Saturday, May 09, 2015

Translation of the Roswell Slides Placard

I will freely admit when I was told, during a telephone conversation last night (May 8) that two groups, working independently, had come to the same conclusions about the placard near the body, it didn’t overly surprise me. They both said the first line proved it was a mummy of a child. I didn’t disbelieve this claim because to me, it looked like a mummy and I was surprised that Tom and Don would go off on a years’ long search for some answers given the look of the slides.

Overnight there have been some questions raised about the legitimacy of the announcement and I have done today what I probably should have done last night but then I have more information today. Last night I contacted two people, one at each end of the spectrum and asked them about this. I had their answers in hand before I posted the link to the Blue Blurry Lines with the text of the placard translated as:

MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY
At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton
shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of these small cotton blankets.
Loaned by the Mr. Xxxxxx, San Francisco, California

If this is accurate, then the discussion ends at this point and we can relegate the slides to the footnote they should be. The evidence at the moment suggests that it is, though the reading of the placard is not universally accepted. Tony Bragalia, late last night, provided a number of scans of the placard that seem to argue against the ease with which others said they had deciphered the words.

The problem is that Tony’s scans all originated in the same place and that is with Adam Dew. These scans are difficult to read and seem to suggest that those who say they can are engaging in wishful thinking (my analysis and nothing that Tony said). Tony thought that I shouldn’t have posted anything until I had consulted with others, but I had done that last night and have been doing this today. To me the question is too important to let it slip away now. If nothing else, that posting, along with those by Rich Reynolds and Frank Warren have stirred up the conversation and provided some additional clues to what has been going on.





I asked Chris Rutkowski, who was listed as one of those operating on what is known as the Roswell Slides Research Group (RSRG), and he told me, “I don't have full confidence [in the interpretation by the RSRG], actually. It's a bit suspicious that a readable placard wasn't shown in Mexico... I did voice my concerns about its provenance, as I did about the slides themselves.”

In fairness to Chris, I asked him early this morning and he replied early this morning. Isaac Koi replied late this afternoon and said, “I think the position in relation to the analysis of the placard is now beyond any reasonable doubt.” It is a position that others have taken up as the day wears on.

Although there had been some questions about the provenance of the slides, and this would be worrisome this question has been resolved. Dew, as SlideBox Media, has not released an unmodified high resolution scan of the slides as had been promised but he did place a better scan on his web site. Using that scan it seems that the first line has been read with reliability by many different individuals using a variety of techniques on a variety of the released images. He has provided, at his site, a better scan, so any questions of provenance have been rendered moot.

Dew has responded to the announcement by the RSRG, suggesting that they are the ones who manipulated the data. He wrote, “Any claimed success should be repeatable and will be tested. You should be able to give specific and clear enough instructions that anyone could actually repeat your actions with the actual placard scan we have posted here.” You can see the scan at:


Paul Kimball, who has been recently and unjustly vilified for his anti-slides stance, has published additional information over at The Other Side of the Truth, and has linked to another site that seems to confirm that the placard does identify the body as human. In the interest of full disclosure, that other site is operated by the RSRG.

In response to Dew and to Tony, Paul wrote, “Adam Dew and Anthony Bragalia are claiming that the image from which we derived the proof that the ‘alien’ body is actually a human mummified child is a fake - that it was photoshopped. I believe Jaime Maussan has said the same thing… This is categorically untrue. The only change made was an increase in the contrast to accentuate the actual letters on the page (which were deblurred using simple commercially available software). Nothing was added.

For those interested in that commentary, see:


Kimball’s earlier comments do seem to suggest a bias, but then, the evidence, as it stands now, seems to support his and the RSRG’s interpretation. I did contact other members of the RSRG individually. Lance Moody believes that they had read the placard with a high degree of certainty and that suggests the body is human.

Tim Printy, another member of the group told me, “Depends on source image and how much manipulation is required.  Moody and Nab Lator are better at it than I but even using one of Bragalias and Dew’s images I could read ‘two year old boy, and ‘San Francisco California.’”

I suppose you could argue that the RSRG is made up of rabid skeptics, with a couple of exceptions, but that doesn’t actually negate their findings, especially if others not affiliated with them are coming up with the same reading. It seems that if there is manipulation going on here, it is on the part of Dew, who is keeping the debate alive by not releasing the high quality scans he said it would… and by suggesting that those offering a counterpoint are involved in a scam of some sort.

