Details of Alleged Photographic Evidence Re Roswell UFO Crash Leaked To The Public!

Greetings Mr Warren,

Originally posted by Frank Warren
Mornin' Spiro,

Originally posted by Spiro
Greetings Mr Warren,

I am somewhat confused here. The title of the thread says " Details of Alleged Photographic Evidence Re Roswell UFO Crash Leaked To The Public! .

If there is an " alleged " photograph leaked to the public then 1] where is the alleged photograph and 2] which part of humanity was it leaked to?

I really don't understand why someone [yourself] would spread what appears to be disinformation?

Be safe be well and please find/post the " alleged " picture

Spiro

You correctly quoted the (post) title, then in your question below it omitted the noun "DETAILS." As it states, its the DETAILS that have been leaked via the article (technically) about how the author(s) surmise that the Aztec Incident was created in order "cover" the Roswell Incident.

Forgetting the Aztec- Roswell Mishmosh, the key points (DETAILS) in the article (IMHO) as stated are:

• New evidence ala Roswell has been uncovered.

• The evidence is apparently both physical in that it's in the form of photographs, and with (new) eyewitness(es) via the geologists who took said pics.

• The media is involved.

• The so-called Roswell Dream Team is involved.

Finally, as stated in the initial post (here) that started this thread, the article was penned by Rich Reynolds of the RRRGroup & The UFO Iconoclast(s); we published it with his permission (as always).

Not to be rude; however, to say that this is disinformation, would suggest that Reynolds is lying . . . do you know something that others don't?

Cheers,
Frank

I do apologise, that not to sound rude in accusing you as a disinfo agent however, you are spreading disinfo are you not. Have you seen the photo or are you going on " hearsay "?

Though, some one in your position [ a compliment ] could have waited to post the OP with the original image upon which you state has been released, You have to bare in mind that people/members will not believe it until the " real " photographic image is present. I mean, the whole Roswell could very well be made up which has been suggested by another member. You should know that ATS has a moto. " Pics or it didn't happen ".

What say you? Do you have privy to the original image?

Be safe be well and share the original image, PLEASE!!!!

ETA: Reynolds could very well be lying. Heck, the whole Roswell story could be a lie. So yes, I indeed believe, that unless Reynolds produces the original leaked image then he could be seen as a liar? I could very well churn the same story and show an illustration however, people would not believe me. Do you see where I am going with this?

Spiro

So let me get this straight...A photo has emerged of the Roswell crash site, but rather than get the photo out to the public ASAP they want to sit on it....for how long?..another 66 years or just enough for the government to say...here, give us that or well kill you and your family....


I smell Crapolla.

Originally posted by interupt42

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Roswell is quite simple from the outside:

Why would the USAF try and explain Roswell four times in the course of the last few decades? They certainly don't care about public opinion, so that to me doesn't make sense unless something weird did happen.

I'm not saying its disinformation, but there are benefit of using disinformation to hide in plain site.

1. The outcome for UFO witnesses has not been a positive one. For decades most people kept their mouth shut when they saw something strange in fear of ridicule. That would be a good thing if you are trying to hide something from the general public when doing testing or during oh $h1t moments.

2. If people associate UFO with Alien technology versus advance military technology that is also beneficial in obscuring factual evidence from being released .

3. If people don't know what is true or false they tend to run in circles, which is always a benefit to top secret type work.

4. If foreign countries buy into the Alien visitation thing , that would be a huge benefit for covert top secret missions.

So there are benefits to keeping everyone guessing that does not relate to Alien technology, but rather human psychological traits.

The tactic of Obfuscation

My friend,

Originally posted by Soloprotocol
So let me get this straight...A photo has emerged of the Roswell crash site, but rather than get the photo out to the public ASAP they want to sit on it....for how long?..another 66 years or just enough for the government to say...here, give us that or well kill you and your family....

I smell Crapolla.

Damn, well said

And that is exactly how I see this. Why wait, why show an " Illustration "? It all sounds " Made Up " to me.

I'm off to write a bog on this, make things up just to get hits

Be safe be well and THANK YOU

Spiro

Mr Warren,

Originally posted by Frank Warren
Mornin' Chunder,

Originally posted by chunder
reply to post by Spiro

 

For goodness sake where is the disinformation !

