Thursday, May 21, 2015

Thoughts from Eusebius....something different.

Image obtained from Wikipedia

A note to readers:  I've added this post as something different as far as topic matter.  I've always been fascinated by the early Christian Church and have spent considerable time reading texts regarding the initial fathers of the Christian movement.  The likes of Paul, Origen, Tertullian, et al, continues to intrigue.  What one takes from the blog post below concerning UFOs is somewhat at the discretion of the reader, however I see elements of the necessity of the employment of critical and rational thinking hinted at by the post's subject matter.  I readily profess that I'm not an expert in the area of antiquity, but am drawn to it none the less...Tim Hebert

A few years back I had procured The History of the Church, written by the early Christian scholar, Eusebius.  This work was translated by G. A. Williamson (1965) with an introduction by Andrew Louth, 1988.  Eusebius' great work opened the door as to pointing me in the right direction as far as the works of the first generation of the Apostolic Fathers.

During Eusebius' scholarly works, he was Bishop of Caesarea. ca 313 AD.  The city of Jerusalem was a mere shell of it's former self as a result of the decimation of the Jewish population and culture by the Roman legions under Titus and Vespasian following the two Jewish Wars (66 AD, 135 AD). Even in name Jerusalem had changed to Aelia Capitolina. Thus was the changing landscape of politics and geography during Eusebius' times.

Andrew Louth, in his introduction, stated that though Eusebius was a great scholar, he was lacking in producing original Christian thought. This may be true to some extent, but Louth seems to glance over the fact that for all practical purposes, Eusebius was issued what tantamount to a gag order after being denounced at the council of Antioch in 325 for his support of Arius and Arianism.  So from then on it seems that Eusebius had to walk and talk a fine line in order to avoid excommunication from the Church.  To this day, Eusebius is largely forgotten, or ignored, by the Catholic Church.  Such is the price that he paid going against the grain of church politics.

The following is an excerpt from The History of the Church which I believe provides great insight into the past thinking of our religious scholars and a hint at some of Eusebius' original thoughts:

Why He was not preached long ago, as He is now, to all men an to every, what follows will make clear.  It was impossible for the teaching of Christ in all its wisdom and virtue to be grasped by the human race in its former state.  At the very beginning, after the original life of blessedness, the first man disregarded the divine command and fell into this mortal, transitory state, receiving this earth with its curse in place of the former heavenly delights.

His descendants, who peopled all our world, showed themselves much worse, apart from one or two, plunging into a beastly existence and a life not worth living.  City and state, arts and sciences meant nothing to them; laws and statutes, morality and philosophy were not even names...nature's gift of reason and germs of thought and culture in the human soul were destroyed by the immensity of their deliberate wickedness.


Eusebius


I've bold printed the main idea that is of importance, yet kept the full paragraphs as to keep it in the context of Eusebius' thoughts.  True the above passage pertains to Christian thought as Eusebius provides a rationalization for the coming of Christ at a specific time period in our history, but what is of interest is his reasoning that certain aspects of man's intellectual development had to be achieved to set the stage for the coming of Christ.

Let's look at Eusebius' words in a secular light.  Man's cognitive state had to evolve beyond the old hunter-gatherer days and his nomadic lifestyle to embrace new ways of thinking. Eusebius in two paragraphs of his writings encapsulates the intellectual impact of the Egyptian, Greek, Roman and Persian civilizations.  Man's ability to develop the concepts of art, science and philosophy and cultivate the fruits of these intellectual endeavors was paramount for the continuing and the fine tuning of rational thought.  It is from the nurturing of these disciplines that a sense of governance, law, morality and ethics came into being albeit not perfect, yet constantly evolving as such concepts are never static. 

Monday, May 11, 2015

As they say in the mummy business, "That's a wrap." Last thoughts.

I wanted to post my last thoughts on the Kodak slides and then future post will get back to normal, but should something sensational crop up I'll post it.  But for me this should do it after a few closing thoughts.

As most know, I'm a member of the Roswell Slides Group and I was in the process of writing up a detailed comparative analysis study of the slide image vs. that of an actual mummy of a child.  With the deciphering of the placard, my work really became unnecessary as the efforts by others in the group nailed the image as that of a mummy specimen.  Rather than rendering an opinion, I was treated to a fascinated night as I observed in real time how it all came about.

As I write, I'm being informed by others in the group that Jaime Maussan is still discounting our efforts.  He is currently under the opinion that the placard's writing/text may be an attempt to hide the fact that what is on display is still a deceased humanoid-like ET alien mascarading as a child's mummy. Such is the will to believe or the will to cover one's ass. I'll leave the reader to make the distinctions.


Images provided by Gilles Fernandez

Since Maussan and others still hold out on an alien outcome, I'll share briefly my thoughts on my initial and subsequent assessments. With my experience in anatomy and physiology, there can be no question that the image is that of a mummified child.  The clearer photo, not the deceptive dark blue lighted image, provides the evidence.  If we omit the placard for the moment, strict observation shows what appears to be the remains of a child or adolescent of undetermined age lying in the supine position on a glass shelf.  The effects of desiccation, the drying and shrinkage of tissue, is evident as what remains of tissue forms a contour around the head/skull and the exposed long bones both upper and lower extremities.  The appearance of an over enlarged head/skull may be correct or a visual distortion based on the positioning of the head and the angle of the photo shot and the surrounding lighting.

