The Roswell Slides Have Been Leaked Online

[Constance]

I didn't mean to imply they are. It's a question of the fallout of preemptive action, which would be reported on the internet and create additional attention to and interest in the slides. There's also the problem of the slides most probably having been copied and locked up in several unknown locations (unnamed attorneys' office safes, for example).

 

[SRL+]

There's also the problem of the slides most probably having been copied and locked up in several unknown locations (unnamed attorneys' office safes, for example).

Those are minor details to those guys. The NSA could easily evesdrop in on the entire "Dream Team" if needed, without them even knowing.

 

[DissectionStalker]

The problem I have always had with Roswell is I just can not see how this advanced civilization wrecks in desert in the first place...

I've made DETAILED POSTS about this too... with plenty more logical thinking to go along with it too... but it ALWAYS falls on deaf ears to "experts" like Constance and other believers.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Those are minor details to those guys. The NSA could easily evesdrop in on the entire "Dream Team" if needed, without them even knowing.

According to Redfern and other dreamers:

Some dream people and Redfern were computer hacked long ago. The hacker(s) was even communicating with Redfern too!

 

[DissectionStalker]

No

No, what???????

Then you went on some damn rant that had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the help I'm asking you for... Both sincerely and politely too!

Do I deserve your rant totally off-topic having NOTHING to do with my request to you! You're the one that has asked Dew questions and gotten answers too!

Please, help-out with this... this has absolutely nothing to do with the 2 slides matching the 400+ other slides... you do NOT need to rant about that again. I got your point the very first time you wrote about that. Ok? Let's be cool...

According to Dew's story. He is the center piece, maybe owner, or middle man fronting for someone. With that in mind...

Mike, please respond to this post noted again below:

Mike, you probably know Redfern's story in detail, right? He made considerable comments about this at Bishop's recent RM program. November 20, 2014. Check it out dude, mate.

Here's the really cool thing about Redfern's "contact"... all that happened two years ago BEFORE the slides were exploding on the net. Redfern got exact identifying information about the images that also MATCHED what dream people knew back 'then', yes, "they confirmed" it was correct too! ALL done privately before any posting online about it.

Soooo....

You got your contact with Dew... do us a favor and ask him to explain this issue. It's VERY UNLIKELY the old man was a hoax 2 years ago BEFORE the media hype about any of this!

Don't you see how important this is??? Seriously!

Come-on man, you're "the man". You want the truth or part of it asap. We all do.

Help us! Please. And, thank you, sir, mate.

Wink. I think I might have OCD about this...

Lol...

 

[DissectionStalker]

Ive already outlined why i think it would be difficult if not impossible to fix a location based on other pics.
You counter with it is but im not going to tell you how.....

No, that is not what I countered with about locations.

They only claim made thus far is the image "looks like" the sort of alien allegedly retreived.

Retrieved? From? Wink.

These guys are not making any claims of fact, Others have thrown up phrases like smoking gun, Adam has not. He admits he doesnt know. A fair and honest answer imo.

What do Dew's business partners say? The dream team? Dew speaks WITH the other people HE organized. DEW CONTROLS the slides and this show!

Do some research, we are not here to spoon feed you

I did several hours!!! of research tonight digging into what the Redfern and Dream People have confirmed 2 YEARS ago BEFORE ANYTHING went public ANYWHERE about the 2 slides! ...VS what Dew says about the slides he is controlling.

Why haven't YOU found and provided that information Mike? You damn sure know more about every little detail than I do. Right? You're an insider too with Dew, because you withhold information you've learned from Dew directly. Where are your loyalties? Where is your "independence" from Dew?

So, I'm asking you to respect my contribution to this matter. I did my homework. You can ask Dew to respond about this. It is reasonable to want to know what's up with this controversial matter.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Hi SlideBox Media, Mr. Adam Dew,

I don't know where to post this, so please excuse any misplacement here if it belongs elsewhere. Recently, Greg Bishop at Radio Misterioso had Nick Redfern on to explain what he knew about the slides two years ago. In that program he mentions BEFORE anything went public that a Mystery Man, obviously elderly, called Nick from Midland Tx. This mystery man described unique details about the images, so Nick contacted and confirmed with the Dream Team members too that these images were being described correctly! They said that man was legit, and they sort of freaked-out that Redfern was contacted about the worth of these ET Alien slides.

Mr. Dew: you stand by your video about the discovery of the slides. They came from your friend's sister [named Cat] that saved these slides in her garage for 10 years. Sooo, how come an old man from Midland Tx is contacting Nick two years ago about these EXACT images and about its value and worth if truly of ET origin?

