• 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!

Your Paracast Newsletter — May 10, 2015

the ironic (?) thing here is that there COULD have been an opppurtunity to present this artifact/find as a potential off planet entity if they had taken a different tact. but they ( Anthony Bragalia, Jaime Maussan, Adam Dew, Donald Schmitt, Tom Carey) try to tie it to the mythology of Roswell. being there was no smoking gun ( i.e. body) and apparently there was some pecularities in the body structure...determined from the slides?.... i suppose one could have made an argument it was a mummified OPBE. the fact that the card identified it as a boy meant only that the party that found the original it had no real reason to think it anything else and probably thus determined it as such, there would have been no DNA testing at the time and i don't think it would have crossed anyone's mind that it could have another origin. mind you i don't think this is the case BUT if Dew et al really did think they had a OPBE slide on their hands perhaps they should have thought it out a little bit more. in other words one could reasonable challenge the (mis)identification of the entity or the determination to call it a boy, but to dismiss the card ( illegible, even to the pentagon ???) and the circumstances of it's presentation within the slides doesn't cast the team in a favorable light.
 
Last edited:
I don't see any signs of autopsy going on in the slides, and I don't believe its a thing, rather the body of a young boy.
I think that has been forgotten, I am pretty sure whoever entombed this child never intended for him to be "displayed", but for us to understand and learn from the past is a good thing, so I understand the value in such exhibits, however I think we have a responsibility to do so with respect.

I think that those that have been dishonest about the slides have not only disrespected the child in question, but all of us collectively, as humans.

And I might add that Egyptians were well know for their curses, so I would not be suprised if the slide peddlers have evoke some kind of cosmic retaliation ;)

Maybe I am taking it too personally, but I don't like the ideas that are being promoted surrounding our origins, especially when based on faulty or deliberately misleading grounds.
 
At this point, the only thing of interest here is the attempts of the Sliders to come up with more and more desperate and convoluted reasons to still take any of this seriously. Only defenders of the Book of Mormon outdo them.

The placard identifies the object as a child mummy. The object looks like a child mummy, desiccated, in pieces, and showing signs of having been eviscerated before embalming. In the name of William of Ockham, why should we get our knickers (and our brains) in a twist trying to deny the obvious? We all have confirmation bias, but enough already. Some folks are beginning to sound like Criswell in the epilogue of Plan Nine:
criswell.jpg


"Grave robbers from outer space! Can you prove it didn't happen?"
(And by the way, it seems they can.)
 
At this point, the only thing of interest here is the attempts of the Sliders to come up with more and more desperate and convoluted reasons to still take any of this seriously. Only defenders of the Book of Mormon outdo them.

The placard identifies the object as a child mummy. The object looks like a child mummy, desiccated, in pieces, and showing signs of having been eviscerated before embalming. In the name of William of Ockham, why should we get our knickers (and our brains) in a twist trying to deny the obvious? We all have confirmation bias, but enough already. Some folks are beginning to sound like Criswell in the epilogue of Plan Nine:
criswell.jpg


"Grave robbers from outer space! Can you prove it didn't happen?"
(And by the way, it seems they can.)
I've haven't laughed so hard in weeks thanks to your two posts in this thread today! Priceless! Genius!

And, btw, many many laughing thanks too... :D

I'm still smiling...
 
I don't see any signs of autopsy going on in the slides, and I don't believe its a thing, rather the body of a young boy.
I think that has been forgotten, I am pretty sure whoever entombed this child never intended for him to be "displayed", but for us to understand and learn from the past is a good thing, so I understand the value in such exhibits, however I think we have a responsibility to do so with respect.

I think that those that have been dishonest about the slides have not only disrespected the child in question, but all of us collectively, as humans.

And I might add that Egyptians were well know for their curses, so I would not be suprised if the slide peddlers have evoke some kind of cosmic retaliation ;)

Maybe I am taking it too personally, but I don't like the ideas that are being promoted surrounding our origins, especially when based on faulty or deliberately misleading grounds.
The Chinese probably had the best curse of all, 'May you live in interesting times.'
 
I don't see any signs of autopsy going on in the slides, and I don't believe its a thing, rather the body of a young boy.
I think that has been forgotten, I am pretty sure whoever entombed this child never intended for him to be "displayed", but for us to understand and learn from the past is a good thing, so I understand the value in such exhibits, however I think we have a responsibility to do so with respect.

I think that those that have been dishonest about the slides have not only disrespected the child in question, but all of us collectively, as humans.

And I might add that Egyptians were well know for their curses, so I would not be suprised if the slide peddlers have evoke some kind of cosmic retaliation ;)

Maybe I am taking it too personally, but I don't like the ideas that are being promoted surrounding our origins, especially when based on faulty or deliberately misleading grounds.

