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.

 

Compilation: The Evidence For EBEs

page: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


Great job you are doing here, I for one do appreciate it very much. A lot of the information you post is new to me and knowing they are debunked or close to it, is very helpful.




posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Rhain
 


Thank you very much Rhain, and cool Avatar!
Some of these cases are new to me too. Just as you are thankful for the reports, I feel the need to further express that same thanks to those ATS members that helped to hash out this data in the first place. Compiling all of this information without the existing ATS threads to glean source data from, well it would have taken a VERY long time.

Also, being fairly new here myself, I feel at a disadvantage at times, because ATS members who have been here longer know the pertinent details of each case, having watched the actual investigations transpire. These compilations also serve (to me at least) as a sort of Primer on what has happened at ATS in this genre of research to date. They are helping me to 'catch up' with the data/evidence from each case, and that gives me the knowledge to be able to intelligently examine the case, and to compare/contrast with other existing data.

It's a tangled web, but if anyone can untangle it, it's ATS.
Thanks again Rhain, and please add any cases you may find relevent here, I'm bound to miss some!



posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
WitnessFromAfar,

Can you tell us a little about yourself?
Since this is the first thread you started when you joined here recently, I'm curious why you started off with Aliens instead of UFOs for example.



But at any rate, I'm curious why you are interested in the topic of ET's and UFO's. Many people here have had some kind of experience of some sort that triggered off their interest -- and yes, obsession with these phenomenon's. Have you had your own experiences? It would be great if you could share them with us!



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Palasheea
WitnessFromAfar,
Can you tell us a little about yourself?
Since this is the first thread you started when you joined here recently, I'm curious why you started off with Aliens instead of UFOs for example.



Certainly Palasheea, I'm a human male from the western edge of the north american continent here on Earth.


I'm really only here at ATS to debate and discuss Aliens/UFOs etc. I don't really frequent the other boards. Those topics are interesting to me, but I don't have time to research everything.


I started off with Aliens instead of UFOs for two reasons:
1) Gazrok has already begun a compilation of UFO cases, it inspired this effort because reading his thread really helped me find good info on a lot of casefiles I had no prior knowledge about. I realized what a great research tool such a compilation could be, and decided to develop the tool further, since it helped me so much.

2)I also recognize the important fine line between the term 'UFO' and the term 'Spaceship', and while UFOs are of great interest to me (being possible spaceships) I'm really much more interested in talking about/researching Spaceships.
So I will probably begin work on a Compilation pertaining to the evidence for Spaceships before too terribly long.



Originally posted by Palasheea
But at any rate, I'm curious why you are interested in the topic of ET's and UFO's. Many people here have had some kind of experience of some sort that triggered off their interest -- and yes, obsession with these phenomenon's. Have you had your own experiences? It would be great if you could share them with us!


I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this question, and I never really am when asked. To my knowledge, I've never come into contact directly with an EBE (or ET). That's not to say it hasn't happened without me being aware of it. Once I saw a very strange Bug about the size of my fist that seemed to drop out of the sky (no trees above, just open air). This happened right after I'd seen a big blue fireball rip across the sky. I didn't capture the bug, but it looked REALLY strange to me (had antennae that were flat, and resembled a tuning fork). I have no evidence that it was an EBE, or even related, but I can't say it wasn't either. It behaved strangely, and kept trying to move closer to myself and my girlfriend at the time. Finally, we moved away from it, and it sort of flew/hopped off.

In my personal experience, however, I HAVE witnessed several 'UFOs', things that I cannot identify moving about the sky. (The blue fireballs above are a good example of this, some of them make 90 Degree turns, or weave back and forth as they progress across the sky, and sometimes they travel in twos, perfectly parralel and moving in formation) I've also witnessed several objects that I'm prepared to label Spaceships. (Two objects I could see details, and made reports to NUFORC about) These occurances were unrelated as far as I can tell, and at some point I'm sure I'll probably start a thread about those viewings. Right now I'm researching EBEs because it's my current belief that Humans could not have created the machines I've seen, the ones I'm calling Spaceships. I could well be wrong, and would be open to evidence that these things are man-made also. I'd like to know what information is available on EBEs, and if any of it is solid. I'd like to try to positively identify the crafts I've seen, be they made by humans or beings from offworld (or both).

