Jonathan Reed affair on tom'w's Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files on Syfy

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
How i feel about the show, it is utter trash!

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Dont bother with that shill show check out Ancient Aliens instead you might learn something.

edit on 16-11-2010 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)

Dont bother with that shill show Ancient Aliens, you won't learn anything.

Not from the commentators! Erich von Däniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, David H. Childress, Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock, Bill Birnes, Michael Cremo, Dr. Steven Greer, Linda Moulton-Howe, George Noory, Peter Fiebag, Nick Pope, and I didn't include the names I left out 'cause they're not familiar. None of these "experts" know anything and what you hear them spout is pure b.s.

And that guy Tsoukalos must have done the sex thing from "Barbarella" 'cause his hair looks just like David Hemmings'!

Originally posted by haglebert

Originally posted by draknoir2

Dont bother with that shill show check out Ancient Aliens instead you might learn something.

I did and I did... that the "History" channel has turned into the Sci Fi Channel, and The Sci Fi channel has turned into The Wrestling Channel, and that people are willing to believe anything if it's presented in a "documentary" format.

So when do we get to the truth? or how will we know weve heard the truth? and how should the truth be presented?

First, you have to recognize when you are being b.s.'ed and this show is full of b.s. The truth should be presented with irrefutable evidence. Since that is lacking in almost everything you see on the "Histerical" Channel, putting it in documentary form is just a ploy.

reply to post by MrAndy


Honestly, that website is extremely bias. Whoever was willing to put up the money to do all that and invest money in running the site for years. Obviously, has a lot of chump change money or well funded to do all those investigations. That's the big red flag for me.

Reed also mentions that they raided his house and took everything. Why not use his personal photos and make lies about it. Anything is possible I guess.

Originally posted by The Shrike

Dont bother with that shill show Ancient Aliens, you won't learn anything.

Not from the commentators! Erich von Däniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, David H. Childress, Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock, Bill Birnes, Michael Cremo, Dr. Steven Greer, Linda Moulton-Howe, George Noory, Peter Fiebag, Nick Pope, and I didn't include the names I left out 'cause they're not familiar. None of these "experts" know anything and what you hear them spout is pure b.s.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. Your post makes no sense. Ancient Aliens is a well produced and thought provoking show. What do you mean none of them knows anything? Nick Pope has probably forgotten more than you'll ever know.

reply to post by haglebert


You "know" it's not a hoax? As much as I am interested in aliens and UFOs and as much as I want things like this to be true, I am not going to let my desire blind me.

I am glad I keep making you laugh though.

reply to post by amfirst


I sort of agree with you. I really don't know how it could be written otherwise if all you found was evidence against his claims, though. I mostly agree with their hall of shame (of the people I am familiar with), and their hall of fame has some of my favorite people in the UFO field.

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by haglebert

Originally posted by draknoir2

Dont bother with that shill show check out Ancient Aliens instead you might learn something.

I did and I did... that the "History" channel has turned into the Sci Fi Channel, and The Sci Fi channel has turned into The Wrestling Channel, and that people are willing to believe anything if it's presented in a "documentary" format.

So when do we get to the truth? or how will we know weve heard the truth? and how should the truth be presented?

Peer reviewed reports from genuine scientists and scholars instead of wildly speculative, unsubstantiated "theories" from the usual, uncredentialed suspects that are used as "experts" in every UFO show. We all know who they are.

edit on 16-11-2010 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)

Ahh yes but of course the scientific community wont touch it, in fear of ridicule. So you can forget peer review from the scientific community. There seems to be a certain attitude problem within the scientific institutions when it comes to UFO's and Alien visitation. Either you comply and be a good boy and ignore the history of UFO's and play dumb or maybe few will go against the grain willing to lose their job and credentials to pursue the phenomena.

And what exactly is or who are these uncredentialed suspects you speak of? I do not believe "uncredentialed" is even a word?

Yes there is much speculation to the ancient alien theory and that one fella always has a bad hair day but are these people mindless fools? I think not and there is a very good case for ancient alien visitation and the show makes an excellent point.

Originally posted by haglebert
exactly. i was thinking to myself last night, what exactly is the point of the show if you can recreate anything with cgi. and since we know cgi can recreate anything then what is the point of this show?