I understand your misgivings, Han, and feel the same way. What could be more disturbing than verbal wars and competing claims over the physical remains of afflicted human children, or even of alien beings? But I have to say that I haven't seen any inappropriate emotions expressed about all this coming from the original slides researchers. By contrast, their attackers have been out for blood in wanting not only to destroy the possibility that the slides might be evidence of an alien being, but also to destroy the careers of the researchers who spent time and no doubt personal resources trying to find out. Ufology via internet blogging is a war zone. How did it get this way and who would want to be part of it?
 
Forgot to mention re autopsy having been performed on the being in the slides that this seems to have been recognized by the researchers and their consultants.
 
But I have to say that I haven't seen any inappropriate emotions expressed about all this coming from the original slides researchers.

Constance, I don't quite see the relevance of the appropriateness or inappropriateness of emotions, however you may define them, to the discussion, though I think you are giving the slide promoters more slack than they deserve. Mr. Bragalia, at least, has not been noted for his even demeanor. And I do think the irresponsibility, lack of due diligence, marketing campaign, and secrecy of the researchers, as you call them, leave them open to rough handling.

Let's take a look at how all this has unrolled. First ufologists are tantalized with hints about "game changing" evidence--physical evidence, even--that will establish the truth of the ETH explanation of the Roswell events. Then there are leaks, glimpses, and hacks that ramp up interest even more. There are stories about the alleged photographer/owner of these slides that ties them to a name already well known to the cognoscenti, but no real evidence. We are told that because of the painstaking research necessary to authenticate the slides, it will be a long time before they are released. We are assured that when this work is done, the slides, or at least the best possible scans of them, will be made available. Then we are told that the slide team is looking for the "most appropriate" way to make their work public. And finally we are told that we'll have to put our pesos on the line (or online) if we are to witness the overthrow of all previous paradigms at a "reveal" (Mother of Samuel Johnson, how I hate it when verbs become nouns for no good reason and vice versa) in Mexico City. And frankly, I've seen more eye-opening reveals at Coney Island.

And what do we learn from all this? That these zealous researchers and the experts they hired, who are hardly eminent names in their professions, dismissed the most obvious interpretation of these remains, that they didn't make much effort to decipher the most important piece of writing in it, that they failed to recognize the setting in which the creature is displayed, that they were unable to provide any verifiable evidence for the provenance of these slides. No, all their efforts were focused on dating the slides and their cardboard mounts, as if all that really mattered was when they were taken. Meanwhile, they seemed to be scuttling around looking for a media sugar daddy to reimburse their expenses and give them a well-earned payday. Sadly for them, all they could find was Jaime Maussan. I hope they got their checks before Jaime lost his hundred thousand dollars.

The true reveal is that in the end it's all been a game with no rules, half Trivial Pursuit and half three-card monte, played on a Ouija board, in which all the players lose. But it does provide a little guilty Schadenfreude to those of us who are only watching.
 
Constance, I don't quite see the relevance of the appropriateness or inappropriateness of emotions

It goes to motivation, Bonaventura. 'Schadenfreude' doesn't begin to touch the animus and contempt displayed over the last four months from the ufo 'blogosphere' toward the Roswell slides researchers. Now it extends to jubilant (and absurd) claims that Richard Dolan's career as a ufo researcher has been destroyed by his consideration that there might be something to the analyses of the forensic archaeologists and physiologists at the May 5 event and that we should read their detailed reports before rushing to judgment. Too much to ask of bloggers and blog readers? And the vilifications of Dolan coming from people who have made little to no contributions to ufo research compared with the extensive research performed by RD. This piling on has all been too shabby and too debased to take seriously. I comment on it because almost no one else does. Sorry to say you haven't changed my mind.
 
It goes to motivation, Bonaventura. 'Schadenfreude' doesn't begin to touch the animus and contempt displayed over the last four months from the ufo 'blogosphere' toward the Roswell slides researchers. Now it extends to jubilant (and absurd) claims that Richard Dolan's career as a ufo researcher has been destroyed by his consideration that there might be something to the analyses of the forensic archaeologists and physiologists at the May 5 event and that we should read their detailed reports before rushing to judgment. Too much to ask of bloggers and blog readers? And the vilifications of Dolan coming from people who have made little to no contributions to ufo research compared with the extensive research performed by RD. This piling on has all been too shabby and too debased to take seriously. I comment on it because almost no one else does. Sorry to say you haven't changed my mind.
Constance, I don't doubt my inability to change your mind. Nonetheless, I think the Sliders brought most of this on themselves by the irresponsible way they handled the whole business.

