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.

 

The alien autopsy footage: Can will really debunk it ?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Now i have done a few searches and nothing came up on the subject. I just rewatched the full version of the "alien autopsy footage" and never really seen or read this being "debunked". I always see people saying "ohh its has to be fake" or "thats not how an alien would bleed or look they have....." like they have seen one to make that comparaison.
So how would one definitively know this footage is faked ?. I guess if you spoke to the makers of this footage, that mite do but thats looking slim.
So please post up your proof so we can either proof this real or debunk it once and for all !!!




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:15 AM
link   
There have been plenty of reasonable debunking jobs done on it, some better than others, some going into a lot of technical detail about the length of the footage, the position of the body, etc. Some of it is okay. Some of it is slapdash. Of course the worst kind of debunking is where somebody says, "Here's how it COULD have been done," which is no real logical proof of how it actually WAS done. That spurious, illogical argument always bugs me.

Anyway, there were problems with the Alien Autopsy thing from the very beginning. I don't know why it's so hard for people to get in their heads that "Mr. Anonymous" is a bad source for reliable, verifiable information. Whether it's Serpo, or the Alien Autopsy, or whatever, the minute you discover the source is unknown or anonymous, you might as well throw the whole thing in the trash. I don't care about the whole notion of people trying to protect themselves from reprisal or too much publicity. The best remedy for that is complete disclosure. If something as important as proof of alien life is the subject, then whoever is presenting the evidence is NOT going to be anonymous. As for the Alien Autopsy, sure, Ray Santilli wasn't anonymous, but his supposed "source" was. And that's enough of a stink right there to throw out the entire thing.

Another thing that frequently bugs me about people in the "UFO community" is how they'll use unsupported information to somehow judge some other piece of unsupported information. Again, with Serpo, a lot of people were encouraged to think it was real because some of the information tied into other pieces of UFO folklore. If I created a story or a piece of film and mentioned Roswell, Zeta Reticuli, the Pleiades, Majestic 12, the Mothman and whatever else, does that help "verify" it in some way? Of course not! It's just name-dropping. In fact, the more a story mentions this common UFO folklore, the LESS I tend to believe it.

So with the Alien Autopsy, a lot of people got excited when the thing was tied into the Roswell mythology, but it had as many divergences from the story as it did links. The whole four fingers versus six fingers argument, for instance. Nobody involved with Roswell EVER said anything about six fingers on the aliens. It was always four. Even without the finger problem, the aliens in the film hardly resembled the descriptions of the Roswell aliens, at all. Most Roswell reports say the aliens looked mostly like little people, small and light. The thing in the film is downright robust, with a very oversized head. So what can be discerned from that? Well, how about nothing? It's not a vote in either direction for authenticity, because, as I said, you can't use one unverified piece of information to judge another.

If those two things weren't bad enough, the whole story of the purchase and sale of the film, the wacky dealings with the American "cameraman" who supposedly gives a statement that doesn't sound American, the mysterious "missing" footage of President Truman that some people report seeing, the weird suppression of the footage by the enigmatic Volker Spielberg, etc., just lead you into a confusing Alice in Wonderland hole that the White Rabbit couldn't find his way out of. And whenever that happens, I just shake my head and walk away, because it usually means that it was all a lot of nonsense from the beginning, or the disinformationists got to it and now it's impossible to tell if there was even a tiny shred of authenticity about it.

So who knows? The film is still around, for what it's worth. As time goes by, and as computer technology gets better, maybe somebody will be able to enhance or extrapolate or whatever and squeeze a bit more objective evidence out of it. For the moment, though, until somebody comes forward and fesses up (if there's anything to fess up about), the Alien Autopsy is going to sit in that wonderful state of Limbo, where the same arguments are occasionally trotted out again and rehashed and nothing moves forward, again.






posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   
agree with the above post and to add in my 2 cents.....

last I had heard........meaning possibly year(s) ago......there was talk the video might have been from a different crash......because of the "camera man's" claims that he filmed this in JUNE and not July.........which someone said would explain the differences in features compared to the reports from Roswell.

I say "someone".......because it's been a long while since this topic has been brought up into my attention and I don't have specifics......just thinking off memory.
I kept an "open mind"(that phrase people love to throw around so much) ......about this video for a good while........but eventually "gave up".......if you wanna call it that.........or just got un-interested in the research into it a long time ago.......

