Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Current State of Affairs: Roswell Linked Kodak Slides

I know, I'm back to the Kodak slides again,  I'll flog myself later today, which according to some clinical studies show that after awhile I should start to like it.

Since last week, numerous blogs and websites, mine included, have been a buzz with the unveiling of the alleged alien Kodak slides.  Following the uncovering of numerous depictions of the slides, visual analysis and comparisons have cast serious doubt regarding the subject depicted and its surrounding environment.

Some readers at Kevin Randle's and Rich Reynold's blog have now gone so far as to claim that the slides in question are either hoaxes or the representation of a severe form of congenital defect thus rendering the slide issue and the Roswell UFO claims/story as dead.

Interestingly, some UFO/ET buffs have surfaced embracing the slides as the real deal with the skeptics doing a piss poor job of debunking the product.  Frankly, I find it hard to believe that even the most die hardened slides proponent could muster any defense as to what is currently available for assessment.

Based on what has been presented for our viewing curiosity, I have to agree that the photos are a lot less to be desired and causes me to question the previous spent time and effort that it took to investigate the accuracy and veracity of the photos by Dew, Schimtt and Carey.  In other words, if this is an example of "scholarly" research then the current ongoing shit storm that is being heaped upon Dew, et al, is well deserved.

Currently, a quiet study by some of my skeptic friends is ongoing.  That is, quiet, without fanfare, analysis and comparisons is being looked into regarding what is currently available for study.


My good friend, Gilles Fernandez, is looking into various photos depicting a mummified corpse with the tentative intent to draw correlations.  He is getting a lot of flak, but it is an area of possibilities that must be looked at regardless of the opinions of his detractors.

As far as whether the Dew, Carey and Schimtt team should continue to hand off this carnival barking show to Maussan for the Mexico City showing scheduled for May 5th, I leave you with my personal take as I commented on Paul Kimball's "The Other Side of Truth".

Personally, I hope that Maussan fills all 10K of the seats. I want everyone to sit through hours worth of preliminary BS complete with all of the trappings Then when its time for the main attraction, I want to hear, in Spanish, English, broken English, the collective utterance..."what the hell?"

Sometimes people need to be fleeced and at the end of the day know that they've been fleeced, taken for a ride, no more than a collection of marks in a Roswell three card monty game. 

That is the only way that they will learn or understand that however long this dog and pony show last, it's time wasted, time that can never be reclaimed.

Besides if the Roswell group wants to metaphorically cut their own throats, who are we to stand in their way. We must politely allow them to oblige themselves.:)


Tim Hebert

Meanwhile, the drama will continue...


Saturday, February 7, 2015

A needed course correction

For the past few days I've produce a couple of blog post that nibbled on the extreme edges of the Roswell saga in particular the slides issues.  That will be it for me for there are others that are better suited to dive into these issues both now and later.  

The issues of of the slides legitimacy will be established or ripped apart soon enough.  I'm betting the paper shredder route myself.  

Yet, this blog was not constructed for the likes of Roswell and I've strayed off of the path.

If you've read my comments in the last post, Roswell, or anything associated with it, is ufology's black hole and the best that one can hope for is to stay away from it's event horizon.

"Abandon all hope ye who enter here."  That should be plastered on anything Roswell.

So in the future, I'll correct course and return to poking and prodding various UFO case.  I've neglected the Minot story, so I'll continue on with it.  Sadly, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than Roswell and I miss bantering about with Tom Tulien.

There is also a couple of MUFON cases, all current, that look like good candidates to apply subjective/objective criteria and play around with tentative conclusions.

So, its on to the next...

Thursday, February 5, 2015

The Holy Relics of Roswell


As of yesterday, Ufology was on the verge of canonizing a new saint, Bernerd Ray. The blessed Ray had descended from a holy mount, not holding two tablets, but possessing two photos. This precious gift would change the destiny of humanity...turn the cosmos on its eternal axis.  The truth was to be shown to the faithful.

