Travis Walton - September 21, 2014

[technomage]

I found Travis Walton to be credible. Usually, the ones I don't trust are narcissistic and arrogant. I also find it hard to believe that all his co-workers who saw him made up this story for some unknown reason. Nothing in what he said or how he said it indicated to me that he was lying. It doesn't mean there isn't a chance it's all a hoax, but I think the likelihood is small, in my opinion.

I think the interview was fair. I don't see the questions as "soft ball". If Gene and Chris harass a guest, they won't come back and others won't come on the show. No one likes to be badgered. Their goal is to draw out as many answers as possible in as non-confrontational manner as possible so that the guest opens and up and talks, not clams up in self-defense. It's then up to the listener to see if they like the answers (or not).

 

[marduk]

I think what adds to his credibility is that he's not pushing any particular agenda, worldview, or has a continuing ongoing saga to keep his followers going.

 

[Jimi H.]

There's more shysters blagging huge grants and securing a good living in the scientific community than are 'showmen' earning peanut's in pseudoscience jimmy lad...

Rebrand Climate Change, choo choo all aboard for another decade.

Nice try Manx, not falling for that one though

 

[Jimi H.]

I found Travis Walton to be credible. Usually, the ones I don't trust are narcissistic and arrogant.

Con-man = Confidence man. Think about it.

I also find it hard to believe that all his co-workers who saw him made up this story for some unknown reason. Nothing in what he said or how he said it indicated to me that he was lying. It doesn't mean there isn't a chance it's all a hoax, but I think the likelihood is small, in my opinion.

On what scale is alien abduction more likely than a gang of young country lads trying for a buck with a tall story? Can you imagine that non-believers would agree to that gradation of what constitutes 'likely'? If I said that the little people ate my hamster, would you believe me if I told you with a straight face and didn't brag?

I think the interview was fair. I don't see the questions as "soft ball". If Gene and Chris harass a guest, they won't come back and others won't come on the show. No one likes to be badgered. ..

Come on man, let's be real here, Chris asked 100% soft ball questions, and Gene's line of more prying questions was quickly cut off.

But I get it, you want to believe him. I'll be happy to 'believe' the UFO guy who brings data and documentation. Walton is not that guy.

 

[Jimi H.]

I think what adds to his credibility is that he's not pushing any particular agenda, worldview, or has a continuing ongoing saga to keep his followers going.

Making money/becoming famous wasn't a possible agenda? And what about his story about the 'good' aliens? Is that to please the Exopolitics/disclosure crowd who pays mucho dollar to meet the good imagined aliens/light beings?
Did you read my post where quote how modern Mormon preachers have described human-like beings from other planets? Did this provide Walton with the background and the motivation?

You write it's not an ongoing saga, but the Paracast interview was about a conference about that very story, a story where he now explains that the 'aliens' wanted to help him.

 

[kanakaris]

What exactly did Travis to exploid his story in the past 40 years ?I don't remember hearing much about Travis himself , or am i wrong ?

 

[Stagger Lee]

"..little people ate my hamster, would you believe?"
Of course not. But if a bunch of your neighbors claimed to have seen the wee folk running down the street and into the forest with a hamster in hand- and the police say, find a fresh half eaten hamster on a path- assuming your neighbors stuck to the same version of events 40 years later passing poly's and all-- I'd say you have one hell of a case/story.

 

[technomage]

Con-man = Confidence man. Think about it.

Well I put politicians on the extreme end of deception (i.e. psychopaths), so if he is a con-man, he is not quite as good at it as they are. I have to go by my gut feeling just like we all do when we evaluate whether someone is lying or not and there is insufficient information to know for sure. My gut says he is telling the truth and your gut says otherwise. I am not going to tell you you're wrong, but I can't alter my gut feeling. But I do admit that I could be wrong.

This video doesn't sway me in any particular direction. I don't know what kind of lie detector he was strapped to. Regarding trying to make money off of it: If I went through a traumatic experience, I would be quite tempted to make money off it as compensation for my trauma.

On what scale is alien abduction more likely than a gang of young country lads trying for a buck with a tall story? Can you imagine that non-believers would agree to that gradation of what constitutes 'likely'? If I said that the little people ate
my hamster, would you believe me if I told you with a straight face and didn't brag?

Using that logic, no extraordinary story is likely because there are always more mundane "likelier" explanations. But the "less likely" explanation is sometimes the right one. I don't think it's likely that the tellers of tall tales would make it through a police interrogation and multiple lie detector tests.

Come on man, let's be real here, Chris asked 100% soft ball questions, and Gene's line of more prying questions was quickly cut off.

