• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Roswell Slides Have Been Leaked Online

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

George Wingfield said:
Burnt wrote: " And that's the goal of ostension, to bring the myth to life.

But it does beggar the question, can we really use Lundberg as a mechanism to discredit something, when he himself says the paranormal events are real, that the crop circle phenomena is real.

If hes telling the truth as he see's it then he cant be used as an example to discredit crop circles and other paranormal events
If hes telling lies, then like billy meier hes also useless as a source of example.

To me the logic offers 3 options

Lundberg can be used as an example in favour of paranormal events and crop circles being real (as he states in his site)
Lundberg can be used as an example that they are all bogus
Lunberg cannot be used as an example of anything ......

******************************************************************************************

Dear Burnt,

Here is a problem designed to test your powers of establishing the truth in a critical situation: - There are two doors labeled A and B which lead respectively to ‘Hell on Earth’ and to ‘Heaven on Earth’. The doors are guarded by two poker-faced twins, one of whom always tells the truth and the other who always tells a lie. Only snag is you don’t know which twin is which… You can ask each twin a single question and then you must choose whether to enter Door A or Door B. You have just one chance.

OK. If you want to find your way to ‘Heaven on Earth’ here’s the question you should ask them each in turn: “If I were to ask the other guy which door leads to ‘Heaven on Earth’ what would he say?” You will find that both will always give you the same reply. They both will either say “Door A” or they will both say “Door B”. If they both say “A” you need to enter Door B. If they both say “B” then I strongly suggest you head for Door A.

Right. Now consider the disinformation man who sometimes tells the truth but who just as often tells you untruths. This is a Mirage Man and there is no way you can be sure whether he’s telling you the truth or telling you lies. Richard Doty was just such a Mirage Man –and he very probably still is. John Lundberg is another Mirage Man.

Now don’t get me wrong. I like John and I enjoy conversation with him but if your life depended on everything he told you I’d recommend extreme caution. One can discuss his fine documentary film Mirage Men (which I strongly recommend all UFO researchers to see if they haven’t done so already) and there would be no reason to think that he’d lie to you. Other topics such as who created the Roswell Slides Hoax are just a little more difficult for him, so you shouldn’t expect a straight answer. He could deny responsibility or he could say --as the guardians of secrets often do—“We can neither confirm nor deny what you suggest…..” Trouble is that few believe that sort of response and, as far as he’s concerned, it’s much better to say nothing at all.

What, of course Mirage Men do when confronted by the disclosure of an uncomfortable secret is to get their friends and colleagues to publicly cast doubt on the veracity of their accuser(s). That is why, Burnt, you may well find certain people whispering in your ear that Wingfield is a liar or a disinformation agent himself. I’m not!

George

P.S. Hi, John. I do realize that you are reading every word of what’s written here. ‘Ostension’ apart, you can respond to what I say though I’m not exactly expecting you to do so!
Click to expand...
My daughters and I watched this scenario play out in the David Bowie children's movie Labyrinth the other day...
 
I am (and have been for years) so jaded with Roswell that even if headlines across the planet announced something like "Roswel first hand witness confesses all on deathbed!" - I could care less. Not interested. Done.

However, I'm still going to follow the slides debacle because I would love to see repercussions ensued by the guilty. But as far as "new" Roswell news, evidence, etc....forget it.
 
Han said:
I cannot and will not accept the testimony of charlatans, and make no mistake this is what they are. the attempt to drive a wedge between us has been successful as demonstrated by your post.
Click to expand...

I'm not following what you're saying in that post, Han. What was demonstrated by my post?
 
Dr. O'Connor wrote "Guys, the placard is false, ignore it" He then goes on to suggest the remains should be examined further, saying the placard/San fran as a possible museum location.
I am confused- is he trying to say the placard is completely false, or not.
 
I want to say sorry to Constance, I let me emotions get the better of me.
I can't excuse what I wrote, but I would like to try to explain why I was so upset.

I met some friends for a drink last night, one of the things we spoke about, is the fact that people are being literally driven into the sea (Mediterranean).

It is history repeating itself, and it frightens me how people can't see that.

I wish I had a solution, but I don't, the only thing I know is that people are dying, and we have to work together, or it will never stop.

I am sorry for taking liberties, it was wrong of me to speak about how or what you think, it is your property not mine, and I can't see things exactly the way you do and vice versa, I know that I went too far, and I am sorry for that.