In short, I've always been a Witness, From Afar, hence my username in this forum. I'm looking for more evidence before I call anything a certainty. I hope this answers your questions Palasheea, thanks again for adding your cases to the thread!

(Edited for spelling)

[edit on 30-12-2007 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I for one like to have some new people here, who are interested in topics of our interests. Welcome, we do like to have lots of people analyzing stuff and report their findings. This filters out the crap.

However, this leads us to another topic that is in our interests as well. You said that you also include all the crap because you feel you are not qualified to say what is real and what is not. We, here on ATS, are constantly trying to do the opposite. That opposite is leaving the crap OUT and focusing on the good cases. You are doing a nice work, but if you do include even that crap which is already filtered by us, you are not doing a good service here.

I do appreciate what you are doing and have been done, though, don't leave it to that. You should consider reading all those threads and pages and figuring out what makes something a hoax and what doesn't. That way, you eventually begin to notice things that shouldn't be and things that should. Therefore, such actions leads your collection of evidence to become a quality bunch of cases. THAT is what we need.

Just start with reading those threads and leave everything that is, in your eyes, not crap, into your compilation. Then post again.

Don't get depressed, people here want to see good cases and it serves the community if the good ones are made public in threads every now and then. There are millions of posts on ATS, nobody can read them all. Newcomers are indeed faced with way too much information to make anything out even after weeks of studying. Compilations help them, and good compilations include a few cases that are indeed hoaxes as long as it is told exactly why it is so.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Thanks WFA for your response to my questions!

You've put so much time and effort into compiling information on these Alien cases, I really can't see someone having any interest in doing that unless they've had some of their own experiences with these phenomena's themselves.

But on the other hand, there are also many people out there who are fascinated with the subject of UFOs and Aliens even though they themselves have never seen one or experienced one or the other.. or both. Many of these same people are also well known researchers, like Friedman, for example. So I was just wondering which one of the two you were.

Thanks again for compiling all of this information into one thread! I'm sure the information in this thread will come in handy should anyone want to know what members on this board said on any given photograph or case.

Lol, in regards to Aliens, as you can see, the vast majority of these cases have been ridiculed and debunked here ... most of them deserve to be debunked but yet, there are still a few here that are at least inconclusive and even one or 2 that some believe are real -- it's those ones that should taken note of for future reference.



[edit on 30-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Hello rawsom!

I think you are missing the point of WFA's compilation of these EBE cases and why he's putting this information together in one thread.

Check out his first post to find out this information:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But I do think it would be interesting if members here could look over those cases in this thread and then start up their own thread on those Alien cases and photograph's that he or she thinks possibly may be the real thing. The fact is, ALL of these cases, with the exception of a scant few have been thoroughly debunked here.
But maybe someone here wants to analyze those cases further because they are not entirely sold on those reasons why the photo has been branded a hoax or misrepresentation of some sort.

Also, by having a compilation like this of Alien photo's and discussion threads on them, it allows for us to do some cross-referencing on those other photographs out there that are similar to them. Having everything in one thread is much more time expedient for the researcher than having to spend hours just looking for and gathering information like this. WFA, has already done the legwork for us here now.. and that's great!!


Rawsom, so having said this -- why don't YOU start up your own thread posting those Alien Photographs from this thread here that you think are REAL photographs of Aliens... and not crap.




[edit on 30-12-2007 by Palasheea]



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Hi

Just wanted to congratulate Witnessfromafar for his excellent job in compiling all the information in this interesting thread, some of the pictures kind of take you back a while.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Palasheea

I think you are missing the point of WFA's compilation of these EBE cases and why he's putting this information together in one thread.

Check out his first post to find out this information:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Not really, no. He said that he won't filter anything in another post that was posted after the thread was started.



Also, by having a compilation like this of Alien photo's and discussion threads on them, it allows for us to do some cross-referencing on those other photographs out there that are similar to them.


This is good of course, I never meant to say that everything done so far is all wrong. Its just that there are a lot of people here who are sick and tired of hoaxes and don't want to encounter into them all the time.

I do understand that if we actually focus on cases that are rock solid, we are left with too little cases to continue interesting conversation for years to come. That pretty much means that cases which aren't that rock solid are needed, too.

Hoaxes however only damage each and everyone of us, who believe in things not accepted by main-stream science. Hoaxes mean that we cannot discuss these things with people if we want to prevent them keeping us crazy.