Roaming a desolate desert, a prophet was calling out to the UFO faithful, "Rejoice...Rejoice...for the alien photos have arrived from on high"  "Do not ask questions of me for I am not worthy to reveal the truth...for I am a mere messenger."

So a path of self righteousness was set forth.  A path that leads to Mexico City.  And along this path towards salvation, the Roswell multitude had gathered...those who were blind and wish to see, to glimpse, to touch, to receive cure.

And it came to past that the blessed Ray had other photos in his gloried possession.  The blessed Ray was seen to be in the presence of the great Dwight Eisenhower.  Surely this bode well for the blessed Ray.  The great Eisenhower was a man of means, wisdom, knowledge capable and willing to reveal great secrets.  Both Eisenhower and Ray had been blessed and spiritually linked for both played the game of golf...surely good things would come from this union.

"Rejoice...Rejoice...for the alien photos have arrived from on high!"  "Do not ask questions of me for I am not worthy to reveal the truth."

Wise men dropped to their knees for they were amazed.  "Surely if the blessed Ray was in the inner court of the great Eisenhower and the blessed Ray was an esteem geologist then knowledge would be passed of the mythical land of Aztec."  These wise men then set forth to the desolate lands of New Mexico.

Yet woefully these wise men were deceived.  The curse of Roswell had lured them to their potential doom.  The photos were a mirage...a false idol.  The blessed Ray was not counted among the court of Eisenhower.  The wise men were left to tear at their garments in utter despair.

In a distant land, a caravan slowly proceeds along the path of self righteousness that leads to Mexico City.  The throngs of the faithful, the multitude, pay homage to the holy relics. They rejoice, they cry, for salvation is to come.  Yet in the distance, the wise men cry.

 "Rejoice...Rejoice...for the alien photos have arrived from on high!"  "Do not ask questions of me for I am not worthy to reveal the truth."

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

Alien Slides Show Extravaganza Gets Interesting

Thanks to the efforts of Tim Printy and Lance Moody, we might, and I stress, we might have an image of one of the alien slide photos that's due to be released to the public this coming May 5th in Mexico City.


Provided by Tim Printy and Lance Moody
What can be made from this photo, assuming that this is the real deal?  Not really much, as congenital defects could have cause this appearance on a human infant...hydrocephalus comes to mind causing increased cranial pressure.

From a psychological point of view, the image matches up perfectly to what we have been conditioned to for the past decades as to what an "alien" should look like. Seriously, do we really know what ET is supposed to look like?  The reported past descriptions ranges from tall white angelic figures, reptilian, to what we see in the photo.

So we don't really know what an ET is supposed to look like, other than what we are told, but we do know that congenital defects and cranio/neurological issues correspond well to the photo at hand, assuming that this is indeed one of the slide photos.

Here is the hitch with the photos, in my opinion.  The two slides are supposedly produced on Kodak film manufactured in 1947.  I'm led to believe by reading Tony Bragalia's piece on Kevin Randle's blog that this is conclusive evidence that alien bodies were recovered from the alleged UFO crash at Roswell, NM back in the first week of July, 1947.

The photos would have to be pinpointed as actually being taken during that week and on location in the Roswell area for this story to continue to gain any future traction.  As the old real estate mantra goes, "it's location, location, location."  A tall, if not astronomical hurdle to jump. 

I've attempted to ask on numerous occasions if statistical data will be presented showing that Kodak film stock was used by buyers soon after purchase.  This seems to be one of the theories bantered about by those stating that the slides are the real deal.  If this could be shown to be true, from a statistical position, then this would add some degree of credence, but as of yet, I've not gotten any replies.  I would imagine that Kodak did marketing analysis on how long a product sat on the shelf in locations such as Roswell (surrounding area) prior to being purchased.

Then, after all of the above is accomplished, we're still left with the "money" question, "Is this truly the photo of a real alien entity?"

What if the above photo is not one of the two being unveiled on May 5th?  All of the above still applies.  The shark tank must still be jumped.

