Friday, August 21, 2015

Scientists and the Roswell Slides

Since we have been repeatedly given the “facts” of the mummy as established by Richard Doble and are told that no other scientists, anthropologists or archaeologists would go on the record, I thought it time to challenge this bit of misrepresentation. As I have noted, when we are told that no American anthropologists would go on the record, it might mean that none would go on the record based solely on examination of the slides. They wanted additional information and I don’t see that as an unreasonable request. In fact, it sounds just like the question a scientist would ask when presented with something like the Roswell Slides.

But that is only part of the story. There have been statements by recognized scientists concerning what is shown in the slides. Tim Printy has published information about this, much of it found by Philip Mantle. Printy’s article can be found here:


But for those who don’t wish to access all the information provided by Printy, here are the germane points:

Dr. Daniel Antoine, Institute for Bioarchaeology - Curator of Physical Anthropology: Based on the photograph, this appears to be the mummified remains of a very young child. The mummification process is likely to have been natural (i.e. buried in a very hot or arid environment) but it may also have been intentionally embalmed.
François Gaudard, University of Chicago: To me it looks indeed like a mummy: the mummy of a child. The item on the other side of the mummy appears to be remnants of mummy bandages, but it is difficult to tell for sure. However, since some parts of the mummy look a little shiny, for example, the right hand and just below the ribs, it makes me wonder whether it could be varnished or made of plastic? And also why is the text on the label not visible as if someone was trying to hide something? [This is an accurate statement. Someone was trying to hide something.]
Frode Storaas, University Museum of Bergen: This seems to be a mummy, but not from old Egypt. Mummies are found many places. The photo indicates that this mummy is exhibited, or stored, somewhere and by someone who probably can tell more. [Should I point out here that this is right on point. That documentation exists.]
Dr. Suzanne Onstine, University of Memphis: It does appear to be human remains (and likely a child), although the photo is too blurry to tell if artificial mummification procedures were done. It is certainly possible the body was naturally mummified due to dry climate and soil. That kind of thing happened all the time in many cultures.
 S.J. Wolfe, Director of the EMINA (Egyptian Mummies in North America) Project: 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.
Dr. Ronald Leprohon, University of Toronto: Where was this shot taken? It looks like a museum. What did the label say? Did you ask the folks there? I’m sure they’d have information on their displays. It certainly looks like a mummy but it’s pretty blurry so it’s difficult to see properly. Sorry I can’t be more helpful, and good luck in your quest. [A really astute comment by someone who only had a scan of the slide to examine.]
Dr. Patricia Podzorski, University of Memphis: Based on the image you sent, it appears that what you saw is the preserved remains of a human body, or a good imitation thereof. Since no wrappings are clearly visible in the photo, I can not determine the culture (Egypt, Peru, Asia, North America, etc.) or the date/ period (ancient or recent) of origin. Given that the head is turned slightly to the side and the color, it might not be an unwrapped ancient Egyptian mummy, but I am not able to be certain based on the visual information.
Salima Ikram, American University in Cairo: I confirm that the photo is of a mummy of a child, possibly Peruvian or even Egyptian. [Another scientist who was to accurately identify the remains from the slide without going off into the extraterrestrial.]
Denise Doxey, Curator, Ancient Egyptian, Nubian and Near Eastern Art. Museum of fine arts, Boston: Yes, that would appear to be the mummy of a small child.
As I have noted, Philip Mantle was the man responsible for interviewing these people and getting their statements on the record. All that can be found here:



Given all this, I hope that we can now move beyond the claims that other scientists, versed in the necessary disciplines, have not gone on the record about this. It is clear that their opinions are more informed than that of Doble. The trouble for some commenters here is that they agree with what Doble said and ignore everything else. It seems to me that there are many arrayed on the side of the image being an unfortunate human child based on their examination of the scans available and a few who are sticking to the idea it is alien while ignoring all the other documentation, photographs and evidence. For those unable to understand it, these are the remains of an unfortunate child. There is nothing alien about it.

49 comments:

Steve Sawyer said...

Amen.

I'll just wait here for the inevitable popcorn to pop... 8^}

jacarav@ca said...

Kevin, this note is a good birthday gift to Don ...

saludos

Brian Bell said...

I'm waiting for someone to say the scientists quoted above are either CIA agents themselves or were threatened by one.

KRandle said...

