• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Roswell Slides Have Been Leaked Online


Walton is one of the few stories I vacillate on as it really is entirely anomalous up against the traditional m.o. in the many other high profile abduction cases. His story is unique and it hasn't changed. But the more I spend time studying Ufology the more I hold to trainedobservor's position that the likelihood of alien civilizations visiting earth is pretty close to zero, making all alien abduction stories extremely unlikely. That doesn't mean there isn't something really weird going on, it just means I don't see the ETH as very plausible. Walton's case still leaves a lot of room for a hoax as contrived by Walton and brother alone not involving anyone else in the logging crew sitting in the backseat.
 
Well then, I agree with 2013 Burnt but not 2015 Burnt! Perhaps I'm just two years behind in my thinking and research... I will add that I don't necessarily believe Walton was abducted by your "traditional" ETs, it could very well have been cryptoterrestrials, extra-dimensional beings or even a military abduction with implanted false memories. However, I DO believe something profound actually happened to Walton and that he and his crew are telling the truth, at least as they understand it to be.
 
My biggest problem with the Walton case is the lack of "M.I.B."* activity, I mean if I was in the business of keeping tabs on all possible security threats, and or trying to advance "our" technology, surely a first hand witness to the inside of an interstellar craft would be able to provide invaluable information, based on first hand observation which could potentially be invaluable.

When Mr Walton appeared on the Paracast, I asked him (via question bank) if he had ever worked with any kind of forensic artist (as in: a reconstruction of the exact details of the inside and outside of the "craft" and his response was no.

In a nutshell I don't think that the powers that be, believe in his "encounter" otherwise they would have taken steps to extract the valuable information he could provide.

My gut feeling is that something very extraordinary happened, that can not be explained by a simple "hoax" but what that "something" was will remain a mystery.

Lets put it like this: a threat imagined, is just as daunting, as a threat realised. (who knows what can happen in the woods)
I believe that he is telling the "truth" as he sees it, but there are enough "reasonable doubts" to suspect over exaggeration and or fabrication.
 
"I believe that he is telling the "truth" as he sees it"
I wish this could be more accurately tested in all witness reports of anomalous experiences as step one. Do you believe what you saw or are you uncertain? are you confabulating? has someone else influenced your beliefs? and then start examining the 'what' of the incident, to know if more than an experience it was an actual event.

Walton has told the same story for so long now I'm convinced he can tell that story with absolute conviction. Walton's claims are of a genuine physical event that has very definitive narrative sequences to them to account for the time missing. It is a highly rich and nuanced set of stories that also is reasonably filled with some fragmentation and intensity of emotion. Proof of the physical parts of the event are very, very limited and non-specific. That, combined with the other historical contexts makes it plausible for me to strongly suggest a hoax, and I'm sorry to say ChrisJohnsen that I definitely shifted towards a more cynical estimation of his story over time. Still, I highly appreciate some of the very unique features of his story. I accept that there are a range of beliefs and suspicions on this case, all with good reason. If it's any consolation I also believe that the rest of the crew, minus his brother, believe they saw something, as they were genuinely freaked out.

But then I heard some of the Gulf Breeze material was also pretty spooky weird, so for me it's always on a sliding scale of conviction as to what I can factually believe. I have the most conviction that something very strange is happening in our skies and elsewhere that is defying what we know about time and space, has changed radically over decades in its presentation, comes in waves, can have very powerful effects on people and looks like it's coming from outer space. I also very strongly feel that we are involved in how it appears to us when witessed. But after that it gets mostly foggy. I doubt there will ever be any truth known about this case, only our respective beliefs and convictions.
 
An "apology!" How very Canadian of you, Burnt! :D However, your belief that they believe is no consolation... Haha. As I am not yet that cynical, we'll agree to disagree about this particular event. #DontStopBelievin
 
Northern values help things along sometimes instead of bashing into each other. I see you are singing Journey songs. VanHalen would not be happy. ;)
 
#HotForTeacher would not only have been out-of-context but given your profession, potentially misconstrued... Although I suppose I could have referenced #LightUpTheSky from VH II but that seems a little too obscure. I don't bash with anyone in the forums. I'm a zero conflict type of guy, or at least I certainly try to be. Lots of opinions in a place like this and given the main, general, overall topic being Aliens and UFOs, none of those opinions can really be backed up by anything other than assumptions, personal beliefs and what many would consider wild speculation. Thus I try to remain pleasant because I certainly don't have any answers. I'm here for mutually beneficial exchanges (hopefully) about a subject I'm very curious about. I enjoy absorbing different points of view and unique ways of thinking about this phenomena. For example, years ago I was a strict ETH kinda guy but after years of listening to The Paracast I've evolved my thinking to seriously incorporate more CTH and EDH in my analysis. Even more recently, thanks to you and several other excellent contributors to the forum, I am giving consciousness and co-creation a stronger role in my thought processes regarding high strange events. Thank you.

