they were in the bathtub, relaxing on what the caller calls a normal night. At that point Art Bell interrupts them: [quote withheld] The caller picks up again after the break, in lines that belong to another story, where they repeat that they were in the bathtub and say they looked up at the doorway. What they saw or heard is not in this story, and no cause for the reported noises or chills is offered.
Reported events, in order
- 0:13
The caller says the events they are about to describe happened about ten years before the broadcast, when they were around eight years old.
- 0:18
The caller says that right after their parents divorced, they, their mother, and their brother moved into an old house.
- 0:26
The caller says they felt the house was creepy from the moment they moved in.
- 0:36
The caller reports noises and cold chills in the house, loosely described as “strange things.”
- 0:41
The caller says nothing concrete happened until one night when they and their mother were home alone.
- 0:52
The caller describes relaxing in the bathtub on what the caller calls a normal night.
- 0:56
The host interrupts them for a station break before they describe what happened.
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).
- interpretation· 0:26
The caller says the house felt creepy to the caller from the moment the family moved in.
- observation· 0:31
The caller reports that strange things happened in the house beginning when the family moved in.
- observation· 0:36
The caller reports hearing noises and feeling cold chills in the house.
- interpretation· 0:41
The caller says nothing concrete happened until one night when they and their mother were home alone.
- observation· 0:49
The caller says they were in the bathtub on that night.
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.
Component sum: source proximity 15 (firsthand but partial and brief), specificity 9 (a city, an age, and an approximate interval, but vague events), internal consistency 15 (coherent, no contradictions), alternative explanations 5 (old-house noises, drafts, and an unfamiliar house after a move fit easily), calibration of claims 10 (modest claims, no escalation, but little separating of perception from conclusion). Sum 54, reduced to the fragment cap of 40.
Evidence for and against
- Firsthand speaker: [quote withheld] [quote withheld]
- Some anchoring specifics: stated location “Chattanooga, Tennessee”; [quote withheld]
- The sequence is coherent, and the caller’s answers follow the host’s question about location without contradiction.
- The events are stated generically: [quote withheld] There is no place, time, duration, or sensory detail.
- No detail could in principle be checked (no address, no dates, no named individuals), only a city.
- The story is a fragment cut off before any concrete incident, so most of it cannot be assessed.
- The story is cut short, so consistency and calibration across the whole story cannot be evaluated.
- It is unclear whether “cold chills” means a change in the room’s temperature or the caller’s own physical sensation.
- 0:13
- 0:36
- 0:56
What the model inferred (not said on air): Applying the cap for a fragment too short to assess is my judgment, because the story is cut off before any incident is told.
This sits in the lowest band: the caller’s word alone, with no names, dates, records, physical evidence, or on-air backing. The faint checkable specifics (city, approximate decade) do not lift it above a low single-figure score.
Evidence for and against
- Checkable-in-principle specifics are minimal: a city (“Chattanooga, Tennessee”) and an approximate timeframe ([quote withheld]).
- A household member, the mother, is said to have been present that night: [quote withheld] She is not said to have seen anything.
- No documentation, recording, photograph, or physical trace is claimed to exist.
- No second witness speaks on air.
- Nothing checkable beyond a city name.
- The story is incomplete, so any evidence the caller might have gone on to offer is unknown.
- 0:03
- 0:07
What the model inferred (not said on air): The band follows the scoring guide’s description of a score of 0 to 10. No independent support of any kind is present in the transcript.
Mildly eerie rather than frightening. This part of the broadcast is atmospheric build-up (creepy house, noises, chills, a child in the bath at night) with no described threat, contact, or revealing incident before the break.
Evidence for and against
- An “old house” said to feel creepy from the moment of moving in: [quote withheld]
- Unspecified noises and chills ([quote withheld]) build mild anticipation.
- Home setting with a child alone in the bathtub at night: [quote withheld]
- No threat, harm, physical contact, or hostile presence is reported in this part of the broadcast.
- The events are described only in general terms (“strange things,” “little odd things”).
- The story stops before any concrete incident, so there is no escalation.
- The material that would carry the scare (what the caller saw or heard) is outside this story.
- 0:26
- 0:41
What the model inferred (not said on air): The creepiness rating reflects the structure and setting of the story as I read it, not the caller’s delivery, which is not used as evidence.
The available content is made up of familiar ghost-story furniture (creepy old house, noises, chills, child witness), so the provisional model score is low. How new it is compared with the rest of the archive cannot be judged from one short fragment.
Evidence for and against
- One mildly distinctive detail: the caller places the story in a bathtub, and the host jokes about returning [quote withheld]
- Stock elements only: an old house, a family just moved in, noises and cold chills, a child who sees things.
- No distinctive event or unusual combination is described in this story.
- The distinctive part of the story, if any, lies beyond this part of the broadcast.
- 0:31
- 0:49
What the model inferred (not said on air): The provisional score is my judgment from the content. The published originality depends on comparison with the rest of the archive, which is not available here.
Scoring confidence 0.35 · analysis confidence 0.50 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s firsthand story only (live telephone call); No names, dates, addresses, documents, recordings, or photographs offered or examined; No second witness speaks on air in this story. The originality score blends the model's score (22) 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.
- Ordinary sounds and temperature changes in an older home (settling, plumbing, drafts, heating) could account for the reported noises and cold chills. · Old house with unspecified noises and chills
- An unfamiliar house entered right after a major household change could make unclear sounds and sensations more noticeable and easier to group into a pattern. · [quote withheld]; [quote withheld]
What stands out
This part of the broadcast is only the build-up. The caller sets up a “creepy” old house and vague noises before being cut off for a station break, so the reported event itself falls outside this story. One small distinguishing detail is the setting, a child in the bathtub, which the host picks up in the surrounding lines.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.