The Atacama Desert Alien

Some time back, when all this broke about the Atacama Desert skeleton, I learned that some seven percent of the DNA had not been identified. The other 93% was human. I didn’t want to draw a conclusion then, about this, because, well, all the evidence wasn’t

Dr. Steven Greer
Photo copyright by
Kevin Randle

in. Oh, it was fairly conclusive, but I thought, since additional testing is being scheduled, we could wait until all that testing was done.

Yes, I have seen most of Dr. Steven Greer’s documentary, Sirius, but I walked out somewhat early, when it began to delve into the MJ-12 hoax, suggesting that MJ-12 was a real committee. MJ-12 was hiding the proof that aliens were real and had crashed one of their craft near Roswell. Don’t forget, that same document claimed another crash near the Texas – Mexico border was also real but it turned out to be a hoax. I have reviewed that information on numerous occasions on this blog.

Now, it seems that we have the final word about the Atacama Desert being, and it doesn’t suggest alien. A referred scientific paper just published answers the questions about the tiny being. You can read it here:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879981718300548?via%3Dihub

The abstract for the paper tells us about the topic and some of the information to be revealed. It said:

Here we evaluate Bhattacharya et al.’s (2018) recent paper “Whole-genome sequencing of Atacama skeleton shows novel mutations linked with dysplasia” published in Genome Research. In this short report, we examine the hypothesis that the so-called “Atacama skeleton” has skeletal abnormalities indicative of dysplasia, critique the validity of the interpretations of disease based on genomic analyses, and comment on the ethics of research on this partially mummified human foetus. The current paper acts as a case study of the importance of using an anthropological approach for aDNA research on human remains. A critical evaluation of the ethically controversial paper by Bhattacharya et al. highlights how an understanding of skeletal biological processes, including normal and abnormal growth and development, taphonomic processes, environmental context, and close attention to ethical issues of dealing with human remains, is vital to scientific interpretations. To this end, close collaboration with palaeopathologists and local archaeologists through appropriate peer-reviewed journals will add to the rigour of scientific interpretation and circumvent misinterpretation.

There are a series of conclusions about the study and what they found during their research. I’m not going to publish them all here because you can read that for yourself. I will note, however:

Close collaboration with archaeologists and/or palaeopathologists is a vital part of informed scientific research on human remains from the past. A nuanced understanding of skeletal biological processes and environmental context is essential for accurate scientific interpretation and for acting as a check on the ethics and legality of such research. Unfortunately, there was no scientific rationale to undertake genomic analyses of Ata because the skeleton is normal, the identified genetic mutations are possibly coincidental, and none of them are known to be strongly associated with skeletal dysplasias that would affect the phenotype at this young age. We caution DNA researchers about getting involved in cases that lack clear context and legality, or where the remains have resided in private collections. In the case of Ata, costly and time-consuming scientific testing using whole genome techniques was unnecessary and unethical.

I, of course, would hope that this would close the book on this controversy, but nothing in the UFO field ever goes away. Remember the Alien Autopsy? There are those who believe that some of it, or

Creation of the alien for the autopsy.

all of it, is real. Doesn’t matter that the men who created the hoax have admitted it. Doesn’t matter that we have photographs of them putting the alien together. Doesn’t matter that we have drawings of what they were going to do. There are people who will never let go.

So, I’m sure it well be the same here. No matter what the scientific research says, no matter the qualifications of those conducting the research have, the refrain will always be, “Government conspiracy to hide the truth.” This matter should be closed now, but we all know what will happen. The truth will be buried under a pile of crap because “I want to believe.”

Why I'm Beginning to Dislike UFOlogy - Part One

This might be the beginning a new series to be published periodically when I discover that something nearly everyone agrees is a hoax, misidentification or misinterpretation of some natural phenomenon that is again promoted as something real. It seems to me that every few years, cases and reports that we thought had been solved to almost everyone’s satisfaction resurfaces with some sort of new life. Or, those few who cling to these ridiculous cases or reports reappear stating that we need to look at them again. They never present new information or provide any reason to reevaluate these cases but they are in their pitching for their renewed status.

The alien from the Autopsy.

The latest of these is the nonsensical Alien Autopsy that was unleashed on the world more than two decades ago. Though it generated a great deal of interest and made millions of dollars, it is an admitted hoax. The men responsible for creating the alien and the film have explained how they did it. There are photographs showing the evolution of the alien and concept drawings of it… and yet, there is a die-hard core (or could we say corps) of believers who simply will not accept that this is a hoax.

