(Blogger's Note: Although I feel I'm fanning the flames of controversy unnecessarly, I thought there was enough interest in all this to go ahead. Tony Bragalia apparently emailed that to many of us. He gave his permission to reprint it here.)
This
is a ‘mass email.’ Given
the ‘anti-sliders’ group’s belief that the slides depict a mummy and their
forthcoming conclusion, here is a summation email that I am forwarding to
several interested parties that I have dialoged in the past with to help people
to understand that the being shown in the slides is simply not a mummy. One must
understand that we have thought about the ‘mummy possibility’ thoroughly and
have consulted experts and cannot come to the conclusion that it is for these
reasons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6F7xcPcfeA
There are two basic types of mummies: Accidental and Intentional.
Accidental mummies have had their bodies preserved through atmospheric conditions such as extreme cold or burial in snow or ice. This short video is the best example of mummification through accidental exposure to extreme cold.
Intentional mummies have their bodies preserved through the application of chemicals and the removal of all organs, and then use desiccation (or extreme drying) to fully dehydrate the remaining corpse. Wraps are then applied, sealed with resin.
The slides being does not have the skin-look of an accidental mummy.
The slides being does not have the skin-look of an intentional mummy- it simply is not desiccated. It appears to have been recently embalmed or dead. There is an ‘organic’ patina to the skin tissue. It is possible that their skin is more resistant to necrosis - but no matter, the skin appearance of the being depicted in the slide is not the skin of a mummy.
FOUR DIGITS
The being depicted has only four digits (fingers) instead of five like a human mummy.
EYES
The being depicted has very wide set eyes. Its eyes/eye sockets are also twice the size of any human.
FACIAL FEATURES
The face features and countenance appear totally non-human. The lower part of the face has an almost ‘insectile’ look and the upper part appears frog-like/amphibian. The chin is ‘pointed’ in the extreme, unlike any human. The head is large, but not hydrocephalic.
EARS
The ears (such as they are) appear vestigial. They are ‘embedded’ into the skull and they are pointed at the top.
APPENDAGES
The limbs (legs and arms) are disproportionately long relative to the body. They are very, very thin and ‘spindly.’ The body appears to be about 3.5 feet long, just as the beings reported at Roswell. The image that anti-sliders are working with is compressed and gives a false sense of size. The body itself is very frail-fragile and under-sized.
ENCASEMENT
Though very difficult to discern, the being appears to be placed in a glass container. It does not however, resemble those display cases found in museums and we have looked at dozens of such images. It may be tubular. And the being rests on hastily-cut blanket resembling green-colored military blankets used at the time. The entire setup seems very ‘make-shift’ as if it is temporary storage allowing for viewing with intended transport to another location- not at all ‘permanent.’
FRAMING OF THE SLIDES
Finally, the pictures themselves were not ‘framed’ properly- they are taken ‘askew’ as if taken surreptitiously in a hurried fashion. Had they been taken at a museum, the framing of the slides would have been far better. Every other slide found in the chest is wholly different than the slides of the being in terms of the angle they were taken and the framing of the shots.
HIDING THE SLIDES
The Rays hid them separately from the rest of the slides as if to assign them special meaning. There are no other pictures of any other beings in the chest- including those of mummies. There are no other museum pictures. No other ‘travel’ slides were found separately packaged and hidden away from the other slides as were the slides of the being.
THE SLIDES OWNER
And given the 1947 provenance of the slides; and that Ray worked the Roswell region in the 1940s as an oil exploration geologist who was confirmed to have taken photographs using Kodachrome film while on oil explorations in NM; it is difficult to come to any other non-Roswell conclusion.
INDEPENDENT WITNESS CONFIRMATION
A Roswell vet who saw the bodies acknowledges this is what the slides depict; and that these 1947 slides reveal a creature very similar to those reported at Roswell.
For all of these combined reasons, most everyone who has viewed the actual two slides agrees that the being depicted is humanoid, but not human.
Tony Bragalia
85 comments:
Hi
Yes I always believed in the Roswell slide team and will continue to give them the benefit of doubt!!!! After all they have the slides and the developing story to go along with them.
As far as the cynic critics (pistachio brains) I will continue to scroll past their wacky posts.
Tony claim (among other false/wrong in his teasing for the slides) "There are no other museum pictures."
Hum? Really? :
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SXcB_6NyhlQ/VP4eifV8r5I/AAAAAAAABdY/StdV0q9Rb3k/s1600/slide.jpg
Regards,
Gilles
?