The point of the show is there is no point. The show falls short of conclusive evidence. There is no modus operandi, no method to the madness is as if the show is trolling in a sort of way. It insults the intelligence of the viewer. I think Sifi has just run out of ideas and talent and has been suffering with terrible ratings the past few years and this being the bi-product of it's failures and to copy other fake investigation shows. The made for TV CGI b movies with lousy actors for example. I use to watch Ghost Hunters but after a while i suspected the "TAPS" team was being encouraged by the producers to see things to keep the show interesting like "Ohhh did you see that shadow Grant" yet the camera crew never gets footage at least in most shows. They probably started out legitimate. I think the producers are the driving force of fail behind GH and obviously FOF.

I mean they changed it form Sci-Fi to Sifi ? lol

Destination truth is entertaining in a comical sense too, even though they never catch anything besides those Ghosts in Masada. Fact or Fiction seems to be scripted with a mix of high school science projects done by ammeters wanting to get in to the entertainment industry. It is as fake as Paranormal State.

And what exactly is or who are these uncredentialed suspects you speak of? I do not believe "uncredentialed" is even a word?

Yes there is much speculation to the ancient alien theory and that one fella always has a bad hair day but are these people mindless fools?

un·cre·den·tialed ( n kr -d n sh ld). abbr. Not having proper credentials: "the ministrations of uncredentialed healers"

I think you're talking about Giorgio Tsoukalos [I had to google his name - can never seem to remember it]. His hair mirrors his thought processes.



The mainstream scientific community is warming up to the possibilities of intelligent alien life, but the people presented as authorities on the subject in these "documentaries" are at the very least biased in favor of their particular beliefs and at the most presenting complete speculation and fanciful fabrication as scientific/historical fact. Mindless fools? Not necessarily. Many of them make a living off of UFO folklore - Greer, Peckman, Von Daniken, Noory, Birnes...

Come on... stone doorway carved into the side of a cliff - obviously an extraterrestrial stargate through which aliens come to earth to guide our development? Egyptian obelisks act as power sources for the pyramids? Says so on the Tee Vee, so it must be true.

I can understand recreating a scene to help the investigation like, finding out the speed of motion, direction of motion, distances, height's, angles that bullet's travel etc, but this whole thing they did was BS. Just because you can recreate a scene in it's likeness doesn't mean it's fake. Oddly enough nothing was mentioned about the artifact from both parties. Reed's alien pics and video look real, maybe because they are? I mean you have to take into consideration that if this happen to anyone you would see the same results. Obviously he was in shock, shaking, hyper ventilating, vomiting. I'm sorry, but this scifi investigation didn't prove or disprove a thing. Loved the part at the end using pseudoscience computer voice analyzer to detect deception! This show is a joke.

I remember watching the big foot show, when they was baiting with fish, running through the woods at night making noise. Tracking a beast with thermal imaging. I was damn near laughing my a** off waiting for one of these fools to get attacked and eaten by some wild bear or wolf probably. Did they really do that? I sure in hell wouldn't unless I was packing a large bore rifle or side arm.

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
I mean they changed it form Sci-Fi to Sifi ? lol

Err Syfy not Sifi.. how on earth did you get that wrong. I'm not sure for what reason they changed the name of their network. I don't like it either.

Originally posted by Unknown Origin

Originally posted by The Shrike

Dont bother with that shill show Ancient Aliens, you won't learn anything.

Not from the commentators! Erich von Däniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, David H. Childress, Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock, Bill Birnes, Michael Cremo, Dr. Steven Greer, Linda Moulton-Howe, George Noory, Peter Fiebag, Nick Pope, and I didn't include the names I left out 'cause they're not familiar. None of these "experts" know anything and what you hear them spout is pure b.s.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. Your post makes no sense. Ancient Aliens is a well produced and thought provoking show. What do you mean none of them knows anything? Nick Pope has probably forgotten more than you'll ever know.

edit on 17-11-2010 by Unknown Origin because: (no reason given)

I'm NOT being sarcastic, the show sucks. These mostly logic-less commentators spew the biggest pile of b.s. this side of the White House. They talk abot mythology and legends BUT treat them as if they were real events. I don't know if they believe their own crap but I sure as hell am not going to lower my standards and accept anything they say about subjects for which there is no evidence, just hearsay fantasies.

