Monday, November 16, 2015

The Ramey Pictures

I hadn't realized that the pictures of Ramey would become so important and there would be a few who thought you can't understand this without seeing the "missing" Ramey picture. There has been an offer to share this picture with others, though it seems that permission must be obtained from another, I found this which came out of the trip to the University of Texas at Arlington in April. It certainly won't appease everyone, but at least you all can have a look at the missing Ramey photo that apparently only appeared in the newspaper and that the negative is not available.


The Ramey/Dubose pictures are obviously those of Ramey and Dubose with Dubose cropped out. The missing Ramey is from the newspaper.

So now all four pictures taken of Ramey are available here. I will note, for those interested, that the copyright is the University of Texas - Arlington Special Collections, and this particular piece is a composite that is not available online. Further copyright belongs to David Rudiak who made the composite.

24 comments:

Don Maor said...

It might be significant that of four photos of Ramey with the memo, in three of them Ramey seems to be hiding the written text from the camera. Just a little slip, and Ramey has dozens of people in the future, trying to read his memo, which says "the victims of the wreck". Fascinating.

Jeanne Ruppert said...

Kevin, thank you for posting these four photos. Do you also have a copy of the photo of Newton you could post? Thanks.

Unknown said...

Kevin-

I seem to be unable to find your honest repudiation of the incompetent "Roswell Research" of your BFFs "Don Schmitt" and Carey....

Do you REALLY want your research legacy to prop these idiots up???

TheDimov said...

Michael Lemurian you are a genuinely disturbing human being. What is wrong with you? You'll do all this just to draw attention to yourself, what are you, 10 years old?

Steve Sawyer said...

Mu can't even spell my name right. Such "genius"!

Oh, and "Unknown" -- aren't you Timothy Green Beckley? "Mr. UFO"?

"I seem to be unable to find your honest repudiation of the incompetent "Roswell Research" of your BFFs "Don Schmitt" and Carey...."

Try reading KR's blog from, uh, May 6th onward. Edumacate yerself. If you can. ;-)

cda said...

Don Maor:

Ramey must have decided to have a quick look at the contents of the memo before the 4th photo was taken. Nothing surprising or sinister about it. Unless you want to make it so, of course.

Brian Bell said...

Don would have us believe that in four of the photographs Ramey is deliberately trying to hide the text from the camera.

But to be honest, most people hold a piece of paper with text on it so that it faces them and that doesn't mean they're trying to hide something. To me, it just looks like he's holding a piece of paper. Nothing special about that.

Besides, if Ramey is trying to hide something intentionally, why the heck did he bring that super secret memo to the photo opportunity anyway?

To believe Ramey is deliberately trying to hide something on a sheet of paper that he is holding requires all conspiracy theorists to accept the fact that he really is the drooling idiot that David suggests, or he's just insanely stupid and forgetful.
Never mind the fact that as a druling idiot he masterminded the greatest cosmic cover-up of all history!

cda said...

Brian:

I advocated long ago that if that scrap of paper in Ramey's hand revealed the great untold super-secret that DR, Kevin and many others say it does, what on earth was Ramey doing with it in his hand in front of the camera?

However, DR replies that Ramey could possibly have been careless over its secret contents (!) and usually cites an example of something similar happening in the past.

In other words, however much you try and prove it is NOT the all-important hush hush document containing the great unmentionable (to the public) news, there is always some ET proponent ready to offer a counter argument. Once again, it is heads the ET guys win, tails the skeptics lose.

Meanwhile real scientists and astronomers ignore it and get on with more important matters. And the USAF likewise briefly examined it then decided it was useless to try and decipher it.

But still the hunt for the elusive pot of gold continues.

Daniel Hurd said...

Brian, Don, and others,

If Ramey is attempting to hide the memo, why have it out at all? If it was a highly classified memo, why not tuck it away safely into a desk drawer?

Does that mean it isn't a classified memo? No. It still could be, but I think we are reaching.

TheDimov said...

Its so easy to pick over things in hindsight. The whole argument to me about how Ramey wouldn't hold a super secret document in front of camera's of course makes logical sense but just have a look at his expression, as well as Marcel's; there is to me an expression bewilderment and uncertainty - just as would be the case if you've just heard there was a flying saucer crashed just outside your backyard, and I don't think the coolest of heads wouldn't get just a bit flustered when having to be responsible with how the hell to deal with it all. If there was ever a time and situation where you would do something like hold a Top Secret memo in front of a camera good God this would be a situation to do it in, would it not? And if not, when then would a good time for there to be? Ramey is just human after all.

cda said...

Ramey just human after all? Maybe, but I wonder.
Five years later this same man sat at the famous Washington DC press conference and said precisely zilch about the 'great secret' he had supposedly known since 1947. And of course he took this secret to his grave, so it is claimed. Think of the great dis-service he did to the scientific world. Just human?

Nitram Ang said...