That's a confirmed "mystery man" both from Redfern and some Dream Team members that Nick ALSO confirmed from them that this elderly man is legit! The image description was correct too.

Can you explain what this is all about? This Midland "mystery man" of elderly age somehow does NOT seem to mix in harmony with your story of the slide discovery. Are you his "front man" ? Or, do you own the rights to the slides now having obtained these from that same elderly man? Please explain what happened about this situation confirmed by at least two different sources: Redfern and Dream Team person(s) [except? KDR].

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Well Flat Earther when are you going to prove anything?

You made the claim its a mummified child. Now you have to prove it.

There is one simple fact that destroys your argument.

1. Most mummified children have 5 fingers.

2. The figures in the Kodak slides don't have 5 fingers.

Your next response is predictable.

The default position is that it's not an alien until it is proven to be an alien. However, it can't ever be proven to be alien and this it will always remain as "not alien".

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Exactly, The claim was made earlier someone said it was taken in a museum in columbia.

Rather than just present opinion as fact, why not look up columbian museums on the net
Send them the pic, and simply ask "im checking the provenance of this image, someone has suggested it was taken at a museum in columbia. Can you tell me if this might have been an exhibit in your collection at some stage"

Dont mention aliens or Roswell, just ask if this might be something they had on display in the past.
I'll admit imo its a slim chance, but boy what a smoking gun it would be for the deniers if they did in fact get a reply confirming with pics from the archives that this was one of their exhibits

Get off your bums and do some real research, Dont just rely on your's and others opinions as being fact. Do some fact checking

With the internets, cut and paste and emails you dont even need to leave your armchairs lol

I doesn't work that way, Mike. If I believe it's a mummified child I don't have to prove it. It's the person who claims it's extraordinary who has to prove the case.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I've made DETAILED POSTS about this too... with plenty more logical thinking to go along with it too... but it ALWAYS falls on deaf ears to "experts" like Constance and other believers.

I'm neither expert nor believer, just curious on what exactly crashed there in '47. Assuming some type of advanced, non-human vehicle could not possibly crash- is just that- an assumption. To be fair, just because the air force came clean with it's ridiculous explanation of project mogul and crash test dummies, I do not assume a cover up of exotic technology crash landing. Trying to wrap ones head around the idea of an advanced civilization traveling light years just to crash land here, is an assumption that such advanced technology must have made the age long trip here from a distant star system. To come on a forum here and finish your post with the statement "Roswell is dead" -just sounds silly. The outcome of these slides will not change the Roswell witness accounts- whatever truth or fiction may be had in those accounts. The outcome of these slides COULD boost the Roswell story, if say, some of the other slides contain images of a recognizable US base, for example. I wouldn't hold my breath for such an outcome, but we won't know until May.

 

[SRL+]

The problem I have always had with Roswell is I just can not see how this advanced civilization wrecks in desert in the first place... I have said it before, It would be like me driving a brand new Tesla from New York to Disneyland in California and then driving the damn thing into the parking garage wall.

Maybe it was a Hyundai? Great space mileage, yet crummy handling.

Edit: The Hyundai’s handling isn’t too shabby, as the Yugo GV is the winner here.

 

[mike]

I doesn't work that way, Mike. If I believe it's a mummified child I don't have to prove it. It's the person who claims it's extraordinary who has to prove the case.

Yeah actually it does

Any counter claim requires something to give it credence
And while extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, Claims like its a mummy in a columbian museum require some corroborating backing, or its just opinion presented as fact

Characteristics of pseudoskeptics:
1. Denying, when only doubt has been established.
2. Double standards in the application of criticism.
3. The tendency to discredit rather than investigate.
4. Presenting insufficient evidence or proof.
5. Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof.
6. Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.

 

[mike]

this has absolutely nothing to do with the 2 slides matching the 400+ other slides... you do NOT need to rant about that again

Fraid i do mate

I posted good logic as to why you would be unlikely to be able to fix a location from the other slides. where you claim its extreemly likely we could do that i countered with good logic outlining why its unlikely (though not impossible)

You reply

IF the two slides can match any sequence in the other 400+ slides, then it is very likely true. I've had considerable photography experience including developing negatives and slides too. I know these can be matched-up ABSOLUTELY beyond dispute, but I'm not revealing that now.

Really ? and you insist on our co-operation while offering that ? statement of absolute fact "i know" but im not telling.......