Contrary to your positive comments Ancient Aliens, IMO, is far from well produced and thought provoking show. Yeah, there's an audience for them composed of the gullible. Critical thinkers such as myself only look in to see what is being spread but I don't stay long 'cause the show, as a whole, is an insult to my intelligence. There are no quality researchers involved because if there were this show would not exist. But the History Channel is made up of whores who don't care about quality programming, they'll accept any crap as long as it might pull in an audience and the quality of that audience is not a factor to be considered.

You made me laugh when you said that Nick Pope "has probably forgotten more than you'll ever know." Nick was born on September 19, 1965. By that date I had already been a UFO enthusiast for 8 years! Actually, I've forgotten more than he'll ever know! Whatever his background, all he could do was learn what had already transpired, just like everyone in UFOlogy.

I think the Ben guy didn't like how Reed blamed the government for the cover-up. Since Ben is ex-FBI, it makes sense he got some grudge against people like Reed.

Hi all, this is my first post on ATS, but I do enjoy a good bit of Reed banter

I have been following this case for years and years. I was 16 when this even allegedly occurred, I didn't know what the internet was back then. So much has changed, all I know for sure is that if this is real, the next time it occurs will be a completely different affair. Think Wikileaks style global awareness within hours.

I completely believe in extra-terrestrial life. 100%. Quite frankly, all of those who disagree with me are most likely religious and are more comfortable worshiping a God that allegedly exists, with no video/sound/photo evidence to back it up. Humanity is all built around belief, yet we are so arrogant we cannot bear to imagine things out of our control, namely our extra-terrestrial friends and our lifespan.

Broadly it seems as though we have nothing to fear from them and they are simply trying to maintain our existence despite ourselves. Presumably they feel we have a lot of growing up to do before they want to make us aware of their presence officially. Ironically, I don't think they will have a choice of when this will occur, our gadget technology is getting too great. One person can speak to 10's of millions in seconds. The truth will come out within the next couple of years. Everyone will have 720p recording in their pocket by then.

This case fascinates me. It feels like the smoking gun that's too good to be true. I don't usually bother commenting on UFO cases, and this is probably the only time, but for what it's worth...

In it's defence

1.) The glints in the eye were not present in FoF.
2.) Dr. Reed wouldn't be killed off for fear of giving weight to the case (After all why would a Con-man take his life if he has no morals?)
3.) FoF's alien is absolutely TERRIBLE. I'm downloading the show, but those photos look rubbish.
4.) Fire in the Sky was all about realism, yet those aliens looked far more fake and cheap.
5.) The alien is a work of art from a imagination perspective. If you remember what the aliens looked like in Independence Day you'd give it a bit more respect. Dare I say the most realistic looking alien picture I've ever seen.
6.) I agree about the legs and arms of the alien, and the awkward way.. BUT look at it from a different perspective. If you're making a hoax you'll do multiple takes until you get the best version. So you're telling me that they went to all that effort with all this mad stuff, yet just slumped the creature like a car crash victim? I personally think this is strong evidence to support the case. We don't know how these beings move, but I imagine they are quite otherworldly.
7.) The skin texture is beautiful. Again, compare to the one in FoF and FITS and you'll have to take your hat off to Reed's apparent FX guy.
8.) When creating a hoax, it's wise not to make the story too complicated or else it will unravel fast. Reed's is undoubtably incredibly intricate. Essentially he realised he needed to provide enough evidence for people to believe his claims. You would not invent a mysterious piece of alien tech. You would not put yourself in a position to do a live test of it on TV. You would not lie about owning a dog. You would not say you have audio. You probably would have just left out the 'camera' part entirely and concentrated on the grainy video.
9.) Musson is completely convinced of it being real and I feel he has integrity.
10.) The gargling when he twists its neck in the video is as incredibly as the...
11.) Eye blink. Now that's evidence. I haven't taken the time to see if he mentioned it in the initial Art Bell interview. I don't think he had even noticed it at this point.
12.) The heavy breathing - I would think it would be very difficult to fake this.
13.) Magnetic Interference when pointing at the Obelisk. Again, incredibly hard to fake in 1996.
14.) Obelisk again adding more complexity to the case for no real reason. I also like the way it is a very unearthly looking matt black. If it was 9ft long it would be as long as a car making transporting it (and removing it from scene) tricky.
15.) Creature talking clips were pretty scary. I don't believe the balloon or editing theories.
16.) Let's not forget the length of time Reed has been alleging it's authenticity. Nearly 15 years is a long time. For some of you that's your entire life. You'd get bored of it. You'd get debunked a few times and probably give up after a few years. I don't think he earns much money from this story, no more than an average job. There are easier ways to earn money. This approach would completely consume his life.
17.) Reed is an old and recognisable man. He would have met hundreds and hundreds of people in his life. Yet nobody comes forwards to say how he's lying?