My wife just came in to find out why I was still up, so I'm going to bed. I'll have more to say about this later in the day.
 
I see both sides to this. I see today that they may have "easily" figured out the placard. If that is true then it's crazy to say the least. It's the most basic aspect to figuring out what they have. It throws in doubt all the next stages to an investigation. However, it has amazed me for this whole year and last year, the level of crazed desire by prominent people in this field to cut the ankles out from under this team. Long before they had slides to work with they posted at various blogs known hoaxers and tagged them to the dream team. Long before there was this Mexican venue. Part of me wished they'd keep the evidence and just announce that the investigation would continue without anyone else involved. I remember when they were hacked. Talk about crazed. Someone was so anxious and righteous that they couldn't wait and hacked their computers to get to the slides. There was absolutely no accountability for that. So while we hold this team's feet to the fire for "lousy, possibly hoaxed" product , what about the flip site of this crazed group that has no problem pissing all over the field to prove their point?
 
The more I think about this whole Slides episode, the more I feel this kind of nonsense will keep repeating itself. Why? People want to believe, have to believe there are aliens among us.

Even when certain facts are presented, some people refused to see this whole thing was a sham. Perhaps the old saying still holds true. 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.'
 
Anthony Bragalia has posted on the RRR site an identification of the source of the child mummy in the slides and an apology:

"Sunday, May 10, 2015


THE “ROSWELL ALIEN SLIDES” AND MY APOLOGY TO A DEAD CHILD OF THE MESA VERDE by Anthony Bragalia

Several days ago a group of skeptical researchers applied a program called “SmartDeBlur” to the placard found juxtaposed near the being pictured in slides from 1947 thought to be of an extraterrestrial creature found crashed at Roswell. This author championed the slides as those of an alien and this author was wrong.

The group of skeptical researchers interpreted the placard as reading “Mummified Body of Two Year Old Boy. At the time of burial the body was clothed in a xxx-xxx cotton shirt. Burial wraps consisted of these small cotton blankets. Loaned by the Mr. Xxxxxx of San Francisco, California.”

Working with a colleague from Europe and with the text of the de-blurred placard, I discovered last night that this interpretation of the text was correct. Found in the September 1938 Volume VIII, Number 1 Mesa Verde Notes that was published by the National Park Service was an article that definitively solves the mystery of the “Roswell Slides.” In paragraph four of the section of the publication entitled Around The Mesa was found this:

“A splendid mummy was received by the Park Museum recently when Mr. S.L. Palmer Jr. of San Francisco returned one that his father had taken from the ruins in 1894. The mummy is that of a two year old boy and is in an excellent state of preservation. At the time of burial the body was clad in a slip-over cotton shirt and three small cotton blankets. Fragments of these are still on the mummy.” The full text of the article can be found in this link: Mesa Verde National Park (Notes)

This paragraph corresponds directly to the slides placard: the mummified body of a two year old boy, three small cotton blankets (the word “three” understandably seen by the de-blurring program as “these”) andMr. Xxxxx of San Francisco, California.

A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY

The word “hoax” has been used to describe the “Roswell Slides” saga. It was not. At least, the principal investigators, Tom Carey, Don Schmitt, and I did not knowingly fake or obfuscate anything. No matter, it is a serious case of mistaken identity, the consequences of which I fully accept.

I was told that the best-available, highest resolution images of the placard were provided by the co-owner of the slides, Mr. Adam Dew, and given to world-class photo experts including Ray Downing of Studio Macbeth in NY (who conducted analysis on the Shroud of Turin) and Colonel Jeffrey Thau (who sent them to the Pentagon’s Photo Interpretation Department.) Despite the application of the best de-blurring software in the world, they were unable to read the words on the placard with any definitiveness.

I can only surmise that Mr. Adam Dew did not provide to these experts the highest-resolution images of the slides. Why he did not, I cannot be certain. But Adam Dew has to this very day not yet publicly provided the crystal-clear slide images that I know exist.

And Adam Dew in an email to a German researcher just two days ago, accused the skeptics who applied the SmartDeBlur program to the placard of using Photo Shop to fake their interpretation of the text. Given the discovery of the Mesa Verde Notes which clearly corroborate this interpretation, it is not the skeptics who faked anything. Mr. Dew has some explaining to do.

He has provided at various times to researchers different segments of the slides, partial images of the slides, and images of the slides of varying resolution. We can ask why, but I think we know without asking. Dew’s motivations were from the very beginning very different that those of mine, of Tom’s and of Don’s. He is new to the UFO field and has no stake in it as those who have spent years in such study. Unlike the placard images that he provided, it is not hard to read between the lines.