I find it so frustrating that you seem still have any trust in the slides, or the "experts" hired by the slide owners.

the reason I said that the article you posted was irrelevant was because the remains in question are still available for "testing".
you can go to the American Museum of Natural History and see the bones for yourself:
American Museum of Natural History

That is never going to be the case with the Roswell slides. a Picture alone is not enough, the body/skeleton is required, and even then more than one example is needed, like with h. floresiensis it is not just based on one skeleton.
Even if George is right about it being a model, which I don't agree with, because of the matching features in the slides and the Mesa Verde museum display and records, or if it is an entirely new species of "human" there is zero Roswell connection, and photography can be extremely deceptive, two slides of poor quality just do not qualify as "evidence" of anything apart from a poor photographer.

I am slightly uncomfortable saying this but in the past people carried out taxidermy on human remains for financial gains, who knows what happened to the remains depicted in the slides, but the other thing is that the museum staff did not think the mummy was "unusual" or of huge significance, I would trust there expertise, especially given that they actually examined the body first hand, over any "expert" who's opinion is based solely on two bad quality slides. The thing is that the body has now be repatriated for want of a better word, so there will be no DNA testing etc, and that is the only remaining buttress of any notion that anything other than a hoax was perpetrated, the masterstroke if you will. There is no body, just bad pictures of it.

I am sincerely sorry for allowing my frustration to cloud my judgement, and that I took things so personally.
I will try to learn from this mistake.

Best wishes. Harry.
 
Last Laugh said:
The image could not have been taken in the last 12 months, the child was buried many years ago. And if one was going to take photos now to defraud, why not construct a model that would look less like a human?

It's entirely possible that the principals realized what they had, but I think it makes more sense that the photos are actually from the late 40s.
Click to expand...

DUMMY NOT MUMMY!

Last Laugh,

I rather think you have misunderstood what I am saying about the Roswell Slide images having been photographed in the past twelve months. I suggested that the hoaxers took the photos of a dummy not a mummy. The head of their dummy may well have been modeled on the mummified head of a Native American two-year-old in order to give the creature a humanoid appearance. At one time there were several such mummified corpses of young Native American children in museums like Mesa Verde and the Million Dollar Museum at White's City, New Mexico (now closed). Most, if not all, were given back to the tribal people and were reburied years ago. The head of the "alien" in the Roswell Slides --which is not attached to the rest of its body-- may well have been fashioned to look like one of these mummified heads of which there are quite a few old photographs around but not ones that look exactly like the "Roswell Slides".

The mysteriousuniverse.org website has a story which attempts to link Hilda & Bernerd Ray of Midland, TX, to the Million Dollar Museum and one of these small mummified children. I don't know whether there's any truth in such a link but it does give support to the fall-back position that has been adopted by promoters of the bogus slides which is: Oops, sorry! That wasn't a Roswell Alien after all and it must have been a mummified Native American child which Hilda & Bernerd happened to photograph back in 1947.

I don't buy that one either as I'm sure the whole story of finding the slides and their supposed connection to Hilda & Bernerd Ray (who were real people) and Hilda's supposed close friendship with Mamie Eisenhower is false. The replica of a mummified child's head in the slides does not seem to fit the skeletal body that's with it and we are told that body exhibits several features which prove that it could not possibly have been human (see my posting of yesterday).

These considerations give further reason for thinking that the slides really depict a carefully constructed special effects dummy (with separate head and body) rather than a small mummified child. The photos were almost certainly taken during the last twelve months and this hoax/scam was very specifically prepared for presentation at Jaime Maussan's Cinco de Mayo UFO/alien extravaganza.
 
Han said:
I want to say sorry to Constance, I let me emotions get the better of me.
I can't excuse what I wrote, but I would like to try to explain why I was so upset.

I met some friends for a drink last night, one of the things we spoke about, is the fact that people are being literally driven into the sea (Mediterranean).

It is history repeating itself, and it frightens me how people can't see that.

I wish I had a solution, but I don't, the only thing I know is that people are dying, and we have to work together, or it will never stop.

I am sorry for taking liberties, it was wrong of me to speak about how or what you think, it is your property not mine, and I can't see things exactly the way you do and vice versa, I know that I went too far, and I am sorry for that.