Ed -

I told you I don't want a repeat of Doble's unsupported claims... if you have something new, fine, but the continued drumbeat is tiresome and frankly, just wrong.

Wind Swords said...

Kevin,

Did Carey and Schmitt see these scientists statements above before the May 5th fiasco? If so then I am just dumbfounded at how they could have thought it was an alien.

edward gehrman said...

Kevin,
The quotes Philip supplied express a wide range of opinions but they were all generalizations. Not one explained why they thought the creature was clearly a human. I think they didn't have the slightest idea of what they were viewing, for sure, and of course not one of them would mention the alien possibility. Varnish, maybe?
You're in the cat-bird's seat, but I'd take a closer look if I were you.
Consult your own anthropologist, someone as smart as Doble, that you can trust, and then let them argue out the fine points of human bone structure and convergent evolution.
Ed


Stephen Jackson said...

Ed-

Convergent evolution is totally irrelevant yet you keep bringing it up. Are you trying to say that two species, probably millions of miles apart, on completely different planets with different environment variables just both happened to walk upright, have 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 eyes, fingers and toes and a mouth and nose in all the same places as each other? You really have no idea of evolution or science.

Don Maor said...

Stephen Jackson said:

Convergent evolution is totally irrelevant yet you keep bringing it up. Are you trying to say that two species, probably millions of miles apart, on completely different planets with different environment variables just both happened to walk upright, have 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 eyes, fingers and toes and a mouth and nose in all the same places as each other? You really have no idea of evolution or science.

Stephen, I don't think Ed is speaking about two species coming from two different planets. His more or less crazy theory is that UFO crews are humanoid beings from planet Earth.

However, the notion that intelligent beings from different planets can end up with the humanoid shape is not strange nor absurd. First, the environmental conditions of planets with life would not be much different, provided for instance, that water is liquid in a relatively narrow range of temperatures. On the other hand, we can expect that a biped having two legs and two arms with hands, is more or less an obvious evolutionary result from the evolution of a quadruped that has evolved to free his forelimbs in order to have hands to manipulate tools. Off course, you should not expect intelligent extraterrestrials being like snakes or dogs. If they don't have hands, the don't have civilizations and of course they can not come here. These ideas are related to convergent evolution an have been proposed before by scholars, for example see the work of Robert Bieri "Huminoids on other planets" from 1964.

Don Maor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Don Maor said...

Ah Stephen, having a mouth under the nose is not a mere coincidence, it is good to sense the smell of a good/bad food. Two eyes symmetrically located are good for estimating distances, one eye won't do, and three eyes would be too much. In general, nature prefers symmetrical solutions, so expect aliens to be symmetrical. Eyes are also needed to be over the mouth, given that food has been usually prepared and served over surface (wood, rock, hand, etc), so having the eyes under the mouth would render impossible to watch the goodness of the food.

So yes, expect the aliens to be humanoid, at least most of them.

Brian Bell said...

"So yes, expect the aliens to be humanoid, at least most of them."

Ok Don. Whatever you say. Humanoid one and all.

edward gehrman said...


All,
This is an interesting article on convergent evolution. Humans
occupy the "tool making and using" niche. This means that
another species that opted to travel along the tool-making path
would end up looking very much like humans.

http://tinyurl.com/cw8x3br

"Scientists once thought that snakes in Australia and Asia were the same species, Enhydrina schistosa. The snakes from these regions do look similar, with beaklike mouths that have a notch between the lower jaws.

However, when University of Queensland researcher Bryan Fry and colleagues tested the serpentine DNA, the results showed that they were separate species, and not even close relatives, as noted by the publication Asian Scientist.

This is a case of convergent evolution, wherein different species evolve independently but end up looking quite similar, according to the study, published recently in the journal Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution. Or, as Yong put it, convergent evolution is "when different species turn up at life's party wearing the same clothes."
Ed

Brian Bell said...

Ed and Don:

The reality is I can think of perhaps three, possibly four, well known scientists who advocate that an ET species would naturally evolve into a hominid. That sounds like a lot but the counter reality is the rest of the scientists in the world who advocate ET life claim that if it were to evolve and become both sentient and intelligent it would not develop into a hominid. Those same scientists claim that on earth only one species has achieved that - man - and that no others would or could rise to parallel mankind due to the fact that man himself is an evolutionary fluke at such random and impossible odds that it could not be done twice on the same planet or any other.

That leaves convergent evolution on this planet or any other a remote if not impossible feat of nature the way you are describing it.

