Roswell Slides Solve the mystery in 1.5 minutes (Your independent verification welcomed)

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
the " captain obvious " solution to this =

find independant images of the museum exhibit in question - or testimony from the museum that owns it .

The problem was that there are/were a lot more child mummies around than you might think. So many mummies, so little time...

Anyway, I hope to be able to post details from the relevant museum. The question will then be whether to post those details in this thread (which few people will be reading by then) or start YET ANOTHER thread about all this nonsense (in which case I'll probably get strung up since virtually everyone has accepted the mummy solution already so anything more is a waste of time...).

Here is a Gif that allows quick verification for the end of the first line.
Everybody can easilly notice the deblur from Nab Lator matches the double exposure (above the first line) on the original provided by Slidebox Media.

How old is that picture said to be? All glass display cases were not in use until the 1960s and later. The normal display case prior to the 60s had wooden corner fixtures for a very long time.

I have personally taken note of all those supposed UFOlogists and celebrities in attendence.

Edgar Mitchell's apparent support truly makes me doubt the validity of the entire disclosure enterprise. A sad day, indeed.

And who do they think they were fooling with this? You can see someone's grandmother standing behind the case for crying-out-loud. Amateur Hour on this level makes me wonder if maybe the whole show was intended to discredit further research.

Ugh, like the UFO community needs help looking like a bunch of crazy, gullible frauds.

There are so many good cases, so many interesting potential proofs, but this - THIS gets the news.

I call shananigans.

Looks like another dead baby to me. The truth is out there but a partly decomposed mummy baby doesn't really make me think... ERRR MAHHH GURRRDDD ARIEANS!!!!

originally posted by: Xtrozero
How old is that picture said to be? All glass display cases were not in use until the 1960s and later.

Well, the claim by the promoters of the slide has been that the slides were taken in 1947.

The evidence for that claim has been, um, less than entirely persuasive.

originally posted by: IsaacKoi

originally posted by: Xtrozero
How old is that picture said to be? All glass display cases were not in use until the 1960s and later.

Well, the claim by the promoters of the slide has been that the slides were taken in 1947.

The evidence for that claim has been, um, less than entirely persuasive.

The display case gives it away then.... It is pretty damn hard to re-create 1947 just right if it is not truly a 1947 picture.

originally posted by: skunkape23
I immediately recognized it as a mummified infant.
It didn't take a year or a team of experts.

All the pictures I have seen of fetus's look human, they do not have large heads and look like aliens.... Just saying..

ID

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
I'd like way more on the deblurring custom image btw- invite Nab here to explain

Nab Lator asked me to let you know, in case you think he has special expertise, that didn't read the manual for the software (SmartDeblur) but instead:

I clicked on the buttons and figured out quickly how to improve the automatically generated kernel by trial and error.

IsaacKoi, I'd like to thank you and Nab Lator for the efforts you and the rest of your adhoc team put into proving what patently obvious to anyone who was willing to be honest with themselves or functional enough to perform a 3 second Google search of images.

THANK YOU.

I imagine the potential for monetary loss (rather than riches) was the ultimate driving factor behind the promoters. That said, it always astounds me how horridly these type underestimate the crowd.

It begs the question, could they have been so ignorant and or stupid as to really think this would survive as a "case" longer than a few days once the genuine images were on the Internet? I know most of the promoters involved believe anything they hear and seem to have zero critical thinking skills (especially if there's a documentary budget or speaker's circuit invite in the offing) but have they no shame or pride either?

A documentary about two slides found in a box that show the bodies of what some believe to be aliens. The photos were taken between 1939 and 1946...

Kodachrome (2015) - IMDB in comedy category

Photo taken between 1939 and 1946…hmmm. That would put it before Roswell which was July 1947. Also curious this short film is in the comedy category. Strange since it was supposed to be a documentary on the slide authenticity. Hmmm, the director and writer is not chicago-based Adam Dew but Catherine A. Callahan, an actress who's worked in comedy movies and TV shows and lives in NYC and California. Maybe the Roswell Slide Team can run the deblur software on this situation and give us some reason why this isn't Dew's project and why it's a comedy. Something tells me that's the real story that is yet to be revealed.