Normally, I would rewrite a press release rather than just cut and paste, but I think, given the credibility of the writer of this press release and his status in the investigation of the alien autopsy (and because today is Sunday and I want to watch a movie on cable), I’m going to let Philip Mantle explain what he knows. In his press release, he wrote (I will note that I did edit it slightly but left his British spellings intact):

For a number of days now a number of us have been have a debate on the alien autopsy analysis page (on Facebook) run by Colin Woolford. He made claims that Spyros Melaris (the man who led the team that faked the alien autopsy film) has 'handlers' and is being paid cheques, presumably by these handlers, to make up the story that he faked the alien autopsy film. Colin Woolford has also stated as a fact that the intelligence agencies (MIBS) are involved and it's all one big cover-up to hide the truth. That 'truth' according to Woolford is that the alien autopsy film is in fact real. For a couple of days now I have respectfully asked Woolford to show me his evidence that Spyros Melaris does indeed have 'handlers', that MIB etc. are involved. Woolford has wriggled and wriggled and continually kept trying to avoid answering my request by trying to change the subject. It simply did not work. You will not be surprised that Woolford was unable to provide any such evidence. I HAVE WON A MAJOR VICTORY HERE. To Spyros Melaris and all the others involved you can rest assured that Colin Woolford has nothing to offer and should simply be ignored. For those want the facts about my investigation into the alien autopsy film hoax you can of course find it in my book:

ROSWELL ALIEN AUTOPSY.

The facts of course, as fully presented in my book, prove that the alien autopsy film is a hoax beyond any reasonable doubt.

You can also look at his blog and website here, if you so desire:

Blog: http://flyingdiskpress.blogspot.co.uk/
Web site: https://www.clothesencounters.co.uk/

At this point I probably should also mention that I covered the tale at length in Aliens Mysteries, Conspiracies and Cover-ups, published by Visible Ink and, of course, available on Amazon in hard copy and as an ebook. There are pictures to underscore the conclusion of hoax. Naturally, Philip was a help in assembling the photographic evidence. Don Ecker was also very helpful in refuting some of the data by the alleged cameraman.

For those interested in my book, here is the link to Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Alien-Mysteries-Conspiracies-Cover-Ups-Randle-ebook/dp/B00C0JD11Y/ref=sr_1_11?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1520197354&sr=1-11&keywords=kevin+randle

Tom DeLonge and Alien Writing

Isaac Koi alerted many of us to an interview that Joe Rogan had with Tom DeLonge about DeLonge’s announcement about his UFO research. For those of us who have been around for more than ten minutes, some of the things that DeLonge believes are quite disturbing. You can watch the whole interview here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n_3mnJfHzY

Koi pointed out some of the trouble with this interview and I would be remiss if I hadn’t checked just to be sure, though Koi is reliable and careful. He noted, for example, that at the one hour, two minute and forty-two second point in the interview, DeLong begins to talk about Atlantis and how some of the survivors, a small number of them, escaped. These people had been directing… maybe influencing, human development.

But then he slips off the rails and talks about Greek writing found on the Roswell wreckage. They, Rogan and DeLonge, say you can look it up online. Just type in Roswell Wreckage and you’ll see Greek writing on the I-Beam. The photo they bring up at that point is a shot of the I-Beam (actually more of an H-Beam) as shown in

Jesse Marcel, Jr. and the mock up
of his I-Beam. Photo copyright by
Kevin Randle

the old alien autopsy video which allegedly showed some of the Roswell wreckage. That whole thing is an admitted hoax.

I did type Roswell Wreckage into Google and didn’t get to the alien autopsy footage immediately. I first found the symbols as described by Jesse Marcel, Jr., with an illustration of what he had seen, which, by the way, looks nothing like Greek writing. You can see that here:

http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna_jones1/roswell_hieroglyphs.html

I did, eventually, get to another URL that showed footage from the alien autopsy, but this isn’t what DeLonge had talked about. You can see that here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce98itRdOg

I finally just typed Roswell Symbols into my search engine and came up with a site that had all sorts of pictures of all sorts of symbols that related to Roswell. You can see that here:

https://www.google.com/search?q=roswell+symbols&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIoMjg5JjXAhWIOCYKHdciDKMQ7AkIMw&biw=1706&bih=816

The actual link that they found, which seems to be the one shown on Rogan’s YouTube video of the program can be found here:

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftrowbridgeplanetearth.com%2FALI%2Fgraphics%2FIBeam.gif&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftrowbridgeplanetearth.c

And to really complicate all of this, the main photo in that sequence actually links to another site which doesn’t seem to agree with the alleged translations given by Rogan and DeLonge. You can see it here:

http://trowbridgeplanetearth.com/ALI/ROS/Wreck.html

To make it worse, if possible, the symbols on the H-Beam are from the alien autopsy and were created by Spyros Melaris as part of the alien autopsy hoax. The point, however, is that the image shown by Rogan and DeLonge were clearly part of the long-discredited alien autopsy. That doesn’t bode well for the quality of the research that has been conducted by DeLonge and his fellows.