Philip Mantle, who seems to be quite offended by all this and is not part of the RSRG, has provided some interesting commentary. He wrote:

I just wanted to add a little bit more info regarding the on-going debate into the alleged Roswell slides. Unfortunately this last week I have been a little bit under the weather, however, this did allow me the opportunity to sit with my feet up in my ufological armchair and see if I could obtain a quote or two from a variety of experts regarding the alleged Roswell slide. Basically all I did was email a polite request to a number of academics and institutions respectfully asking them to comment on the photo (slide) in question.  Some came back and stated that they didn’t think the photo was of good enough quality to comment on, others requested more details, some did reply but when I asked if I could quote them they declined.

There are a number though that did indeed reply and give me permission to quote them. Personally I believe I’ve spent more than enough time on this sham already but for the record I am providing here two of the replies I obtained. They are unedited and all they were sent is the so-called Roswell slide photograph. Again, for the record, none of the academics I contacted came back with a reply that they thought the photo depicted an alien.
Here are two of several replies I received:

I confirm that the photo is of a mummy of a child, possibly Peruvian or even Egyptian.
Salima Ikram
Professor of Egyptology
American University in Cairo

Okay, it is a mummy, but very hard to tell if it Egyptian, South American or European. I see no wrappings of any kind, it appears to be a child or youth. Do you have a provenance on the slide??? That may help the determination.
Cordially
SJ Wolfe 
S.J. Wolfe
Senior Cataloger and Serials Specialist
American Antiquarian Society

And when I asked if I could have this person’s permission to quote her the reply was:
Of course you can. And if you do, please describe me as Director of the EMINA (Egyptian Mummies in North America) Project. Here is the link to the website http://egyptologyforum.org/EMINA/
Cordially
SJ
You are of course free to make of these comments you will as they are simply my humble attempt to help try and get to the bottom of what I believe is a very sorry saga. There will no doubt be those that question the abilities of the two above ladies to comment on this matter but so-be-it. The one thing that I can say regarding the above two comments is that they have both been made independently of any of the promoters of the ‘Roswell slides’ and therefore in my opinion are a great deal more credible. You can choose to agree or disagree of course but this is just one way to try and bring the matter to an end as quickly as possible in my humble opinion.

So, while those who support the slides talk of scientists who don’t believe the body is human, there are other scientists who believe it is. But that’s not the real take-away here. It is the statement by an American about the slides. Don, during one of the interviews said that Tom had failed to interest any American scientists in looking at the slides or voicing an opinion about them. Philip seems to have done that and has some sort of response by an American scientist, which just shows you can find someone with credentials to support your point of view as long as that point of view isn’t too extreme.

The real point is that if the first line does identify the body as the mummy of a human child, then a search for an exact match is irrelevant. In fact, an exact match isn’t necessary because the body in the slide looks an awful lot like many of the other mummies that have been identified from around the world. And, of course, it is not up to those who believe it to be a mummy to prove it, but to those who claim it is an alien to prove it. This they haven’t done.

There is one other fact here. A short video shows how the words on the placard were identified. This seems to suggest that those on the RSRG and others are sharing their methodology and their research into this while some others are calling names. That is always the last defense when the facts begin to crumble. You can see the video here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkaKpPGKTV0&feature=youtu.be


We might have taken this as far as we can at this point. We might have solved the “mystery” of the alien in the slides, and all the other discussion, discourse, allegations, and claims have been rendered moot by those who were able to read the placard, it turns out so easily.


38 comments:

Paul Kimball said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paul Kimball said...

I was actually right there with Chris within the RSRG urging caution in the release of this because I was concerned about questions of provenance related to Jose's source... but as we were having an on-line back and forth in our private Facebook group Dew released his version of the placard with which we were easily able to repeat the experiment. At that point, there was simply no reasonable doubt as to the nature of the findings (the heavy lifting being done by RSRG member Nab Lator). The discussion now shifts to who knew what, and when, amongst the slides promoters, because this bears all the hallmarks of a con.

Paul

Paul Kimball said...

Demonstrations of methodology, freely shared by us: http://www.roswellslides.com/how-the-placard-was-deciphered/

SlideBox Media said...

Looks crystal clear Paul. Incredible really. Hopefully we'll all be able to replicate it.

Tom said...

I think most expected a hoax out of Maussan, Carey and Schmitt. However, it's shocking that Richard Dolan solidly hitched his wagon to this hoax. This has done irreparable harm to his once sterling reputation.

Michael Mu said...

@Kevin

Funny Youtube Video that posted here! Made handwritten Letters to pamphlet Letters! :D


@Paul Kimball

Why you dont make the same without the "Deblurmodel" by Nab Lator?