I find it so frustrating that you seem still have any trust in the slides, or the "experts" hired by the slide owners.

the reason I said that the article you posted was irrelevant was because the remains in question are still available for "testing".
you can go to the American Museum of Natural History and see the bones for yourself:
American Museum of Natural History

That is never going to be the case with the Roswell slides. a Picture alone is not enough, the body/skeleton is required, and even then more than one example is needed, like with h. floresiensis it is not just based on one skeleton.
Even if George is right about it being a model, which I don't agree with, because of the matching features in the slides and the Mesa Verde museum display and records, or if it is an entirely new species of "human" there is zero Roswell connection, and photography can be extremely deceptive, two slides of poor quality just do not qualify as "evidence" of anything apart from a poor photographer.

I am slightly uncomfortable saying this but in the past people carried out taxidermy on human remains for financial gains, who knows what happened to the remains depicted in the slides, but the other thing is that the museum staff did not think the mummy was "unusual" or of huge significance, I would trust there expertise, especially given that they actually examined the body first hand, over any "expert" who's opinion is based solely on two bad quality slides. The thing is that the body has now be repatriated for want of a better word, so there will be no DNA testing etc, and that is the only remaining buttress of any notion that anything other than a hoax was perpetrated, the masterstroke if you will. There is no body, just bad pictures of it.

I am sincerely sorry for allowing my frustration to cloud my judgement, and that I took things so personally.
I will try to learn from this mistake.

Best wishes. Harry.
Click to expand...

Don't worry about it, Harry. You're clearly a very sensitive human being occupied with the troubles and sufferings of all the creatures of this world on many levels. It seems you are also committed to some ideas about the uniqueness of our species that I don't share. No problem. :)
 
George Wingfield said:
. . . These considerations give further reason for thinking that the slides really depict a carefully constructed special effects dummy (with separate head and body) rather than a small mummified child. The photos were almost certainly taken during the last twelve months and this hoax/scam was very specifically prepared for presentation at Jaime Maussan's Cinco de Mayo UFO/alien extravaganza.
Click to expand...

Prove it, George, and I'll be personally grateful because it might finally demonstrate to people how deeply debased the Lundberg group are and what their intentions have been all along.
 
Constance said:
Don't worry about it, Harry. You're clearly a very sensitive human being occupied with the troubles and sufferings of all the creatures of this world on many levels. It seems you are also committed to some ideas about the uniqueness of our species that I don't share. No problem. :)
Click to expand...

Thank you Constance. I am grateful.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I have no doubt the slides, as advertised, were taken between 1947 and 1949. But it doesn't really matter, right?
Click to expand...

DUMMY NOT MUMMY !

Gene,

You may be a Forum Super Hero, but NO! It really does matter when the slides were taken. That would show the difference between this being a carefully prepared hoax/scam --as I maintain-- and an unfortunate mistake along these lines: "Oops, sorry! That wasn't a Roswell Alien after all and it must have been a mummified Native American child which Hilda & Bernerd Ray happened to photograph back in 1947".

These hoaxers go to extraordinary lengths to deceive their intended victims into thinking that their "Roswell" photographs were actually taken back in 1947. Let me give you an example of this. Soon after Ray Santilli presented his "Alien Autopsy" at the London Museum on May 5, 1995, he grudgingly allowed me to interview him (no camera or tape recorder allowed) about his autopsy film. My first question was how could he prove that the autopsy footage had actually been taken in 1947 as he claimed. He showed me an impressive letter to him from a senior executive of Eastman Kodak in Rochester, NY, assuring everyone that a piece of 16 mm film which he had sent them for identification had been manufactured in 1947. I could see that the letter was genuine and I then asked him whether the piece he had sent them was a bit which actually depicted the alien on the autopsy table. He assured me that it was.

This was, of course, a bare-faced lie as I found out later. Ray was knowledgeable about film and had mailed them a cut off piece of blank 16 mm runner which he knew damn well had been manufactured in 1947 by its edge markings. In fact there was never any 16 mm film supposedly taken by the mysterious (non-existent) cameraman at Roswell. All of his autopsy footage was faked in London in 1994 or 1995 on a modern camcorder and produced by some of the very same people who have now faked the Roswell Slides. Santilli made at least $1,000,000 (some say much more) from this scam and there was a movement demanding that he should be prosecuted for fraud though I don't think this ever happened.