Gilles,this is a picture (apparently) of a ship model of some sort...I have no idea to what you are referring.
Tell me where this is, when it was taken and specifically how you obtained it.
This has nothing to do whatsoever with mummies, a museum holding biological specimens, or of antiquities.
The Rays were well-traveled. This seems to relate to something nautical. What is your point?
Hi
That slide was part of the Ray's slide collection, go to www.slideboxmedia.com
Thanks Jim.
Gilles will have to do better than show us a picture of a boat.
That slide, Tony, is apparently part of the Ray's collection (the same collection that you endlessly speak about)--are you not familiar with it?
Don't worry, the others on the slide team misidentified the ship model seen in the slide as well. And that after years of looking the slides and doing "research".
On the other hand, that slide was almost immediately traced by several of us outsiders to the Mariner's Museum in VA. I spoke with a curator at the museum and they were sure that it was part of their collection.
So it is a Ray slide that was taken at a museum.
That's all.
Lance
Sorry Gilles, sorry Lance...I have just learned from Tom Carey-
This is not even a picture of Hilda Ray!!! It is not her...and I didn't think that it was. Now this is confirmed.
Do better than a toy ship pictured with some woman.
I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Randle and his research. It is for that reason I will not be offering my own opinion on what the slides actually show. However, since Mr. Bragalia seems to be monitoring this comment thread, I have a question for him.
Following disclosure of the slides in Mexico City, are there any plans to immediately release high-resolution scans of the pictures to the public?
I apologize if this question has already been asked/answered at some previous time.
Thanks
Dennis
I give Anthony Bragalia credit for a well-written post that does seem to point out some inconsistencies with the mummy hypothesis. For this reason, I'm withholding my own pre-conceived judgement until the slides are fully unveiled.
Also:
With regard to the figure in the case, it looks a little similar to the drawings of the Allagash abduction aliens.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/Allagash.html
Food for thought.
A while back Larry posted something puzzling:
"Nearly a year ago I saw what I would consider low resolution computer screen images of the slides for a period of about 10 to 15 minutes. ...
the images I saw at that time were of poor enough quality that I could not see other features that others were claiming to be present. ...
It wasn’t until I saw the cleaned up images earlier today that I could see enough detail to form an opinion."
He's claiming the leaked image is clearer than what he could see in a 1st generation copy?
The leaked image must not be all that bad, then.
Tony,
My point was that you claimed/stated in your new piece "There are no other museum pictures", then in the "400" sample, which is wrong if you devoted a close examen of the other slides publicaly revealed.
It seems you dont and discovered this other slide "today", but claimed "There are no other museum pictures". Nothing more and QED.
Do better than a toy ship pictured with some woman.
I see that you do not miss humor, but it's a nice way to get you out of only one your false statements (among others, then). But we/I'll try to do better than that, then.
Regards,
Gilles
Mr Bragalia
Again you are making a set of extraordinary claims without presenting the supporting evidence. You claim you have clearer images which allow such conclusions to be drawn but do not present them alongside such claims.
As such the claims can not be evaluated except in relation to the image and other limited information currently in the public domain. I am exceedingly unimpressed...yet another media type release of 'information' that is actually no information at all as it is just unsupported claims.
I am totally disgusted
20 years ago we had the alien autopsy film where the 'being' had six fingers. Now we have a 'being' that has four fingers.
Both are, supposedly, part of the evidence strongly favoring the ET nature of the 'being.
Yet I suspect something quite different...
Gilles-
I think that you know perfectly well what I meant:
Where are other photos of other displays in the museum holding what you believe to be 'mummies.'?
Where there is one mummy there are many. Its called a "collection" and there is none.
The fact that there exists one photo of someone who is not even a Ray as you tried to imply, pictured in front of a boat model means nothing.
I meant- show me a photo of a Ray in a museum holding mummies or items of the ancient past or of classical times- or other displays of other mummies. Show me their attendance at a medical museum or of a collection holding biological specimens. I await.
And you have failed repeatedly -speaking of photos- to explain what journalistic or scientific value is had by Paul Kimball posting multiple whole-house photos of a 90 year old Roswell vet witness to the bodies.
CDA-
The alien depicted in the 'Alien Autopsy' was a now-admitted fabricated model dreamed up by special effects master John Humphries and huckster Ray Santilli. This is not anything remotely like that and you know that.
Where are other photos of other displays in the museum holding what you believe to be 'mummies.'?
Tony,
It is not an argument.