INCREDIBLE BUT TRUE COINCIDENCES

The data points and the narrative of the slide are all true. The slide stock is from 1947, the very year of the crash. A Roswell vet from 1947 who actually personally viewed the dead bodies found fallen at Roswell did see similarities between what he saw and the being shown on the slides. Bernerd Ray and Hilda Ray, the original owners of the slides really were very well connected people. Bernerd really was an oil exploration geologist who worked the Permian Basin in New Mexico the 1940s and really was the President of a geological society in 1947 that covered New Mexico and he really did quit the organization after his 1947 term. His wife Hilda really was a prominent oil industry lawyer in the 1940s who very likely was friends with Mamie Eisenhower. They really did place these slides in a chest only to be found decades later after their deaths. The being depicted in the slide is of an extremely unusual appearance, is unusually well-preserved and does bear strikingly odd features.

But all of this must be a series of extraordinarily incredible coincidences. My guess is that Hilda hid the slides of the mummy child within the chest because she felt some sort of guilt that they were in some way exploitive. She was a childless woman. She likely read that Mr. S.L. Palmer’s father had stolen the mummy child and that Palmer’s son, with a sense of guilt, returned the child to its rightful place.

LESSONS LEARNED AND AN APOLOGY TO A DEAD CHILD

I have learned much about myself and things that I need to change in order to become a better researcher. I must be less trusting, more discerning and less accusatory of those with whom I disagree.

But more than this, I must offer my sincerest and deepest apologies to the Native American people of the Southwestern United States. One of their children, a dead child from well over a century ago, was made a spectacle. Whoever you are, you deserve to be extended dignity and respect. Your people, the Ancestral Puebloans, honored you by preserving you. I played part in disturbing your eternal rest, and for that I am so very sorry. Though I did not seek nor receive any money from any of this saga, and though my efforts were sincere and my offense unintentional, I am making a substantial donation to an American Indian children’s charity and encourage everyone else who played part to do the same.

AJB"
 
It did not take long for the apology to come and the fingerpointing to begin. Considering that some still hold out a belief that the Alien Autopsy might yet turn out to be real, I am not sure that this will satisfy everyone. This does not seem all that different than any other straw that people have grasped - the field is full of those who have a will to believe almost anything. Perhaps this is the film that Dew intended to make and the ending that he envisioned. If so, it was all too predictable.
 
Last edited:
I think the way this has turned out is very sobering. It's as if we've all been shown the partiality of our own limited perspectives on the world and the folly of holding on to our ideas too tightly, to the point of arguing about them. The meanings embedded in the world are much larger than all of our ideas about 'reality'.
 
Last edited:
I've only been involved with the UFO subject since 1979. Still not one piece of irrefutable evidence. That is unbelievable to me. Funny thing is, back in '79 I would have thought it would be solved by like 1985. LOL.
 
In the very early discussions with the Dream Team the schism round the slides was about which two had direct access to the slides vs. which person was excluded and not able to see the slides.

What researcher would make any claims at all about these images without having had direct personal examination of the slides? To claim after the fact that they never actually saw the original slides is beyond a ridiculous position to take. Any researcher who has claimed status in the field and supported these slides needs to have their own "thorough approaches to research" re-examined.

Many need to be lumped into the same bag of "profit over truth" and shoud never be seen any other way. There is no reasonable defense or explanation to claim. Saying you never saw the primary proofs personally after the fact is not defensible in the slightest. It only makes those individuals look more ridiculous or they are simply uncritcal admitted members of the faithful.

Bragila's attempt to buy out his shame through charitable donation is both immature and reprehensible.
 
Bragila's attempt to buy out his shame through charitable donation is both immature and reprehensible

THANK YOU , i was going to comment on that earlier but forgot about it. more than anyone in this whole sad episode i think his conduct has been...as you so eloquently put it...reprehensible, and bombastic to boot , judging from his posts on kevin randle's blog...and his mea culpa is to solicit funds (to a worthy cause) by badgering those who took place in it. #sadsadsad
 
Last edited:
THANK YOU , i was going to comment on that earlier but forgot about it. more than anyone in this whole sad episode i think his conduct has been...as you so eloquently put it...reprehensible, and bombastic to boot , judging from his posts on kevin randle's blog...and his mea culpa is to solicit funds (to a worthy cause) by badgering those who took place in it. #sadsadsad
Wouldn't it be nice to see all those involved say they were going to donate their fee for the Mexico City debacle to, let's say, the Humane Society.

I know this will never happen but it's nice to dream once in awhile.
 
Back
Top