#EverbodysWorkinForTheWeekend*

*See what I did there? :)
 
Great reply and certainly worth the wait! I believe you and I are on the same page. Not to get "off topic" in this thread but one part of your response piqued my curiosity. I think your hoaxers list is spot-on but I've always thought that the Travis Walton experience was, for lack of a better term, the "real deal" based on what I've read and interviews I've heard/watched. He seemed like someone who has had a definitive high strange experience involving non-human entities of some kind, though not necessarily "extra-terrestrial" in nature. The number of witnesses and the fact that most all of them, including Walton, ultimately passed lie detector tests, or so I've read, seem to lend an element of credibility to his account not usually found in most "alien abduction" claims. I'm interested in what your dissenting opinion is regarding his claims and the facts you've uncovered to arrive at your conclusion. If you are amenable to sharing your thoughts with me (and the forum), or share a link to a post (or posts) you feel demonstrate a rigorous case against his claims, I'd appreciate it, as I've yet to come across a cogent argument that comprehensively debunks his story. If not appropriate to answer here in the thread, since it's unrelated to the Roswell slides, then perhaps via a direct message? If it's too complex to explain or too time consuming I completely understand that as well. I've appreciated and enjoyed our dialog in this forum thread. Thank you.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi, Chris

Although this particular forum is really meant to be about the Roswell Slides Hoax, I see we have now been sidetracked into consideration of the Travis Walton case. Oh, well – I’ll tell you what I think of that although it doesn’t mean to say I’m a total UFO atheist like the late Phil Klass!

Like you I was once prepared to believe that the Travis Walton abduction story from November 1975 might be the real deal unlike so many other tales of alien contact over the last sixty years. I met Travis Walton at a UFO conference in Florida in 1997 and bought his book “Fire in the Sky”. That tells his version of his alleged alien abduction but it leaves out much of what happened before and after the event.

In particular there is no mention of the fact that the National Enquirer newspaper –famous for its sensational and often highly dubious stories-- had offered tens of thousands of dollars to anybody who could positively prove that aliens had visited our planet - in the knowledge that exclusive rights could be worth millions. Travis and his brother Duane were well aware of this and I think their motive in concocting the abduction hoax was to collect this prize money which they certainly succeeded in doing. For an account of what went on at the time and the attempts by both the National Enquirer and APRO (the leading UFO research group, Aerial Phenomena Research Organization) to take control of this case and cover up polygraph test failures by Walton and other members of his logging crew, see:- The Selling of the Travis Walton "Abduction" Story

It looks as if all seven members of Walton’s logging team must have been aware this was a hoax but went along with it to cash in on the prize money. It has been suggested by some that Walton and his brother and/or his friend Mike Rogers may have put on some sort of a stunt involving a bright fake UFO in the forest to deceive the other members of the team but that seems unlikely to me. In any case the National Enquirer paid Walton $2,500 and the other members of the crew split a check for a further $2,500. The total $5,000 was quite a bit of money in 1975 and the Enquirer’s UFO reporter Bob Pratt flew to Arizona to deliver these prize money checks. Travis Walton and other members of the team made a trip with Bob out to where the abduction had supposedly taken place and some of the money was spent on liquor with which the loggers noisily celebrated their win.

A recurring aspect of some of the tales of alien contact or abduction like this is that the abductee --and maybe other witnesses-- subsequently undergo polygraph tests. Usually they will claim that they passed such tests even if they failed or else produced inconclusive results. In this case the fact that Travis Walton had flunked a polygraph examination, paid for by the National Enquirer, and administered by the most experienced lie detector expert in the state of Arizona, John McCarthy, was completely concealed. John McCarthy concluded that Walton was practising "gross deception." APRO (which was promoting Walton's story) and the National Enquirer both concealed this embarrassing fact. Walton later passed a different polygraph test (for which he had adequate time to prepare), but failed a later one on the 2008 TV show Moment of Truth. In reality, if someone is anticipating taking a polygraph exam, and practices for it, they have a very good chance of fooling the examiner.