Why do you want other photos/slides than such two if such two would be maybe 2 photos of a conventional museum mummy/corpse display (or taken in a similar conventional place a museum is among others where there are mummies or corpse)?
I have not the collection of the 400 vintage slides, but:
Similary, there is then the slide with the ship model in the collection of the 400 slides you ignored until yesterday:
Where are/do we have other photos of other displays taken in this particular museum in the collection of the 400?
If not, does it means this photo have a special/anomalistic meaning (and the serie B movie you have in mind!) if only one or two regarding this museum? I dont think so.
There is the "Paris slide" in the vintage collection of the 400: where/do are other photos/slides of other Paris places in the collection of the 400 slides? Maybe, maybe not. But if you have in the vintage collection, only 2 or 3 slides regarding a trip in Paris, does it means something anomalistic is depicted?
There is the slides with Ike, well decline
There is the "Hunt slide"too : well decline again...
I mean that, if because in a vintage slide collection, you have only 2 pictures depicting something, and not other slides regarding the same place, it means nothing. Or at least, it is not an argument to proove your extraordinary claims: it's an alien depicted!
Regards,
Gilles
PS:
I mean this vintage collection is or would be ou sounds to be only the random remains of a larger collection of a family (as all of us have).
You will have then several "missing" slides of a particular roll, and then for a particular trip or visit, etc. What else? What does it proove or is sufficiant to have a great mystery? Nowhere.
I guess there are "number" in the slides mounts, prooving that in any case, this collection is "complete".
For example, it have been publicaly said by one of your team that the two slides numbers in the mount dont follow them, aka 9 switching to 11 (dont remember exactly the numbers). Where is the 10th of this particulary roll?
And the slide 8? 7? Etc.
If they are missing (or if slides depicting the same place of a roll are missing), there are 250 prosaic/conventional possibilities to explain it, and the main is imho only because this "vintage collection" is only the remains of a larger collection. What else?
Well, enough said for today.
Regards,
Gilles
Tony:
"The alien depicted in the 'Alien Autopsy' was a now-admitted fabricated model dreamed up by special effects master John Humphries and huckster Ray Santilli."
What odds would you give that these latest slides also depict a fabricated model, dreamed up by a different UFO faker and huckster?
I am totally certain of two events occurring on the morning of May 6:
1. The sun will rise as usual.
2. The astronomical/scientific world will be no further forward in its quest for finding ET intelligence than it was 24 hours earlier.
A likely further event is that Tony Bragalia will bow out of ufology (though probably not immediately).
Christopher!
May 2015 the 6th would be a special day for the astronomical community aka the Eta Aquarids shower and the day they perhaps will "rain" down the most!
Amitiés,
Gilles
CDA-
Hardly 'likely.' How about 'never'?
My sense of obligation to truth and to history are too strong.
Despite being publicly berated and even having criminal acts committed against me over all of this, I am in this till I die.
CDA-
I'm not saying one way or the other, but there is a couple stories prior to the appearance of these slides where the claims depicted the Roswell aliens to only have 4 fingers. I think one was a second hand account of what Lt. governor Montoya saw at Roswell, and the other Glen Dennis' sketch. I know that is a far cry from corroborating, but there were at least a few stories. I don't know of any where the Roswell aliens had 6 fingers, other than the Santilli film.
This is why you have my respect.
Tony wrote: The being depicted has only four digits (fingers) instead of five like a human mummy.
Tony,
Just curious (and teasing myself), how many fingers you are counting in this picture of a mummy? ^^
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GeVn2wbAlhE/VP98Rhmnh0I/AAAAAAAABds/5Wll1E0PAZA/s1600/4%2Bfingers.jpg
Regards,
Gilles
I'm curious, do we know what the second slide shows? We have glimpses of one of them and opinions have been formed around it but what of the other?
Gilles- the angle of the photo of the mummy you show is wholly different than the two slides. An opposable thumb may be curled or tucked in, or the fifth digit fallen off.
By contrast, with the being depicted in the slide,one can see that the four digits are meant to be just four digits.There is no sign of breakage or decay, and it is not malformed like your example. It has an organic skin patina and the four digits are not meant to be anything more that four. Yours still had five fingers. The four fingers are due to breakage or decay or the thumb is tucked. Your example was born with five fingers, no matter what you are trying to imply. And the slides being was born with four.
And I do think it interesting that -as Daniel Hurd astutely points out- that more that a mortician and a Lt. Governor reported the aliens fallen near Roswell as having four fingers!
Bob-
I appreciate the kind comments.
