It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Area 51 alien autopsy image is ‘smoking gun’, researcher claims

page: 2
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
interesting article, but as we say , pics it or didn't happen, this screams of a future book release to me.

Q




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: longy9999

No, the phone had nothing to do with it. Actually, for a while, it was hard to prove as a fake--even the film codes matched up to the proper year that it was claimed to have taken place. Obviously they came out and admitted the hoax, but the phone had nothing to do with it--IIRC, that was an assertion made that was false, as they had phones like that in 1947.


Ah right, fair enough. To be honest I was quite young when the video was aired on tv so only remember a few details about it, I just remembered something about the telephone wire being mentioned sometime after but I have no doubts that your right.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: UKWO1Phot
Interesting the article refers to "insect-like" aliens.
There is a councillor in Whitby(famous as a location in the "Dracula" novel),who claims he was raised by "Mantid-like aliens."
He looks about the right age to have been born around the time of the Roswell incident too!

Here's an excerpt of an interview with him where he mentions what the mantid's craft looks like inside,and talks about roswell:
exopolitics.blogs.com...< br />
And if thats not far out enough for you,there's a lengthy video interview entitled:
"Alfred Webre interviews: UK Councillor Simon Parkes raised by Mantid ETs: The Great Shift begins in 2017. No to Ebola vaccine"


Sorry if slighty off topic,but I did wonder about the possible mantid/insect connection.
Course he could just be a crazy guy who somehow got elected councillor..



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The images in the article were just there to take up space. The "real" image isn't this one, is it? The description is of a single alien in a container partially dissected. This doesn't appear to be it:



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Seems interesting, but I am already turned off by the fact that Tom Carey has milked the Roswell incident for every penny he can for years. He certainly doesn't appear to have an objective approach. His significant sources of income appear to come from lectures, movies and books related to Roswell. See his website:roswellinvestigator.com... Therefore, he has every incentive in the world to continue to perpetuate myths on this subject. I really wish this mysterious lady had given this so-called evidence to a non-biased source.

Now, in my mind, this doesn't mean that the evidence is fabricated, but it does mean that you have to look at it with a strong sense of skepticism.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: UKWO1Phot

Tom Carey did an AMA here on ATS a year ago, tom carey ask me anything

So one of the owners here might be friends with mr. Carey.
Perhaps they could ask him if this is true or better still, give ATS a copy of this 'smoking gun' photo


From the above AMA,



A motion picture, based upon these books, titled Majic Men, is nearing production, as is a TV mini-series based on the book.


Whats the betting one or both of these is set for release next year, soon after he releases this autopsy photo?

edit on 17/11/14 by SecretKnowledge because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: longy9999

you know thats from an alien abduction recreation, right?



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: MysterX

Two things:

1) Film from 1947 would show tell-tale signs of quality degradation if tried to be used to take a photograph 60+ years later (and a film expert from Kodak could tell that), and

2) Taking a picture of a printed image is also easily discernable by your average lay person, let alone any sort of experts--your proposed hoax would fall flat on its face before it ever gained any traction.

I'm not saying what you describe isn't possible, I'm just saying that it will be easily detected if this is the case.

Also, if I recall correctly from watching that Alien Autopsy video years ago, there are date codes on film (at least the 8mm film used for video) that are symbols, and those symbols are recycled every 20 years or so. I'm assuming it's the same with camera film, and if so, just because the date code is correct for 1947 doesn't mean it's not correct for other years, too (like '67, '87, etc.)


That's right most if not all of the paraphernalia used in the autopsy film was appropriate. I think it was maybe the procedure that was criticized.
The picture in the link is just a story header.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
The first photo in the article is from a ufo sighting in Copenhagen, Denmark from 1950, not sure what the other one is from but thought I'd share that at least
..

"farmer, by the name of Christian Anderson, and his wife watched as two discs appeared over their farm. One landed in a field while the other hovered nearby. The landed disc then exploded in a shower of sparks while the other flew away. No other information concerning this case exists."