Everytime you posit a "its over" theory its been reasonably countered, so you just keep coming up with new and even less compelling grounds this case is busted wide open. Not sure if its OCD but your desperate progression from one debunk attempt to another does suggest to me some underlying internal issue that has nothing to do with research or learning and more to do with propping up some personal agenda.

Now its some guy was asking Nick redfern about slides 2 years ago ?

SO WHAT !!!!!!!

According to Adam

Would Hilda and/or Bernerd take multiple photos of a mummy/preserved body with hydrocephalus? Even the anthropologists who've seen the slides don't offer a definitive opinion, but you guys seem pretty certain. I've spent nearly three years trying to find what's in the images but I've had no luck. Please send all pictures of hydrocephalus mummies on display in the 1940s to me
AD
(posted online feb 09)

No need to mail him and ask him, hes posted hes been trying to find out whats in the images for 3 years

So whats your latest claim ?

Whats significant about someone contacting Nick 2 years ago ?

So far every nail youve tried to put in the coffin lid has bent rather than been hit home.

Is it the time frame ? nothing significant there given Adam has been trying to find out about these images for 3 years
Is it the question about their monetary value ?


If in the process of cleaning out a deceased estate garage they had instead found a painting that looked like a Picaso
Do you know the process thats applied

Painting Authentication Experts & Art Authenticiation specialists - expert in international fraud investigations | Professional Investigators Forensic Analysts authentication investigation | England, Canada, Spain, Germany, Italy, USA, فن بيكاسو , Autenticación de arte - Kunstbeglaubigung

Fake or Fortune? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Almost identical process, they forensically examine lots of clues, In just the same way the provenance of these slides have been investigated.
Who pays for this process ? in the case of the above doco the BBC did and then sold the "doco" they made of the process..... Gadzooks how dare they........


Now if one finds a lost Picaso, and then pays to have it authenticated. they can then donate it to a prestigious gallery (who will likely tour the item as a pay per view exhibt) or you can contact Sotherbys and sell it.
So if this is about "money" again let me ask.
If you found a lost Picaso, spent 3 years time and money establishing its provenance, would you give it away or sell it ?

 

[mike]

IF the two slides can match any sequence in the other 400+ slides, then it is very likely true

Lets explore this ......

Lets say that we can match the slides in sequence to others in the trunk, we dont get a location fix because the slides either side dont show much, one is a white dog with a ball on a lawn, the other is some people sitting on a house porch, with these two slides in between these in the sequence ?

You'll just reach into that bag of nails you have ready and say " oh well that entire roll of film could have been faked to make it look like it was from the 40's. Matching these in sequence proves nothing.

But what if we did this

The edge codes on the film is confirmed to be 1947 stock. and according to Tony Bragalia

Kodak experts consulted agree that the overwhelming majority of film customers of just-bought film take their pictures and have the film developed within a year of purchase. And more commonly, it is used within weeks or months, certainly not years, from purchase.

Additionally, the emulsion and other characteristics of the slides were compared against slides known to have been exposed in the year 1947. This provided further authentication, but I will leave it to all to review the report's findings when presented in May.

A far better test imo, compare the emulsion and other markers with unrelated slides we know were exposed in 1947..... and they allegedly match

Now im at pains here to point out i'm not arguing for the authenticity of this case.

What im concerned with is the agenda of some to debunk it before even seeing the evidence, and the flimsy and tenuous reasons why they "KNOW" it must be a hoax/fake/BS

The frantic attempt to nail down the coffin lid before the corpse is even cold speaks volumes about the motivation involved.

 

[Burnt State]

And I think we have ways to vet testimony and give levels of priority, two or more versus one account, for example. We do this in society on everything. Having said that...there are multiple avenues of pursuit in Ufology, none of which needs be singled out and obsessed over, but collectively studied. If testimony is to be considered garbage then everyone should pack their bags and leave the hotel. The story is over. And that is the constant debate in this field. If we don't have a flying saucer and a grey dead inside then its a weather balloon or someone off in the head. I just don't agree with that assessment. That's why I'm still here.

We have an incredible pile of testimony of all kinds and some small percentages of trace evidence, radar confirmations, and some even say we have photos of unusual craft. But what Ufology boils down to is a series of discontinuous events that introduces a kind of chaos into the social fabric. Many attempt to perceive an order there by connecting dots and then they make the claims and theories that they will.