It's funny I remembered reading an issue of Omni magazine with an article about Steven Speilberg being offered footage "related to the roswell incident" but never heard another word about it.........then awhile later from nowhere came the Alien Autopsy footage and I'm guessing this was what was offered to Speilberg but he turned it down.....(note i said guessing lol)
Never recalled hearing much mention of that when all the "debunking" of the video and Santilli started up wide spread......

Oh well.......the video still sits with countless others of mine related to ufology..... all nice and dusty.......

nice trip down memory lane....



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   
The alien autopsy film is fake. I know what the extra terrestrials look like, and they don't look like that at all. It was said so also on Disovery channel, as well as the News...that, that alien autopsy was fake. They were just doing thast for money. i mean look at the mouth. And those eyes...and the stomach...the skin also doens't look like real skin. Being into EBES and paranormal all my life, I have to debunk this. The video is a hoax.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 02:30 AM
link   
The whole point of the exercise is that we should not be put into a position to "debunk" anything, anyway. It's up to the people presenting the material to provide the information that verifies what they're saying the thing is. If they're saying it's anything. Santilli, for his part, always just said, "Here is this thing. Here's what I was told. I don't know anything more about it than that." So, in that regard, what's to debunk? Nothing.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitelightwolf
The alien autopsy film is fake. I know what the extra terrestrials look like, and they don't look like that at all. It was said so also on Disovery channel, as well as the News...that, that alien autopsy was fake. They were just doing thast for money. i mean look at the mouth. And those eyes...and the stomach...the skin also doens't look like real skin. Being into EBES and paranormal all my life, I have to debunk this. The video is a hoax.


i call shenanigans



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitelightwolf
The alien autopsy film is fake. I know what the extra terrestrials look like, and they don't look like that at all.


This is exactly what i was talking about. Please can you post your definitively proof that you are making your comparaison from ?.
Please people can we avoid debunking the footage with opinions and rather with soild proof.


Originally posted by whitelightwolf
It was said so also on Disovery channel, as well as the News...that, that alien autopsy was fake.
:

Gee if the news reports it as fake it must be



So as its stands i have yet to see proof either way, but rather peoples personal opinons. As for the "Mr. Anonymous" theory, there's no why if i was in a postion to haved filmed a alien for the government would i want my name attached when its leaked to the media would you ?. Even say 50's year's after it suposedly took place.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitelightwolf
It was said so also on Disovery channel, as well as the News...


heh.. well there's an alarm bell ringing right there! LOL, it was on Discovery channel, therefore they MUST know it's hoaxed, lol. Of course they would want to do that - they are part of the ongoing coverup! It could well have been some kind of disclosure "test" using real material and then to give it a good old fashioned public dressing-down to kill it off.

One thing I found interesting was that Dr Steven Greer recently gave a radio interview where he casually said that he believes the Alien Autopsy footage to be authentic, and this is speaking from the viewpoint of an MD and the medical procedures on display.


Originally posted by whitelightwolf
I know what the extra terrestrials look like, and they don't look like that at all.


Well there must be different species of ET; just because they don't look like the creatures you allegedly saw doesn't mean the Grey on the slab wasn't genuine.



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   
I'll have to dig you up some links...but here's some of the most damning evidence...

1. the film supplied for date testing was indeed dated to 1947, however, no frames of THAT film show ANYTHING like what was on the Alien Autopsy film, so the chances of it being NOT of that film, is pretty damn good, and REEKS of purposeful hoaxing....

2. In a dead body possessing blood, gravity pulls all of the blood to the base of the body. You don't see this on the alien autopsy video.

3. The lack of internal support structures. When doing the autopsy, we don't see any kind of rib cage or exoskeleton, so we're left wondering how exactly this would be.

That said, there are still some intriguing questions. The one that still keeps me thinking on it is this: Just as Corso described (Day after Roswell), the beings had thin artificial bio-like membranes over the eyes, and this gave them their black appearance with more human-like eyes underneath. This is just a coincidence that seems too weird...but the evidence is strong that the vid is a fake....for whatever reasons....



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I think it is a very big possibility of hoax. I suggest to read this
.
www.v-j-enterprises.com...



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Might want to take into account this site:

www.trudang.com...



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
This website has an excellent analysis of the autopsy video: www.trudang.com...

I for one go back and forth between belief and disbelief... Right now, the evidence seems to point toward it being a hoax.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I think it's a hoax. Unfortunately, we'll probably never know.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join