I guess it would have been better if Chris asked him:

• Travis, have you been lying all these years about your alleged abduction experience?
• Travis, why are you lying to us?
• Travis, why have your friends been lying for 40 years?
• Travis, isn't it true you're trying to make money off of this? Doesn't that make you a suspected liar?
• Travis, you can't possibly expect us to believe this cock and bull story? Where's your evidence, you con-man?
• Travis, did you get your ideas from Mormonism? They sound awfully similar.

These kinds of questions would definitely ensure we never hear from him again and from many other guests who don't want to be told they're liars.

But I get it, you want to believe him. I'll be happy to 'believe' the UFO guy who brings data and documentation. Walton is not that guy.

It's not a matter of what I want to believe. There are plenty of abductees I don't believe. I think his case rings true to me, but if turns out it was all a hoax, I will be disappointed, but I won't go into a depression.

I would also love to 'believe' the UFO guy who brings data and documentation. Who wouldn't? But sometimes, you have to work with what you have and not throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Just curious. What type of data and documentation could Walton possibly have to offer? Perhaps some personal medical documents.. the only thing I can think of.

 

[marduk]

Making money/becoming famous wasn't a possible agenda? And what about his story about the 'good' aliens? Is that to please the Exopolitics/disclosure crowd who pays mucho dollar to meet the good imagined aliens/light beings?
Did you read my post where quote how modern Mormon preachers have described human-like beings from other planets? Did this provide Walton with the background and the motivation?

You write it's not an ongoing saga, but the Paracast interview was about a conference about that very story, a story where he now explains that the 'aliens' wanted to help him.

C'mon, how much money has the guy actually made, and besides, if it really happened what's wrong with making a bit of a buck off of it?

I mean, damn, look at all the hostage victims that have come out and written a book, given interviews, tv shows, etc and made a dime off of their traumatic experiences?

What is the guy supposed to be, some kind of saint?

And just because he since has a different interpretation doesn't mean anything. He doesn't claim to KNOW what their motivations are, he just has a plausible theory that seems to make sense to him and is probably a hell of a lot less traumatic than "the aliens zapped me" which would be pretty damn terrifying.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I was trying to recall the source of the recent interview by one of the logging crew. Turns out it was from an episode of SyFy's Paranormal Witness. I'll have to find it and see which crew member it was- but this interview really made an impression on me, when the guy broke down and described his fear of one day looking out a window to find a saucer hanging around. If indeed he is still covering a known hoax, that was some damn fine acting.

 

[kanakaris]

I was trying to recall the source of the recent interview by one of the logging crew. Turns out it was from an episode of SyFy's Paranormal Witness. I'll have to find it and see which crew member it was- but this interview really made an impression on me, when the guy broke down and described his fear of one day looking out a window to find a saucer hanging around. If indeed he is still covering a known hoax, that was some damn fine acting.

I found it on TPB

 

[Constance]

You write it's not an ongoing saga, but the Paracast interview was about a conference about that very story, a story where he now explains that the 'aliens' wanted to help him.

I don't see what's wrong with having conferences devoted to possible answers to unanswered questions, including what happened to Travis Walton. (Indeed, what would be the purpose of gathering and conferring to discuss established facts?) Our relatively intelligent species does not yet comprehend the nature of reality, and nothing is more interesting than explorations of that question. Similarly, Travis Walton is still motivated, perhaps driven, to understand what happened to him in the autumn of 1975. If by one means or another, or several means, he has continued to explore in the recesses of his consciousness and mind what happened to him during those five missing days, surely not only he but many people want to know what he might since then have understood or realized. I think that we humans generally don't realize all at once the meaning of even our ordinary experiences, and this is particularly the case regarding our anomalous experiences, especially when similar experiences have been reported by many members of our species and remain unexplained.

 

[boomerang]

I've simply never known what to make of Walton, yay or nay. What would go a long way toward tipping the balance for me would have been be a larger number of probing interviews, either singly or as a group, of his co-experiencers. One would think they would have presented a more united front over the years than has apparently been the case.

Small town mischief is almost legendary. This does not mean Walton's claims are bogus. But prankster motivation for young guys with time on their hands is not hard to imagine.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

What ever Travis experinced seems to left scars deep and his fellow workers wonder what happened to their families did any have family connected to some military groups prior to the event?

 

[Jimi H.]

"..little people ate my hamster, would you believe?"
Of course not. But if a bunch of your neighbors claimed to have seen the wee folk running down the street and into the forest with a hamster in hand- and the police say, find a fresh half eaten hamster on a path- assuming your neighbors stuck to the same version of events 40 years later passing poly's and all-- I'd say you have one hell of a case/story.