If it was all garbage then it all would have died long ago, like one's childhood belief in Santa Claus. We were convinced once but now we know better. However, Ufology persists in presenting a genuine mystery as confirmed with each passing decade and the occasional new case that presents some continuity in the mystery. Albeit there are shifts, from saucers to triangles, from contactees to forged documents. Trying to sort out human perpetuation vs. an actual anomalous event is an ongoing chore.

Too often I think we lump all this discontinuity together instead of trying to discover real starts and stops to the phenomenon. These slides are simply two more obscure moments that someone is trying to thread a needle with the proverbial camel. It doesn't fit. It's just trying to fill in the empty spaces that beliefs have grown around. None of that has anything to do with witness testimony. In fact, in this case the witnesses who took the pictures are long dead.

I don't understand how anyone can form an opinion without reading the research.

Perhaps I should have put that last line of mine in quotations. What I was suggesting is that in the pantheon of Ufological writing and investigation, readers, you and I included, will decide what we champion and what we believe based on what agrees with us, on which version of order makes sense. For some it's obvious Linda Cortile was floated out her bedroom, that the coast of Turkey produced video images of real aliens aboard their craft and that Dale Spaur really continued to see a spaceship he affectionately named Floyd. But others dismiss it all outright.

The debunker and the believer stand firm on their beliefs for no particular reason that we can all agree on, just the reasons that agree with them. The seeker persists until the gaps between skepticism and positive suspicions are relinquished by a genuine new finding that identifies a clear start, a clear finish and what actually happened inbetween. I haven't seen that happen yet. I even still doubt myself on occasion.

These slides perpetuate discontinuous thinking IMHO and just because Santa's boot prints are in the fireplace cinders doesn't mean Santa exists. But then again, Carlos Santana claims that his contact with an alien intelligence is what prompted his return to the music scene. So in an irrational world we find our reasons for our own truths and that's all Ufology will add up to given the limited tools at its current disposal.

We need different thinking to move this quest forward instead of trying to unearth the myths of the past.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Fraid i do mate

I posted good logic as to why you would be unlikely to be able to fix a location from the other slides. where you claim its extreemly likely we could do that i countered with good logic outlining why its unlikely (though not impossible)

I disagree with your logic. Mike, I honestly can't believe you're soooo fixated to make long posts about this for the fourth time; meanwhile, you're ignoring such important points that Dew has legitimate business partners HE hires or controls that make outlandish claims. So, instead of facing that music, you're putting Dew into a corner saying he is not making these claims... it's foolhardy, imo.

IF the two slides can match any sequence in the other 400+ slides, then it is very likely true. I've had considerable photography experience including developing negatives and slides too. I know these can be matched-up ABSOLUTELY beyond dispute, but I'm not revealing that now.

Really ? and you insist on our co-operation while offering that ? statement of absolute fact "i know" but im not telling.......

Mike, you're withholding "privileged information" or insider knowledge from Dew. I'm not giving Dew any advantages about what I might know how the slides can be matched-up absolutely beyond dispute. [By that I mean it would satisfy most people that are photographers that also have done a lot of lab work developing film. So, saying "absolutely beyond dispute" is said within those qualifications.]

Everytime you posit a "its over" theory its been reasonably countered, so you just keep coming up with new and even less compelling grounds this case is busted wide open. Not sure if its OCD but your desperate progression from one debunk attempt to another does suggest to me some underlying internal issue that has nothing to do with research or learning and more to do with propping up some personal agenda.

It is you, my friend, that is supporting Adam Dew, as if Adam Dew is innocent of his business partnerships HE formed, and he controls. He is not the independent videographer you once believed he was; just some innocent guy with no horse in this race. On the other hand, it is I who watched his video and learned otherwise about his direct connections with these slides, and you called into question whether I understood or recalled the story correctly. Strangely, Dew removed the video within minutes of him posting it too! It conflicted with stories on the net that you were supporting unless I could prove to you that my memory was correct. You're failure in this kind of logic in the grand scheme of things, imo, is it is Dew making money here; not me. Dew has the burden of proof. I don't. I have the luxury of offering my opinions and ideas, and I have no agenda other than that.

Every time you debate with me, for the 4th time now, about my opinions and ideas regarding the slide sequencing it is just a distraction from "the fact" that Dew is making outlandish claims by "plausable deniability" (from your POV), because you don't acknowledge he is the leader [or front man leading for someone] and "the face forward" of these slides inside a business relationship with these other people making claims on behalf of their entire agenda working as a team together. Don't play good cop and bad cop with me bud. Why? It's a partnership, and he has to assume some responsibility being "the front" or "face forward" for their team! IMO. wink.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Lets explore this ......