Travis Walton in his book Fire in the Sky never admits that he failed any of the polygraph tests and he makes no mention of the National Enquirer or their offer of prize money which he and his team won for their “proof” that aliens were visiting our planet. To my mind this is more than an oversight: it’s a deliberate attempt to hide the truth. When I met Travis again recently and expressed these misgivings he airily dismissed my criticism and said that his brother was the one who had dealt with the National Enquirer at the time and he had had no prior knowledge of the $5,000 prize. I suggest this is not true.

Yet again a sensational claim of alien contact looks very much like a carefully thought out hoax. Maybe one should not be too surprised since the many dozens of claims of alien contact starting in the 1950s have never produced any solid evidence for it and one could say that we have simply been dealt hoax after hoax after hoax. Here we go again in 2015 with the bogus Roswell Slides.....
 
Anyone that collected the ET Award money from that Rag and hid the fact they failed two polygraphs has to be under extreme suspicion that they are a repetitive liar and fraud artist. What's far worse, imo, is Walton is invited as a Star Witness to ET Abduction at all the UFO events, so what's that imply about the quality of information being spread around at such events too? SyFy fantasy cloaked as the hidden truth? Walton certainly is an ET Star, and he is still making plenty of money off his story too!
 
Last edited:
For an account of what went on at the time and the attempts by both the National Enquirer and APRO (the leading UFO research group, Aerial Phenomena Research Organization) to take control of this case and cover up polygraph test failures by Walton and other members of his logging crew, see:- The Selling of the Travis Walton "Abduction" Story

George, it may be a small point but do you have insight on why the reporter in the first story couldn't be bothered by using the people's names in his story? it was the cowboy, the kid the professor etc. while Jeff's reporting may be spot on...and i suppose that would be the important point... it reads to me as if Mr. Wells had his mind made up before he even stepped on the plane. talk about a hack job. Not even sure if it would qualify as reporting just some observations, I am (along with others on this forum) skeptical about Travis's story but if this article had been introduced to me i don't know how much creedance i would have given it because it is so blantantly prejudiced. I have to wonder if Jeff Wells hadn't had the story already half written on his flight to Arizona. he certainly was insulted his very valuable time was taken up going there, maybe he didn't have an expense account at the time it was the Enquirer after all. It very much comes across that he himself had an agenda which doesn't come across very good except to those who already have their minds made up.Mr. Wells it would seem, was more interested in character assassination.

the other stories on the page had a lot more merit, especially anson kennedy's. debunker.com is not doing itself any favors, as far as integrity, by posting the first story.
 
Last edited:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi, Chris

Although this particular forum is really meant to be about the Roswell Slides Hoax, I see we have now been sidetracked into consideration of the Travis Walton case. Oh, well – I’ll tell you what I think of that although it doesn’t mean to say I’m a total UFO atheist like the late Phil Klass!

Like you I was once prepared to believe that the Travis Walton abduction story from November 1975 might be the real deal unlike so many other tales of alien contact over the last sixty years. I met Travis Walton at a UFO conference in Florida in 1997 and bought his book “Fire in the Sky”. That tells his version of his alleged alien abduction but it leaves out much of what happened before and after the event.

In particular there is no mention of the fact that the National Enquirer newspaper –famous for its sensational and often highly dubious stories-- had offered tens of thousands of dollars to anybody who could positively prove that aliens had visited our planet - in the knowledge that exclusive rights could be worth millions. Travis and his brother Duane were well aware of this and I think their motive in concocting the abduction hoax was to collect this prize money which they certainly succeeded in doing. For an account of what went on at the time and the attempts by both the National Enquirer and APRO (the leading UFO research group, Aerial Phenomena Research Organization) to take control of this case and cover up polygraph test failures by Walton and other members of his logging crew, see:- The Selling of the Travis Walton "Abduction" Story

It looks as if all seven members of Walton’s logging team must have been aware this was a hoax but went along with it to cash in on the prize money. It has been suggested by some that Walton and his brother and/or his friend Mike Rogers may have put on some sort of a stunt involving a bright fake UFO in the forest to deceive the other members of the team but that seems unlikely to me. In any case the National Enquirer paid Walton $2,500 and the other members of the crew split a check for a further $2,500. The total $5,000 was quite a bit of money in 1975 and the Enquirer’s UFO reporter Bob Pratt flew to Arizona to deliver these prize money checks. Travis Walton and other members of the team made a trip with Bob out to where the abduction had supposedly taken place and some of the money was spent on liquor with which the loggers noisily celebrated their win.