The clue is in the title, details of - alleged photo - re Roswell / details of which leaked to the public.

Thanks for your due diligence in actually reading the article.

Cheers,
Frank

I also read the article. It has led me to believe that it is just a story, a story with an illustration of a " supposed " leak of an image that may be in the public eye. I am part of the public eye and I have NOT seen this supposed leaked image. Where is it?

Where?

Spiro

The thing about Roswell is that it was an event. Nobody is in denial, nobody has said there was not a clean-up and heavy military personnel involved. What is ridiculous, is the idea that all this secrecy was over one of three balloons, weather, mogul or skyhook, and all we are asked to believe is that what remained was hundreds of tiny pieces of foil, balsa, plastic, and tape with sometimes a microphone attached. When something like that is lying in hundreds of pieces there is nothing to see, except litter, mostly of balloon and foil, (they might have wanted the mikes back ) but they could have done that clean-up with an audience of millions with not one of those million thinking it was anything other than a broken balloon. Instead it was all high profile and hush hush because it was a secret project.
It may have been a secret project, but it was no balloon.

Spiro,

(Love the avatar by the way)

I do apologise, that not to sound rude in accusing you as a disinfo agent.

Though, some one in your position [ a compliment

] could have waited to post the OP with the original image upon which you state has been released, You have to bare in mind that people/members will not believe it until the " real " photographic image is present. I mean, the whole Roswell could very well be made up which has been suggested by another member. You should know that ATS has a moto. " Pics or it didn't happen ".

What say you? Do you have privy to the original image?

Be safe be well and share the original image, PLEASE!!!!

Spiro

As a researcher for over 40 years re Ufology in general, and for many years heavily involved in Roswell and Aztec research specifically, I found what was seeded in the article about Aztec being a cover as subterfuge most interesting.

To be clear: the thesis of the article is technically about the subterfuge, but what is significant is the details salted therein IMHO.

It's important to note, that as I understand it, the geologist is a "new" witness, or more accurately one not previously know to researchers in general. So, aside from the picture(s) that were uncovered (as stated in the article) there's a new player.

Finally, pictures, photos on their own merits (of anomalous, unknown phenomenon), without any supporting evidence are just that–pictures. The motto, "pictures of it or didn't happen" is a faulty one. There is more "chaff" today then there ever was given the advancement of man's personal tech, e.g., computers, digital cameras, phones, software etc. There are tons of examples of pics of blurry insects, birds that have been debated to death, many right here at ATS.

That said, IF these alleged pics (presuming that they are of something identifiable and substantial) can definitively be attributed to Roswell, given the substantial ancillary evidence in that case, this would be monumental.

The author does two things in the article, one he shares information that has come to him and the other is his conjecture of the Roswell and Aztec events (which I personally vehemently disagree with). Reynolds is the primary publisher of Tony Bragalia's penscript and research; the latter is a member of the so-called Roswell Dream Team, and he hinted in his last article (several weeks ago), that "new" Roswell evidence is forthcoming. It is presumed, that the minutiae in the Reynolds piece is just that.

Cheers,
Frank

Greetings Mr Warren,

He was a great man and indeed sadly missed. I had the opportunity to meet him quite a few times and even shared a brew [ irish term for tea ] with him. I found him fascinating in that what he said " off stage " has and is very true

Originally posted by Frank Warren
Spiro,

(Love the avatar by the way)

I do apologise, that not to sound rude in accusing you as a disinfo agent.

Though, some one in your position [ a compliment

] could have waited to post the OP with the original image upon which you state has been released, You have to bare in mind that people/members will not believe it until the " real " photographic image is present. I mean, the whole Roswell could very well be made up which has been suggested by another member. You should know that ATS has a moto. " Pics or it didn't happen ".

What say you? Do you have privy to the original image?

Be safe be well and share the original image, PLEASE!!!!

Spiro

As a researcher for over 40 years re Ufology in general, and for many years heavily involved in Roswell and Aztec research specifically, I found what was seeded in the article about Aztec being a cover as subterfuge most interesting.

To be clear: the thesis of the article is technically about the subterfuge, but what is significant is the details salted therein IMHO.

