Alien in Mexico?

[edit on 1-1-2008 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Originally posted by Palasheea
You are doing exactly what Saviorcomplex is doing -- you are not presenting a fair and balanced presentation about this video and you are only posting that information on the internet that SUPPORTS YOUR VIEW.

And just like SaviorComplex, you didn't bother posting that information in that paper that refutes the information in that first article they published.

Um, yes I did post information about the second article (and other related information)!

Please read my post.

I included the following:


I think your criticism is misplaced.

Kind Regards,

Isaac

My criticism is not misplaced as far as those here who DEBUNK everything that shows up in this forum on a regular basis but in this case, I see that you did include information in your post that's got some of that information from that one article in it so good for you!

Keep up the good work!

And one more thing... Kudo's to that data bank of yours! Just remembered the list you gave us of all of those free UFO e-books that are online, a few of which I've never read before so thanks for posting that information!

I'm also very impressed that you are not just posting information on cases that only support your own personal opinion on things... I can see in this regard, my criticism was very misplaced... my apologies about that.

Anyway, thanks for the information you have in your data bank on this particular video!! After taking the time to look it over, I'm very impressed!

[edit on 1-1-2008 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
I'll cut and paste below some details from my database of infamous UFO videos. (Internos - the relevant entry is at "Annex 06").

Isaac, I'm impressed by your research. Any chance this Database of yours is available at ATS? Sorry if that's common knowledge, I haven't seen it in my searching here, and I'm still fairly new.

If your database is not available at ATS, any chance you could send me relevant casefile information and/or EBE evidence that has not already been reported on in my compilation that is available at ATS? (There is a link to that thread in my signature, as well as several other ATS Compilations of different categories)

Sorry to just jump in here, but you are exactly the type of ATS member I'm looking for. Like Internos and Gazrok, you seem to have an extensive database of past research to draw from. I'm really looking to combine as much data as possible from as many of us (like us) that research, and compile it all into case reports. In searching ATS for data on this case (extensive searching) I could not find your report.

Anyway, just curious, sorry to stray off topic.
Great work to ALL getting to the bottom of this one. It took several threads, but with the recreation video proving the kid could hide behind the pole, I'm finally nailing the coffin shut on this case in my mind. That was the key piece of evidence for me...

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Originally posted by free_spirit
The three kids were interrogated several times together and separately
by the researchers and they sustained their story preserving all the details
every time.

Not according to some press reports, which suggest that the relevant kids admitted that this was a hoax. The full story is a bit more complicated...

IsaacKoi,
You did an EXCELLENT job of presenting the information on this case the way it should be presented regardless if one is pro on con in terms of this video's authenticity or not.
Thanks for taking the time to do that. I will be printing your post out to use as a 'model' in case presentation.

The truth of this case as well as many others rely on the actual witnesses'
testimonials. The only way to establish this incident was "staged" would
be with the actual confession from the kids involved wich has no occurred
at any time since that day. These three kids have been appearing on
national television in Mexico as well as other tv shows from other countries
after the incident and they still sustain their story. This is fact. All the rest
is just speculation and hypotesis.

We may be arguing about the authenticity of this case for the rest of our
lives without getting to a conclusion. But the facts tell these three kids
came forward telling their story to the world and they still keep their
word.

By the way Jaime Maussan was not the original researcher of this case.
Maussan came to know this case after a year of the incident while he
was visiting Merida. The original researchers are Mr. Gustavo Aleman
and Mr. Emilio Cetz from OVNI Merida. They discovered the case and
made the investigation for a year, not Maussan. You get it ?

Jaime Maussan was just one of many researchers involved later as
the story attracted the attention of the media. These are facts.
The rest are speculations. Scott Corrales as well as those mentioned
reporters from Merida came later after Jaime Maussan presented the story
on national television in Mexico a year later. Therefore neither Maussan,
Scott Corrales or the two reporters have nothing to do with the original
investigation on this case. You got it ?

Jaime Maussan gives a scientific Analysis of the alien captured on mobile phone camera in mexico

Although this is a bit off the topic about ufos but it is still interesting. Jamie Maussan reviews the alien footage in caught in mexico on a guys mobile phone. I remember watching the video ages ago and thought it was a fake and it was classed as prank by the mexican media - but now Jamie says this is untrue according to new scientific evidence including high radiation at the site.