The story gets interesting by the day...

Monday, February 2, 2015

Alien Slides Supposedly Linked to the 1947 Roswell UFO Crash.

This UFO tease has been out on the web for a little over a year.  Generally I shy away from Roswell discussions due to the muddied water effect that has accumulated over the past decade rendering any understanding of the case as a gross exercise in futility that leads to an unhealthy trip towards the realm of obsession.

Tony Bragalia has posted on Kevin Randle's blog, "A Different Prospective", an article stating that slides purported to be that of extraterrestrial aliens will be unveiled in Mexico City on May 5, 2015.  The slides supposedly will show humanoid bodies that were recovered from a crashed UFO near Roswell back in 1947.  The Roswell case is well known so I'll not go into any details.

Tony is of the opinion that the slides have a definite link to Roswell.  He provides background as to how the slides surfaced...that in itself is interesting and raises some questions concerning authenticity.  The slides are said to have been produced from vintage 1947 Kodak film...this has also raised numerous questions concerning authenticity.

As far as my take on this issue, I'll await the big unveiling later in May.  I see no need to render an opinion based on something that I've not seen.  That's not to mean that others have withheld their opinions and speculations as a quick look at the comment sections on Randle's blog and Rich Reynold's "UFO Conjectures" shows a varied range of such.

The only questions that I have is why Mexico City was chosen?  What's the significance of this venue?  Roswell is a slice of Americana folklore and it appears to be like everything else...out sourced to a foreign landscape. 

Update:  Reading my emails, Brit, Christopher Allan, pretty much nails it...the slides must definitively show that the photos were taken during the first week of July 1947, otherwise it proves nothing.

Reading the comment section of Kevin Randle's blog, it appears that the best that can be said of the slides is that they where imaged using 1947 Kodak stock.  It is extremely doubtful that the slides will be pinpointed to a specific date in 1947.  The theory being proffered by the slide proponents is that most people would have used up the film within weeks or months after purchase...I've seen no supporting statistics to bear this out.

Monday, January 26, 2015

NASA's New Horizons Spacecraft Starts Its Approach Towards Pluto

Artist conception, from Wikipedia
Last week I had to drop off items for my son at our local Barnes and Nobles.  While completing my task, I happened by the magazine racks and spotted the February 2015 edition of Astronomy Magazine and on its cover was an illustration of the New Horizons spacecraft zooming by Pluto, "NASA Sets Its Sights on Pluto:  New Horizons spacecraft begins its approach."  I quickly grabbed the magazine and purchased it on the spot.

I remember vividly watching the launch of the craft back on January 19, 2006 on TV.  This was no ordinary launch for NASA as it was not launching a satellite or probe to meet up with an asteroid or comet.  This was a planned mission to Pluto and its moon, Charon.  It would take nine years to reach its destination.  I was spell bound both by the mission and the relative short time required to cover the distance to Pluto.

From Wikipedia, New Horizon's launch Jan. 19, 2006
New Horizons reached Jupiter in January 2007 providing photos and details of some of Jupiter's moons during its flyby and gravity assist towards Pluto.

Now, nine years later, the waiting is almost over...I'm still spell bound and filled with a sense of anticipation and awe.  New Horizons will reach Pluto around July 14, 2015.  As I write, the craft is out of hibernation mode and conducting imaging of this tiny dwarf planet.  BTW, for those not aware, Clyde Tombaugh's cremains are on board the craft.  Tombaugh was credited with discovering the tiny planet in 1930.  For the UFO aficionados, Tombaugh's bio on Wikipedia has an interesting UFO section concerning Tombaugh's interests in UFOs. 

Here is NASA's site for the New Horizons mission.  And the Wikipedia entry as well.

Both web sites and magazine are good reads providing in-depth details about the spacecraft and it's mission.