Rawsom, so having said this -- why don't YOU start up your own thread posting those Alien Photographs from this thread here that you think are REAL photographs of Aliens... and not crap.


I merely gave an advice that I believe helps all of us. If giving an advice means that everything must be done yourself, nobody would have any feelings towards helping other people if you have to do all the work on them. Arguments such as these are good for people who believe in nothing and keep demanding evidence no matter what. I just don't think this was appropriate given the person I am.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Why thank you Camilo1 for your kind words. It's good to know others are finding value in this style of analysis. Please feel free to add here if you know of a case I've missed in my posts thus far!

Palasheea, thanks for your analysis, and for your interest! From reading your posts on other threads I can tell you have a passion for this research also. Thanks for your close attention to detail in the original post too!

Rawsom, thank you also for your well thought out post. Many of these thoughts have also occurred to me during my work in these threads.

This part of your message struck me especially:
"I do appreciate what you are doing and have been done, though, don't leave it to that. You should consider reading all those threads and pages and figuring out what makes something a hoax and what doesn't. That way, you eventually begin to notice things that shouldn't be and things that should. Therefore, such actions leads your collection of evidence to become a quality bunch of cases. THAT is what we need."

A few comments, 1st, unfortunately the 'quality' of this bunch of cases is what it is, it's what I've found in my searching. I'm disappointed myself that the majority of these cases seem to be dead ends. I look at this sort of research like any other science though, I'm here to discover and test the available data, no matter what those tests may show.

Believe me, as a human that is interested in EBEs, I would have loved nothing more than to see a collection of 'smoking gun' evidence emerge as a result of these compilations. But as a scientist (or at least an amateur attempting to keep the quality of my analysis 'pure') I'm obligated to form my conclusions in concordance with the data. I'm still hoping for more 'real' cases to present themselves, but at this point I would tend to agree with everyone else posting, this data set simply doesn't point to there being clear cut evidence for EBE presence on or near Earth. There are some cases here that I'm still on the fence on, but you are right IMO, this is where the bulk of the evidence leads.

I don't have an opinion (yet) on how much the data set has been flooded with deliberate fraud, and that would also influence the 'results' any reader should draw from this 'test'.

When you said:
"You should consider reading all those threads and pages and figuring out what makes something a hoax and what doesn't. That way, you eventually begin to notice things that shouldn't be and things that should. Therefore, such actions leads your collection of evidence to become a quality bunch of cases..."

I could not agree more. In fact, in my time researching these cases, I have been reading all of those threads and pages, and YES! I'm learning a lot of things I didn't know about debunking different sorts of evidence. I've particularly learned a lot from ArMaP. That guy is dedicated and a special sort of brilliant. Many of his arguments have been the determining factor for me in many of the threads I've researched thus far. I'm all about learning, and applying the methods I've learned to future work. In fact, you can see the growth of the format between the beginning of this thread, and the following thread, the Compilation regarding Alien Technology. There is now a new category, for 'Debunking Evidence', and equivalent sourcing for debunking arguments.

I agree, it would be nice to pick out the fraud more easily, which is why I earlier suggested that Mods come in to add [HOAX] tags to the entries that have been declared as such through ATS analysis in other threads. I'm still open to this possibility, if any Mod should choose to do so, provided sourcing is also listed to the thread where we can discover why the case is a Hoax. I'd also be open to a [VALID] tag, or something like that, for cases deemed to be the real deal. I'm not a mod though, so I don't actually have the ability to go back and change/edit previous entries. I also believe it's important for people to make up their own minds, which is why I tend to focus mostly on Evidence, and not so much on commentary.

Thanks Rawsom, for sharing your thoughts and advice, I'll take them into consideration on my future works



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


At some point long time ago, it occured to me that it is not reasonable to request rock solid evidence in everything that is in existence. There are quite a few things that would have to go, one being self-awareness, another being the reality of one's picture of the world. It follows that if we have even a few cases that appear to be solid, it is enough to give an expectation that sightings which aren't documented by film can be authentic as well.

It all comes down to seeing a phenomena which is already documented somewhere, someplace. If it is, it is then reasonable to understand that if such a thing indeed exists, it means that there will be sightings. When that is the case, it is unreasonable to expect every single human being to carry a digital camera or a recorder whenever they see something they want to share.