The only way around it is to suggest directive panspermia has taken place throughout the universe due to a hominid super species having chosen to replicate themselves everywhere, which raises even more issues that cannot be explained by legitimate science.

Don Maor said...

That sounds like a lot but the counter reality is the rest of the scientists in the world who advocate ET life claim that if it were to evolve and become both sentient and intelligent it would not develop into a hominid.

All right. Bring the names.

"man himself is an evolutionary fluke at such random and impossible odds"

Nobody has calculated such a probability yet. Sorry.

The only way around it is to suggest directive panspermia has taken place throughout the universe due to a hominid super species having chosen to replicate themselves everywhere, which raises even more issues that cannot be explained by legitimate science.

Yes, bla bla bla, let's just leave a that panspermia is another possiblity.

edward gehrman said...

Brian,
It is clear you don't have a clue about convergence. Why not at least try to understand the basics before you spout off?

"Convergence is the repeated evolution of similar traits in multiple lineages which all ancestrally lack the trait — is rife in nature, as illustrated by the examples below. The ultimate cause of convergence is usually a similar evolutionary biome, as similar environments will select for similar traits in any species occupying the same ecological niche, even if those species are only distantly related. In the case of cryptic species, it can create species which are only distinguishable by analyzing their genetics. Unrelated organisms often develop analogous structures by adapting to similar environments.

(list of convergent life)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_examples_of_convergent_evolution

The environmental pressures force and control the organisms so all the tool makers and users will eventually end up looking like us, superficially.
Convergence is certainly not a "remote if not impossible feat of nature".
Ed


Brian Bell said...

Don:

"Bring the names..."

> You should do your own homework Don, after all you are the one making the claims. If you don't even have any inkling of this issue in scientific literature you might reconsider quoting body mass indexes and telling folks all aliens must be humanoids as a result of the evolutionary process.

"Nobody has calculated..."

> Yes they have indicating once again your operating on assumptions, lack of knowledge, and a will to believe instead of hard data.

Brian Bell said...

Ed:

You need to do some homework too Ed. The majority of scientists agree that convergent evolution will not spaun hominids everywhere in the universe or replicate parallel and equally or more intelligent sentient humanoid life on this planet opposite man. Do some? Yes. The majority? No.

This is how science gets twisted to support one's belief in little space faring human-like creatures living underground on earth or on distant planets.

You might consider the Fermi Paradox.

Don Maor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Don Maor said...

"You should do your own homework Don, after all you are the one making the claims. If you don't even have any inkling of this issue in scientific literature you might reconsider quoting body mass indexes and telling folks all aliens must be humanoids as a result of the evolutionary process."

I do have some literature on the topic, there are a few names, but not so many as you claimed, so I again ask you to provide the names, don't treat us like childs.

BTW, I did not say all aliens must be humanoid, I wrote "most". Just another sample of your reading lack of ability.

Yes they have indicating once again your operating on assumptions

Who are they? Bring the names, again.

TheDimov said...

I shudder to think that, in light of the evidence we have been shown, there are still those that believe the mummified child is an alien. It defies belief, quite simply.

Don Maor said...

The Dimov said:

I shudder to think that, in light of the evidence we have been shown, there are still those that believe the mummified child is an alien. It defies belief, quite simply.

The fact that any other belief defies your own belief is not quite an argument, TheDimov.

Having said that, I hurry to clarify that I think the evidence is overwhelming in favor of the human mummy (for the slides).

cda said...

The reason there were, and still are to some extent, people willing to believe that the creature in the slides is an ET, is that they were all brought up (mainly through exposure to the Roswell affair in the literature and popular TV documentaries) to believe ETs have visited the earth in recent times. To such people, anything looking a bit strange, even if only a photograph, that is not easily resolvable as a normal or slightly abnormal, earth creature must be an alien.

Had we not been fed a constant diet of ET and other Roswell-related stuff for the last 35 years these slides would have been recognised at once for what they are. And there would be no controversy, and no Mexico City presentation.

Let's fact it, everyone the least bit oriented towards the 'Roswell is ET' thesis has been desperately looking for something solid to confirm their ideas. It can come in various ways: actual ET hardware, actual bodies, or genuine documentation. This time it came in the form of not 'actual bodies' but photographs thereof. In the past, others have produced 'documentation' (MJ-12, SOM1-01, etc); still others have produced actual hardware of a kind, or tried to.