Issac - I would love to see a follow up to this pertaining to the actual museum where this photo was taken. This is a watershed event in ufology. Whereas, my personal view is that it would be audacious for us as a species to think we are the only sentient beings in the universe, it is important to expose the hoaxers & their hoaxes as thoroughly as possible. Separate the wheat from the chaff. A lot of people had high hopes for Dolan, but I see on his FB page he is backpedaling from his considerable involvement with this hoax like crazy. Such a sad state of affairs for ufology. I'm down to just Jacques Valle at this point. His theory is becoming more relevant as quantum physics String Theory further develops, along with the Multi-Verse Theory. Besides Valle, not sure there is any credibility left in this field, with the possible exception of Stanton. But, imo, he hurt himself a lot with the supposed Truman & Eisenhower memos. a reply to: IsaacKoi

originally posted by: Springer
IsaacKoi, I'd like to thank you and Nab Lator for the efforts you and the rest of your adhoc team

Many thanks for the kind words Springer and I'll pass them on to the rest of the team. Just to avoid any confusion, I should make clear it isn't "my" team in the sense that I'm a leader of it or anything. We are a very informal group that happen to have had the same interest and had fun working together on this.

It begs the question, could they have been so ignorant and or stupid as to really think this would survive as a "case" longer than a few days once the genuine images were on the Internet?

You'll have to ask them...

a reply to: IsaacKoi

I'd love to ask "them" but I doubt I'd get a straight answer.

originally posted by: Springer
I'd love to ask "them" but I doubt I'd get a straight answer.

By the way Springer, I have a couple of other treats for you and members of ATS.

I'd like to ask for a bit of help in relation to one of them, so I'll be bothering you shortly.

originally posted by: LiteraryJourney

.... A lot of people had high hopes for Dolan, but I see on his FB page he is backpedaling from his considerable involvement with this hoax like crazy. Such a sad state of affairs for ufology. I'm down to just Jacques Valle at this point. ....

I try to be balanced about people who make a living out of the commercial side of ufology. And DupontDeux said earlier in this thread

For what it is worth: I heard Dolan on Coast2Coast after the conference and he he clearly did not believe the bodies to be alien. In fact, he went out of his way to avoid giving a straight answer to whether or not he thought the pictures actually depicted alien bodies. Frankly he seemed embarrassed about it all.

Link

I would say he does seem a little non-committal and clearly steers away from endorsing it personally. But is also very aware he doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds (the C2C audience). So he also talks about how impressed he was by the various speakers and what they had to say.

I've listened to the part of the interview with Richard Dolan and he does say "I can't say that I'd bet that it was a hoax" .

One caller even challenges him about how all these researchers "can't even read the label next to the body"....and Dolan declares "the placard........no one has been able to decipher it".

I got the feeling he was was somewhat underwhelmed by it all but didn't want to say so live on radio.

Whether you want to give Dolan the benefit of the doubt on that is up to you after listening to the show.

When I read this:

I wrote the following piece a few hours before the alleged deciphering of the placard of the Roswell Slides was announced, indicating the body depicted is that of a two-year-old mummified child -- although the deciperhing [sic] itself is being claimed to be a hoax.

(emphasis mine)
on his own site (Dolan's) I have to just shake my head in disgust and sadness for what used to be an interesting phenom....

a reply to: Springer

It is still an interesting phenomenon. These huckster and hoaxers, charlatans and conmen are a symptom of the phenomenon and as such are interesting too. In fact, they are more fascinating than the videos of specks in the sky or photos of blurred birds.

Roll up, roll up! Come observe the cavalcade of ufologists. See the incredible Greer, who can make your cash disappear before your very own eyes! See the amazing Dolan, whose brain is on the outside! See the astonishing Moulton Howe - a lady who can turn cows inside out! See the unbelievable Maussan, who can make a balloon into anything! Watch the astounding Bragalia as he pierces himself with his own sword! And there's more, more, more! Only $350 entry fee.

Though despite these people I'm sure there's a real phenomenon out there.

a reply to: torsion

I KNOW there's a real phenomena "happening" out there (don't know what it is other than real), that's why I get a little disturbed when I see things like this taken for anything other than the circus sideshows they are. :-(

Not sure if this has already be posted.

Maussan releases the forensic report.

It's in Spanish of course so here's a Google translate of the conclusion.

First is a central image of anthropomorphic characteristics of humanoid type , in a state of artificial cadaveric conservation corresponding to formaldehyde and cooling and having technical characteristic of evisceration by necropsy.

Second, which by its morphology and anatomy observed and analyzed , together a number of anomalies that are not compatible to human life as individual adhesion of each pathology and each syndrome may be a percentage decline would determine the likelihood of coexistence the life of human kind known.

In the report 'not compatible to human life' is in bold and all caps!