Now, this doesn't mean believing everything blindly, but gives a nice perspective on how things should be handled. Hoaxes are another matter, and do not belong to a cathegory I just roughly outlined.

There's one particular phenomena that comes into my mind. Some years back, maybe two, biologists discovered an ant species that has some quite interesting features. Whenever they cross a leave or some branch of a tree, if it happens to have holes in it, ants form _bridges_ with their own bodies and can even form these bridges together with other ants if their own body is too small. Some time ago, this was considered impossible for ants to do. Reality once again proved to be very different. If you had gone and told scientists about such behaviour with ants, they wouldn't have believed you because altruism belongs to humans, not animals.

So, now that it is documented you can point them an another species and tell that they do the same, and they will go an check if that indeed is the case. Documentation gives credibility even to cases where an observer neccessarily isn't an expert.

Just my thoughts.. Keep up the good work.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


~Evidence Update!~

This new piece of evidence pertains to the 'Alien in Mexico' video footage where three boys playing soccer appear to be startled by an 'Alien' hiding behind a light pole.

Upon my initial investigations into this case (click the link above for the original report on page 3 of this thread), I found several threads here at ATS where members debated the merits. I did not however, see the following YouTube recreation until recently. It is here:
www.youtube.com...



This was found in a new thread that has floated around the main page of this forum the past few days. The thread is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The post linking this evidence (by smans) is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also (from later in the same thread) Isaac Koi has a comprehensive report on this case here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


(Edited to add Isaac Koi's research link)



[edit on 1-1-2008 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply post by WitnessFromAfar
 

It's interesting that someone commented on your personal history and that some who are possibly obcessive about it might have some previous unknown history. I myself have been thru some of this myself and have recalled quite a few episodes and encounters of missing time going back to around 3 years old.

For all we know cell phones and the internet might or obviously be used as a free source by our government to find and report these various sitings, even with the alleged hazards of their use and cell phone towers. There's so much we can speculate on.

As for debunking and disqualifying sources; our government probably has become quite proficient in producing and swapping evidence to give the illusion of a hoax. There are so many ways to analyze this.

In so saying, as another example: is that allegedly many of these life forms are artificial or androids etc. So, it would be easy to dissect one, claiming it was a hoax and giving credit to some special effects group.

Sometimes the interviews can broaden your suspicions, such as why these videos etc. are still on the internet.
Disclosure can mean that these EBE's are even better with illusions than we are. Some disclosure reports suggest that it's actually these people who are controling our government and limiting the amount of disclosure etc.

The sci-fi series Taken was another example of illusion thru perception by ET's. Having remembered being an abductee doesn't necessarily make me one or a good source either. Abductees can be created using hypnosis as well.

It makes me wonder why after recalling these things I even bother to find proof of it. I guess it's just another way of putting the pieces together by association and my part or value for this was, be it hero or victim.

[edit on 1-1-2008 by aleon1018]

[edit on 1-1-2008 by aleon1018]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Rawsom said this:
"It follows that if we have even a few cases that appear to be solid, it is enough to give an expectation that sightings which aren't documented by film can be authentic as well."

First and foremost, I wanted to highlight that sentence, because it's a valid argument that IMO isn't presented very often.

Now on to the new
...

Over the past week I've been contacted by Internos, and provided with many links to external data sources where further 'evidence(s)' are to be found. I've spent the past couple of days checking out each site, and reviewing the data at each one. Some are repeat cases, already featured here in this thread. Others are new, and throughout the course of today I will begin to post case reports on them here. I also received a few links from Isaac Koi, and will be processing the data found there after I finish with Internos' links.

There is a lot of data to sift through, and a lot of cross referencing to do (among existing ATS threads) to make sure all of the available data on each case is included. Thanks for your patience, the first report from these new data sets should be out soon...



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Evidence Description:
Alien in a Jar???

From the Source:“SALINAS 1980: Two young people have reported that a saucer landed, from which a group of very small beings came out. The beings, astonishingly, did not care for the disproportion between their size and the size of the two young men and surrounded them, grabbing their pants. At one point, one of the terrified boys hit one being dead by smashing the alien head with a piece of wood he picked up. They brought the corpse back in Salinas, and the owner of a local funeral house preserved in it a jar of formaldehyde. The picture is from the "Quest" picture library. It later inspired many gift shop items.”

Evidence Source:
ufologie.net...
or:
aliens.monstrous.com...