A recurring aspect of some of the tales of alien contact or abduction like this is that the abductee --and maybe other witnesses-- subsequently undergo polygraph tests. Usually they will claim that they passed such tests even if they failed or else produced inconclusive results. In this case the fact that Travis Walton had flunked a polygraph examination, paid for by the National Enquirer, and administered by the most experienced lie detector expert in the state of Arizona, John McCarthy, was completely concealed. John McCarthy concluded that Walton was practising "gross deception." APRO (which was promoting Walton's story) and the National Enquirer both concealed this embarrassing fact. Walton later passed a different polygraph test (for which he had adequate time to prepare), but failed a later one on the 2008 TV show Moment of Truth. In reality, if someone is anticipating taking a polygraph exam, and practices for it, they have a very good chance of fooling the examiner.

Travis Walton in his book Fire in the Sky never admits that he failed any of the polygraph tests and he makes no mention of the National Enquirer or their offer of prize money which he and his team won for their “proof” that aliens were visiting our planet. To my mind this is more than an oversight: it’s a deliberate attempt to hide the truth. When I met Travis again recently and expressed these misgivings he airily dismissed my criticism and said that his brother was the one who had dealt with the National Enquirer at the time and he had had no prior knowledge of the $5,000 prize. I suggest this is not true.

Yet again a sensational claim of alien contact looks very much like a carefully thought out hoax. Maybe one should not be too surprised since the many dozens of claims of alien contact starting in the 1950s have never produced any solid evidence for it and one could say that we have simply been dealt hoax after hoax after hoax. Here we go again in 2015 with the bogus Roswell Slides.....
Thanks George. Looks like I have some further in-depth reading to do about this case. Certainly the articles you linked out to contain some very damning information that casts major doubt on the veracity of Travis' story.
 
Last edited:
George, it may be a small point but do you have insight on why the reporter in the first story couldn't be bothered by using the people's names in his story? it was the cowboy, the kid the professor etc. while Jeff's reporting may be spot on...and i suppose that would be the important point... it reads to me as if Mr. Wells had his mind made up before he even stepped on the plane. talk about a hack job. Not even sure if it would qualify as reporting just some observations, I am (along with others on this forum) skeptical about Travis's story but if this article had been introduced to me i don't know how much creedance i would have given it because it is so blantantly prejudiced. I have to wonder if Jeff Wells hadn't had the story already half written on his flight to Arizona. he certainly was insulted his very valuable time was taken up going there, maybe he didn't have an expense account at the time it was the Enquirer after all. It very much comes across that he himself had an agenda which doesn't come across very good except to those who already have their minds made up.Mr. Wells it would seem, was more interested in character assassination.

*******************************************************************************************************************
Wade,

I don't really know anything about Jeff Wells. the Australian reporter who worked for the National Enquirer at the time of the Travis Walton abduction story. It's certainly a curious way of describing what went on without using the names of any of the characters involved but I think his version largely rings true. Even back in Australia he may have thought that the Enquirer might get back at him somehow if he ever revealed their dishonest approach to packaging this story for maximum sensation value and commercial advantage.

I did however speak at length with Bob Pratt who worked for the National Enquirer at the time although I didn't realize that he was involved with the Walton case. Had I known that I would have tried to find out what he really thought about the Travis Walton abduction story. Sadly Bob died in 2005 and this excerpt from his obituary --without any mention of Walton-- sums up his position on UFOs:-

During his newspaper days, he was a skeptic on the subject of UFOs, but in May 1975 as a reporter for the National Enquirer, he came to believe UFOs are real after interviewing more than 60 people in one week who had seen UFOs. From that moment on, UFOs became a major interest in his life, and since then, he has interviewed more than 2,000 people who had UFO experiences. He traveled all over the United States and Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Puerto Rico, Peru, Uruguay, the Philippines and Japan, looking into reports of UFO sightings.
As a result, after leaving the Enquirer in 1981, he began investigating UFO reports on his own and traveled to Brazil ten more times, most recently in 2003.
He wrote the book UFO DANGER ZONE: Terror and Death in Brazil – Where Next? (Horus House Press 1996). An updated version in Portuguese was published in Brazil in July 2003.