So far, it is all totally useless garbage. But we still await the real, genuine thing. And what a (very) long wait it is going to be.

edward gehrman said...

CDA,
You wrote:
"But we still await the real, genuine thing"

"Would we/you know it (the real genuine thing) if we saw it and gave us a big kiss and yelled "here I am!"

What did Betty and Barney experience? They drew images and told true stories
which were believable. Betty passed two polygraphs. Why don't you believe their
story?
Or the many hundreds like it. Most of the folks reading this or working on UFO related research are doing it as a hobby. We're convinced that there's something out there and we'd like to know what it is. We really don't enjoy your condescending attitude.

You might be correct and it will be a "very long wait". I don't agree.
But I don't think anyone will be happy when our visitors pay us a call
and reveal their identity.
Ed

Tom said...

Let this poor child rest in peace already. Those that cling to this hoax. Have they no shame?

KRandle said...

Ed -

Please provide a description of the alien seen by Betty Hill as it appeared in The Interrupted Journey.

Jack Brewer said...

I think cda's comments about literature and TV bear more attention. I've become pretty convinced most people don't understand the related dynamics well enough to adequately grasp the relevance. I also don't think most people are consciously aware when it's happening and realize the implications it carries, but cultural conditioning is very relevant, whether or not it's discussed and understood.

edward gehrman said...

Kevin,
You asked for a description of the alien seen by Betty Hill as it appeared in The Interrupted Journey.
I don't have the book with me but I exchanged emails with Betty many years ago and she told me her abductors looked just like the creature in the "Alien Autopsy".
She and KT Frankovich were friends and KT had seen two creatures while walking her dogs. She also agreed that the creatures looked like the AA. Betty also told Philip Mantle that the AA creature looked like the creatures
who abducted her.
Go to the link I provided and scroll down to see the drawings that are included there.

http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/hill/chronology.htm

"The figures, according to Barney Hill were of human form dressed in shiny black uniforms and black caps with peaks or bills on them (which could be seen when the figures turned their heads). The uniforms were like glossy leather… The figures reminded the observer of the cold precision of German officers; they moved smoothly and efficiently and showed no emotion except for one figure operating a lever who, Mr. Hill claimed, looked over his shoulder and smiled… The 'leader' at the window held a special attraction for the witness and frightened him terribly."

Why did you ask?

Ed


Brian Bell said...

Ed -

In regards to your statement, "We'd like to know" what is behind the UFO phenomenon, as I have said before the answer is highly complex and not as simple as explaining all events as evidence of ET.

The phenomenon is a mix of many things that coalesce.

You want to know the answer so bad that you grasp at pure conjecture, fake documents, hear-say, 3rd and 4th hand testimonies, speculation, rumor, ancient myths and legends, and all manner of nonsense to feed your hunger to know....all the while ignoring factual information and scientific data.

This is why many think people who follow UFO's are lunatics suffering from a mental disorder.

As far as disclosure goes, you already have it. ET's have been a mainstream Hollywood feature for decades not to mention the tens of thousands of Science Fiction books and video games that feature ET.

What more do you want?

KRandle said...

Ed -

The Interrupted Journey, page 298 (hardback) "During this time I become conscious of several things [She is referring to her dream, as all though this account]. First, only one man speaks, in English, with a foreign accent, but very understandably. The others say nothing. I note their physical appearance. Most of the men are my height, although I cannot remember the height of the heels on my shoes. None is as tall as barney, so I would judge them to be 5' to 5'4". Their chests are larger than ours; their noses were larger (longer) than the average size although I have seen people with noses like theirs - like Jimmy Durante's.

"Their complexions were of a gray tone, like a gray paint with a black base; their lips were of a bluish tint. Hair and eyes were very dark, possibly black...

"They were very human in their appearance, not frightening..."

This does not sound like the creature in the faked Alien Autopsy. Sounds like the description of the alien has evolved, not to mention that three dimensional representations created in the 1980's do not match either her physical description or the dummies in the Alien Autopsy.

edward gehrman said...

Kevin,
Betty wrote me that the the creature in the Alien Autopsy looked like her abductors.
She also told Philip and KT that same story. I think Barney's drawings are very close to depicting the AA creatures. The "alien bust" shows a similar creature.

http://www.theparanormalguide.com/blog/the-hill-ufo-abduction-case

Brian,
My information regarding the alien autopsy has been gathered over the last fifteen years, but my major contribution has been the discovery and survey of the "crash site" the cameraman described and gave directions. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can visit yourself.

http://www.thewhyfiles.net/gehrman.htm

KRandle said...