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
it's always irritating when somebody claims to have something of potentially huge importance, but doesn't show us the something at the same time. it's a tease.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Taken from that article:



Carey says: ‘What’s interesting is, the film is dated 1947. We took it to the official historian of Kodak up in Rochester, New York, and he did his due diligence on it, and he said yes, this filmstrip, the slides are from 1947. It’s 1947 stock. And from the emulsions on the image, it’s not something that’s been Photoshopped like today. It’s original 1947 images, and it shows an alien who’s been partially dissected lying in a case.’



Where have we heard this before????


Hmmm let's jump back two decades to 1995. Replace the name Tom Carey for Ray Santilli.



I don't think the word gullible is used in the whole of that video is it?

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

ETA



Carey was sent the slides by a couple in Texas. ‘The woman was a high-powered Midland, Texas, lawyer with a pilot’s licence. We think she was involved in intelligence in World War II, and her husband was a field geologist for an oil company,’ claims Carey.


Well if she was involved in intelligence in World War II and was only say 20 in 1940 that would mean she is now well into her 90s.

If it walks like a rat, and looks like a rat, then it's advisable to use those nostrils too.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
edit on 17/11/14 by mirageman because: addition



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Tom Carey is serious investigator and researcher, not some casual UFO clown.I will take this story with serious approach and wait for releasing the image.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
Where have we heard this before????

It's apparently also associated with the Aztec UFO crash and the whole story of the university geologist and a group of students accidentally coming across the crash site. That whole story was debunked long ago.

Ah, the UFO field. Come for the revelations, stay for the endless rehashing of old crap.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe




Oh, and the fact he isn't releasing them until early next year


next years is days away.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Yes I've only just realised it's actually the same old story that's been around a while:

ufocon.blogspot.co.uk...

TIm Printy also covered the story it on page 4 of his FREE Sunlite magazine from the start of 2014 : Free Sunlite Magazine Download Link

We've waited nearly 70 years for any photographs of ANYTHING from the Roswell incident other than some weather balloon debris so what difference will waiting another few years make.
edit on 17/11/14 by mirageman because: addition



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I'm surprised no one's jumped on the fact that it would be impossible for these pictures to be from 1947 while also being from Area 51. The Groom Lake facility wasn't established until 1955.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
The true "smoking gun" will not come in the form of photographs.

We've seen countless photographs and videos that have been debunked and many others that aren't convincing enough to sway anyone but the true believers.

As for the folks criticizing the timing of his release, I can think of 2 reasons why someone would do it this way: 1) Once he sent the photos to Kodak for validation, he figured word might get out so he's beating the rumor-mill to the punch. 2) It only makes sense for him to get his ducks in a row and have several people validate the photo before releasing it. Otherwise, the photo becomes yet another victim of drive-by debunkings and disappears into the pit of hoaxes.

For a photo to have any chance of changing anyone's mind, it will have to be bullet proof BEFORE it's released.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

Too true, I don't think a photograph could ever be enough proof, there isn't any truly reliable way to verify it.

Its gotta make you wonder if out of all the pics and videos of aliens we have circling the net are there actually some genuine ones there but we just haven't realised it?



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX

Here's a simple if somewhat unorthodox way that image could be manufactured.

Take genuine, unexposed Kodak film from 1947.


Film has a shelf life.



a reply to: mirageman

His story seems to be changing as well. The page you linked says "The bodies were not quite human but not quite unearthly either." Now he's describing them as insect-like.


edit on 11 17 2014 by CosmicRay because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: longy9999
a reply to: Answer

Too true, I don't think a photograph could ever be enough proof, there isn't any truly reliable way to verify it.

Its gotta make you wonder if out of all the pics and videos of aliens we have circling the net are there actually some genuine ones there but we just haven't realised it?


It's certainly possible. The problem is, the topic has been flooded with so many fakes that we'll never know what to believe.

I'm fairly certain that if there's a "they" that controls the information, they're at least partially responsible for the hoaxes.




top topics



 
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join