A lot was made that the remains had no teeth.  True, no dental landmarks can be seen, but that does not mean that teeth were present or not.  Again, this all depended on the age of the child at death.  The same was said of the remains showing only four fingers on the right hand.  Based on the position of the right arm/wrist/hand the thumb was out of view, yet adjacent to the right index finger, or the thumb could have been curled up under the palm of the hand or the index finger.  

The clincher in the anatomy structure of the image was the rib cage structures.  Humans have 10 sets of ribs on either side that are prominent and being attached to the vertebral column and sternum  What can be seen on the groups comparison mummy is 9 ribs with the cervical ribs out of view. The image in the Kodak slide deceptively shows only 5 sets of ribs. One should note that each of the 5 ribs are wide vs. that of our comparison mummy.  What we are actually seeing is the lack of fine demarcation that is separating the ribs.  This can be attributed to attached tissues and desiccated muscle, ie, the intercostal  muscles.  Thus we actually have the normal set of 10 ribs. What is absent is the sternum.  This is consistent with the preparation of the body for mummification as the visceral organs are removed during the process.  You will note that both images show the results of this process.

The above should give pause to Maussan and others that still harbor hope that the image depicts something else other than human.  Add the deciphered text on the placard and the identification is complete.

As far as to what should befall those that fostered these images on the general public, I suggest that we leave it to the rank and file of ufology.  They are in a better position to exact whatever cost that should be placed on the reputations of those that conjured up this story.

I here that there is a movement to shame the promoters of the May 5th event into refunding the money of those that attended the event.  To this, I say caveat emptor.  As I stated a few months ago:

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.


I have to say that prophecy has been fulfilled.  Let's hope that people are much wiser in the future.

Saturday, May 9, 2015

Kodak "Alien Slides" Sunk...It's Over. The Fat Alien Sings

I received the news a couple of hours ago as Curt Collins had published in his Blue Blurry Lines blog that the placard associated with the Kodak "alien" on display had been deciphered.

http://www.blueblurrylines.com/2015/05/the-placard-of-roswell-slides-final.html

It's as it was always thought to be:  a mummy.  It's not a dead alien involved in the Roswell crash, nor the alleged Aztec, NM crash, nor a secret display in a secret government/military lab, nor the prop for a disinformation operation. It's a mummy.

From Curt Collins' blog:








MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BOY
At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton
shirt. Burial wrappings consisted of these small cotton blankets.

Loaned by the MR. Xxxxxx, San Francisco, California

The "research" team of Adam Dew, Tom Carey and Don Schmitt supposedly spent a year or so researching what the Kodak images represented.  This group then turned the slides over to one Jamie Maussan, who in turn had "experts" in the fields of anthropology, forensic pathology, etc. and all supposedly came the the conclusion that the images depicted something that was not human...not of this world.

The poster child for "I want to believe", Tony Bragalia, gave the smug impression that the images shown in the Kodak slides would change every fiber of our belief system.  The slides would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that dead alien bodies were indeed recovered at Roswell and skeptics and debunkers would be eating crow after the "Great Reveal of May 5th."

Up to six thousand people paid their hard earned money to attend the "Great Kodak Extravaganza" at Mexico City's National Auditorium.  A further 3000 or so paid to view the event on-line in a pay for view fashion.  These folks were told that they themselves would be witnesses to a changing paradigm...."BeWitness", be part of an event that would change history as we knew it.

It was dog shit!....pure unadulterated dog shit...

What took Dew, Carey and Schmitt well over a year to research and come up with a dead Roswellian ET alien, only took a few individuals 48 hours to come up with the proof that the image in the slides was definitively that of a mummified body of a young child...a human child.  So much for the field of ufology.

But it may be even worse, if such is possible.  What if all of the principles involved in this dog and pony show knew that what was being peddled was false?  The original unveiling of the slides were cast in a dark blue lighting [not the original lighting of the photos themselves] with the purpose to visually distort the images as to be seen as something bizarre and freakish...not of this world.

The placard shown in all of the photos was either heavily blurred or blotted out by white light, yet one photo shot had a fairly good quality of the writing on the placard that was not shown at the Mexico City venue.  An oversight by Dew, Carey, Schmitt and Maussan?  Or was it deliberate with the intent to obfuscate the possibility that they knew all along what was written on the placard?  

At what point in time was it determined by the group that what they had in their hands was the image of a mummy.  It was plain for all to see.  A small human mummified body lying on an open glass shelf surrounded by other artifacts.  The obvious setting for a museum.  The open chest cavity showing the results of the ritualistic removal of the visceral organs during the mummification process.  The state of desiccation of the body as a whole.  Perhaps by the time Carey, Schmitt et al made the true discovery it was way to late in the game to change direction and admit that they had made an honest mistake.  It was either incompetence as researchers or an outright attempt to scam the general public with the hopes of a big pay day. 