I was going to end it at this point, but then remembered their discussion of the discovery of Pluto. Fortunately for them, they had access to the Internet which provided the information they didn’t have. They then suggest that the Sumerians knew about Pluto. They find a picture that seems to show the sun surrounded by a number of circles they call planets and use this to prove that the Sumerians knew about Pluto long before we, in the modern world, knew.

You can read the whole article about the artifact so that you can put it all into some sort of context here:

https://subharanjangupta.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/case-for-nibiru-the-sumerian-angle/

The sun symbol is between the two standing
figures with the circles surrounding it.

As you’ll see, there is nothing to suggest that the small circles that surround the alleged sun were the planets of the Solar System. Those names shown by Rogan were obviously added later, much later, and include not only the planets that were visible to the unaided eye, but those dwarf planets that have been discovered in the last decade or so. This way everything is labeled, but it is not evidence that the Sumerians knew, not only of Pluto, but several of the other dwarf planets. It’s all wild speculation that looks and sounds good until you take the time to look at the evidence.

Here's the real point. We have an opportunity to listen to Tom DeLonge talk about what he knows about alien visitation, ancient history and UFOs. What we see is that he has not subjected this to any critical thought but rather talks of inside sources who know all this and who have shared it with him but he fails to identify those sources. Even a cursory search of various websites seems to indicate that little of this is true, and if this is the direction of his research and his new organization are taking, then there is little hope that it will accomplish anything except make money for a few people involved in it.

Meier Explains the Alien Autopsy

There are those who read my blog who say that they really don’t want to hear any more about Billy Meier and his alleged contacts with alien beings. There are others who say that arguing with true believers is a waste of time because no matter what evidence is presented, it will never be enough to show them the errors in their true beliefs. But sometimes I just have to poke the stick into the Hornet’s Nest (capitalized as a small tribute to the 116^th AHC) to see what flies out.

The latest evidence that Meier might not be the sage some say that he is, revolves around the Ray Santilli alien autopsy hoax. According to the information, “In the 253rd Contact from 1995 and in the 256th Contact from 1996, Pleiadians, Florena and Ptaah claimed that in regards to the famous Santilli alien film, it was not about the alien, but the figure of a 16 year-old girl having been abused to make the autopsy film. According to them the girl is supposed to suffer from the strange illness ‘proteria,’ and this illness has nothing to do with the illness more widely known as ‘progeria.’”

You can find this prediction on a number of websites. Two of them are:

http://www.exopolitika.cz/the-analysis-why-billy-meiers-pleiadians-lie-and-disinform/1516

and

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/meier/esp_meier10.htm

Here’s the trouble with this. The alien autopsy is a hoax and those who were involved in it have confessed, repeatedly to that hoax, explaining how it was done. I

John Humphreys works on the alien. Photo copyright
by Philip Mantle

have reported on this in this blog and in the book, Alien Mysteries, Conspiracies and Cover-ups. It includes pictures of the alleged alien as it is being constructed for filming showing that it was not a human being.

More to the point, I can find nothing about the strange illness of proteria. There is Angina Pectoria, which simply is chest pains and something called protean which is about changing shapes. The example was of an amoeba. But it seems that the very existence of the disease, proteria, is controversial and isn’t found in medical books or any of the medical definitions and diseases cited on the Internet.

Humphreys and the creature. Photo copyright by Mantle.

The point, of course, is that his prediction is in error. It suggests that those making the alien autopsy film had subjected a minor girl to some form of abuse. But the creature in the film was created by those making the film, it wasn’t a real person. And Meier’s pals’ claim of the disease is in error as well.

At the same time, I was looking at this claim that Meier had 80 photographs of UFOs and this was documented in a 1964 English language newspaper in India. Actually, it said, “He has about 80 photographs of the space objects…”

About 80 is not the same as 80. That is, of course, splitting a fine hair, but it is something that the Meier crowd does on a regular basis. I will note the same article said that he had taken many more but that some 400 had been stolen. I’m not sure why anyone would steal 400 UFO photographs, but I do have an idea of what might have happened to them… they just weren’t very good.