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

An analysis of a recent MUFON case: Applying subjective and objective criteria

MUFON case 62491, submitted drawing.  Accessed at MUFON.com
Earlier this month, I came across a MUFON case, 62491, listed in Frank Warren's UFO Chronicles.  Warren had posted an article by Roger Marsh of OpenMinds.tv concerning a sighting in North Carolina on Jan. 7, 2015 (date report submitted to MUFON).

Looking at the case, provides the possibilities for evaluating the sighting using subjective and objective criteria, whereas, subjective is the witnesses description of the event and objective being a combination of measurable data, if possible.

Here is the actual submitted report to MUFON:

On the way to a gas station in northern Durham, North Carolina, my girlfriend and I witnessed an extremely bright hovering object, amber in color. We decided to drive around to get a better view of it over the treetops and witnessed what looked like a triangular light pattern -- one very large, very bright amber light in the nose and a smaller flashing light on each wingtip and center which stayed illuminated but strobed brighter in order from left to right. It passed in the opposite direction of our car. Because it was so far away we could not make out any structure. The large light was unlike anything we had seen in the sky before in terms of its size and brightness. Once it was out of view we continued to the gas station.

On the way back to the house we saw the object again, hovering back close to its original position. It was much closer and we turned into a neighborhood to get a good look:

The object was very close. I would compare it to watching a plane in take-off pass overhead in terms of its distances. As we pulled into the neighborhood it stopped hovering and began moving -- drifting might be a more fitting verb -- across the sky towards us. We parked the car and got out as the object passed directly overhead. As it did we both witnessed the solid black outline of an equilateral diamond: a small white running light in the center and at each tip with an over-sized, amber-colored seemingly directional (forward to forward-down) light at its nose and a significantly dimmer light on its tail. The three lights from wingtip to wingtip constantly strobed in a right-to-left direction as it moved away from us. The object was silent as it passed over and disappeared behind the treeline.

We jumped back into our car to try and get a better angle to continue watching it but as we circled the woods which it had passed over it was nowhere in sight -- until we happened to catch the faint strobe of the object now a great distance away.
We drove to my girlfriend's parents' house and watched this object glide back and forth across the sky at a great distance -- like a commercial plane at altitude -- for over an hour. At one point her mother came outside to watch it pass at about 45 degrees above the horizon close enough to make out the triangular front of the object. We kept noticing that it seemed to pass in a straight line until we could not see it anymore and then begin its trajectory again from where it started -- but we never saw it fly back. We assumed that we simply missed its return path. Finally we watched one disappear not behind trees but simply into the distance and made sure to watch for its return. It never flew back. Suddenly it was once again close and over our left shoulders. 
 faint strobe of the object now a great distance away.We drove to my girlfriend's parents' house and watched this object glide back and forth across the sky at a great distance -- like a commercial plane at altitude -- for over an hour.


We tracked the object as it passed about 60 degrees above the horizon when suddenly we noticed a second, identical object flying towards us from a great distance. We continued watching these two objects pass back across the sky.

The total sighting lasted from 9:20pm to 10:45pm. Which is to say that at 10:45pm I finally came inside out of the frigid cold to write this report.


End of submitted report.


Let's look at the subjective portion of this case.

1.  "...my girlfriend and I witnessed an extremely bright hovering object, amber in color."

2.  "... looked like a triangular light pattern -- one very large, very bright amber light in the nose and a smaller flashing light on each wingtip and center which stayed illuminated but strobed brighter in order from left to right."

3.  "The large light was unlike anything we had seen in the sky before in terms of its size and brightness."

4.   "I would compare it to watching a plane in take-off pass overhead in terms of its distances. As we pulled into the neighborhood it stopped hovering and began moving -- drifting might be a more fitting verb -- across the sky towards us."

5.  "... we both witnessed the solid black outline of an equilateral diamond: a small white running light in the center and at each tip with an over-sized, amber-colored seemingly directional (forward to forward-down) light at its nose and a significantly dimmer light on its tail. The three lights from wingtip to wingtip constantly strobed in a right-to-left direction as it moved away from us. The object was silent as it passed over."

