Feedback Loops, Pareidolia, and Documented Hoaxes

The video-feedback method popularised by Schreiber and others has a straightforward conventional explanation: pointing a video camera at the screen displaying its own output creates a well-understood electronic feedback loop that generates constantly shifting, often face-like or figure-like patterns purely as an artifact of the equipment, the visual equivalent of the auditory pareidolia that explains ordinary EVP, and any face-like pattern appearing in that noise will be readily interpreted as a recognisable person by a viewer already primed to look for one, especially a grieving one hoping to see a specific face.

ITC claims involving computers and telephones have periodically been traced to deliberate hoaxing rather than equipment artifact; several publicised cases in the 1990s and 2000s were later withdrawn or discredited after the messages or images were shown to have been fabricated or staged by a participant, a pattern that echoes the documented history of fraud running through physical mediumship more broadly. No instrumental transcommunication claim, whether audio, video, or text-based, has been produced under conditions that rule out pareidolia, ordinary electronic artifact, or deliberate hoaxing, and mainstream science treats ITC as an unsupported extension of the already unreplicated EVP claim into newer consumer technology rather than as an independently evidenced phenomenon.