Dangling Conversations : Is Brooke Greenberg a Hoax or Real?

Is Brooke Greenberg a Hoax or Real?

Posted 01 Sep, 2005 at 14:21 by blue in /Social | Permanent link

Some of you may have heard of this already...

In Baltimore, a girl lives who is supposedly the only one of her kind on the planet. She may also hold answers to increased longevity. She is a medical mystery. She's also pretty darned cute.

Why?

Cause, at the age of 12, she is physically and mentally, still a baby.

In a quick (5 minute) quest to determine if this story was true or false I wasn't able to prove anything other than that the story has been on going on the internet for the last few years.

Here are some quick links to get you started if you want to weigh in...

When she was 8 this article ran on WBAL TV in Baltimore Same local news agency ran this update when she was 12. This site took a stab at trying to figure out the truth... they didn't get far. This site went further... again... they were unable to prove one way or the other anything about it

I have watched a video of the recent story... by all accounts it seems real. If you want to see it, let me know.

A quick search of her name on Google will turn up lots of sites... but surprisingly for something which is such a mystery... very little constructive information.

What do you think?

Real or not?

Comments (43 comments so far)

Who honestly believes its a hoax?!

come on people, you honestly think this is a hoax... think about this...they ran the report when she was 8, now FOUR YEARS LATER, they ran another story on her and shes the same size... (little known fact: normal infants grow a great deal in four years, as do their siblings) SO: if Brooke is no bigger than she was 4 years ago, and looks the exact same, and yet her siblings ARE bigger, then...reason would lead us to the conclusion that...this is not a hoax!

Posted 2005/10/24 12:41:24 by kelsey

She is very real and lives within 5 minutes of my sister.

Posted 2005/10/24 20:42:02 by Sue

GO TO http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9778227/ FOR NEWS ARTICLE AT NBC News Updated: 7:39 p.m. ET Oct. 23, 2005 ALSO, FOR A NATIONAL NEWS ORGANISATION, DATELINE NBC MET AND FILMED BROOKE AND FAMILY 4 YEARS AGO AND AGAIN THIS MONTH. SAD TO SAY, THIS IS AS REAL AS IT GETS !!!

Posted 2005/10/25 01:52:18 by MICHAEL J. FOSTER

A case of confusion

It seems this post caught the attention of someone else that drew a rather fantastic conclusion. I posted the following rebuttal to his site should he feel so inclined as to remove my follow up. His site is at: http://teardownthehighplaces.blogspot.com/2005/10/case-from-now-case-from-then.html.

Hmmm. Interesting. So let's follow the path of argument here just a bit to be clear. It sounds like the following: Fact A (child not aging) leads to future disbelief due to incredible rarity of Fact A. Future disbelief of Fact A is like present disbelief (of resurrection of Christ) of supposed event B because it is similarly rare (1 out of all the known living human beings). Supposed event B is a fact by similarity.

The difference between the child and the resurrection of Christ is the former has evidence. The significance of this is the former is now possible and now the probability is relevant. The latter has no demonstrable proof (hence the incredible amount of disbelief) without which it can't enter into the realm of possibility regardless of how equally probable it might be should it be true (which isn't verifiable).

Another way to look at the argument itself were to compare two completely dark rooms. Everyone would agree that what is inside is not visible and hence could contain anything. However that does not mean they contain the same things. Human perception or belief does not form the basis of equivalency between anything.

I honestly don't think you would want to make this argument either even if it had a shred of substance. The child has the resources and the interest of science, medical, biological, genetic, etc that I'm sure would be glad to identify the cause of the condition. However, if science can demonstrably show that the cause is entirely natural means (such as by reproducing the phenomena--probably in a different animal), then your argument would suggest that the resurrection of Christ was also by natural means, removing any potential for him being the son of God (who is supernatural and outside the realm of science). But that would only be if your argument made sense, which it does not.

Finally, the article you referenced from goldenempires.com was to inquire on the veracity of it. Which is entirely legitimate because it is an incredible fact. It's far outside the bounds of our normal experiences. Incredible statements require incredible amounts of evidence. Particularly in present times when absurdities abound on the internet.