Well, what if it wasn't just my neighbors, but a group of guys who I knew very well?

What if I said that my fully clothed circus hamster returned a week later, and my friends supposedly didn't keep the clothes (which likely carried the wee wee bacteria of the wee people), but instead proceeded to dispose of them immediatly, thus destroying any possible evidence? Would you suspect that the clothes were disposed of because the clothes might actually reveal that the hamster had been at home in the crib the whole time?

And what if I failed a lie detector test on public TV, even though it took me about 10 seconds to answer a simple question, so I could steady my heart rate and think of a simple unrelated question in my head, so I could try to fool the test?

Maybe he managed to do it sometimes, but not every time? Ufology brings up some pretty damning issues in this regard (UFOLOGY SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL):

".. Although he did pass two polygraph tests, it was discovered that there was a previous test from which the polygraph examiner concluded Walton was attempting to perpetrate a hoax. It was also discovered that the questions used in the later tests had to be approved by Walton before the tests were administered.

"Another highlight in the Walton story happened in 2009 when he appeared on the television game show Moment of Truth in which he was asked, "Were you abducted by a UFO on November fifth 1975?", to which he relied, "Yes", an answer that was scored as "false" because the show's polygraph eximiner determined that Walton had been "conclusively deceptive".

Conclusively deceptive, ouch! I bet they didn't use an amateur on that program, mind you. Because there were big money at stake:

Walton stood to win up to $500,000 for his appearance on Moment of Truth. According to the show's host, Walton had still answered 14 other questions satisfactorily, which let him walk away with a tidy $25,000 despite his abduction claim being ruled false!

 

[Jimi H.]

..
Using that logic, no extraordinary story is likely because there are always more mundane "likelier" explanations. But the "less likely" explanation is sometimes the right one. ..

I see your point, but then there are UFO cases with much better evidence, cases that don't rely almost entirely of accounts from unreliable sources.

I hate to be 'that guy', but it's important when we only have trust to go on, so I'll quote Ufology again, wrt. to the reliability of his statements:

Other circumstances that cast doubt on the story are that according to a local official, the Walton family had a history of interest in UFOs stemming from several sightings, including one in 1964 by Duane Walton ( Travis's brother ), and that Travis had unsuccessfully tried to gain media exposure in order to highlight the experiences.

Walton's desire to gain media exposure isn't all that damaging in and of itself, but it was also discovered that in May of 1971, Walton had plead guilty to stealing payroll cheques and forging signatures in order to cash them. So the picture suddenly becomes one of an admitted fraud trying to gain UFO related media exposure who then just happens to go missing, only to resurface claiming to be a victim of alien abduction.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Well, I have to admit that you brought up a good question regarding the clothes Travis had been wearing during those 5 days. I mentioned it in an earlier post, wondering if any investigators thought to ask for them after his return. Perhaps it's because we didn't have the means to run such forensics as we now have today? Or this detail of the investigation was previously talked about, and I just missed it. Were the clothes disposed of by Travis and co. ?

 

[Jimi H.]

C'mon, how much money has the guy actually made, and besides, if it really happened what's wrong with making a bit of a buck off of it?...

As I've said before, I don't find anything wrong with it - unless it's a hoax!

Ufology makes a good case why they made more than a little, I've already quoted some parts above, here's another:

Walton and the crew stood to gain up to $100,000 for submitting their story to the National Enquirer. The Enquirer only paid them out $5000, but the movie, Fire In The Sky, went on to gross $19,885,552 in ticket sales during its 4 week run in theatres. Then in 1994 a VHS home video version was released, and in 2004 a DVD version was released.

Another thing that we must consider: Once you start a con and make a sizeable amount of money, there is no going back! You'd probably be accused of fraud, and be outcast of a large part of your community. All the awe you've received from complete strangers would become contempt.

 

[Jimi H.]

..
Were the clothes disposed of by Travis and co. ?

I can't remember tbh. But I believe they could have gotten back the clothes if they'd asked for it, regardless.

I'm positive that forensic investigations could reveal bacteria etc. in 1975.

I'm reading an excerpt from his book now, and Walton claims they were not stupid country folk, so they would've watched the same crime movies and UFO stories as everyone else!

Admittedly, these mountain communities are somewhat more homogeneous in their views, but there is far more diversity here than metrophiles assume. They seem to forget we're plugged into the same national media they are, not sitting here watching reruns of local news from the 1950s.