It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Johnathan Reed's Close-Up Alien Blinking Video - best footage ever? (video)

page: 38
<< 35  36  37    39  40 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:03 PM

Originally posted by eDrinker

I'm a regular visitor of ATS but rarely post. I have read a fair bit about Dr Reed and just recently came across what I think is a new video.

Some of you know he found a link artefact (bracelet) near the body of the alien. He show's how it works via transportation in his basement, apparently it failed when he tried it in public. Anyway can people correct me, put me onto the original story or just give me their views please.

Much appreciated.

Sorry to edit, there was another interesting video of the video distortion showing the picture of the alien. Very freaky.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by eDrinker]

Hi, there was a rumour that those video's were not done By Reed and that
somebody has edited them to show him disappear - quite badly too ! Does anyone have more information on these claims, cheers in advance.

posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:09 PM
I heard that the videos posted on this thread showing him disappearing that those video's were not done by Reed and that somebody has edited them to show him disappear - quite badly too ! Has anyone got any info on this claim.Cheers.

sorry double post.

[edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT]

posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 07:57 PM
If you are a gung ho skeptic trying to debunk this.Why not replicate the exact same alien being or hoaxed alien being?Seems like common sense to me.

posted on Oct, 9 2010 @ 12:42 AM
reply to post by Jobeycool

do you honestly believe that anyone is going to go to that extent?!. of course it could be replicated or even done better by the right people with the right equipment and a bit of time and money. but no average joe is gonna bother just to prove a point!.



posted on Oct, 11 2010 @ 04:11 AM
reply to post by RICH-ENGLAND

thats just great isnt it
lets just all say its fake because we cant be as$ed to investigate it properly
jesus talk about getting to the bottom of a case

posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 09:04 AM
reply to post by VisionQuest

I saw this for the first time on SyFy's Fact of Faked last night, and it was SO the biggest piece of bull# I've ever seen! They easily debunked the entire thing, faked the video and it was almost completely spot on.

I don't know what type of camcorder he was using, but I have plenty of baby videos my mother shot of me in 1987 that are crystal clear, low lighting or not. It doesn't take a genius to record things, hell, my mother used to let me play with the camcorder when I was in school and I could record things perfectly and IN FOCUS. This man wants us to believe that we're supposed to believe some out of focus video he took? What was his excuse for the poor quality? Idiocy?

I don't understand why he thinks anyone would believe that he made a gash of that severity by hitting the thing on the head with a stick. Has anyone here ever been tree climbing or had a not very nice cousin treat you like a pinata? While being thwopped with a thick branch hurts, it wouln't leave a open wound like that. You would bruise, scrape, split skin open and cause some minor bleeding with a really hard blow, but that wound on the "alien" is too severe. Now, maybe their [bone] structure is different, but what guarantees that its blood/viscous fluid is red like humans and animals? I would think it'd look a little different. But, ketchup and jello are easily available in most kitchens..

Speaking of animals.
Forget breathing hard. If some thing or person killed my dog, I'd be a screaming, crying mess. "hit it with a stick"??? I'd blogeon that # to death, leave it beyond recognition. Alien or not, if your life was at stake [since obviously it has some idiotic super power where it can rip an animal apart by its jaws and TURN IT INTO ASH] you'd run away, or you'd beat the # out of it so it couldn't do the same to you.
He also described seeing the dog's blood and tissue and bits as it was being ripped apart, so...where's the blood? Surely THAT didn't ash up either, did it? It'd take a video of that, scoop up as much as I could and take my dog home with me, find her a nice urn and want to remember her.
Did we ever see pictures of this so-called dog Suze? Of course not, because she doesn't exist. Neither did the alien..and niether does the brain this man supposedly has between his ears. Idiot.

posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 09:15 AM
They don't look like that....

They look like this

and this

and this

and this

posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 12:01 PM
I also saw this on Fact or Faked last night, and it did grab my curiosity. I can't say i'm convinced at all by what I saw on the show, but then I will also ask why they didn't include more of the video/audio clips that have surfaced in the wake of this? I get that they have time constraints, but why not have a selection of at least the audio clips that I have heard on this thread? Alleged alien screams? I mean, c'mon!

I have to say that the conclusion that the team came up with was luke warm at best. The one on one interview, with the one guy saying 'you're not telling me the truth' was a little clunky, and the 'layered voice technology' was disconcertingly vague, but yet it was enough for them to chalk it up as a hoax.

While I believe that this was a hoax, all this is doing is perpetuating the cycle, and possibly generating more potential revenue for this so-called 'Jonathan Reed'.

posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 12:41 PM
Watch how they debunked (again) the fat Reed recreating his bogus alien.