Why do I say that?

Because I read a description of some of the 80 photographs that Meier managed to hang on to. The article said, “… a fourth is a big, bright cross and others bright zigzag lines.”

Those others are obviously of bright lights in which the camera is moved, creating those zigzag lines. It is not the motion of the light that caused them. Anyone who has examined UFO photographs have come across similar faked photos.

I have seen a few of these Meier pictures and most of them are not very good. As noted, one is of a big, bright cross and anyone who had ever developed his or her own black and white photographs knows how it was done. Once the photographic paper is set in the frame; a cross is set on top of it and the enlarger lamp is turned on. After the enlarger is turned off, the cross is removed and it is turned back on for a moment giving the impression that the clouds can be seen through the cross.

Another of these pictures is of eight bright, shapeless blobs seen in the sky. Clearly something had been put of the photographic paper to block the enlarger light, leaving white spots on the paper. This is why it is important to see the negatives. This sort of manipulation is obvious and if the negative is examined, it would be clear that the object in the print is not seen on the negative.

But it seems, based on this, that not all the photographs were of UFOs or alien spacecraft. A bright cross hovering over the landscape is in no way the same thing as a spacecraft. All it did was provide a clue about how some of the pictures were faked.

The final, hilarious, statement in the newspaper is one that we hear all the time from those reporting UFOs. They don’t want any publicity and yet they turn up in the newspaper. The article said, “He doesn’t want any publicity, he doesn’t care if anyone believes him or not.” But if not, how had the reporter learned that he had the UFO photographs? And if not, why tell the wild tale of hundreds of UFO photographs and visits to three planets. That is not the way to avoid publicity.

John Keel was Right - Another New Roswell Witness

Well, it’s happened again, just as John Keel said it would. As I have mentioned before, Keel had written in 1991 that by the end of the century (meaning going into the 21^st century) there would be dozens of people, if not hundreds, claiming to have been in Roswell at the time of the UFO crash. Another one has appeared on the scene by the name of Charles H. Forgus, a soldier who served during the Second World War and who was a deputy sheriff in 1947. No, he wasn’t a deputy in Roswell but one in Big Spring, Texas, which is Howard County.

Here’s how this plays out. According to him, he, with the Sheriff in Big Spring, had traveled to Roswell to pick up a prisoner. While they were on their way, they heard, over the police radio, about the flying saucer crash. They drove out to the site, saw hundreds of soldiers, though Forgus didn’t know which branch of the service they were in (the US Army on their fatigues should have been a big clue), and saw a huge disk crashed into the side of a mountain.

He was asked if there were lights on the craft and he said, “No, they went out when it banged into the wall in the creek. It was like a mountain on the side of the creek.” (Though I’m not sure how he would have known that the lights went out when it hit because he wasn’t there.)

He also said, “We couldn’t see that well because of the trees. It was in a riverbank. It slammed into a river bank. I saw them lifting one up with the crane.”

I recognized the place he was talking about. I had been there, I had walked the land and I knew that there was no creek or river there but from the picture that had been printed in The Truth about the UFO Crash at Roswell, it looked as if there was. You can see for yourself that his description matches the picture except for the water.

He added, “The saucer hit the bank on this side of the creek and I was standing on the other side of the bank, at the top of the hill. I was looking down at the site…” (This is the point of view of the picture.)

Kaufmann's alleged crash site. Photo copyright by Kevin Randle.

This is what Frank Kaufmann had said as well. Same description of the craft having hit the side of the canyon wall near what looked like a creek or river. Of course, we all know that Kaufmann’s testimony has been discredited. And if Forgus is describing the scene as if he was standing on a cliff some distance away, then his tale is bogus as well.

Forgus added some detail that is interesting, but also somewhat contradictory. I know this because I have been to that place. From where he was allegedly standing, he said he could see the bodies, though he didn’t have a good description of them. He talked about the big eyes. He said, “They eyes looked like the ones we see on television and the pictures of them.”

But he was so far away, according to him, it is difficult to believe that he would have seen the eyes. The real clue is about having seen alien creatures on television. He just picked the most popular version of the aliens to describe.

Here’s another nugget. According to several of the witnesses, and this includes CIC agent, Bill Rickett, William Woody and former part owner of KGFL radio Jud Roberts, the roads out to the area had been blocked and the crash site was cordoned off. Forgus and his sheriff wouldn’t have been able to get anywhere near the site before they would have been stopped by the military. Forgus made it clear that the military was already there with hundreds of soldiers, a big crane and trucks to remove the craft (Can you say “Alien Autopsy?”). If that is true, then the cordons were up and a sheriff from Texas wouldn’t have been allowed to penetrate it. He and Forgus would have been stopped before they got close enough to see anything at all simply because they weren’t military, they weren’t the local law enforcement and they had no legal authority in New Mexico.