I talked to Bob about his researching of the subject of lethal UFO encounters and serious injuries in Brazil --mainly by river fishermen operating in remote areas late at night. Despite his stint as a reporter for the National Enquirer I thought that Bob was a sincere and very experienced researcher and he was not trying to deceive anyone with what he told us in his book UFO Danger Zone. That is certainly well worth reading though I don't know if the same sort of thing is still going on in the forests of Brazil.

Bob Pratt was also a co-author, together with Phil Imbrogno and Dr J Allen Hynek, of the book Night Siege --the Hudson Valley UFO Sightings (first published by Ballantine Books, New York, in 1987). For many years I believed everything that I read in that book about the huge triangular UFOs that were seen by hundreds of witnesses in the Hudson Valley, upstate New York, and in Connecticut. Hynek was certainly an honest man and I felt sure he would not have put his name to it if there was any suspicion the content was false. More recently Kevin Randle and others have discovered that Phil Imbrogno who evidently supplied much of the material for Night Siege was not entirely straight with us about his CV and his claims regarding his service in the military. See:- A Different Perspective: The Crash of Philip J. Imbrogno

I think that Kevin has got this right although he has certainly been deceived by "Anthony Bragalia" and the Roswell Slides Hoax. Does this then mean that some of the UFO stories in Night Siege are in fact Imbrogno's fantasy and fiction? Did the sensational episode where unnamed witnesses allegedly saw a huge triangular UFO hovering low over the Indian Point nuclear complex beside the Hudson River in 1984 never take place? I cannot say --although I fear that most times when one finds someone who has made extraordinary UFO/alien claims is lying, the whole damn thing usually turns out to be untrue. Possibly my positive assessment of Bob Pratt may turn out to be wrong as well?

George
 
It boggles one's mind. Apparently, Carey feels the need to strip away any remaining shred of credibility and respect he might have had remaining. Not that I feel he had any left.

And Randle commenting that he doesn't think they were "in" on the hoax, just simply duped and blinded by their own biases? Come on! Schmitt and Carey were knee deep in it, no excuses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
And the latest wrinkle in the "Topic That Shall Not Be Named":

A Different Perspective: Tom Carey Doubles Down on the Roswell Slides
Well, well, and Richard Dolan supports Tom Carey on your recent shows. I wonder what excuses he'll make for Carey now???

I expect a lot of people are prepared to double down and triple down and maybe burn down with Ray Stanford too, but that is another subject "off topic" for this thread. Yet it is related, so let me explain why.

Part of this Roswell Slide disaster was the continual withholding of photographic information. People should know what any photo is produced from when possible. We should know as soon as possible what camera was used, what lens was used, what film type/brand and ASA rating was used. If any digital scans are done of the originals, then we should know what those specifications are too!

Withholding that information only brings on more distrust and controversy, and I see that happening now in the Stanford picture thread too. No one is demanding to see that picture now, but everyone should be allowed to know ASAP the technical information about that photo. I see a lot of similarities going on now in that other thread compared to this thread here.

I just hope debating Ray Stanford will not be banned from this forum, as it seems Chris O'Brien is suggesting that happen in another "hot thread" here. Please do not allow for that Gene. That is clear censorship and not worthy of what this forum is all about, imo.

Also, since Chris has a personal "mentor connection" and deep respect for Ray, I think it is best Chris O'Brien not moderate ANY Ray Stanford topic. It's just too emotional and painful it seems. I trust your judgement, Angel, Goggs, but Chris is just too upset when people become critical about Ray Stanford. For Chris O'Brien to suggest Ray Stanford be a banned topic at this forum is over the top, and Chris should back down from that idea 100%.

Ray is a mature man, and he can stand on his own two feet as a controversial person. He knows he has stirred controversy all his life. In fact, he has attracted it so much that it is part of his entire life history. That can never change or be rewritten by anyone.

It is Ray Stanford himself that may offer his films and photographic proofs he has withheld from the public at large, but he has to understand he will be judged beyond the MUFON experts or Chris O'Brien's word to gain any legitimacy. The Roswell Slides "experts" prove that UFO experts are NOT needed to find the truth. That is what is awaiting Ray Stanford's films and photo proofs right now. No one is going to take any experts opinion after the Roswell Slides has proven otherwise!