Or do it with a another programm like Gimp or some other programms but all without the faked Deblurmodel from Nab Lator.

And when you doing that and the Placard show the same like in your faked one - i will believe you! :D

Lets go! :D

Paul Kimball said...

At this point, anything Adam Dew has to say is completely irrelevant.

SlideBox Media said...

Paul didn't you promise to release the slides on May 4?

For what it's worth, I've asked Smart Deblur to replicate this. I asked them to post to this blog when they have their results. I sent them Paul's links.

SlideBox Media said...

I hope you guys are being fully honest about your work... because if you're trying to pull a fast one... you're going to set debunking back many many years.

Jason Gammon said...

@ Tom

"I think most expected a hoax out of Maussan, Carey and Schmitt. However, it's shocking that Richard Dolan solidly hitched his wagon to this hoax. This has done irreparable harm to his once sterling reputation."

You've made a couple of similar statements. I've replied to you but I guess you didn't read them. Dolan's reputation has never been sterling. Do you not recall his defense of known hoaxer Stan Romanek when he was busted for child porn? Have you not listened to one of his speeches where he lumps every single governmental conspiracy theory into the UFO phenomenon?

Richard Dolan never was credible. It's just that many people in the UFO community are just under a trance and are not registering when beloved figures do things like this. It goes right over the heads.

At least you are now awake and realize that Dolan has no credibility.

Lance said...

Kevin said:

"I did contact other members of the RSRG individually. Lance Moody, of course, believes that they had read the placard with a high degree of certainty and that proves the body is human."

What does the "of course" mean here?

Is this not the whole of my communication to you yesterday:

"Hey Kevin,

Yes, we have had some good luck.
Someone has now leaked the info so Curt rushed out a story on it."

Where do you get all the other stuff you attribute to me?

I notice you also talk about rabid skeptics. Would have been nice to hear more talk about rabid believers a few months ago, huh?

===

Adam,

If you would release a good quality version of the placard that you have not sharpened or changed via levels, we could possibly resolve the name on the placard as well.

Nice job claiming that we had Photoshopped the results...maybe you have seen the videos we made that demonstrate the process.

Your page on the placard only demonstrates that you don't know how to use the software.

But then you must be busy preparing an apology?

Lance

KRandle said...

Lance -

Extrapolated from your comment that you believed that the placard had been read... and since it mentioned a mummified human, that would suggest that it was human. I will happily change the sentence if you object to the extrapolation...

Mentioned rabid skeptics to underscore the point. The rabid believers would reject what was said because of the stances you and others had taken... thought you of all people would understand the point.

Lance said...

The "of course" seems to be dismissive: "Of course Lance believes it is a fake."

This is pretty unwelcome since I stayed up very late last night trying to be sure that we had all our facts straight.

Additionally, I openly and immediately replied to your questions so I don't understand the seeming snarkiness of your account.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding?

Lance

Ross said...

I am amazed that during 3 years of 'research' not one of Team Bozo made any progress on the placard. There is ample resolution and contrast available in the image, the only problem is the text is not in focus. There are numerous software packages which use fairly simple algorithms to correct issues caused by motion blur and focus. Apparently not one was tried. Instead significant sums of money were paid for complicated physical analysis of the slides themselves. It's completely baffling.

Ross said...

By the way the 4th to last word seems to be 'Professor' which would suggest what is next is an abbreviated title for the institution he works at and the location 'San Francisco, California.'

eBikesRC said...

I agree with Kevin Randle that there is probably SMOKE and MIRRORS that can end with a stake in the heart of this matter related to how Adam Dew can solve this issue immediately... or keep prolonging and burning their reputations into another kind of stake in the heart, imo.

Adam Dew: No More Smoke and Mirrors!

Quoting Kevin Randle:

[...]

"Others in the group have told me that the readable placard came to them from someone on the inside, who has not been identified. This would be worrisome, except that Dew, as SlideBox Media, has not released an unmodified high resolution scan of the slides as had been promised. He could certainly clear this up by doing so, yet he keeps attempting to push another modified version off on researchers and even with that, it seems that the first line has been read with reliability by many different individuals using a variety of techniques on a variety of the released images.

[...]

I suppose you could argue that the RSRG is made up of rabid skeptics, with a couple of exceptions, but that doesn’t actually negate their findings, especially if others not affiliated with them are coming up with the same reading. It seems that if there is manipulation going on here, it is on the part of Dew, who is keeping the debate alive by not releasing the high quality scans he said it would… and by suggesting that those offering a counterpoint are involved in a scam of some sort."