The other part of the story that fails is that they heard about this on the police radio, which seems unlikely, but even if that had been true, they wouldn’t have heard instructions on how to find the place. You can’t see it from the main roads, and the gravel and dirt roads into the area are quite rough and quite confusing. If you don’t know where you are going, you’d get lost. Without someone leading them in, or precise directions which wouldn’t have been broadcast, they would never have found their way to the crash site.

This story was uncovered by Philip Mantle and was told to Deanna Bever in 1999, a Los Angeles private investigator. The tale appears in the book, UFOs Today: 70 Years of Lies, Disinformation and Government Cover-Up by Irena McCammon Scott, Ph.D. and published by Flying Disk Press. It was edited by Philip Mantle.

Alien Autopsy and the H-Beam

While the majority of us understand that the Alien Autopsy was a hoax created to make money, and that the participants in it have declared it a hoax, there are still those who hang on. They provide a variety of explanations for this. My favorite is that after Ray Santilli paid big dough for all these canisters of film, most had disintegrated before he could get them transferred to another medium, so they “recreated” the footage. There was a very small portion of those films that could be salvaged and they were added into this recreated footage, which to my mind ruined their value if they ever existed. If you have just a small portion of authentic footage of an actual alien autopsy, why contaminate it by “recreating” other parts and splicing it in. Why not just reveal the actual footage, however little you have? To do otherwise opens you up to claims of hoax.

For some reason this debate rages today with a small number of people claiming that parts of the autopsy footage is real. Never mind that military autopsies were always in color, were both filmed and photographed, and there would be a mounted camera in the room along with the photographers. All this was violated in the Alien Autopsy, but we’ll just ignore that.

When I posted my short article about the Alien Autopsy, it generated only a few comments, mostly from the usual suspects. Interestingly, one of those comments came from Spyros Melaris. He posted:

Hi All. 

The picture you show here is from a TV Doc that Shoefield and Santilli had a hand in. It was called Eamonn investigates alien autopsy. 

As usual Ed is WRONG...They are the actual pieces as given by me to Santilli. The language seen on the beams are a mixture of English, Greek and Egyptian styling. Actually the debri pieces were all designed by me and John. The words indeed the shapes of the items have a firm rooting in Magic history and optical illusions. All of this is explained in great detail with examples of this in historical documents. Be that as it may, The beam that reads VIDEO when turned upside down. This is called an 'Ambigram'. In this case, It reads VIDEO one way, and ELEFTHERIA the other way using the same letters. Eleftheria means FREEDOM in Greek. My thinking was most people would think the word VIDEO is a modern word and cause them to think this was a modern day film and therefore a fake, but an educated person would point out that Video is Latin and a very old rooted word. Eleftheria, seemed like a wonderful concept to name ones ship, or boat or in this case a spaceship. Although Ed maintains that the bits in Santillis trunk are not the same, they are. In my book I also reveal the entire footage of the Debris frame by frame BEFORE it was aged by me. My camera original is VERY clear and shows a lot more detail than the film we released into the public domain which I washed out and aged heavily and as a result, shows a lot less detail. I'm happy to amswer any questions you may have.

All the best, Spyros.

That, for me, pretty well ends the debate because you simply can’t say that those involved in the hoax haven’t come forward to explain it. For others, such is not the case because that comment was followed by this by Neil Morris:

You’re not going to get anywhere discussing the props from the Ant and Dec Alien Autopsy movie as that is what the stuff is in Ray’s car boot. It was recreated for the movie from the designs used in Spitz’s AA footage. Unfortunately Spitz over egged his recreation footage in a few places, I say this because the original “video” beam he based his version on didn’t have those raised symbols it actually only had the simple surface features as described by many of the original Roswell witnesses. Ie here’s the original beam.

http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/neil.morris/Pnlsyms.jpg

Best Regards

Neil.

But here is the problem for me. I saw the debris footage not long after the autopsy was announced and that included the tent footage that was too dark and wouldn’t make for compelling television, the black and white autopsy in a hospital-like setting, and the footage of some soldier wandering among the tables holding the debris. It was run several times, and what struck me then, before this Ant and Dec Alien Autopsy movie was even in the planning stages was that I-beam (yes, I know it is really an H-beam) had the “video” word on it then. It was about the first thing that I noticed and I say again that this was within weeks of the big unveil of the autopsy in London.