Against the case

1.) Quite convenient to have Camera and Video Camera with you, but I guess if you had such items back in 1996 I would have taken them with me every time I went outside as well.
2.) When he tested the Link Artefact live in Canada, I'm yet to see video of the reaction from the people in the room.
3.) Reed's book writing sidekick looks pretty shady. Maybe I'm bad judge of character though.
4.) Allegedly he has proof of nano-tech in the Link artefact. If that's true and it really is true, he would be one meeting (with the right person) away from proving the case to everyone.
5.) I've seen many clips of scientists etc claiming that the Tissue etc. is not of this planet. Yet we instantly presume they are all part of the Hoax. There is no real way that we'll believe any scientific information coming out of this case without it coming from someone like Obama's mouth.

Personally, I believe it.

Excellent first post, Holodex. I agree with just about everything you typed. I think the most important con that should be added is the phony looking link activation video from Reed, allegedly. Once you see it, it's so bad that it alone is enough to kill the whole Reed story.

Originally posted by Unknown Origin
Excellent first post, Holodex. I agree with just about everything you typed. I think the most important con that should be added is the phony looking link activation video from Reed, allegedly. Once you see it, it's so bad that it alone is enough to kill the whole Reed story.

Thankyou I did think about putting in that particular video, but TBH when I saw it it reeks of disinfo. That canned laughter etc.. The fact that there is just 1 low quality short clip from the event tells signs it may have actually happened. It's the kind of thing the mainstream global press would be all over publicising just for the shock value alone. 'Man to demonstrate alleged alien technology live on TV' surely should have been headline news.

If anyone has any info about the show that it was done on I'd really appreciate it. I believe it was filmed in Canada and shown in Mexico? There were people either side of him. Who were they? What did they think? Are they credible?

Actually I've just found this on youtube and it has some very interesting statements in the comments. It was apparently in front of 200 unsuspecting people.
il.youtube.com...#

Originally posted by holodex
Actually I've just found this on youtube and it has some very interesting statements in the comments. It was apparently in front of 200 unsuspecting people.

The only thing in front of Reed when this video was made was his own camera. There is no audience there at all. The gasps of awe and applause in between the total silence are added sound effect .wav files. Look around on the web and you'll find them.

where the clips of the E.T talking can be found ? can you give a link please ?

Originally posted by holodex

Thankyou

I did think about putting in that particular video, but TBH when I saw it it reeks of disinfo. That canned laughter etc.. The fact that there is just 1 low quality short clip from the event tells signs it may have actually happened.

Reeks of disinfo? Neither Reed nor anybody from his camp have ever explained this video. Why don't they come on a say the video has been altered. The funky light show and the crappy static camera tricks combined with obviously added canned audience is laughable. Do you think this video was not produced by Reed as is? Then what has happened?

Originally posted by Unknown Origin

Originally posted by holodex

Thankyou

I did think about putting in that particular video, but TBH when I saw it it reeks of disinfo. That canned laughter etc.. The fact that there is just 1 low quality short clip from the event tells signs it may have actually happened.

Reeks of disinfo? Neither Reed nor anybody from his camp have ever explained this video. Why don't they come on a say the video has been altered. The funky light show and the crappy static camera tricks combined with obviously added canned audience is laughable. Do you think this video was not produced by Reed as is? Then what has happened?

I thought I'd be thorough and fully investigate this before proclaiming wether it's disinfo or not.

The main issue with this video seems to be the quality.

1.) Why so few copies of it on the internet?
2.) Why did just one guy manage to get it on YouTube? User: bravo1stprojectsun was originator)
3.) Why did the Canadian TV Channel re-edit the footage and add canned laughter? (possibly someone very scared)
4.) Why is the viewport of the video so tiny?
5.) What did the Mexican media make of it?
6.) Why is there no description of what Reed experiences when transported?
7.) Do the interface pins leave permanent marks on his arm?

