Seriously? Even on the high-res copy of the Underwood video, you can't possibly make out details of that kind. It's so indistinct that the anomalies could be more or less anything. If it's a hoax, it's brilliantly done - clear enough to be scary, but not so clear that the explanation's obvious.
There's this famous photo of a ghost at Gettysburg. Again, it's bang in the middle-ground: enough of a 'figure' to give us all goosebumps, and yet you can't rule out the most likely explanation that it's a bit of pareidolia created by a torch shining into the trees. (Try shining a torch into some trees tonight - you'll scare the hell out of yourself.)
Here's another Gettysburg video. I suspect most of us here will conclude that it's obviously a fake, but what interests me is why the Underwood video doesn't get the same reaction. Why is it considered credible while this one isn't? Is it because it's 'too good'?
*sigh* Seriously. http://www.paranorma...ost video&st=20
The video has corrupted over the server moves. It used to be quite a bit clearer. Several of those people who were talking in those old threads about it saw the original and say that the one posted online is very difficult to see compared to the original video that Jim has in his personal posession (or maybe DA has it... I think, though, she said that he owns it in one of them).
Wow. Really? Wow. That crossed the line.