The H-Beam from the Alien Autopsy footage and not the Ant and Dec movie. Photo copyright by Philip Mantle.

Here’s the thing. We have the guy who created the film telling us some of the details about how it was done. We have the drawings and photographs of this as the creatures were created. And there is no real provenance for the footage. Nearly everything we were told about it was untrue from film of Truman walking the debris field to the film of the cameraman “confessing.” Finally we’re told that all this was for the movie by British comedians about the whole fiasco, and we are now supposed to believe that the evidence is actually from this movie rather than part of the original autopsy.

Well, no, it is not. I saw the original films and I saw the word video on the beam and I have been saying this for nearly two decades. That the word video is on the beam is just one more reason to reject the autopsy hoax… but there will always be those who simply can’t let go.

Video on the I-Beam

Although I do not wish to get involved in a long discussion about the nonsense of the Alien Autopsy, I had mentioned that the word, “video” in a stylized form appeared in the tent footage. Without taking a great deal of time on this, I found a photograph, published in Roswell Alien Autopsy by Philip Mantle, and published Noe Torres at RoswellBooks.com, which I mention in case anyone wishes to see the evidence about the film laid out carefully and precisely.

First is the whole picture that appears in the book. It shows the I-beam with the word on it, together with other bits and pieces that were claimed to be part of the wreck and some material that clearly was not. Seems strange that all of this would be mixed together unless it was part of a hoax. The government certainly would have had no reason to put all this material together in one place.

This is a cropped version that shows the word a little bit clearer, but certainly not as clear as it appeared in the tent footage. The “E” in video is quite stylized but the other letters are close to our alphabet. For those who wish to see a better picture, I’m sure someone can find it on the Internet. These pictures are copyright by Philip Mantle and Noe Torres.

The End of the Alien Autopsy

Spyros Melaris

We have discussed the Alien Autopsy on many occasions, and there is very little more to say. It is an admitted hoax with the advocates clinging to the nonsense that although there was a lot of faked footage added to clarify the situation; the point is that it was supposedly mixed with the real autopsy footage. This argument makes no sense. If you have footage of a real alien autopsy, why would you contaminate it with footage that you created? This is a story that is little more than fantasy and no way to verify any of it because the alleged witnesses are unidentified.

Rather than go through all this again, I’ll just point you to the words of one of those who was on the inside. According to the site hosted by Andre Sokandas “On April 17, 2016, Spyros Melaris appeared on a radio show to discuss his involvement in the Alien Autopsy. He appeared on the regular show and then he came back at the insistence of the host for another 30 minute XTRA segment.” The link to both segments can be found at: 

http://cjme.com/on-demand/jeff-richards%3A-paranormal

You all can listen to this interview of one of those who were involved in the creation of the Alien Autopsy and decide for yourselves how valuable it is. I have no reason to believe this will end discussion on the autopsy but it really should close the books on it.

UFOs - The Never Ending Saga

There was a time when I believed that once a sighting had been solved, once a real solution had been offered, we could eliminate that case from our files. We wouldn’t have to worry about it because we all knew what the answer was. That was back when I was younger and somewhat naïve.

Today I see us still talking about the so-called Philadelphia Experiment as if it wasn’t an admitted hoax. That’s right, the man who originated it, Carlos Allende, or if you wish to use the name he was born with, Carl Allen, admitted that he had

Carlos Allende aka Carl Allen

made the whole thing up in an attempt to stop Morris K. Jessup from writing any more UFO books. The Allende Letters, and the annotated copy of the Case for the UFO sent to the Office of Naval Intelligence, was a hoax. Allende even signed a statement for Jim Lorenzen saying as much.

In the October 1980 issue of Fate, Robert Goerman drove the final stake through this tale when he found Allende’s family (known as the Allens) and interviewed them. They said that Allende had been a strange man who always annotated everything he had including birthday cards and magazine articles. They confirmed the hoax and yet we still have to hear about this as if there is something to learn from the letters. For an overview see:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2009/07/allende-letters.html

Or take the case of Thomas Mantell. Here was a man who earned a Distinguished Flying Cross during the Normandy Invasion as a transport pilot. After the war he transitioned into fighters and in January 1948 was leading a flight near Godman Army Air Field when he was asked to attempt to intercept and identify an object over the field. Mantell could not reach the altitude the UFO was operating at and he was killed in his attempt.