Stephen-
The second slide that has not been released yet is strikingly more clear and reveals far more detail.
Hey Gilles,
and how many fingers do you see this human baby specimen?
http://postimg.org/image/fl966701l/
Mr. Bragalia:
My question to you earlier in the thread seems to have been ignored or simply missed. So, I'll ask it again.
Following disclosure of the slides in Mexico City, are there any plans to immediately release high-resolution scans of the pictures to the public?
If you provide an answer, please address the specifics of the question - if scans of the pictures are to be released will they be high-resolution or low-res thumbnails?
Of course, if you choose not to address the question, then a non-response informs me all too well.
I apologize if this question has already been asked/answered at some previous time.
Thanks
Dennis
Daniel Hurd wrote:
I'm not saying one way or the other, but there is a couple stories prior to the appearance of these slides where the claims depicted the Roswell aliens to only have 4 fingers. I think one was a second hand account of what Lt. governor Montoya saw at Roswell, and the other Glen Dennis' sketch. I know that is a far cry from corroborating, but there were at least a few stories. I don't know of any where the Roswell aliens had 6 fingers, other than the Santilli film.
Corso also claimed the Roswell aliens were six-fingered, but Corso claimed all sorts of non-credible things.
The standard description of the "gray" is four fingered, Roswell or no Roswell. Leonard Stringfield's medical witnesses gave that description and self-described alien abductees typically give that description.
It puzzled me how an intelligent, technological creature could have four fingers and no opposable thumb. In the Allegash abduction case of four people, two who were artists drew pictures of how the four fingered hand operated. It could fold in half along the midline, providing not one, but two opposable digits, an ingenious solution I doubt I would have thought of.
Of course, like you, I know nothing about what the slides might actually show. I'm just saying...
David, Adam Dew said,"We've had David Rudiak and experts from Adobe try to decipher the placard with little luck."
What have you seen of the slides, and what techniques were used?
Curt Collins wrote:
David, Adam Dew said,"We've had David Rudiak and experts from Adobe try to decipher the placard with little luck."
What have you seen of the slides, and what techniques were used?
Because poor focus seemed to be the main problem, I tried various refocusing software, but couldn't get what I thought were consistent results.
I also made what I thought were reasonable guesses what might be on the four lines, such as the top line might provide a date and/or location and the last line might be the name/names of those writing the description, such as Doctors perhaps. The two longer middle lines would be a more detailed description of what was shown.
On the other hand, if this was something like a museum piece, the top line would more likely be something like a general description of the exhibit or the pathological condition shown.
Tom Carey wanted me to have a look because of my work on the Ramey memo. But there is much less to work with here, such as unknown circumstances and font, quite unlike the Ramey memo
I'm not claiming to be a full-fledged image processing expert, and when examination of the placard in high resolution is hopefully undertaken after May 5 by multiple qualified people, maybe we will get a definitive answer as to what is shown.
As Robert Hastings just wrote on his website (copied to Frank Warren's UFO Chronicles), the placard is the key to resolving this thing (or somebody finding something like a child mummy that is an exact match to what is shown.)
David, et al
FYI: Robert's article is (currently) exclusive to The UFO Chronicles; it resides in our "Roswell Slides Fiasco" column.
Cheers,
Frank
Another 6 finger reference:http://youtu.be/bc1B4dwzE-w
What do we know about this footage?
David-
I was going to email you privately- just two days ago another individual confirmed what you related to us that you thought may be some words in the placard. I do not want to give away the show, but you were correct. Someone else who has seen the enlargement we received also read precisely what you believe you may have re the: "Dr."
The placard serves a a 'toe tag' of sorts- a piece of cardboard placed near or on the decedent and found in morgues. The scene depicted in the slides is that of what Larry, a a very senior level NASA scientist who has seen the slides, would call a a 'classified morgue.' This temporary morgue allowed for viewing by visitors -very important ones that will be revealed in May. There is more to the story- things in back pockets- that will make the narrative even more extraordinary when told.
The four-fingered Roswell theme is important relative to the slides. And the creature does, in many respects, look like those depicted in drawings of the Allagash abductions. There is a need for an opposable digit to craft and hold objects, and I suspect that it is in the articulation of the four digits that opposability is attained. Rather like an octopus tentacle that can articultate up and down like our fingers- but also sideways.
"And the creature does, in many respects, look like those depicted in drawings of the Allagash abductions."
