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.

Sunday, April 19, 2015

What About the 400?

For the past few months we have all been engrossed with the two "alien" Kodak slides that will be presented in Mexico City on the 5th of May.  Well supposedly copies, as the originals will not be presented for various reasons, but that is a story for another day.  Yet, despite the angst and celebratory emotions, what of the other 400 plus slides?

Those 400 slides are briefly mentioned but seemed forgotten, but I believe that they could hold the key to this enigma.  What are the images depicted? This could give us a pretty good range of time based on what images are actually depicted.  Do those slides show a time range from 1940 to 1960 based on content?  Do these photos give a possible clue as who was the actual photographer and when and where were they processed?  Were they processed in bulk or a few at a time?  A lot of questions that could be answered.

Based on a few of the slides that have been released, there is one that depicts Ike Eisenhower standing next to Milton Eisenhower on the back of a rail car.  Tim Printy put this photo at roughly 1945.  This one photo had caused a slight rush that it might have been Bernerd Ray standing next to Ike, but Printy's analysis sunk that inane theory by clearly identifying Milton Eisenhower. 

But that is one example of one photograph.  What of the others.  Yes, let Maussan et al show the two slides allegedly depicting aliens on May 5th, but the real answers may come from the heavy scrutiny of the 400 slides.

Just a thought.

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Ufology's Version of Wrestle-mania...A Re-cap


A little recap from the last few weeks verbal wrestle-mania concerning the "alien" Kodak slides.  These two photographic slides appear to be the consummate "self-licking ice cream cone."

Rich Reynolds posted a link to Jose Caravaca's site.  This is actually V 2.0; the original post was removed due to the hint of potential libel issues with Tony Bragalia making claims that Paul Kimball had possibly acquired copies of the two slides illegally.  Missed in all of the "noise" was Caravaca's article.


Paul Kimball announced that he had obtained full resolution copies of the two slides in question.  Paul plans to present his copies to the general public on May 4th.  This is what set off Tony Bragalia in Reynold's Caravaca 1.0 ultimately leading to Rich's removal of his original post.


Paul also provided information that his uncle, Stan Friedman, was invited to the May 5th unveiling down in Mexico City, but has declined to attend.  Friedman joins the ranks of ufologists, such as Robert Hastings, withholding support for Carey, Dew, and Schmitt.


Gilles Fernandez posted on his blog an excellent article regarding some of the work being put forward by the Roswell Slides Group.  This group is in the process of identifying what is actually portrayed in the two photos vs. that of an ET origin. 


Curt Collins produced an informative post detailing an in-depth look as to where the issues currently stand with the two photos.


Of course, there are other web sites of interest dealing with the topic at hand e.g. Kevin Randle and Frank Warren.

So there we have it...the self-licking ice cream cone that is slowly slurping its way south of the border.