Source: realufos.blogspot.com...







I've been doing my own analysis of this video based on the information we have about it as posted by IssacKoi.
I've also been analyzing the video itself and the so-called "alien" in this video and will post my analysis here in this thread sometime soon.

As for J. Mausson's analysis of it... well, he's the most well-known ufologist in Mexico so of course he found out about this one as it was by that time all over the Mexican news and on the web.

And sure, some of his material over the years have turned out to be duds after further analysis, but certainly not all of them. As it is with any of the well-known ufologists out there, we have to have are BS radars up because we already know that they sometimes will sensationalize things just to be able to sell their story. This is the way it is and the way it's always been...

So are we to say that it's an all or nothing thing in regards to Mausson's credibility? Well, I can't answer that one except to say that for us it's a case by case thing when it comes to this particular researcher (and many others too) but, it's up to us to analyze whatever he presents to us and decide for ourselves if it's a hoax or not --- And in those cases where we can't prove that -- then it's up to us if we want to BELIEVE or not if it's real -- But there's no harm in being on the fence about things either which is the safest route to go in cases like this.

Of course, I would not be writing any of this if I didn't find a few things about this video that are worth looking into more. The only way to do that was to analyze each frame of this video including reviewing over the witness' statements and so on...

just my .02 worth.



[edit on 1-1-2008 by Palasheea]

Everyone is free to believe whatever he wish, i'm not interested at all to convince somebody. The only thing that i want to say is that this case has ZERO evidences, just claimings, a crappy video, some involved people who claim that is genuine and some other involved people who claim that it has been a prank, PERIOD. May i ask to see some evidence, at this point? For evidences i mean EVIDENCES, not claimings.
And let's assume that someone has found radiations there (still waiting to see evidences) WHAT WOULD IT PROVE ?
Anyway, i really hope that someone else will follow the case and clarify it conclusively: and if so far it has been so controversial, of course is not my bad.
It seems that the investigations stopped on January 2006: i hope that there's something more recent about it somewhere.

And sure, some of his material over the years have turned out to be duds after further analysis, but certainly not all of them. As it is with any of the well-known ufologists out there, we have to have are BS radars up because we already know that they sometimes will sensationalize things just to be able to sell their story. This is the way it is and the way it's always been...

No, Palasheea: he should be BANNED from every media IMHO, even if i appreciate your last post: his reliability is ZERO, he tried to pass for genuine confirmed hoaxes, he claimed that some documents were original even AFTER he was aware they were hoaxes.. He is the shame of the ufology, and i think that his presence in this specific case is one of the reasons it got so much controversial. He is one of the reasons why ufology is not being taken seriously. How many hoaxes shall we suffer from him before realizing that he isn't deserving to be taken seriously?


[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

internos,

Could you please give us some of your insights on the paragraph below in the "Theories" section of Stanton Friedman's wikipedia page?

Given his engineering background and work on the Hill Star Map in addition to Roswell, Friedman has concluded that in July 1947 an electrodynamically propelled scout vehicle from a large, interstellar "mothership" originating from Zeta Reticuli crashed in the New Mexico desert, perhaps due to a lightning storm. Friedman hypothesizes that the U.S. Government is in possession[citation needed]of both the craft's and occupants' remains, and maintains a cover-up to prevent this becoming public knowledge. Mr. Friedman has published and lectured at length regarding the myriad details and accounts he has accumulated throughout his years of study that have led him to that conclusion.

en.wikipedia.org...




[edit on 2-1-2008 by Palasheea]

reply to post by Palasheea

Stanton Friedman is a Physicist and a guy worthy of full respect from me. First of all he's TRAINED: he wouldn't never state that the presence of radiations near a living being could be an evidence, because he KNOWS that a living being emitting radiations is a dying being (no matter the race) but maybe is better to forgive this facet of the topic . I disagree just with some theories, but i can state safetly that he is one of the most important contributors in the field of the ufology. No matter if he made mistakes: one thing is a mistake, another one is a deliberate hoax. Roswell is a darn cold case, but what he states is more or less what i think (but i can't state due to lack of evidences) about Roswell.
There is no way to comparise him to Maussan.
Black/White | Heaven/Hell and so on...