Evidence:



Debunking Evidence:
None posted directly, however some Alleged ‘Copies’ or Variations on the Alien in a jar idea are here:







ATS Thread(s) Pertaining to Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This post: www.abovetopsecret.com...
May reference this case, I’m not sure, I can’t follow the link…
A similar case, that turned out to be a hoax, of a dragon in a jar, is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 5-1-2008 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Evidence Description:
Well, she says that she’s from Venus…

From the Source:
[This attractive person made quite an impression at the first International UFO Congress convened in Tucson, Arizona, in November 1991, when she introduced herself as Omnec Onec from planet Venus to some 300 attendants. She looked 35, but claimed to be 439. Obviously quite intelligent; one of the admirers said:
"She said she had solved the interplanetary transportation problem as simply as she had solved the planetary surface temperature problem. She so eloquently explained how she merely hyper-jumped dimensions. And everyone there understood. No one ever understands Stanton Friedman's explanations about time-travel physics, but everyone understood Omnec. at least the interdimensional things. Her true message was one of spiritual development and universal love. But she could discuss Grassman Algebra if you wanted to."]


Evidence Source:
www.omneconec.com...
The book (from Amazon.com) is here:
www.amazon.com...
More information:
ufologie.net...
www.youtube.com...
www.answers.com...
archive.alienzoo.com...
www.leechvideo.com...
www.agoracosmopolitan.com...
www.ufocasebook.com...


Evidence:





Debunking Evidence:
Well, there was a lot of laughing, but no actual evidence presented to debunk this one. I’ll add a piece here, just for balance:
The Average Temperature of Venus is:
“The average temperature on Venus is around 480 degrees Celsius, which is hot enough to melt lead…”
Source: www.lessonplanspage.com...

So Ms. Omnec would need to prove her ability to withstand such temperatures in order for her story to begin to look credible to me. She looks like a normal human. There's a start, debunk at will skeptics, I’d post it if I could find it!


ATS Thread(s) Pertaining to Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Evidence Description:
The Ural Alien, 1996 (Ural is a mountainous region located in the former U.S.S.R.)

From the Source: “According to a report published by the Georgian UFO Association GUFORA (from the Caucasian Republic of Georgia) an alien body was retrieved by the Russian State Security Service in 1996. An old woman from the village of Kashtim in the Ural mountains, so the report claims, found a dying little creature on the road. After two weeks, the woman got sick and was hospitalized. The creature stayed home alone... and died. Probably because the woman told someone in the hospital the Kashtim Police Department entered the woman's home and found the dead body on August 13, 1996. The corpse was filmed with a VHS camera -standard equipment of the Russian police these days- when a preliminary investigation (including the use of a Geiger Counter) was undertaken. According to the measurements of the Police, the being was only 21 centimeters (8 1/2 inches) in length. The corpse was later confiscated by the State Security (Ex-KGB).”
ufologie.net...


Evidence Source:
ufologie.net...
hesemann.watchers.ca...
www.redicecreations.com...
A similar case from Puerto Rico is here:
ufologie.net...
pravda.us...


Evidence:





Debunking Evidence:

From the Source: “Around 2004, several web sites in Russia have spread the latest news about the nature of the creature: it is said that its DNA was checked and found to be that of a normal human female…”
ufologie.net...

There are discrepancies with the above DNA report, please read the ATS Threads below for the full argument…

ATS Member: Kriskaos posted the following suggestion:
“hmmm could be an alien or it could be a kid with progeria”
I found the following information on Progeria:

www.progeriaresearch.org...

[The term progeria narrowly refers to Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria syndrome, but the term is issued to describe any of the so-called "accelerated aging diseases". The word progeria is derived from the Greek for "old age".]
en.wikipedia.org...

A google search on Progeria will bring you much more data...


ATS Thread(s) Pertaining to Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
A Related Thread, dealing with the similar cases in South America is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Evidence Description:
The Infamous ‘Roswell’ Alien Autopsy Video & Pictures. One of the first, and still one of the most captivating cases on record…


Evidence Source(s):
The Book: Beyond Roswell: The Alien Autopsy Film, Area 51, & the US Government Coverup of Ufo's is here:
www.amazon.com...