Thomas Mantell

It is clear from the declassified records that this was an aircraft accident. Mantell lost consciousness around 25,000 feet with his aircraft trimmed to climb. It rolled over into a power dive at 30,000 feet and broke apart long before impact. The object he was chasing based on the descriptions and drawings in the Project Blue Book files suggest it was a huge balloon and not an alien craft.

Unless you think that this is a phenomenon of the 1940s and 1950s, there are always the Gulf Breeze sightings. Here was a case in which the model used in the best photographs was found. The evidence offered seemed to refute the idea that there had been some spectacular sightings with photographic evidence. Nearly everyone believes the photographs are a hoax but there are still arguments about it.

And let’s not forget the Alien Autopsy. Here is a case that is an admitted hoax with photographs showing how the alien was created and showing the work in progress. There is just no evidence of a photographer, no evidence that anyone had kept this classified material to be sold to Ray Santilli later) but there are still those who

Creation of the Alien for the autopsy. Photo
courtesy of Philip Mantle. 

believe that some of the footage in the autopsy film is real.

And now we’re stuck with the Roswell Slides. It is clear from the evidence that the slides show a mummy. It is clear that someone in the inner circle had to know the truth about this, but it went forward anyway with some of the people simply ignoring the obvious. Once the mummy was identified by reading the placard, once the museum was identified by comparing the slides to other photographs in that museum, once the journal article was found corroborating the evidence, you would have thought that the debate would be over… but no, we’re told the placard doesn’t matter and the research continues to prove that the body is that of an alien.

David Rudiak is continuing to work to nail down the photographs and other scientific information so that we might put this, briefly, to bed. I have no confidence that any evidence offered will be accepted as authentic if it doesn’t show that the body on the slide is alien. The fallback position seems to be that the scientists from the May 5 presentation pointed out all these “nonhuman” characteristics so the evidence to the contrary is unimportant… just as the admission of hoax by those involved in the Alien Autopsy is unimportant.

The point is that no matter what evidence is presented, no matter who admits the hoax, no matter what is said and done, there are those who are going to reject the evidence and believe what they want. I simply do not understand how you can reject the evidence that you don’t like… oh, I get that sometimes the evidence isn’t as persuasive as it is in these cases and that there can be legitimate disagreements, but I don’t understand how you reject the words of those who participated in the hoaxes when they say they made up the stories or when the evidence clearly leads to a specific conclusion. But that is what we contend with day after day here.

The Roswell Slides After the Big Reveal

Well, the great reveal has happened and it was… not great. In fact, opinion seems to be running against the idea that this was an alien creature and with many inside the UFO community saying that they were underwhelmed. Even those who are solidly inside the extraterrestrial camp have expressed disappointment in the program and the slides with some suggesting this was all promotion for another Don Schmitt and Tom Carey Roswell book.

Tony Bragalia, who has worked with Schmitt and Carey for months if not years on this, is still convinced that it is nothing earthly and there are scientists who back up his claim. In an article that he has circulated this morning (May 6, 2015), he provided this statement from two of those scientists:

It's nothing like us, we can see that his feet and legs appear to be like that of a reptile and could have evolved from something like a gecko or some similar animal that became larger and developed a large brain and binocular vision. His nose is small, his mouth different from ours. There are parts that could have been removed during autopsy. I[t] seems to have no teeth.

Joint Statement, Luis Antonio de Alba, Anatomist and Physiologist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico and Richard Doble, Canadian Physical Anthropologist.

Bragalia also wrote, quoting  Professor Rod Slemmons, Former Director of the Chicago Museum of Contemporary Photography and 1950s Kodak Executive, “It would be really, really hard to fake these slides or to duplicate them if that is what you want to do [.]”

And while all that is somewhat interesting, it doesn’t actually prove anything other than these fellows have expressed an opinion about the slides that don’t actually say anything about it being obviously alien. In fact, the name of the Rochester, NY Photo-scientist who supposedly rendered a positive opinion on the slides dating was not revealed. Bragalia wrote:

The truth is that the name of the photo-scientist is known to researchers and others. It was not publicly revealed for a simple reason: the man was repeatedly harassed at home by strangers. It is known that skeptic Lance Moody and reporter Billy Cox both separately -and within a day of each other- found the leaked name of the scientist and saw fit to call him at home at night out-of-the-blue to question him. Bear in mind that this was before the scientists name had been properly revealed and well before his image analysis report was even released. Understandably, the man was angry and has indicated that he simply does not need this kind of thing in his life.