Ed -

My final word on this. The Alien Autopsy is an admitted hoax. I provided you with Betty Hill's description of the aliens made to Benjamin Simon and provided to John Fuller in The Interrupted Journey. You ignore this important information at your own peril.

Brian Bell said...

Ed -

As Kevin has correctly pointed out the aliens depicted, drawn, described, and sculpted as found on the website you provided:

http://www.theparanormalguide.com/blog/the-hill-ufo-abduction-case

Bear absolutely no relationship to the ones Betty described in "The Interrupted Journey". How do you rationalize this? Clearly Betty was influenced over time to convey something unlike what the book described - in fact so unlike that by age 84 Betty had been influenced to morph her original alien depictions into something much closer to today's modern Greys, not to mention Sci-Fi characters depicted in The Twilight Zone and other Hollywood media.

Isn't it more plausible that during the Civil Rights Movement an interracial couple decided to concoct a story to draw attention to themselves as means to support, in some odd way, the common bond between blacks and whites and draw attention away from racial tension?

Larry Holcombe said...

I'm at a loss for words to see that race is now being brought into the conversation.

edward gehrman said...

Kevin,
For whatever reason, she changed her mind and in a letter to
Philip Mantle, Feb 3, 2000, she writes that she and Barney referred to their captors as "UFO-people" and not weird or aliens. They were all men; they didn't notice any feminine appearances and they were all individuals and all were different in appearance. Their eyes were larger and noses smaller, no hair, or protruding part of their ears... : "The UFO people we saw had a closer resemblance to this (alien autopsy)film than any other picture"
Why would she say this if it weren't true. Some had big noses and other had small ones, just like here with most of them being shown as small-nosed. How did Ray Santilli, fool so many people into somehow believing that he could create a hoax I've known him for twenty years, in Qct. That's when I wrote my first AA article and sent it to Ray and we've been in contact ever since. I know he could never pull off a hoax like this. There isn't any evidence that he did.
I asked John Humphries, who get's credit for making the fake creature from both Ray and Spyros about where he got his ideas and he said from the old footage of the creature that Ray supplied.
I think you should have done a background check on Spyros before you put his face on the front of your blog.
What do you mean:"at your own peril"?
Ed








KRandle said...

Larry -

I was about to say the same thing. I would add that if you were a racially mixed couple in the early 1960s the very last thing you would want to do would be to call attention to yourselves by claiming to have been abducted by aliens. I had heard this ridiculous theory years ago and thought it would be rejected because it was so dumb.

Steve Sawyer said...

"Isn't it more plausible that during the Civil Rights Movement an interracial couple decided to concoct a story to draw attention to themselves as means to support, in some odd way, the common bond between blacks and whites and draw attention away from racial tension?"

Well, while Betty and Barney were active in their local NAACP chapter, I frankly doubt what you suggest is likely, although "more plausible" than the kind of "alien abduction" scenario they came to believe.

I suspect their experience, whatever its unknown origin and nature, was probably not deliberately concocted for the kind of purpose you posit, as to have done so would have backfired and drawn negative attention, and there's no indication I'm aware of that they ever tried to express or exploit their experience for the reasons you surmise.

The essential problem with the Hill's somewhat differing accounts of their recalled experience is that it was almost entirely anecdotal. The minimal "physical artifacts" of their alleged encounter (torn, soiled dress, scraped shoe tips, supposedly anomalous magnetic spots on their car's trunk lid, etc.) could also "more plausibly" be explained via more mundane or ex post facto actions.

Over time, it has been suggested by some that perhaps they had some bizarre kind of shared "folie à deux" (or à imposée, à simultanée) or temporary psychotic break invoked by some trigger related to stress or sleep deprivation, or that maybe they were "abducted" and manipulated possibly as part of some kind of MK ULTRA experiment. The use of regressive hypnosis, by Dr. Benjamin Simon in this case, is also quite problematical.

But again, these too are just little more than "contra" speculations and conjecture.

