originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
what an epic it is, if not THE epic UFO story of all time.
Is it a UFO story though? Did you listen to the calls to the national UFO reporting
center that Kandinsky posted in your thread? The call said what they saw was a light, close to the ground.
One of the witnesses mentioned he thought it might be something related to a deer stand at first, didn't he? That would be something attached to a
tree, not flying. So if I missed the witness testimony that they actually saw something flying, please point it out. The closest I saw was when they
drove away (the chickens, or maybe just the decision of the alleged co-hoaxer Rogers and the rest were along for the ride), they looked back and
thought they saw a light moving through the trees, but that's not really definitive that anything was flying.
So instead of a "UFO case" maybe it's a "light, close to the ground, in the forest, which could have been on a deer stand for all I know" case.
There were some other odd calls, like the call from Travis's brother who said Travis wouldn't hoax, he's intelligent with a high IQ. Does that make
any sense? Seems like that added statement is more convincing that he COULD pull off a hoax if he wanted to, if he has a high IQ. It's people with a
low IQ that I'd expect to have problems pulling off a convincing hoax.
And then there was yet another caller who clearly wanted to believe the story, and did believe it early on when Travis first re-appeared. But that
phone calls seems to document that Travis possibly lied about why he wouldn't talk to the scientists at Phenomena research anymore, because they
wouldn't cut Travis in on the profits they would make writing their book. The response was that Phenomena research had been doing research for 20
years and never wrote a single book yet, and that's not what they do. So Travis's whole reason for not talking to them because of not cutting him on
on book profits seems fictitious since they don't write any books and they confirmed that on the phone call.
So, whether Travis was telling the truth about anything else or not, the NUFORC recording seems to show he wasn't being truthful about the "book". So
the caller who wanted to believe and did believe, who was very close to the case, indicated that and other things indicated him the case was falling
apart and not so believable anymore.
So, while I don't think anybody doubts the "innocent" 5 witnesses other than Walton and possibly Rogers, what did they really see? A UFO? Or as the
caller to the UFO hot line said, a "light, close to the ground"?
associated UFO interests (how sceptics love to throw mud at folks who have the affrontery to admit that)..
You could apply that to
Klass, but GSW was said to be a "pro-UFO" organization, who pointed that out in their notes, and why do you call it mud if it's factual? GSW said: "2.
The entire Walton family has had a continual UFO history. The Walton boys have reported observing 10 to 15 separate UFO sightings (very high)." Is
that "mud", or is it just a fact they discovered from which you the reader can draw your own conclusions?
That these five guys (and Rogers as an assumed co-hoaxer with Travis) were genuine murder suspects for a few days, the genuine trauma resulting
from such allegations should not be discounted lightly by sceptics.
You seem to be assuming Walton and Rogers predicted the outcome. What if
they didn't even consider all the possible consequences? (aside from the prize money they recently heard about for a UFO story which coudl be
published, that would be a consequence which would occupy their thoughts). Besides I don't think the murder allegations were that serious, the cops
believed the witnesses eventualy after their lie detector tests, right?
Also, what do you think about this, how does this impact the murder allegations you seem so worried about?
Travis Walton’s Alien Abduction Lie Detection
His brother Duane confessed: “He’s not even missing. He knows where he’s at, and I know where he’s at.”
(The lie detectors aren't really that helpful due to unreliability, but it's funny to hear Walton say an earlier lie detector test paid for by the
Enquirer proves he was telling the truth, when the after lie detection test on TV showed he was lying, at which point he says they can't be trusted.
But for those interested in lie detectors the most important one conducted by one of the area's top lie detector professionals is completely ignored
by most people, which isn't the one paid for by the national enquirer.)
One notion doing the rounds is that this was potentially a military abduction (there was military activity in the area at the time of the
incident) - a theory that the Betty and Barney Hill case from 14 years earlier is not a stranger to. Hmmmm.
Lots of people claim they have been abducted. The Walton case is unique on having extra witnesses who saw a "Light, close to the ground" before a
man's "disappearance", but there's no evidence he was abducted. There's no evidence Betty Hill was abducted either. Did you see the
letter that Benjamin Simon wrote to Phil Klass
, saying that he's
sure they made a sighting of something, but he's also sure there was no abduction?
So before I tried to explain any abduction as military, I'd want to see evidence of the abduction, and I have yet to see any good evidence of any
abduction. If there really are abductions, now we have places like London with security cameras everywhere, which could possibly give some independent
evidence of abductions claims by London residents, if they were really happening, which I expect are not really happening..
edit on 2020722 by Arbitrageur because: clarification