I had proposed this on Rich Reynold's blog:  whenever Bragalia, Carey, Dew and Schmitt are mentioned, there should be an astrik (*) by their names depicting their combined epic failure.  Ufology's version of a "scarlet" letter with an automatic admittance into Ufology's Hall of Shame

Wednesday, May 6, 2015

The Kodak Slides: Did They Crash and Burn?


I had to work yesterday so I missed out on getting into the live feed.  I had hoped to take a peek, but earning an honest living took precedence.  Despite this, my friend, Gilles Fernandez was kind enough to post the actual photos as they were presented last night. Gilles ponied up the cash (exchange rate?) to watch this marathon.

Judging from the response of other blogs and sites, most being pro-ET, it appears that the Kodak slides have been met with a near collective "what the hell?"  I can only image those poor unfortunate souls squirming uncomfortably in their seats in the National Auditorium.  I further get the impression that those on the stage may have been squirming also.  If not, I suspect they will as the next few days unfold.

ufocon.blogspot.com 

kevinrandle.blogspot.com

http://www.theufochronicles.com/

http://badufos.blogspot.com/

I only had access to the actual photos and 3-D imaging.  I have heard none of the assessments rendered by the so-called experts.  That should be soon coming in transcripts, or one would hope.

As a member of the Roswell Slides Group, I was able to give a preliminary assessment on the physical nature of the being in question both from an anatomical and physiological aspect.  Basically, I described what I saw and rendered a tempered yet objective assessment.  I also compared the Kodak specimen to that of what the group had as a photo of a child's mummy.

As I complete a more exact assessment and given permission by the group to do so, I will post it on this blog. 

Will Bragalia, Dew, Carey, Schmitt and Maussan wind up in ufology's witness protection program?

Saturday, May 2, 2015

Tim Printy provides a prelude to the Kodak slides May 5th gala...


Tim Printy has made his latest issue of SUNlite available for viewing.  Tim has devoted most of this issue with indepth analysis and discussion pertaining to the Roswell "Alien" slides which is due to be presented to the general public [those that pay] this coming May 5th.

Tim discusses all aspects of what is known about the slides up to this point in time.  Tim opens up different areas of alternative interpretations which anyone interested in this story must read.  Its a great piece of work and arguably may be his best work.

If you want to "Be Witness" then knock yourself out, but read SUNlite first and "Be Educated."

Bookmark Tim's site:

http://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/SUNlite7_3.pdf

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

While we are all awaiting the "Great Reveal"

Here is a re-post from my Facebook page for those sitting on their asses awaiting the "Great Reveal" this coming May 5th. 

Want to loose weight?
I've been asked by some of my friends how I keep from gaining weight. I shall now reveal a secret that has been passed down from generations of my family.

Side effects from this amazing weight reduction implement:
1. Pectoral muscle soreness.
2. Increased perspiration (not to be confused with diaphoresis).
3. Lower back pain which can be alleviated with ibuprofen.
3. Some blistering on the hands. I recommend using work gloves.
4. Rare occurrences of delusional thoughts with possible auditory and/or visual hallucinations.
5. Induced tendency to inadvertently sing old spirituals.

This has been a free public health service message...

Monday, April 27, 2015

The 5th of May fast approaches. What can we expect?


With the 5th of May Roswell alien slides presentation soon to be on hand, we have to wonder what to expect.  The expectations will be based on one's personal position as to belief or disbelief in ET visitations.  It's as simple as that.

You'll notice that I said "Roswell alien slides" as that is how the original hoopla was presented by early on spokesman Tony Bragalia.  And despite the apparent down playing of a Roswell connection, Roswell is still the elephant in the room...or auditorium.  Just look at the promotional image above...it has Roswell written all over it.

In a perfect world, here are my expectations:

1.  Clarification as to whose house the slides were found in Sedona, AZ (including the other 400 slides).  Was it the former home of Hilda Ray or her attorney?

2.  Did any of the researchers involved (Carey and Schmitt) do a documents search as to the past owners of the home in question.  This information would have been public information accessible through the city and/or county offices that registered land deeds.

3.  What is the hard evidence that links the Rays to Roswell back in 1947 that would have put them right smack at the scene of the alleged UFO crash?  Let's go further. Is there hard evidence that Ray was in the Aztec area back in 1948?  I'm not looking for mere speculation or correlations, but hard documentation that proves so.

4.  Why am I to assume that the images in the photos are those of an ET versus that of a mummified specimen or a human deformity/oddity?  Do we even know what ET is suppose to look like?  We have ample evidence of mummies and human deformities.  

5.  I'm expecting to have expert testimony from various fields of forensic photography, possible medical examiner opinions and statements from real anthropologists.

So my wish list is at 5.  That's a reasonable start with reasonable questions that should illicit reasonable answers.  Let's see what happens on May 5th.