Ray Santilli told me and others many such lies and claimed that he had photographs of the crashed Roswell flying saucer and also of President Truman standing beside an alien body. After several weeks of investigation and checking all the things he claimed I found there was barely a single shred of truth in any of it. This is why I've had no qualms about calling him a fraudster. When I started telling audiences this at various UFO conferences in 1996 I was often heckled and barracked and I'm sure that many Roswell Alien believers would have flung rotten tomatoes at me if they'd had them.

Some of the characters at today's UFO conferences are still promoting totally false stories of alien contact and the like but at least I hope that folk now are slightly more amenable to listening to what I say --rather than to Jaime Maussan or Linda Howe who both still maintain that Santilli's 1995 "Alien Autopsy" was the genuine thing.

George
 
I'm so very confused here, George. There is no reason to think that the image is anything but a human mummy. Nothing compelling in the so called differences, especially since you aren't examining the body itself, just a couple blurry images. The images are taken at the Mesa Verde museum, as verified by the floor tiles and the benches that are still there! And then, in the Mesa Verde journal, is a record of a mummy that is described exactly as the image shows, including the shirt (covering the clavicle!) and the missing left leg. So many things point to this being a real mummy, and nothing really points to it being a dummy. Nothing except some suspect opinions of people that might need to take a second look.

I'm not supporting the promoters here, it's possible that they knew what they had all along, but.... what again makes you think it's a dummy? Please note that I have previously refuted the doctors claims about no clavicles, no patella, etc. And actually, I think it's the doctor that's attempting a hoax. No clavicle? did he look at the slide?

So tell me - is the top image a dummy too? It actually looks more like an alien to me.

mummy.jpg
 
Last Laugh said:
I'm so very confused here, George. There is no reason to think that the image is anything but a human mummy. Nothing compelling in the so called differences, especially since you aren't examining the body itself, just a couple blurry images. The images are taken at the Mesa Verde museum, as verified by the floor tiles and the benches that are still there! And then, in the Mesa Verde journal, is a record of a mummy that is described exactly as the image shows, including the shirt (covering the clavicle!) and the missing left leg. So many things point to this being a real mummy, and nothing really points to it being a dummy. Nothing except some suspect opinions of people that might need to take a second look.

I'm not supporting the promoters here, it's possible that they knew what they had all along, but.... what again makes you think it's a dummy? Please note that I have previously refuted the doctors claims about no clavicles, no patella, etc. And actually, I think it's the doctor that's attempting a hoax. No clavicle? did he look at the slide?
Click to expand...

Hi, Last Laugh

I think a lot of people who are trying to follow this "Roswell Slides" saga are very confused by now and that's mostly because the hoaxmaster(s) are playing with us. We know there are several versions of the slides --some very low resolution and some high resolution. It's very possible that slight differences of the "alien" corpse between the versions may lead people who are allowed to see them to reach different conclusions. Some experts will say the corpse is definitely non-human and others will insist that it is a mummified child.

That is one reason I'm sure the photographs were taken recently rather than in 1947/1948 which is what the hoaxmaster(s) would have you believe. The placard too which appears in the case is highly suspicious and it was deliberately blurred out by the hoaxers --if not actually put there by them. There may well be versions of this slide with a deblurred placard that reads: MUMMIFIED BODY OF TWO YEAR OLD BODY ........ and other versions where the deblurred placard can be made to read something entirely different. Maybe if Maussan had triumphed and his alien had been widely accepted at the Mexico City event the placard would have been deblurred to read: EMBALMED BODY OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL BIOLOGICAL ENTITY RECOVERED FROM FLYING DISK NEAR ROSWELL, N.M., JULY 1947. (From the MJ-12 Collection, Army Air Force Hangar 18, Wright Field, Ohio)

We still have the enigma of Richard O'Connor, M.D. I'd never previously heard of this guy but I suppose he's a genuine doctor even though he seems to believe all that Maussan tells him. If so, he at least must have been shown a high resolution version of the slides where the corpse displays distinct non-human features. Otherwise one has to think that he's a charlatan. He is reported to have said that the deblurred "MUMMIFIED ..." message on the placard is completely false and should be disregarded.

The strong possibility that there are several different versions of the slides which may well have been altered using PhotoShop (or similar) reinforces my belief that the slides were tailor-made for Jaime Maussan's extravaganza during the last 12 months and NOT in 1947. These "perception management" guys are pretty good at what they do and if one doesn't watch very carefully they will run rings round one.
 
Back
Top