[...] End KR's Quote.

To Adam Dew and Mexico Slide Team: Extinguish the smoke and fire with no more scanning mirrors. Release the RAW lossless unaltered high resolution scans now. Please, no more smoke and mirrors.

Save face and move on...

CommanderCronus said...

There will still be those who argue with the placard interpretation. I suspect this issue will not be put to rest until someone recovers the actual mummy, wherever he is. This is not an unreasonable goal, as mummies are rare artifacts and not often thrown away.


I predict the final nail in the coffin of the Roswell slides will be the finding of the actual mummy.

Tom said...

@Jason - Look, I agree with you that Dolan has always simply been a huckster hustling for the quick buck. However, when I say "his once sterling reputation", I thought it would be obvious that I was referring to the popularized version of his reputation. No, I never bought into Dolan. But a large segment of the true believers have.

My point is this should tarnish his reputation with at least some of those people. The gloss is off "Saint Dolan", for all to see. I know many will believe & support him regardless. But this should take a chunk out of his following.

Neal Foy said...

Thanks Kevin,
This is the confirmation I was waiting for. Instead of being 99.9% sure it's a child mummy I'm now at 100% sure.

The mystery that remains for me as a photographer is why on earth would anyone keep photos of such bad quality of a subject of so little consequence. This is dustbin material. We may never be able to solve that mystery nor would I expect anyone to want to.

KRandle said...

Lance -

Yes... you are misunderstanding.

Michael Mu said...

Ok...here is my opinion:

Nab Lators "Deblurmodel" File deblurs nothing...it only change the Original Placard Photo to the faked Placard Photo from Nab Lator.

Thats all!

Jeanne Ruppert said...

CommanderCronus said...
"There will still be those who argue with the placard interpretation. I suspect this issue will not be put to rest until someone recovers the actual mummy, wherever he is."

I agree. The placard interpretation is more or less significant depending on who wrote it and what he or she knew about human physiology. I just read somewhere online that the last line on the placard seems to include the designation 'Professor' Xxxxxx, San Francisco. Knowing who that 'owner' of the 'mummy' was might be helpful. Also finding where that mummy is now would be very helpful in answering the question (still an open question) whether it actually is human.

Checo Beeper said...

I predicted a day or so ago that the museum exhibit would be identified "within weeks or days". I had no idea it would be within 48 hours. Isn't the internet incredible? Such pooled resources, like a giant brain ...

The "Dream Team" should now remove themselves from UFO research permanently. We already knew Schmitt was, to say the least, ethically challenged. This is the end of his and Carey's careers, such as they were.

Dolan is done. There's no coming back from something like this. It should have been obvious this would happen, I have no idea what he was thinking.

Maussan the huckster, the fraud promoter ... we already knew his routine. If there was any doubt of his total lack of scientific rigor, his desire for self-aggrandisment and the crass exploitation of any hoax footage available, this is it. His name will forever be a curse on any associated material. I've no doubt he will continue on, however.

As for Bragalia, he should now remove himself from the UFO enthusiast field and cease commenting on anything related to it, forever.

But I'm sure an amusing meltdown from him will be incoming.

I also note the desperation of some true believers in various fora to claim this result is a fraud. Astonishing self delusion that I'm sure we're all familiar with. There's a paper in this, I tell you.

I further predict the specific exhibit itself will now be found, or another series of photographs of it. I don't feel confident to give a time frame, it could be within the week or even within hours! Such is the power of the internet and good minds doing solid research.

If only the "Dream Team" had realised this years ago ... or perhaps they did.

Manny Coto said...

Bragalia has admitted it's a mummy. See UFO Conjectures.

CommanderCronus said...

Still too early to throw around the "hoax" accusation, in my opinion. I still believe this entire debacle can be explained by human error on the part of several individuals who wanted to believe an incredible idea - to the extent that it clouded their judgement.

Nor is this the death knell of Ufology. It is, however, what some would call a "teachable moment". Some lessons that should be learned:

1. Sometimes science must be done confidentially, in order to maintain the integrity of evidence. This was not one of those times. In this case, the power of crowd-sourcing should have been implemented from the start, as it could have provided an answer within a few days, given full disclosure.

2. Inappropriate association - just because something happened around 1947 doesn't mean it's connected to the Roswell incident. That would be like finding bullet casing from 1963 and assuming it belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald.

3. Investigational bias - even those who saw high-quality versions of the slides should have immediately suspected this was a mummy. Some did, but their desire to connect it to Roswell resulted in in-adequate investigation as they failed to follow up on important clues.