Some really interesting comments I found:

Incredibly Astonishing, Amazing and REAL. In January, my wife and our two adult daughters attended a small locally produced television program near our hometown in Canada. We could have never imagined what we were about to personally witness when an American author; “Jonathan Reed” took stage and began to tell his experiences with some kind of an ET. Interesting but didn’t think to much about it until ten minutes into his history when he said he had brought with him something found on the ET.

Some kind of a controller bracelet- he said was still in

working order? ? ? Ah, yah right. OMG THIS was the most incredible thing we’ve ever personally witnessed.

THIS IS TRUE. No camera tricks, no special effects or anything else.

We all sat ten meters away from the man- and we ALL witnessed exactly what

is on THIS VIDEO. It’s the weirdest strangest thing We have ever seen- but it DID

occur and happen- EXACTLY THE SAME as you see it (here) in the video recording.

Exactly-the-same.

200 plus people ALL WITNESSEED THIS. It was truly amazing to see.

More people need to support this man’s findings- and stand together with him.

Yes, the truth IS truly stranger than fiction- and this proved it to Us.

Grant Carlson - Toronto (Ontario) Canada

CarlsonGrnt 1 month ago 22

===========================================================================

I've gotten in touch with this person on YouTube. I find it fascinating that he's 57 years old and his YouTube channel isn't full of UFO junk. As soon as I find out which Canadian TV channel was involved in this I will have no problem obtaining original footage.

I've spent a few hours watching that damn video clip over and over (with sound off!) and it does look incredibly interesting. The bright white light is produced by the Link artefact. But what's most important IMO is the weird white triangle object and the purple floating object. Both appear when he leaves and returns. Also when looking for alien faces they're all over the place, but I'm completely ignoring this until we get HD video to analyse, for humans naturally see faces (in clouds etc..)

Debunk Videos:

www.youtube.com...
This was fairly interesting, but I don't believe this is what happened.

www.youtube.com...
Pathetic

If I was to give Dr. Reed any advice I'd suggest next time strapping an iPhone on record to his body to see if it records anything during his journey. (GPS tracking would be good for a laugh



Oh, Reed's team has already shed a lot of light on this in this PR.


"The LINK video on YouTube was not posted nor created by Reed nor
his team. The original video taping of the LINK demonstration WAS taken
from a LIVE Canadian talk show - first airing last January. It was the
first time ever to be able to show the LINK Artifact in USE.

It WAS a REAL television broadcast with a LIVE studio audience.
There were no special effects used nor editing of the original broadcast
from its producers- and it was aired Live from a Canadian tv studio /network.

As we have now been told; a second unauthorized party- recorded the
LIVE broadcast- and released it to a third unauthorized party- who then
must have broadcast it in/on another television program in another foreign
country- without the permission from the original producers/owners and/or
parent company / network.

The YouTube video looks to Us- as if it was cut-up / re edited- using
only 8 about minutes of the original 25 minute Canadian production,
possibly to fit the time requirements for the YouTube format.

During the original production- there were three studio cameras used
but only one for all the close-ups of Reed during the demonstration.
This could account for a single camera shot and/or angle.

WE have no facts of how the YouTube video was made, recorded or reedited
for the secondary tv rebroadcast. But its been suggested- that the second
recording was possibly made by recording directly from the Live broadcast
but with a video camera pointing at a tv screen or monitor - as it was
first broadcast over the network. THAT would account for the screen
size (small) and for the lack of any video quility and/or contrast. THIS
also could account for the cuts (or) edits and different screens used.

WE are not sure exactly where the secondary broadcast was released
from and from what other countries. Mexico, Costa Rica or maybe Peru.

But now because of the YouTube release- and due now to pending legal
circumstances- WE cannot release nor promote any issues nor information
relating to this / nor the exact name(s) or title(s) of the original tv broadcast
or station network without prior written permission from the original production's
owners and network- by and/on the advice from our attorney(s).

*It WAS a REAL demonstration of the Link Artifact - broadcast on
a LIVE television program. And what you see in the video IS REAL.

ASAP- WE hope to be able to release futher information relating
to all these events and issues. Currently this is all WE know.

The world for the first time- IS seeing Reed's truth for themselves.
The overall response continues to be tremendously positive.

Thank you again for your time and continued support.
THE REED TEAM"

is there actually any video footage of the creature talking ? or you re talking about the audio of the sound of the creature ?