[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

Originally posted by internos

It seems that the investigations stopped on January 2006: i hope that there's something more recent about it somewhere.

Wrong. The investigation did not stopped on January 2006 as you claim.
The investigation is still active and new tests on the location have been
made by a scientist team. In September 2007 a team from Mexico city
lead by professor Soar Gutierrez went to Merida to make a full coverage
radiation meassures of the actual location and the neighborhood including
several surrounding blocks as the radiation levels were extending.

The results of this research were sent to a goverment's office and
presented on national tv in Mexico. At the same time a japanese research
team also arrived to Merida and conducted their own tests at the location
finding the same radiations levels and strange anomalies in the ambient.
The japanese team interviewed the witnesses again and got their
testimonials of the incident. All these results were presented on national
tv in Japan in October 2007 as an update on this story that is very popular
in Japan.

As you can see the case is still under investigation and active in it's
consequences.

Originally posted by free_spirit

Wrong. The investigation did not stopped on January 2006 as you claim.
The investigation is still active and new tests on the location have been
made by a scientist team. In September 2007 a team from Mexico city
lead by professor Soar Gutierrez went to Merida to make a full coverage
radiation meassures of the actual location and the neighborhood including
several surrounding blocks as the radiation levels were extending.

The results of this research were sent to a goverment's office and
presented on national tv in Mexico. At the same time a japanese research
team also arrived to Merida and conducted their own tests at the location
finding the same radiations levels and strange anomalies in the ambient.
The japanese team interviewed the witnesses again and got their
testimonials of the incident. All these results were presented on national
tv in Japan in October 2007 as an update on this story that is very popular
in Japan.

As you can see the case is still under investigation and active in it's
consequences.

First of all i'm NOT claimin' it, re.read the posts if one time is not enough for you: Ive said that "it seems".
BTW:
ARE YOU ABLE to provide sources for your claimings?


[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

Originally posted by internos
reply to post by Palasheea

 

Stanton Friedman is a Physicist and a guy worthy of full respect from me. First of all he's TRAINED: he wouldn't never state that the presence of radiations near a living being could be an evidence, because he KNOWS that a living being emitting radiations is a dying being (no matter the race) but maybe is better to forgive this facet of the topic

. I disagree just with some theories, but i can state safetly that he is one of the most important contributors in the field of the ufology. No matter if he made mistakes: one thing is a mistake, another one is a deliberate hoax. Roswell is a darn cold case, but what he states is more or less what i think (but i can't state due to lack of evidences) about Roswell.
There is no way to comparise him to Maussan.

Black/White | Heaven/Hell and so on...


[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

internos,

I'm asking you for your insights and comments on the CONTENTS of paragraph below -- not if you like Friedman or not.

Given his engineering background and work on the Hill Star Map in addition to Roswell, Friedman has concluded that in July 1947 an electrodynamically propelled scout vehicle from a large, interstellar "mothership" originating from Zeta Reticuli crashed in the New Mexico desert, perhaps due to a lightning storm. Friedman hypothesizes that the U.S. Government is in possession[citation needed]of both the craft's and occupants' remains, and maintains a cover-up to prevent this becoming public knowledge. Mr. Friedman has published and lectured at length regarding the myriad details and accounts he has accumulated throughout his years of study that have led him to that conclusion.

reply to post by Palasheea


Actually, i answered to your question: i think he's right, but i disagree with some details: i don't know, for example, how he reached the conclusion that the occupants of the craft were "reticulians": B&B hill and roswell are TWO cases: two REAL cases, not ridiculous like this one.

Originally posted by internos
reply to post by Palasheea

 

Actually, i answered to your question: i think he's right, but i disagree with some details: i don't know, for example, how he reached the conclusion that the occupants of the craft were "reticulians": B&B hill and roswell are TWO cases: two REAL cases, not ridiculous like this one.

What details of that paragraph do you disagree with?