It's important to note, that as I understand it, the geologist is a "new" witness, or more accurately one not previously know to researchers in general. So, aside from the picture(s) that were uncovered (as stated in the article) there's a new player.

Finally, pictures, photos on their own merits (of anomalous, unknown phenomenon), without any supporting evidence are just that–pictures. The motto, "pictures of it or didn't happen" is a faulty one. There is more "chaff" today then there ever was given the advancement of man's personal tech, e.g., computers, digital cameras, phones, software etc. There are tons of examples of pics of blurry insects, birds that have been debated to death, many right here at ATS.

That said, IF these alleged pics (presuming that they are of something identifiable and substantial) can definitively be attributed to Roswell, given the substantial ancillary evidence in that case, this would be monumental.

The author does two things in the article, one he shares information that has come to him and the other is his conjecture of the Roswell and Aztec events (which I personally vehemently disagree with). Reynolds is the primary publisher of Tony Bragalia's penscript and research; the latter is a member of the so-called Roswell Dream Team, and he hinted in his last article (several weeks ago), that "new" Roswell evidence is forthcoming. It is presumed, that the minutiae in the Reynolds piece is just that.

Cheers,
Frank

Thank you very much for replying. I can only wait for the " alleged " image to surface. Until then, and please excuse my ignorance, I am still left sceptical

Be safe be well,

Spiro

ETA: I have researched you for many years and I am fascinated by your research. Please don't take my posts as personal. I just like to see the evidence being presented. You take good care now

Just to make things more complicated, what do you make of this video. I don't but it because his thesis requires that Marcel and Marcel Jnr. are liars.

Originally posted by EnPassant
Just to make things more complicated, what do you make of this video. I don't but it because his thesis requires that Marcel and Marcel Jnr. are liars.

What do I make of it, indeed. Haut wrote an affidavit in which he was very clear: he SAW the bodies of the aliens (under a tarpaulin, but their heads stuck out). The 1997 explanation was that he simply got his marbles mixed up: he was said to confuse the 1947 incident with later events, events that involved dummies being dropped down. However, that affidavit was written 5 years later, in 2002. Haut sticked to his story.

In my opinion Marcel and Marcel jr. aren't liars - they are storytellers. There is a difference: storytellers may end up believing their story is true where a liar KNOWS it's not.

Finally I must agree with posters in here that complain about the make-up and content of the site we were redirected to. It reeks of deceit. Subterfuge. A new word I learned today - I'm not a native English writer - thank you.

OP, if there is anything to your story, we'll simply have to wait until evidence is shown. Which has not really happened in over 60 years, but one never knows, we can dream, can't we?

Originally posted by Spiro
Well, for goodness sake, why post a story with an illustration photo to back up a story of a story that has an alleged photo?

They wanted to wait until the unverifiable story that backs up the details the disinformation covering up the hoax that was first fictionalized to cover up the real story was available before announcing details of some missing alleged photos that back up the hoax was released.

My seriously funny friend.

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Spiro
Well, for goodness sake, why post a story with an illustration photo to back up a story of a story that has an alleged photo?

They wanted to wait until the unverifiable story that backs up the details the disinformation covering up the hoax that was first fictionalized to cover up the real story was available before announcing details of some missing alleged photos that back up the hoax was released.

Ha haaa hhaaaa, I had to read that twice to get it. But damn, that was so funny. I wish I could buy you a pint

Be safe be well and get on stage

Spiro

Originally posted by Spiro

Well, for goodness sake, why post a story with an illustration photo to back up a story of a story that has an alleged photo?

Why not wait for the " alleged " photo instead of misleading people with an " illustration " of an " alleged " photo.

Damn, if there is a photo then post the damn thing. Geeeez

Spiro

Perhaps the illustration is of a fake photo? Does that make any sense?

reply to post by Frank Warren

As a researcher for over 40 years re Ufology in general, I haven't learned yet that UFO community is highly sensitive on fake stuff, like shop'ed photos or CGI videos!

Fixed it for you, Mr. Warren.
I refuse to read as long as the photo in question is on the page.

My friend,

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
Perhaps the illustration is of a fake photo? Does that make any sense?

It sure does

Be safe be well

Spiro