For myself, my first thought upon reading the descriptions of the head-shape features (pointed chin) was the infamous Kelly-Hopkinsville "goblin" case:
http://www.ufocasebook.com/Kelly-Hopkinsville.html
It could be a fit if one assumes that the small ears remaining on the corpse were the cartilage base for the large fragile ears that were destroyed in a crash or by predators.
Kurt-
I can appreciate that take on the being's appearance, particularly the ears. Maybe a 'blend' of both.
The face and its features are so wholly dissimilar to those of a human, that when clear images are revealed, people will be reminded in some way of many types of creatures. This is because it is difficult relate the countenance to any one thing here on Earth. The mind is compelled to relate it to things we know so that we can catalog it, but this defies any singular description.
Thanks, Anthony.
What I was trying to carefully put out there is just this:
Have you guys considered the possibility that the two slides ARE NOT connected to Roswell, BUT are a real "Alien" from another, later, totally different CE-3 event?
Here is a patent of a portable corpse preserver from 1940
https://www.google.com/patents/US2236052?dq=cadaver++1940&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OAb8VIb9O8T1OLb7gLAJ&ved=0CF0Q6wEwCQ
If plastic was used instead of metall the difference to a normal museum display case is not so big
Since this was developed in the year 1940 it may have developed further into a modell like it was used for the creature on the slide.
I have contact to a lady who has seen almost 600 mummies in her life. She also has almost all newspaper news about mummies in the 19 century I will ask her, if she recognise the creature.
Personally I don´t think this is a mummy.
Good point by Kurt Peters. There has been a strong focus on Roswell when there are other possible Crashes and CE events that we should all be looking into.
This being, if it is an alien, could be from an entirely different event.
Anthony,
ive followed this whole slides "drama" for some months now and I've come to a conclusion. You sound very sincere in your convictions. The comments against the slides are lacking in all facts and details so questions are getting asked and answers concluded without the aforementioned details. People for the slides are doing the very opposite. It's all humorous to watch.
I hope you do have images of an alien and it can be proven 110% that it is just that. All i can do is wait and see
@Stephen Jackson
...I love the Easter Bunny!
I've come to a conclusion. You sound very sincere in your convictions. The comments against the Energizer Bunny are lacking in all facts and details so questions are getting asked and answers concluded without the aforementioned details.
P.S. I also believe in Santa Claus!!!
Yay!
That is pretty childish Loki. Being a troll helps no one's arguement.
Loki said:
"The comments against the Energizer Bunny"
Hi lokito, I am baffled by your impressive intelligence and huge knowledge of fictional characters, however I am curious to know: Who made such a comment against the Energizer Bunny?
The Ramey memo...
Whats that all about again?
@ Kurt Peters.
Concerning your point about the possibility of the slides depicting an alien from a crash other than the one near Roswell...We'd still be left with the situation where one of the Ray's had to have managed to take a couple of sneaky snaps BEFORE the military were able to completely secure access to it.
To my mind, this can only have happened if Mr Ray was actually one of the people first at the scene of the crash...and quickly took the photos.
Trouble with this scenario, (and there doesn't seem to be any way around this)is the fact the being is already inside a glass cabinet, seemingly inside a building and seemingly in a state of post-autopsy. (Of course, decapitation and severe chest trauma could be attributed to the crash.)
So, on the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter which crash this "alien" was a victim of. The slides would still depend on an extremely slow reaction from the military or whatever "powers that be"...and an extremely zealous autopsy guy and glass cabinet maker.
As for the Kelly_Hopkinsville "goblins" ( a favourite story of mine, I blushingly confess! )...they were described as short, but much more stocky than the alien/mummy/whatever, that the slides seemingly show.
David
Ive read Robert Hastings view on this at UFO CHRONICLES about the writing on the placard.
He says that there are people and equipment out there that could decipher whats on the placard and he says this very confidently and says if theres writing on it then it can be deciphered.
Is this right and possible because i agree that whats written could be of massive importance and should be sought well before this is released
I read a comment earlier on this blog about a theory that Mrs Ray might have been a close friend of Mrs Eisenhower,and through this connection, managed to get a viewing of the body. Then treacherously took a cheeky snap of the thing.
Everything that we know about Mr Eisenhower, with his stella military career, would suggest that here is a man steeped in the tradition of "need to know", down to his marrow!
Mrs Eisenhower wouldn't have told Mrs Ray anything about an alien...because Mrs Eisenhower wouldn't have known anything about it herself. Her old man wouldn't have even considered,for a micro-second, that she had a need to know.