Sites with information:
en.wikipedia.org...
www.rense.com...
www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...
theshadowlands.net...
www.unmuseum.org...
csicop.org...
and probably 1,000,000.00 more…

The following information is on a related video, not the same one, it was also not authentic footage:
en.wikipedia.org...
www.imdb.com...
www.alienvideo.net...
This video is reviewed earlier in this thread.

Pics:
www.iwasabducted.com...
and a google image search will reveal many more…

Video:
video.google.com...
www.youtube.com...
There are several other videos available, but these seem to be the longest…


Evidence:

Pics:











Video:

Google Video Link




Debunking Evidence:
This is one of those cases where you’re going to need to read the relevant threads and come to your own conclusions. There is a brief summary at the end of this post by ATS Site Owner Simon Gray, taken from one thread on this case, reviewing the case to date. There are substantial arguments both for and against this footage. There is no ‘slam dunk’ evidence, to my eye, that proclaims this case either 'authentic' or 'fraud'…


ATS Thread(s) Pertaining to Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and doubtless hundreds more…


In Review:

From the final linked thread, ATS Site Owner, Simon Gray says:
“The Roswell alien autopsy footage has never been down-right stamped "FAKE" I should note. The reason it is not strongly convincing to the more intellectual skeptics however, is for two big points:

1. Ray Santilli never provided Kodak with frames of the autopsy segment to confirm it's authenticity. They requested two frames in order to test the film, but this was NEVER provided.

He did bring film strip to a Kodak Copenhagen office who confirmed by way of the film edge markings that it was produced in 1927, 1947 or 1967.

However, Santilli went ahead in his documentary and stated Kodak had confirmed it was produced 1947.

2. Two segments of film were submitted to a person named Bob Shell, editor of a photographic magazine called Shutterbug who was previously employed by the FBI and U.S. legal system as a photographic consultant.

This person confirmed the film was pre-1958, however neither segment showed footage of the alien.

While this would mean fake in the eyes of anyone who does not research this subject themselves, of which I had spent much time and money doing so, there is still a large amount of information which does corroborate the footage being factual.

This is still open-discussion in my eyes, and makes for a good conspiracy investigation.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Evidence Description:
Alleged photograph of Alien from Toluca, Mexico…

From the Source: “The UFO Casebook received the posted image along with account on 04-19-05. I will try to get confirmation from another source on this, but we will just have to wait and see if anyone can lend any additional information to either confirm or deny the bizarre story contained below. The incident allegedly occurred in 2001. (B J)”

The Story: (translated at the Source from Spanish to English)“Farmers shook with fear when confronted by strange alien creatures. They took their machetes and killed a whole family of them. I had already dug up some of the bodies, and taken photos of them, when a swarm of soldiers arrived. The soldiers took everything there. A daughter of one of farmers kept one roll of the film hidden in her clothes until the soldiers had cleared the area. She, accompanied by a relative, later revealed the photographs in Toluca. These beings appear mutilated. They have 4 fingers; apparently they have lungs, also. You can see that they have teeth, but like an animal's.
I am not lying, this is the truth.”


Evidence Source:
www.ufocasebook.com...
www.ufocasebook.com...

Possible Related Incident, UFO Sighting from the same area, in 2001:
www.ufoinfo.com...


Evidence:



Debunking Evidence:
Well this isn't really evidence, it's hearsay, but if anyone can find a source please post it!

Free Spirit says:
“The first alleged alien is a well known hoax in Mexico. It's a dummy
made of plastic cement that was painted in red and the black eyes
are seeds painted in black. According to the story it was made by
a man who claimed it was a petrified alien mummy he found in
some place near Toluca. This man tried to sell the dummy to some
researchers including Jaime Maussan but the hoax was detected
very easy as the body was obviously faked and besides the owner
refused to make tests to the body for authenticity.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There seemed to be a lot of other remarks about this ‘Alien’ appearing to be made out of gelatin. No other evidence was provided. Nobody even made a gelatin model for comparison...

A google search did not provide any further debunking evidence, even when cross-referenced with Maussan’s name…


ATS Thread(s) Pertaining to Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar
reply to post by Masisoar
 

Pertaining to this particular evidence, I don't have sound on my computer, and haven't for a while. Especially not at the office. Regardless, The point of this thread is not to debate the given evidence, it's to ADD to it, in order to establish a data set.[edit on 18-12-2007 by WitnessFromAfar]


Define data... As the previous poster made an excellent point in relation to, uncritically lumping things in together just muddies the water.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join