CDA unhelpfully wrote:

"I advocated long ago that if that scrap of paper in Ramey's hand revealed the great untold super-secret that DR, Kevin and many others say it does, what on earth was Ramey doing with it in his hand in front of the camera?"

This statement is not entirely accurate. Kevin for example has never claimed that this "scrap of paper" is the great reveal. He, also, has expressed surprise that Ramey allowed himself to be photographed holding it so that at least some of it could be viewed.

But anyway we have been over this before and I'll quote Lance (slightly out of context) about your sort of posts:

CDA - you may think you mean well, but your comments generally only create unnecessary noise. If you wish to assist with the investigation you might like to make some positive suggestions as to what further work could be done to perhaps decipher what is contained on that "scrap of paper".

You clearly have a lot of free time on your hands (like someone else who also creates a lot of "noise") so if you have anything "constructive" to add then please let us know.

David Rudiak said...

This is a graphic I made to demonstrate that Ramey was holding the message in all four known photos of him. In three of photos, only the back of the paper can be seen.

andycher said...

Suppose the paper said that aliens from space had crash landed in Roswell. What would that prove?

A

David Rudiak said...

Yes, there are indeed other examples of colossal security screw-ups by those handling documents or highly classified information who should have known better. These examples include having highly classified documents photographed by the press because those handling them were simply careless.

1) 1965: Pres. Johnson's national security adviser McGeorge Bundy, being interviewed in the White House by the NY Times, had a top secret document about the Viet Nam War tucked under his arm, face out, no cover sheet, with a top-secret code name in plain sight, which was photographed. This was published on the cover of the Sunday NYT magazine (thus larger than normal), with the code name easily readable even in newsprint. This was immediately noticed by the CIA or FBI, who had the Times turn over the negative the next day. All documents with that code name had to be redone at considerable expense with a new code name. Another photo of Bundy's desk covered with papers was also in the story, no doubt some of them also classified and sensitive and maybe even readable, but nothing seems to have been done about that.

2) 2009: UK's head of counter-terrorism Bob Quick was forced to resign after he allowed a Secret document about a terrorist raid to be photographed:

www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/09/bob-quick-terror-raids-leak

Quick was going to a briefing at Whitehall and as he left his car had the document tucked under his arm, face out, with no cover sheet, completely readable. A photojournalist with a telephoto snapped a picture and it was all over the Internet within a few hours.

I keep getting told that classified documents like these would ALWAYS have a cover sheet and those trained in dealing with classified material would never ever allow them to be exposed in public like this. Well, apparently not. Doesn't take into account that human beings can slip up on occasion.

In the case of Ramey's photo, back to camera in three of four photos. In one, it is actually scrunched up in his hand, no attempt on his part to have it facing any particular way. In the Ramey memo photo, text side was still facing him, but he momentarily had it laying flat, perhaps his guard down and his wrist relaxing with him concentrating on smiling for the camera. (The previous photo is called the "grim" Ramey/Dubose because neither man looks particularly happy. The "smiling" Ramey/Dubose photo was much more widely published.)

Notice Ramey also shifted his kneeling position from the "grim" R/D photo, dropping his left knee. His memo-holding left arm perched on the knee drops as well, dropping his resting arm, hand, and memo to a lower position, also rotating his resting lower arm and hand outward, thus exposing the front side.

Because JB Johnson was standing up with Ramey kneeling and the memo near the ground and rotated partially outward, the camera managed to catch an angle on the front-side. Momentary screw-up, nothing more. No damage done at the time, probably never noticed, because the photo in newsprint showed absolutely nothing that could be read (unlike the McGeorge Bundy screw-up).

cda said...

Nitram:

Alas, I have no "positive suggestions as to what further work could be done to perhaps decipher what is contained on that scrap of paper".

However, I will say one thing. In the ROSWELL INCIDENT book, Bill Moore offers the idea that this scrap of paper contains the news release from Ramey's office about the debris, and is more or less what he said in his radio broadcast (except that no transcript of this broadcast is available to check this), and was thus destroyed soon afterwards. In other words it was not top secret at all. I am certainly not a fan of Moore, or Friedman, and never have been. But in this case I do believe he has got it right and that certain ET believers, on this blog and elsewhere, have got it wrong.

The document is NOT secret in any way, and contains nothing of value to the search for intelligent ET life. Which is why the scientific world ignores it.

Please tell us of your own positive contribution to this great decipherment, beyond what has already been done. I am sure you are still hoping to disprove the skeptics.

David Rudiak said...

Andycher wrote:
"Suppose the paper said that aliens from space had crash landed in Roswell. What would that prove?"

Just a wild guess, but maybe that aliens from space had crash landed in Roswell?

KRandle said...

All -

Let's not go down this accidental reveal of classified information again. The point has been made that it has happened in the past and will undoubtedly happen again. Those who deal with highly classified material should know better but sometimes they screw up. We all understand that.