We simply do not know what actually occurred, due to lack of sufficient evidence, and the various theories of what different people have concluded in lieu of facts may say more about the beliefs or psychological orientation of the individuals offering such opinions than any confirmable actuality.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_and_Betty_Hill

And: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folie_%C3%A0_deux

It's quite interesting, as Kevin points out, the major differences in how and what Betty Hill initially described as the morphology of the "aliens" she recalled encountering and how she characterized their appearance much later as the stereotypical kind of "greys" of more modern times, starting with Streiber's "Communion" book. Her early descriptions obviously conflict with and contradict her later statements, and that really is a serious problem in terms of her credibility.

The real point here is that, in relation to the topic of this blog post, and like the interpretation of what the "Roswell slides" apparently were perceived as by Carey, Schmitt, and Bragalia, of an alien body, the same kind of human psychological factors of prior beliefs, public claims, cultural influences, long-term personal vested interests, and the subsequent, basic and often distorted "will to believe" can often lead to misinterpretation and subtle confabulation in certain misleading circumstances and particularly where a critical lack of empirical objectivity results in selective and mistaken "cherry-picking" and confirmation bias that can lead to false conclusions perhaps more than anything else.

A real dilemma and quandary related to our perceptual and intellectual filters and inherent anthropocentric orientation, and somewhat related to what Vallee has referred to as the "assumption of mediocrity" based on what in philosophy is termed the "principle of mediocrity."

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediocrity_principle

And: http://www.jacquesvallee.net/bookdocs/Vallee-Davis-model.pdf

Larry Holcombe said...

Kevin:

Exactly! What more can you say, it's simply "dumb."

Brian Bell said...

Larry:

Not certain why you are so offended or surprised that "race" as you call it is brought into it. The investigation in the 1960's proposed that their interracial marriage caused "stress" which created in their minds to either hoax the event or that it provoked mental delusion. That concept was never mine - no matter how "dumb" you and others think it might be. I'm convinced Larry that despite having written a book on UFOs you know absolutely nothing about older cases such as this as evidenced by your odd reaction to facts documented decades ago. Why is that?

Larry Holcombe said...

Brian:

You stated: "I'm convinced Larry that despite having written a book on UFOs you know absolutely nothing about older cases such as this as evidenced by your odd reaction to facts documented decades ago. Why is that?"

As a general rule I don't respond to comments such as yours, in this case I will.

If you had read my book, which obviously you have not, you would know that I go back as far as the Cape Girardeau incident, the Los Angles Air Raid, Roswell in depth, the farmington Armada, the Mantel case, the Washington-Merry-Go-Round and so on. I have stated that this was the golden years of flying saucers or UFOs. I have spent more hours that I care to remember in presidential archives, at my own expense, have you?

I happen to be personal friends with, Kathleen Marden, the niece of Betty Hill through our work in UFOlogy, and have discussed this case in depth with her. She was extremely close to Betty all her life and later with Barney. My wife and I have dined with Kathy and I'm sure Kathy would be extremely angry at you bringing the issue of race into her aunt's memory.

Kevin, who has done far more research than I have, found your comment out of line, as I do. You asked a pompous question without knowing anything about me, now you have your answer.

Brian Bell said...

@ Larry

Thanks for your explanation. Again I will state the investigations and analysis of the Hill case in the mid 1960's offered aspects of an interracial marriage as a possible explanation or contributing factor. I don't care who it offends because that is documented fact not something I made up as a modern day racial slur. If you want to selectively edit parts of individual historical cases because they offend you that's your business - to me that is tantamount to historical revisionism for PC sake. So be it. We already know that ET'ers edit out whatever they don't like about cases anyway...what's one more detail taken out, right?

Zak McKracken said...

Mr . Randle thanks!!If you want you can´t delete those postings

cda said...

Racial and religious matters are a perfectly legitimate topic when discussing UFO sightings & abductions, and their relevance. For example why do we hear of so few sightings and abductions from the far east (China, India, Pakistan, etc.) and relatively few from parts of Africa and the middle east? Is it just that news of them does not reach western media, or is there another reason?

I wholly accept that Kevin may not want to go down this line, but maybe Brian Bell is right and it DOES have some relevance to the Hill case. I am not saying one way or the other and I do not pretent to know the answer.

Jack Brewer said...

There are other reasons in addition to those already stated as to why interracial relationships in mid 20th century America are potentially relevant to reported alien abductions and/or events in which the witnesses became extremely confused. In their 2010 article 'Cries From the Past: Torture's Ugly Echoes', writer/researchers Hank Albarelli and Dr. Jeffrey Kaye explored such circumstances as Operation Paperclip and Project Artichoke.