I might point out that I have a wealthy foreign investor that needs some help moving funds and if you would be so kind as to provide some personally identifiable information and your banking data we could certainly arrange to move the funds there and leave a percentage for your troubles. Because clearly this is less incredible than the resurrection of Christ rendering it more likely to be true.

Posted 2005/11/13 00:42:36 by Brent

I can see why this article got so much attention in October. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9778227/ ran an article on it at that time... and since then there are a plethora of websites confirming that Brooke does exist, as well as several new theories on what has caused her unique condition.

Posted 2005/11/15 10:07:53 by Blue

Are you kidding?

Check out Dateline's website. They did a story on this child. Find some other supposed urban legend to wonder about...

Posted 2005/11/28 19:21:14 by Rebecca

Of course... at the time of this original post (before the Dateline article, before the MSNBC article... there wasn't much information available online about her. Wondering about things, is what brings them to light.

Posted 2005/12/1 06:02:55 by Blue

Dateline

Dateline's done quite a few (authentic) news reports on this little girl. There was one on tv about a month ago. She is very real...and very cute.

Posted 2005/12/12 14:42:18 by Izzie

What is really retarded

is that a real doctor or scientist, or legit research organization hasn't become involved. This guy in the video looks like some hometown poedunk. If this girl really is a medical miracle then the human race deserves to have their best take a look. Genetic anomalies like this are probably rare and maybe would be hundreds of years to have another chance to study.

Posted 2008/1/21 00:42:25 by greg

today is 6/24/2009

and she is 16 yrs old! http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/story?id=7880954&page=1 hoax or not abc will show her on tv just read till the end of the article.

Posted 2009/6/24 00:42:23 by passing by

Dude Blue, you should update this post with the latest information. The folks at ABC are doing a documentary on Brooke. She will also be featured on TLC

Posted 2009/6/24 21:59:02 by sara

Master

You know what I find suspicious? Possible, but suspicious, Is that in all the pictures of her she has the same hair style and length. That means wither they haven't let her hair grow/change in 16 years, her hair doesn't grow like the rest of her, or every single one of the photo's on the internet of her were taken around the same time. And none of those seem that likely... But at the same time, I don't think that so many news channels would do reports, again and again over such a long period of time, so I guess she must be real.

Posted 2009/6/25 09:36:01 by Caitlin

Oops...

Heh, So when it said 'title' I thought it meant MY title, like miss, ms, mrs, mr, etc. So I thought I'd write master, just to be different. Then I realised it's the title of the post. So that explains that, if you were wondering.

Posted 2009/6/25 11:40:57 by Caitlin

So I've seen two different ages for this girl. Is she 12? Is she 16? Both reports are dated in 2009. The family is giving mixed information.

Posted 2009/6/25 12:01:23 by Biz

It's true. Article published in the "Mechanisms of Ageing and Development" journal: http://www.citeulike.org/article/4897662

Posted 2009/6/26 09:23:37 by José Pedro Magalhães

Proove it!!!

For me to believe this, I would like to see undoctored photos of here and her sisters from year to year starting from when she was born. That would be all the proof you need.

Posted 2009/6/28 12:03:55 by unc92sax

People, just get your facts straight and you will know the answer... And Brent, WTH...Trying to be mister big shot... what does Chirst has to do with this, in a world where science is taking over.......

Posted 2009/7/2 23:08:20 by blablabla

I want you all to know that Brooke's life is similar to my baby. Of course she is for real.

Posted 2009/9/13 20:38:08 by colette

real real

oh c'mon I saw a tv show about it, who would make a tv show of a hoax!?

Posted 2009/10/25 18:09:04 by mgm lion

Dear Brent, I would just like to say that your entire argument is ridiculous. I feel after reading your pointless argument that I have wasted a portion of my life that I can now never recover. In what world can you possibly compare an ageless baby to the Resurrection of Christ? Your point was perhaps pertinent but your logic was full of fallacies. In your attempt to sound intelligent you instead used big words to compensate for your lack of a real point.

Posted 2009/11/10 14:36:39 by Brent is a Retard

Posted 2009/11/10 14:36:49 by Brent is a Retard

I agree with brent is a retard!

Posted 2009/11/18 14:33:04 by Im smart