But I will point out and probably shouldn't that the examples cited here are from high ranking government civilians as opposed to military officers. Though I know of one case in which a senior officer thought that some of the rules for dealing with classified material didn't really apply to him (this was in a training environment so the compromise was of material that was only simulated classified).

Nitram Ang said...

Hi David

You must have missed the first line of Kevin's previous post to yours:

"Let's not go down this accidental reveal of classified information again."

Regards
Nitram.

PS Enjoyed your response to Andycher - unbelievable what some of my fellow skeptics write on this blog...

cda said...

DR:

Nobody is saying Ramey could NEVER hold a top secret document open to the press. What we are saying is that the fact that he did so is a very strong pointer that the said document was not top secret (or even secret). It is a balance of probabilities in the end.

If you are desperately hoping this document reveals the truth about an ET visit to earth in 1947, I can point to the fact that in the 7 decades since then not one single piece of hardware, one ET body or one single document has ever been unearthed since then to provide evidence of it. NOT ONE. You will of course fall back on that old excuse that it is all stashed away in secret vaults. It is the standard 'cop out'.

Thus I claim that the chance of you being right about the Ramey memo are infinitely small, though I agree they are not zero.

After all this time, it is up to YOU to prove your claim to science. I claim that you never will. Now go and prove me wrong if you can.

Nitram Ang said...

CDA wrote:

"Alas, I have no positive suggestions as to what further work could be done to perhaps decipher what is contained on that scrap of paper."

Thank you for your honesty - unless you do come up with some positive suggestion in the future then please feel free to remain silent.

"However, I will say one thing. In the ROSWELL INCIDENT book, Bill Moore offers the idea that this scrap of paper contains the news release from Ramey's office about the debris, and is more or less what he said in his radio broadcast (except that no transcript of this broadcast is available to check this), and was thus destroyed soon afterwards. In other words it was not top secret at all. I am certainly not a fan of Moore, or Friedman, and never have been. But in this case I do believe he has got it right and that certain ET believers, on this blog and elsewhere, have got it wrong."

I agree with you CDA that in all likelihood KR & DR have got it wrong and that Roswell 1947 did not involve the crash of an ET craft. But lets not go on and on (and on!)about this.
Regardless, the Ramey memo is still part of the puzzle if you like and if DR's read is correct - then this really does require some sort of explanation.

"Please tell us of your own positive contribution to this great decipherment, beyond what has already been done. I am sure you are still hoping to disprove the skeptics."

CDA - this is NOT a competition or a debate. Unless you have something helpful to suggest then kindly remain silent.

Regards
Nitram

David Rudiak said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Rudiak said...

On a side note, just in case there was something on the backside of the Ramey message, I had blown up the one surviving negative showing the backside (the one with Ramey clenching the memo in his hand instead of letting it drape down). I couldn't find anything there. I had hoped maybe for something handwritten or a stamp, but nothing in this restricted view of the backside.

Anybody anxious to see higher res pictures of these photos, prints from the surviving negatives have ALWAYS been available for a small fee from the University of Texas at Arlington Special Collections dept. I paid for these prints years ago out of my own pocket; there is nothing stopping any of you.

There is nothing we are hiding here, because we don't control the negatives--they do. I suppose you can even ask for digital copies of whatever from our May expedition, ALL of which was shared with UTA Special Collections as part of our agreement. If they choose to share (maybe for another fee and a signed nondisclosure statement--I don't know), then that solves any potential copyright infringement problems.

These negatives are SMALL money-makers for UTA, selling prints to individuals, but also commercial interests, such as publishers and documentary film-makers, to whom they charge more for commercial use rights.

Jeanne Ruppert said...


David Rudiak wrote:

"Anybody anxious to see higher res pictures of these photos, prints from the surviving negatives have ALWAYS been available for a small fee from the University of Texas at Arlington Special Collections dept. I paid for these prints years ago out of my own pocket; there is nothing stopping any of you."

True enough, we could all purchase our own copies, but how would that facilitate a public discussion such as this one in which what we want to evaluate collectively are details visible to us all collectively?


“"There is nothing we are hiding here, because we don't control the negatives--they do."

?? I have not seen anyone here suggesting that you and whoever you include in "we" is holding these photos back from public distribution over the internet. I think what some of us would like to know is what person or entity holds the copyright and has restricted public distribution of the photographs to a period of 75 years in the first place.

Moreover, the copyright holder evidently permitted small reproductions of the photos by publishers of books and journals. But the copyright holder likely could not have anticipated that decades later the internet would provide a means by which enlargements of the photos could be broadly shared. Were the copyright restrictions altered at the point when it became clear that publishers of books and magazines would not be the only parties requesting permission to reproduce the photos, and that the photos could be shared in larger formats and increased detail via the internet?

You have said that the people in charge of the archive do not know the ‘legal status’ of the photographs. I for one wish that someone with experience with the archivists would ask them to find out what that status is and how it might have been changed in the internet age. Another way to find out the answer to that question would be to write to the university attorneys asking them to disclose that information.