"That the CIA's initial mind control activities show a close kinship with many prominent characters within the racist and anti-immigration eugenics movement is no coincidence," they wrote.

'Cries From the Past' cited now declassified documents in establishing that Project Artichoke conducted over 250 specialized assignments throughout Europe and Asia alone. Operations were also carried out on American soil, in which objectives included "contacting" certain aliens, or immigrants, by infiltrating targeted groups and setting up "sympathetic fake left-wing organizations" to attract members of demographics of interest. Attempts were made to indoctrinate individuals as "hypnotically controlled agents."

To fail to take such circumstances into account while considering potential explanations for events surrounding the Hills loses context of the era, in my opinion. I personally think it most likely the Hills were simply confused during their infamous journey and the legend snowballed, but if fantastic explanations are going to be entertained, activities of the intel community of the era deserve a spot at the table.

Many people think such possibilities are far fetched and extreme, and they are entitled to do so if they choose. I would be inclined, however, to ask they offer the same skepticism to stories of aliens who set up road blocks and conduct pregnancy tests on females involved in interracial relationships, which have no supporting documents for their existence and precedence. I'd also invite further consideration of the reason such a story would seem more likely than human-instigated events confused as alien abduction: cultural conditioning (TV, movies, magazines, etc.).

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

Interesting thread and some great points made.

I've never much thought about this before, but reports I've read on "alien abduction" does seem to suggest that it's something much more heavily experienced by white Americans.

Does anyone know if there has been any sort of study into the racial statistical breakdown of reported US abductions?

Secondly, my thoughts on Betty Hill. She wouldn't be the first person to maybe not be as mentally agile in the "nineties" and "noughties" as she was 1961. This might explain why she made more and more eccentric statements as she got older...and why she couldn't see that her description of her abductors were so much different than what she had stated (in black and white) in "Interupted Journey"

Brian Bell said...

And also my point about the Hill's racial differences is not that they came from different races or that it was an interracial relationship. Those aspects don't matter to me.

What does matter is the context in which the events surrounding the witness' are adequately considered.

The point being that if we fail to take into account social concerns, cultural upbringing, health status, events taking place at the time of the experience, societal norms, religious beliefs, etc. surrounding any case then we are not assessing correctly all the factors that MAY have influenced what the witness is claiming.

KRandle said...

Brian -

While the racial identity of the Hills is an important factor and should be noted (though pictures of the couple seem to give that away), the theory "Isn't it more plausible that during the Civil Rights Movement an interracial couple decided to concoct a story to draw attention to themselves as means to support, in some odd way, the common bond between blacks and whites and draw attention away from racial tension?" is the problem. While you can say, "Well, it's more plausible than an abduction," that doesn't make it right or credible. This is the problem that I have with your post, not to mention that, as usual, you have taken the topic far off into the weeds.

Terry the Censor said...

@Brian Bell and Steve Sawyer
> by age 84 Betty had been influenced to morph her original alien depictions into something much closer to today's modern Greys
> how she characterized their appearance much later as the stereotypical kind of "greys"

No.

Betty's account did change from time to time, but I have yet to see her identify the aliens as greys. In fact, several times she explicitly denies this. She called greys "movie aliens."

Betty in Fortean Times 110, May 1998: "But the UFO people well, you've seen the pictures. They don't look like any of Budd Hopkins' bug-eyed monsters."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/weberman/betty.html

During an interview in 1999, Betty is asked about the grays. Betty responds: "No, no, no. They were a form of human being." She describes them. The interviewer asks, nothing like the classic grays? Betty: "I’ve never seen those. I don’t know what they’re talking about." (This exchanges starts shortly after the five-minute mark.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g93YoWsHjU

Betty in UFO magazine, V 17, No 5, Oct-Nov 2002: "The creatures we saw that night actually looked not that much different from regular people. If you were to see one of them walking down the street, you wouldn't even stop and turn around because they didn't look anything like movie aliens."

If anyone can find Betty saying anything different, please contact me (I am on Twitter). I don't want your interpretation, I want her actual words.

Terry the Censor said...

I should add:

> Betty wrote me that the the creature in the Alien Autopsy looked like her abductors.

Ed, if you have emails or letters from Betty Hill making this unlikely claim, post them online, or give copies to a blogger who will. Your personal testimony is absolutely worthless, seeing as you steadfastly use a hoax (the AA film) to support your verkakte theory.