6.   "...faint strobe of the object now a great distance away.We drove to my girlfriend's parents' house and watched this object glide back and forth across the sky at a great distance -- like a commercial plane at altitude -- for over an hour."

This appears to be the main subjective data for the case.  Subjectively, the observer(s) describe an object as:  large,bright, amber, triangular light pattern, strobing, hovering, gliding, drifting, and silent.

The following is to be considered as "soft" objective data:

1.  Late evening hours, 9:20 pm to 10:45 pm on Jan. 7, 2015.
2.  Durham, NC
3.  Outside temperature alluded to be "frigid cold."
4.  Direction of flight path is not listed.
5.  Object may have been 45 to 60 degrees above the horizon.

The following is considered "hard" objective data for Durham, NC.

1.  Temperature range from 19 F to 20 F.
2.  Clear skies, visibility at 10 miles, waning gibbous moon (ending phase of a full moon).
3.  Winds out of the North, 6.9 to 8.1 mph, gusting to 17.3 mph. (weather data retrieved from weatherunderground.com)

Discussion

The evaluation of the subjective aspects of the case from the reference point of the observer reveals a very detailed and descriptive sighting.  I hesitate to add that it may be too detailed, but it must be taken into account that the sighting supposedly lasted one hour and twenty five minutes.  This is an area of evaluation that invites either too much or too little criticism based on the content of any given UFO report.

What is peculiar is that the boyfriend provides the narration of the observation.  What is missing is the actual thoughts from his girlfriend.  Did she perceive the sequence of events the same as the boy friend?  The same can be said of the girlfriends mother.  According to the report, the mother came outside of her house and supposedly saw the object.  What were her thoughts, in her own words, concerning what she believed to have seen?

The couple where on their way to a gas station.  Where were they coming from prior to the sighting?  A movie, friend's house, or a bar?  This may be of importance to know for the purpose of fully evaluating the report. 

The object(s) where given elevations of either 45 or 60 degrees above the horizon.  In fairness, the observer did predicate the elevations with "about", but the question remains as to how one came to that possible conclusion.  Perhaps the elevation was 30 or 40 degrees instead, or the elevations are not really germane to the total report. 

Noted is the lack of direction or heading of the object.  The speed is merely described as either drifting, gliding or simply hovering.  Wind speeds for the night were listed between 7 to 8 mph out of the North.  There were wind gust up to 17 mph with earlier evening gusts exceeding 20 mph.

Durham is a fairly large size city with a population greatly exceeding 200,000 people.  A check of local media outlets show no unusual reports for the night in question.  MUFON's data base shows only this case for the Durham area.  Given the length of the visual sighting and the slow speed of the object, one would think that other citizens would have happened to glimpse/observe this object.

What works in favor of the observer is that the sky was clear.  The full moon was ending [94 percent of moon in full view], but missing in the report is a description of the moon, nor does the observer state the actual conditions of the sky.

Tentative Conclusion

1.  Unknown flying objects with the possible shape of either a triangle or diamond.

2.  Descriptive observation report, but missing is a separate report from the girlfriend and her mother.  These two could independently help corroborate the sighting.

3.  Unusual event that happened in a high population area.  There appears to be no corroborating reports from others.  Based on the length of time of the observation, one would think that others would have seen and reported the object.

4.  Bright nearly full moon in the sky.  Could it have been possible that the initial sighting was that of the moon?

5.  No photos of the object despite the long duration of time under observation.  A drawing is presented to MUFON.  Missing is the direction that the object was moving.

6.  A possible hoax report can not be ruled out at this time.

The 6 areas of the conclusion are listed as tentative.  More data, if possible, could help explain the sighting.  Minus more data, a hoax cannot be ruled out.  The subjective data is descriptive and provides details based on what the observer saw on the night in question. Objective data shows that the weather and condition of the sky may tentatively support some of the subjective data, but can not fully explain the sighting.