It is really disappointing how the discussion devolves each time this topic comes up. Anthony started a reasonable discussion and derailed it with the completely unfounded linkage to Roswell. Also, the provenance of the slides has been so compromised that the linkage to the Ray's is almost worthless. The rest of the discussion is probably still worth having, so please don't undermine it with ridiculous overreaching.
Nitram Ang:
The "Ramey Memo" is a telegram that Gen. Ramey was holding in his hand to Gen. Vandenberg I believe, in the famous picture taken of Ramey and his deputy, Col. Thomas DuBose holding a weather balloon and radar reflector wreckage alleged to be from the Roswell crash.
Using state of the art photo enhancements, of which I have no knowledge, it seems to say "victims of the wreck" and mentions a "disc they will ship" among other things.
Hope this helps but David Rudiak is really the lead on this.
Personally I have stayed out of this circus until the principles play their hand in May.
Oh Larry - my question was asked in jest!
When we go off topic the Ramey memo is often to blame...
Regards
Nitram
Tony,
Why do you know that the creature
is toothless. What are your thoughts about this?
Ed
Sorry Nitram, as I said I've stayed away from this circus and just check in on occasion. Your post went right over my head. A little late and a little tired.
My best.
Larry -
Just a point of irrelevant clarification. Dubose was the Chief of Staff of the 8th AF, not Ramey's deputy... yes, a point of trivia but one the military members on the list will understand.
@ Paul Young
"We'd still be left with the situation where one of the Ray's had to have managed to take a couple of sneaky snaps BEFORE the military were able to completely secure access to it. "
I strongly disagree. You're assuming that, once the military gained possession of the body, that ONLY military personnel would ever be allowed to see it. This just isn't possible, as such a find would certainly require outside experts and consultants to provide key scientific input.
Bernard Ray was a prominent geologist, therefore he exactly the right credentials if there was a geologic component to the situation...and being fairly well-read in several areas of UFO lore, I can imagine a number of scenarios in which this might be the case.
Kevin:
Agreed, he was Chief of Staff to to Brigadier later Maj. Gen. Roger Ramey (I'm not sure if Ramey was a Brigadier or Major General at the time of the Roswell incident, DuBose says Major Gen.). However, using "deputy" was an improper choice of words and I stand corrected, but Ramey was his senior.
Larry -
In 1947 Ramey was a brigadier general. By 1952 he was a major general and he retired as a lieutenant general... Ramey was the commander of the 8th AF in 1947, Dubose was subordinate to him as the Chief of Staff... and this concludes this part of the discussion.
Rusty said:
"and derailed it with the completely unfounded linkage to Roswell. Also, the provenance of the slides has been so compromised that the linkage to the Ray's is almost worthless."
Hi Rusty. You are being to strict and hard with the commenters. If the slides really depict an alien, then there is some good probability it was from Roswell. The slides are from the era 1947. Of course the slides could have been property of other owners. But from who? Yet, yhe Rays are still the most likely owner.
@Don and @Rusty
Rusty makes a valid point about the provenance of the slides and the linkage to the Rays. However just because the linkage is weak or possibly falsified does not make it incorrect. This isn't the a court of law- however if everyone wants to wave these slides out as the smoking gun, they cannot, even if it is an actual dead alien in the photos.
And Don, we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that this is linked to Roswell. The only linkage to Roswell, is the description, the date, and possibly Bernerd being a geologist located in the area during the time. Those are some big jumps though.
The date- sure the stock is from 47, but they could have easily been taken a few years later.
The description- the beings found at Roswell were said to look like this, but there are also some conflicting reports, not to mention other CE events that match the same description of the little guys.
Bernerd- even if he was working in the Roswell area at the time. Why would he have access to what looks like a real building and a cadaver that has already been dissected? If Bernerd was even the person to take the photo- as I have hear the reflection in the glass is that of a woman, possibly his wife Hilda.
Anyway, just some thoughts. I'm personally reserving my final opinion for May 5th
Why on earth does a crashed alien body need a placard in the first place? Perhaps if it was part of a larger alien artifacts memorabilia collection, to help distinguish it from the many other bodies stored in glass tubes I could see the need for posting its point of origin for those rare visitors to such a storage unit, but as that's equally unlikely I just don't see the purpose of the placard in such an instance. It seems to me that this line of thinking, where the alien body gets its own placard while stored in a glass tube, needs some better explanation.
Anybody with half a clue knows Dew is behind this fraud.
b”h
I think the term “fraud” may be a bit strong. Dew said in his “Kodachrome” video that he makes no claim for what the slides show, and that the being is probably not out of the ordinary. But then he threw in a Stairway to Heaven vibe and said nevertheless that, “Oooh, it makes me wonder. . .” So others are promoting the being as an alien.
