Apr 18 2007
|
|
The Roswell Debris
Kevin Randle has posted an excellent overview concerning one of the biggest and most important questions pertaining to Roswell: namely, was the debris shown in the famous photos the real material that was found at the Foster Ranch by Mac Brazel on that fateful day back in 1947, or was it switched with something far less exciting?
As Randle states: “To understand the Roswell case, it is necessary to review all the relevant material and not just that which supports a single point of view. Nothing in this case is easy…There is an immense amount of information out there, much of it in conflict… but the conflict often centers around divergent points of view of the researchers and not the testimony of witnesses. To understand this means you have taken a step in understanding the Roswell events.”
Randle argues that many of the questions and uncertainties about the “debris switch” story (that ultimately became an area of major debate) have their roots not in the personal testimony of those recalling the long-gone events; but with some of the leading crashed UFO investigators themselves.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, April 18th, 2007 at 6:10 am and is filed under Alien Encounters, Breaking News, Close Encounters, Conspiracies, Crash Sites, Evidence, Eyewitness Accounts, Government Projects, Roswell, The Redfern Files, UFO Sightings, UFOlogists, UFOlogy. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Yet Another Roswell Witness Surfaces »
- The Trowbridge Interview »
- Randle on Roswell UFO »
- Roswell Secrecy »
- Roswell 60 »
|
April 18th, 2007 at 8:41 am
VERY interesting piece. Shows what monkeying around with semantics can do for you. Shandera seems a real “fly in the oinment” here (along with Moore) in an ongoing deconstructive way. Which begs the question, was he a Disinfo agent…the same as I have always suspected Klass of being. There was always an inherent dishonesty in Klass’s “investigations”, and I see the same thing here in Jaime Shandera. Randle has done a GREAT job of analysis here.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Very interesting. I still think Rosewell is one the true ufo cases.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Bill
I sure agree with your statement, intresting article. Klass and Shandera have not helped to find the truth. Who pays these people anyway.
What I have wondered for sometime is, I have some Blk/Wh copies of photos of supposed metal pcs from that crash. They are the ones with weird writing and pieces with the imprint of a set of hands with 6 digits. I came across these probably 8 to 10 years before the autopsy footage came out. I realize many believe this film to be fake and the crash likewise; but, the photo copies of the possible pieces of metal were not on a desk.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Dave:
That’s very interesting re the photos. Can you share re how you got them and from who?
Nick
April 18th, 2007 at 11:53 am
More interesting info. I’ve never heard of such photos. Don’t know that I’ve ever heard of the little aliens having six-digit fingers and can’t recall anything ever being said about the Marcels taking photos at their house either. This is all new to me. Might they be from another crash retrieval?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Bill:
The six finger angle stems from the notorious Santilli film - which he now says is a “restoration”‘ by him and special-effects guys.
It may be; and indeed I have no idea what the film shows. But, there are some genuinely odd issues that relate to Ray’s confession and that still keep parts of the story wide open.
April 18th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
Nick
Sure I will try to find them, for some reason I can’t remember where I got them. May remember when I find the pics. Can you email me with your address as I am waiting for copies of those 3 huge sphere vessels photographed by a friend; to which, I wanted to send to you.
If you look at the Santilli video check the eyes when the full eye contacts are taken off. That split second view and the 6 digit hands was what sold me as Ive read many times that they only had 3 digit hands.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Nick
Just after I emailed you I came across copies of the pics I mentioned above. Go to … (www.geocities.com/djbeirne/2rospics.html)
it appears my above dating is mistaken.
I guess there is no need to send copies by post.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Dave
Thanks for clarification.
Nick
April 27th, 2007 at 10:58 am
So guys still curious if the pics of pcs of metal on that geocities site looked more real then the tin foil pic? Any input as I still think I came across these pics some time before the autopsy footage was released. I realize they are just pics and one would need to have these items in hand for a reality check. Dave
April 28th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Dave
The pictures are from the Alien Autopsy film, which most researchers have discarded due to Ray Santilli’s “restoration” claim - namely that the film he says he got from an elderly cameraman had degraded to where it was unwatchable and unusable so he and a special effects colleague, ahem, “restored” it with a created dummy etc.
So, even if elements of the story were true, no-one - even the strongest supporter - could ever say this or that is real, because Santilli himself admits that a lot of the film is just special effects.
I must stress that - privately at least - a number of UK ufologists who believe the AA film to be bogus, still don’t believe Santilli’s story of how he said it was made.
So the bottom line is that with admitted special effects at work, the film is effectively rendered useless from a credibility level.
But there are some definite intriguing aspects still outstanding.
For example, some time ago I obtaine copies of military papers of a guy named Jack Detmar Barrett whose handwriting is a close match to the writing on the supposed AA film cannisters. In 2 cases. it’s identical.
I shared these papers with Neil Morris and Ed Gerhman, who are still looking into it.
I also know of another researcher who - literally right now - is initiating inquiries to determine where Ray Santilli obtaiined the 1940s vintage clock that appears in the film, where he obtained the various “protection suits” that the people are wearing, and where he obtained the autopsy table etc.
If that can all be shown, then that should lay matters to rest from everyone’s perspective.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Thanks for the reply, Nick. I was one of those that got the full copy of the autopsy footage. No where on the video did it show the pics mentioned above. It also appears all over the net that the footage is faked; because, of this or that. Yet, no one ever mentions the fact that when the full eye contacts are removed the eyes have a death blink (muscle spasim). By the way does anyone out there know when the first contact lens were made available to the public.
April 30th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Dave
Re contact lenses, here’s a good resource:
http://www.contactlenses.co.uk/education/public/history.htm
Yep, there are definitely a lot of opposing opinions re Ray Santilli’s “restoration” confession as per my reply as above.
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Thanks again Nick. As I have been curious to find out if it was possible that the full eye contacts from the autopsy were used to develop the soft contacts of today or some of the polarized sunglasses. Have a great day.