And while it is understandable that the man would have been annoyed at the telephone calls, it is also understandable that others would want to corroborate the information that was being circulated by those who allege the slides show an alien creature. The real problem here is that they leaked the name, unintentionally, and then are appalled that others wish to verify the information. Lance Moody has written that the Rochester scientist’s verdict wasn’t nearly positive as others have suggested and that he was not named in the great reveal suggests that there are problems with the claims about his testimony.

Or, in other words, the point is moot because the witness was not there to be asked a few questions to clarify the situation.

John Greenewald was as unimpressed as were so many others. To his Black Vault site at:

http://www.theblackvault.com/casefiles/the-roswell-slide-alien-kodachrome-slide-released-but-just-one/#

he posted some rather negative words. “When I woke up the morning of May 6, 2015, I expected to at least see 10, maybe 20, maybe even 50 headlines about this.  What did I see? At 8 am in the morning, well after the first news cycle… there were about 3. And those articles ripped apart this story, and profiled it as the joke it was.”

Greenewald quoted from the UK’s Daily Mirror which had said:

Two photographs of a “dead alien” were unveiled at a big money event last night – and immediately dismissed as fake.

A series of ‘UFOlogists’ appeared at the Be Witness meeting last night to reveal images of an extraterrestrial who supposedly crashed to Earth during the infamous Roswell incident in 1947.

The images were found by former journalist Adam Dew, who reportedly turned down interviews with magazines that wanted to cover the story because “they were not offering any compensation” [Which, of course, shows that they weren’t interested as alleged, they just weren’t interested in handing over some cash].

He claimed to have taken steps to verify the pair of alien snaps and said Kodak experts had dated the film to 1947.

But the rest of the world has not had the chance to test the rigour of his methods, because high resolution images of the alien are not yet available.

They are likely to be sold through his production company Dew Media alongside a documentary about the discovery of the slides.

The photos were supposedly found in Arizona, hidden in a collection of snaps owned by oil geologist Bernard Ray and his wife Hilda Ray, who have both died.

Nick Pope, a researcher who headed up a UFO investigation wing at the UK Ministry of Defence, told Mirror Online he was “underwhelmed”.

“It could be a model, or it could simply be a fake image, dressed up to look like a Forties slide,” he said.

Greenewald concluded, “Others took to social networks, and quickly were able to find nearly identical looking ‘bodies’ right here from human civilizations. This, even further, supports the theory this is nothing more than a museum artifact.”

Bragalia, however, wrote, “An overnight poll conducted by Coast-to-Coast radio has thus far tallied over 800 respondents to a survey asking what the nature of the creature:

42% say it is not an alien image.

58% believe it to either be that of an alien, or that they are simply not
certain what it is.

The figures, however, aren’t quite that supportive when broken down. It is true that 42.1% voted that it is not an alien, only 28.55% voted that it was, leaving 29.35 % voting that they were unsure. It could be said, that over 71% voted no or unsure, which is nearly three-quarters of those who expressed an opinion. I asked Bragalia and he agreed that what he had written about this was misleading, suggesting that I could correct that.

Here’s what I think, if anyone actually cares at this point. We haven’t had a good look at the high resolution slides and have been offered excuses for why that hasn’t happened. The slides seem to depict a creature, cadaver, corpse, in a museum setting rather than the expected situation if it was truly alien. The array of expert opinion we were told would be offered has not materialized and the statements that have been made seem to be weak. Already there have been pictures of mummies in various museums that seem to resemble to a high degree the body in the slide. There is nothing to tie this to Roswell and I will point out that both Carey and Schmitt did say that these weren’t “Roswell” slides, but their commentary seemed to suggest they believed otherwise.

They provided some witness testimony but it did little to validate the slides. Carlene Green, whose father, Homer Rowlette, said that he had seen the bodies. There are those who worry about the color of them she mentioned, but that isn’t the problem here. She is a nice woman I interviewed a number of years ago, but she didn’t see anything herself. She is a second-hand witness who can only report what her father told her so long ago.

We still have nothing for the provenance; we still don’t know who took the slides, when they were taken, or who even owns them now. It could be Adam Dew who has said that his company owns them, or it could be the brother of the woman who found them. That point has not been clarified.

Today, May 6, we really don’t know anything more than we did on May 4. Nothing was clarified at the big reveal. We have the names of some of the scientists, but certainly not in the numbers we expected. We have a better resolution of the slides, but rather than clarify, they have not done that. They seem to be of a creature in a museum setting given what is seen in the background, but we don’t know. At the end of the presentation we are as confused as we were before it started.

Can anyone say Alien Autopsy?