Lets say that we can match the slides in sequence to others in the trunk, we dont get a location fix because the slides either side dont show much, one is a white dog with a ball on a lawn, the other is some people sitting on a house porch, with these two slides in between these in the sequence ?

You'll just reach into that bag of nails you have ready and say " oh well that entire roll of film could have been faked to make it look like it was from the 40's. Matching these in sequence proves nothing.

Wrong! Don't speak for me; you have an agenda to make excuses for Dew's agenda. That's not at all what I would say! You're just causing distractions and making filler FOR THE FOURTH FRIGGING TIME, btw. Freaky!

A far better test imo, compare the emulsion and other markers with unrelated slides we know were exposed in 1947..... and they allegedly match

I believe the same emulsion, IIRC, was used until the early 1960's. That is NOT the best way to determine how the 2 slides will match-up with the other slides from the estate. It only lends evidence, but it does NOT pinpoint the 2 slides to 1947 by any means! So, your POV is on shaky grounds, imo.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Now if one finds a lost Picaso, and then pays to have it authenticated. they can then donate it to a prestigious gallery [...] or you can contact Sotherbys and sell it.

If you found a lost Picaso, spent 3 years time and money establishing its provenance, would you give it away or sell it ?

What a worthless comparison, Mike. Why? Picasso is a known quantity that is easily analyzed by several art experts that can offer an informed opinion acting as a group. Evidence can be gathered from the painting itself using non-destructive and/or sampling techniques.

Just DARE to try to get Sotheby's to auction off these 2 "alien slides". Wink. Seriously??? Dew will be laughed out of their offices as a kook and howling loon!

[DS said:] IF the two slides can match any sequence in the other 400+ slides, then it is very likely true.

What I meant by "it is very likely true" is: It means the 2 slides can be considered part of that slide collection, and one would just have to analyze where to go from that point forward. Meaning, it's just another step in the process of validation and nothing more. IF that could happen, then the 2 slides might be tied directly to the Ray's depending on that roll of film, number of remaining matched slides, and sequencing of the slides.

 

[mike]

What a worthless comparison, Mike. Why? Picasso is a known quantity that is easily analyzed by several art experts that can offer an informed opinion acting as a group. Evidence can be gathered from the painting itself using non-destructive and/or sampling techniques.

Actually in one of those Fake or fortune episodes a painting that had plenty of good provenance was rejected by some experts

So the counter re known qualitys fails in that real life case.

The authenticity of the Monet painting 'Bords de la Seine à Argenteuil'. The Wildenstein Institute, presented with considerable evidence of the painting's authenticity, controversially rejected it as a Monet, and was criticised by Philip Mould.

I suggest you watch this and learn a thing or two

It easily debunks your claim above. Yes its a long video, but its a very interesting doco and mirrors the case at hand very well, you cannot claim its a worthless comparrison until you watch you. The parallels will leap out at you when you do

As for the Sothebys reference, i wasnt suggesting Adam might sell them there.
Where is your head at to try and take it there ?, That has to be the shortest thinest nail yet youve drawn from your bag of nails to fix the lid down on this case

The point was, While some might consider the disovery of a lost Picaso to belong to the art world, and thus should be donated free of charge to a gallery for all to see, In the real world people have every right to sell that item if they so chose to.

Like it or not Money is part of the way we live, i get the sentiment that these should just be handed over for us to see, but those who found them are not UFO people, They have no interest in the genre, they owe it no free rides. Finding a lost Picaso in a garage will involve money, either a direct sale, or a pay to view exhibition. Thats life. Why should these slides be different ? we might wish it otherwise, a sentiment i share. But lets be pragmatic there are no free lunches in this world

 

[mike]

Dew has legitimate business partners HE hires or controls that make outlandish claims

Can you prove this ? or is it opinion presented as facts yet again.

Whats to stop someone unrelated to Adam, contacting Nick to ask what these slides might be worth ?

The "dream team" were well aware of these slides years ago

Perhaps some Entrepreneur figured he could make an offer on them and turn a profit. Just speculating of course

Sorry i cant take you seriously anymore, Adam has a Youtube account, a linkdin account and an email addy all of which have been posted online.

And your best effort was to post a question here in the hope he might read it ?

Hardly an endorsement of your research skills or rather obvious lack thereof

You are clearly not bothering to read the totality of the material presented in this case, just cherry picking snippets you think might support your agenda.

This is how you can tell the difference between a researcher and a debunker