Thanks. And please try not to DIVERT. Just answer the question please.

Here's the paragraph again:

Given his engineering background and work on the Hill Star Map in addition to Roswell, Friedman has concluded that in July 1947 an electrodynamically propelled scout vehicle from a large, interstellar "mothership" originating from Zeta Reticuli crashed in the New Mexico desert, perhaps due to a lightning storm. Friedman hypothesizes that the U.S. Government is in possession[citation needed]of both the craft's and occupants' remains, and maintains a cover-up to prevent this becoming public knowledge. Mr. Friedman has published and lectured at length regarding the myriad details and accounts he has accumulated throughout his years of study that have led him to that conclusion.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by Palasheea

originating from Zeta Reticuli

Unless there's some evidence i'm missing, i have no clue how he reached this conclusion: my problem is that Falcon, the alleged government insider, has been exposed like the 90% of MJ12 stuff as HOAX: my fear is that he's basing his conclusions on Falcon's or Condor's statements. If not, i'd like to look at these documentations. Since I've read much about him (Stanton), i can provide examples of many things with which i agree and less things with which i disagree.
But this is NOT a Friedman's related thred: this is a CRAPPY Maussan related thread.

[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

Given his engineering background and work on the Hill Star Map in addition to Roswell, Friedman has concluded that in July 1947 an electrodynamically propelled scout vehicle from a large, interstellar "mothership" originating from Zeta Reticuli crashed in the New Mexico desert,

OK, so you Do NOT BELIEVE, like Stanton Friedman does, that going by the Hill Star Map the alleged UFO retreived in Roswell is from Zeta Reticuli.

For now, let's just leave it at that but it's clear that even though you think Friedman is the greatest... you apparently disagree with him on what seems to be huge chunks of those conclusions he's reached in those most important cases and documents he's researched and wrote books on.


So how does this all relate to this video? It doesn't... but it doesn't relate to Maussan either because this thread is about the video which was shown several times on Mexican TV and was all over the internet before Mausson ever found out about it and looked into it.

This thread is about the video.. not Mausson.



[edit on 2-1-2008 by Palasheea]

Why would someone want to video two kids throwing a ball back and forth at night?

Originally posted by Palasheea

OK, so you Do NOT BELIEVE, like Stanton Friedman does, that going by the Hill Star Map the alleged UFO retreived in Roswell is from Zeta Reticuli.

-- ok, this is silly. Let's drop the subject.

[edit on 2-1-2008 by Palasheea]

I believe that B. Hill star map of Z1R&Z2R is correct and it doesn't matter if the people think that i'm crazy if i believe that B&B hill have been really abducted. The star map you are referring to is a drawing which could NOT match anything else of what we knew about the stars at that time, and I DO BELIEVE that is GENUINE, PERIOD.
It has been drawn before the discovery of Z1 and Z2 reticuli so there's no room for speculations here. If you knew me better, you would know that i even dedicated some avatars to the case:

This case has NOTHING to do with B&B Hill abduction. I believe that B&B hill is a genuine case, that Roswell is another one genuine case and that this IS a crappy video of a scene in which two kids are playing football and the third kid hides behind a pole and then makes a prank, END OF STORY.


[edit on 2/1/2008 by internos]

Thanks internos!

Good to know that you think the Hill case is the real thing... this gives me some hope...lol.

Oddly enough, it seems that there are many members who believe in UFO's but draw the line at alien abductions... or aliens for that matter and this to me is perplexing. My only conclusion in that is that they must think that ALL UFO's are man-made but then where did the tech. come from??

Sort of like reasoning with atheists who say there's no God but when asked where the first atom came from to create the universe, they're stumped.

Anyway, I just wanted to find out if you were one of 'those'... but since you think the Hill case is true then you do believe that there are ET's and that's what I wanted to find out.

Originally posted by Palasheea
I'm also very impressed that you are not just posting information on cases that only support your own personal opinion on things... I can see in this regard, my criticism was very misplaced... my apologies about that.

I'm perfectly happy to accept your apology. Thanks for accepting your criticism was misplaced.

Onwards and upwards,

Isaac

[edit on 2-1-2008 by IsaacKoi]