MUFON has PROVEN recently by its own prominent leadership members that it has very serious issues about being trustworthy, and I have the PROOF with youtube links to these MUFON leaders that went public, thankfully!!!

Though I'm certain many will double down, triple down, that I'm full of it and deserve to be banned. Constance would just love for that to happen, and I have my reasons that Chris O'Brien will attempt this too. In fact, I believe Chris would have done it long ago if he could based on all "the likes" and critical posts he's made when I called into question many things about Ray Stanford and before that about Terry Sherman and Skinwalker too.

Here is what Chris posted today:
I will not speak about Ray on the Paracast again. I am about ready to ban the entire subject. [...] I am going to read this entire thread carefully and decide who will be toast. As you know, newcomers always get a warning first. Others, well, we will have to see...
Here is the thread I am referring to:
Ray Stanford has a photo of the Socorro craft & Martin Willis has seen it and is impressed but...
 
Last edited:
Edit: This should really be in the Ray Stanford thread but DS posted here about certain things that pertain to that thread so I replied here. Sorry for the mix-up.

Not that my opinion matters one bit in here but I've read every post in this thread since it was first created and followed the discourse closely. I've even posted a few of my own thoughts and "Liked" several posts by a variety of participants during the lively discussion.

Regarding the approach and tone of some of the forum members, it certainly got a little contentious but I don't think anyone crossed a line that it would require something as drastic as "banning." Again, simply IMO.

Some of the topics in this forum generate significantly more passion from members than others. We're discussing ideas, concepts and sometimes even "evidence" that can result in a wide variety of thoughts and opinions. Now, whereas I might take a more non-confrontational approach in expressing my thoughts or opinions with someone I might disagree with than some other members of this forum, I accept the fact that different people express themselves in different ways, some more directly and pointed than others. I think it behooves everyone participating in these discussions to enter into the arena with a bit of a thicker skin to start. Worthwhile, spirited discourse is what I'm here for. This thread has been a great example and one I've enjoyed very much, overall. As long as things don't degenerate into lengthy, repeated, unfair personal attacks that aren't relevant to the topic being discussed, I think there should be a wide margin for self-expression regarding the issues we are all here to learn and share about. One person's "evidence" is another person's "BS." That was certainly the case in this thread, to be sure.

Again, simply my opinion, and I'm not saying that's not how things work here, but the possibility of someone being "banned" was introduced by a Chris O post so I thought I would simply contribute my two cents as someone who has been fully engaged in this thread since the first post by EQ42.

I hope everyone has a nice weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
It boggles one's mind. Apparently, Carey feels the need to strip away any remaining shred of credibility and respect he might have had remaining. Not that I feel he had any left.

And Randle commenting that he doesn't think they were "in" on the hoax, just simply duped and blinded by their own biases? Come on! Schmitt and Carey were knee deep in it, no excuses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But notice the wording that kevin uses:
"..But I want to make one thing clear. I do not believe that either Carey or Schmitt were participating in a hoax that they created. They might have been overwhelmed by their own enthusiasm and their desire to find some evidence of an alien UFO crash at Roswell, but they didn’t create a hoax. Fooled? Yes. Naïve? Yes… but not the creators of a hoax.

mabe i'm making too much of a deal about it One doesn't have to be a creator of a hoax in order to participate in one. Like Chris up above said knee deep in it, but maybe they didn't create it.

but you can count me out from those who would argue for prosecution regardless of their involvement
 
We may never know but I get the sense that Carey and Schmitt, unlike say Richard Dolan who was added late and only tangentially involved as an observer, were part of this hoax at or near the very beginning. They may not have had a hand in creating the initial myth surrounding the photos but they sure jumped in with both feet early on in the game when the photos were introduced by Dew. IMO, these two gentleman should have been much savvier given their years in the field. Claiming they were "fooled," as Randle and others have, is just not a believable scenario and too easily lets them off the hook. I'll refer back to some comments I made in an earlier post that simply stated "follow the money." Whoever was part of the subsequent revenue split is where the lion's share of the blame should rest. I also believe those individuals should be held legally accountable for some type of fraud. Like a federal judge ordering fake "psychic" Sean David Morton to pay $11.5 million for fraud, those deemed responsible for the farce in Mexico City should face financial penalties as well. It infuriates me that individuals were able to profit so handsomely on this blatant hoax with no repercussions whatsoever.
 
Back
Top