TheDimov said...

I think the simple lesson to be learned from all this is simply : YOU CANT BEAT THE INTERNET. Nosiree. These days teens and even under-10s know are like little Einsteins with computers and not even PT Barnum himself could get away with any hucksterism these days, no chance. It takes more than triple layer no-sun tanning lotion, a crap story and a big 'ol stadium to fool people these days, got that Don and Tom?

Checo Beeper said...

Bragalia: "But all of this must be a series of extraordinarily incredible coincidences."

What a twit.

Paul Kimball said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mark OC said...

Still pisses me off that Bragalia repeats this lie in his confession: "The data points and the narrative of the slide are all true. The slide stock is from 1947, the very year of the crash."

Not true at all! As I was told by the technical experts at the George Eastman House International Museum of Photography & Film in February, "All that can be verified from the edge printing on slides is the film type. It does not tell when it was manufactured. Kodachrome was introduced in 35mm in 1936. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell when it was exposed or processed."

CommanderCronus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mark OC said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oswaldski said...

Posting of May 8
http://www.anomalist.com/

Michael Mu said...

@Paul Kimball

Ok...i downloadet Smartblur here http://smartdeblur.net/ and tried it...but without the Crackfile from Nab Lator.


Here my results:

http://i59.tinypic.com/xfxe1h.jpg

http://i59.tinypic.com/nw0q40.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/34zf1i1.jpg


And you see...nothing! ^^


So...Paul Kimball, Nab Lator and all the others who want us to believe that they debunked the Roswell Slides are Liars!

End of the Discussion! Or in german: Ende aus, Micky Maus! :D

KRandle said...

Michael Mu -

Given the new information that has surfaced this morning, you might wish to change your attitude.

TheDimov said...

Michael Mu - are you having a joke (primarily with yourself)? You only need to look at the slide which Adam Dew posted as the "actual" slide and you can quite easily read "Old Boy", "Of", and "California" within seconds. If you cant at first, keep looking because you will see it before long. Stop embarrassing yourself, mate. Although you can if you want, for entertainment purposes.

Jason Gammon said...

@ The Dimov

"I think the simple lesson to be learned from all this is simply : YOU CANT BEAT THE INTERNET. Nosiree. These days teens and even under-10s know are like little Einsteins with computers and not even PT Barnum himself could get away with any hucksterism these days, no chance. It takes more than triple layer no-sun tanning lotion, a crap story and a big 'ol stadium to fool people these days, got that Don and Tom?"

Tom Carey delights himself on being anti-technology. He doesn't have a Facebook, only has a TracFone for emergencies and doesn't have any of the modern electrical devices that most young children have today. He brags about this on interviews. What Tom Carey is admitting is that he is a poor researcher because he refuses to use tools. He might as well be banging rocks together.

TheDimov said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
albert said...

I would say that this episode illustrates the value of the Open Source movement applied to such endeavors. A world-wide network of developers is available for a project. Anyone can sign up and join. Folks who show, by their work, that they don't know what the hell they're doing, are ignored and eliminated. Yes, some folks may work on a very small piece of the pie, but their contributions relate to their area of expertise, and most importantly, ALL work is available for public scrutiny. This is the way to get things done, quickly and accurately.
.
OK, projects like the Not Roswell Slides are as much conjecture as science, and not as rigorous as software development. There are so many questions that would remain, even if the mummy was in hand, even if the slides provenance dated to Roswell, even if the mummys DNA was human, even if the mummys DNA was NOT human...I don't see how any reasonable person could do anything but offer opinions, based on probabilities. That's OK; discussions are good, even when they're bad, they're good :)
.
It's in our nature to explain things, or at least, demand explanations. Again, that's good, because we wouldn't have our amazing technology without our curious nature.
.
We (as products of Western civilization) are trained to see things as black or white. When we dichotomize the world, we often fail to see the spectrum in between. Folks in all fields tend to think that way, even scientists and UFO researchers. You've got the paradigm (what's accepted) and the not-paradigm (what's not accepted). Paradigm shifts are almost never forced by the paradigm supporters, nor is it possible for the 'not-paradigm' (fringe) to make much headway either. Change has to come from the middle. And change must come. ALL theories are, by definition, falsifiable; in whole or in part.
.
Here's hoping (with glasses raised) we get some meat the next time 'round, instead of the crumbs we got this time. Cheers!
.
Sorry for gittin' all metaphysical on ya'll.
.
...