Just a few years ago even Nick Pope exercised entrepreneurial initiative just before the London Olympics.
http://www.colinandrews.net/Nick_Pope-UFO-Hoax-London-Olympics-Colin_Andrews.html
And don’t forget the dark-humor feature film Fargo opens with, “This is a true story” . . . all the way to the foot sticking out of the wood chipper.
On the other hand, the poor child depicted at the following link shows how shockingly human ailments can present themselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IidX4CAvbzc
Burnt State,
"Why on earth does a crashed alien body need a placard in the first place?"
Everyone seems to have concluded it's a placard, but that may not be true. It's definitely a sign or note of some kind. Maybe it's a set of instructions, which would be useful if this is a specimen soon to be in transit.
Hi CommanderCronus,
"Bernard Ray was a prominent geologist, therefore he exactly the right credentials if there was a geologic component to the situation..."
I can't think of any scenario where a geologist (no matter how eminent within his field) would have a need to know. An anatomical biologist probably...but a geologist???
Unless this alien/mummy/whatever was retrieved from IN the ground as opposed to lying ON the ground, then I can't understand why the military would sought out the input from a geologist.
Burnt State;
The placard thing strikes, if this is presumed to be an EBE, strikes me as cartoonish. What come to mind is an image of Wile E. Coyote holding an otherwise plain box with "ACME EXPLOSIVES" in big letters ("ALIEN BODY"). BTW, has anyone considered that it may not be written in English?
There are so many things wrong with the ambiance of these slides - apart from the body.
Tony, can you comment on some of the other items visible in the slides? Some of the objects on and behind the glass case are identifiable, but I'm having a tough time identifying the items pictured on the far right side.
..on the idea of a trained geologist being included in an investigative team: what if the alien had an object with him, something that appeared to made of some type of mineral? In that case a trained geologist might be of some use....
Paul Young,
We are discussing an image of what is purported to be the body of either an alien or a non-human entity. While I have serious doubts that will turn out to be the case, I’m willing to entertain all possibilities for now until we have an answer. I will do so because this is a blog about UFO’s, and also because it’s fun.
In an earlier post on this thread I stated there are a number of scenarios where a geologist might be brought in as a special consultant in a case like this. Here are some of them:
1. Ley lines – natural alignments of geographical locations; some have theorized that magnetic properties of ley lines function in the navigation and propulsion of UFO craft.
2. Hollow-earth theory – some believe the origin of UFOs is not in outer space, but inside the earth. Admiral Bird is said to have found just such an opening to the inner earth on one of his flights to the North Pole.
3. Underground civilization - The Hopi tribe in New Mexico have legends of what are called “ant people”, who came from the stars and now live underground. They are said to resemble a cross between humans and ants. Curiously, the head of the Roswell slides specimen does, in some ways, resemble that of an ant.
4. Underground alien bases – there have been rumors of underground alien bases located in places such as Dulce, New Mexico and Area 51 in Nevada.
5. Terrestrial humanoid species – Some believe sightings of aliens actually involve a terrestrial, but underground-dwelling species of humanoids. The military carried out numerous underground nuclear tests in the decades following WW2. If they had discovered an underground-dwelling species during the course of these experiments, I’m sure they would have been able to keep it secret.
I’m not saying any of the above explanations are scientifically valid, but the extra-terrestrial hypothesis for the origin of gray aliens isn’t valid either. A true extraterrestrial species would not look as human as the creature in the slides. Add to this the fact that there were no reported sightings of alien bodies in 1947. Lots of debris, but no bodies. Check the news articles from the time, and you’ll see I’m right. Therefore, the existence of an alien body in the photo is not in any way dependent on it having been found lying next to a crashed UFO near Roswell in July of 1947. That is UFO lore, pure and simple. If it is an alien or non-human entity, it could have come from a lot of places, in a lot of ways.
So I return to your quote:
“Unless this alien/mummy/whatever was retrieved from IN the ground as opposed to lying ON the ground, then I can't understand why the military would sought out the input from a geologist.”
And so the answer is yes, it may well have come from inside the ground as opposed to lying on the ground. As for what it is, we’ll have to wait and see… but you should not exclude various possibilities (such as a geologist being invited to view an alien body) by relying on a misinterpretation/misunderstanding of the facts surrounding the Roswell incident.
@Commandercronus: don't forget undersea civilisation. That's a possibility, too.
Curt-
There are other 'things' that are very difficult to discern. Some think they might be errant pieces of the debris- very hard to tell.
A new development in the slides issue, at my blog:
http://nickredfernfortean.blogspot.com/2015/03/too-hasty-on-roswell-slides.html
So, according to Nick Redfern, there may have been a pre-Roswell connection between Hilda Ray and Silas Newton. Could she have been his attorney?
I wonder if Silas Newton appears in any of the Ray slides.
Cronus:
The official documents are court papers. They show that Hilda Ray worked in her capacity as an attorney in a suit involving Newton in which suit was brought against him. So, she knew him pre-Roswell. Maybe she got too talkative, and Newton (well known for his cons) saw this as ripe for exploitation, told Frank Scully, and the whole Aztec UFO crash issue began. At the very least, there is an important back-story to be uncovered. Whatever the reason, I don't think it's coincidence that Hilda Ray knew Newton pre-Roswell and that both are linked to reports of small humanoids. There is something to be uncovered here - but what, I'm not sure.
Cronus:
One other thing: the Ray slides show shots taken at golfing tournaments. Newton was a big golfer and very skilled and won a number of golfing awards.
Maybe that was a connection - a shared interest in golf, which kicked things off.
Nick:
Scott and Suzanne Ramsey are two of the foremost authors when it comes to the Aztec case. I wonder if they are following the slides controversy. Maybe they can offer some insight to this.
"Scott and Suzanne Ramsey are two of the foremost authors when it comes to the Aztec case"
OK then...as I understand this, we are being assured that the Ramseys are the 'Roswell Dream Team' of Aztec?
...help me out here, are you damning with faint praise, OR praising with faint damns?
Kurt Peters:
I was only implying that they have spent many years researching the Aztec case and published a book on the subject, fairly recently(2012). I'm sure they're not the only ones knowledgeable about the subject matter though, so if you have a better suggestion for Aztec crash related input, I await your recommendation.
?
"UFO Crash at Aztec" by William H.Steinman and Wendelle C. Stevens (1986). Look forward to checking out the Ramsey's work on this topic.
Behind the scenes weirdness on the Roswell slides. My latest blog post:
http://nickredfernfortean.blogspot.com/2015/03/roswell-slides-murky-development.html
Mr. Braglia has repeated here many assertions about human anatomy, the Rays, and witnesses to alien bodies -- assertions he cannot possibly demonstrate. I will not repeat my complaints about his innuendo and illogic; that would be equally tiresome.
I will simply point out a discrepancy:
Braglia wrote, "the being shown in the slides is simply not a mummy..."
But Jaime Maussan, interviewed by Maurizio Baiata, said, "I can say that preliminary reports show that the body is mummified."
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.altrogiornale.org%2Falieni-roswell-maussan-intervista-maurizio-baiata%2F&prev=search
Terry-
I have just been forwarded an email from Jaimie. He emailed Maurizio this morning when informed of what you have brought up:
SUBJECT HEADER:
I NEVER SAID THAT
"Maurizio-
When I talked with you I clearly said that the body was not a mummy of mummified."
"Jaime Maussan: Posso dire che i rapporti preliminari dimostrano che il corpo non è mummificato. Che si tratta di un adulto e che non è un Umano. I rapporti definitivi e ufficiali saranno nelle mie mani a metà Marzo."
Did Maussan say embalmed, and it became mummificato in translation into Italian?
Curt-
Very possibly. This would certainly not be the first time that there has been a mistranslation or inaccurate quoting. Simply, Jaimie never said it.
Tony, or Adam:
"Other photos found in the chest (separate from the two humanoid slides) depict General Eisenhower in 1947 and with the couple at meetings and parties with what appear to be very well-placed people."
When will we see the party photos of the Rays?
Glad an example of the portable glass cadaver case was located - this can go a long way to prove that what is in the case is not necessarily a "mummy".
By the way I have never seen a mummy in this sort of condition - they are always pretty old and rotted or so shriveled that you can clearly tell they are human mummies. The slide seems to depict something a bit "fresher" than that.
As for fingers, people have claimed 4, 5, and 6 without much substantiation one way or the other. Four would be odd for humans, unless one was cut off intentionally - which at least is possible as many Asian cultures (Japanese for example) have criminal cults that do this - and they did back in the 1940's too.
With that in mind, its always possible that Roswell was nothing but a Paperclip screw-up using captured Axis vehicles on balloons with a Japanese crew.
If this is an alien, then it could be from another hypothetical crash.
Post a Comment