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:56 PM

Originally posted by VisionQuest
Apologies if this has been posted before but after having studied this case for years and finally getting a chance to see the actual video of Johnathan Reed's findings, I feel this could be worth a second look. It just doesn't feel like CGI or a recreation to me after seeing the videos. There were also blood and tissue samples taken and analyzed by doctors who take part in the interview in the bottom of this page.

Blinking Video

Woods Footage

Head wound Exam

Dr Reed / Rutter Alien Encounter (1) - Creature Blinking

This video is from the alien encounter of Dr Reed (Dr Jonathan Reed or John Rutter). As Rutter (Dr Reed) explained, his alien encounter originated on October 15, 1996, in the Cascade Mountains east of Seattle near Snoqualmie Pass.

While still in the mountains, Rutter came across the creature by accident while he and his dog were hiking in the forest. For unknown reasons his dog apparently attacked the creature. The creature, in reaction to the dog attacking it, began to defend itself. Rutter, seeing his dog was losing the battle with the creature, picked up a large tree branch and struck the creature in the head. Thinking he had killed it - he eventually ended up bringing the creature home.

He later conducted and filmed an examination of it in his living room. After later reviewing the video, it was discovered that the creature had in fact been conscious while Rutter was filming - as you can see the creature blinking several times during the video.

Continued at source


Art Bell Interview:


Mod Edit: Format correction, source link, external quote tags. Please see New Site Tag For Quoting External Sources. Thank you - Jak

[edit on 16/5/08 by JAK]

woooooooooowww........... I'v never seen this video before, I gonna read up on this, and report back.. and read this tread also

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:28 PM
reply to post by VisionQuest

I thought that this was a good thing until I saw it on Fact or Faked and they recreated the whole scenareo. They even performed a voice analysis on the doctor and seen that he was not telling the truth. To Bad it was not real video footage.

posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 01:38 AM
I too caught this on Fact or Faked on dvr. I would like to believe this is real, some of it very well done if indeed it is a hoax, I didnt like how they went about debunking it though. I really dont like any of their debunking for that matter, its too "made for TV" if any of you know what I mean. I seen someone here also caught the similarity between the fire in the sky aliens and this one. The alien that these Fact or faked guys made up didnt quite blink as realistically as the Dr's alien, despite having Syfy backing them financially, which was disappointing to say the least. What was up with the Dr's alien wearing that turtleneck sweater? I know its cold in space but damn, no space suit or helmet? Another thing is he had no emotion when speaking of his dog meeting its end in front of his eyes. Ive had a dog die in front of me that I loved dearly and honestly Im gettin a lil teary eyed even typing about it. I doubt it turned to ash from the alien simply ripping its head in half either. Now if he had said the alien whipped out his ray gun and shot the dog with it then the ash would be believable, but doing so after already killing it with its bare hands is pretty redundant, unless of course the alien thought the dog may have some supernatural regenerative powers. The alien was blinking long after it had its head bashed in with a stick. If it were me, and I seen it still moving after that, i would have tied it up. I think its safe to say most everyone here would have done the same. Im a believer and not a debunker, but I feel I did a much better job debunking this one then the Fact or Fiction guys, without the fancy equipment and using simple logic.

posted on Dec, 24 2010 @ 01:41 AM
Hi guys this is my first post in ats.
I used to come in here to enlighten myself about some ufo cases 2-3 years ago.If Im not mistaken,back then this forum didnt have this much people who post 'fake-hoax-con man' in a single thread without giving away any information about the subject what so ever.I just can not believe what Im reading in this particular topic.The fact that Dr Reed (Or Rutter how ever you want to call him) simply exists in this world seem to be unbearable to some members here.
Now I can not know this case is real or not but neither can you.What we should be doing is sharing information not passing judgment on people we have never met even never seen.And while you are passing judgment you are failing to present some basis to that judgement apart from giving sites like ufowatchdog.
Ufowatchdogs case about this guy is a JOKE.I did read it all and all they are doing is this:We have talked this guy who confirmed he is a hoax etc etc..If you listened the art bell show about Dr Rutter you know Chacon gave an interview.They say he was working at a local mart but That guy was no clerk in any store.Just by listening complex information that he gives and answers questions accordingly,you know this guy knows what He is talking about.
Then there is the Fact or Faked case.The guys are literally wearing bigfoot costumes and running around jungle determining how fast the guy in costume is AND calling this scientific test.I can go on and on and on about the 'scientific test' that they used on Dr Rutter to prove he is faked but Im not gonna do that.Some fancy equalizer animation with the word FALSE should not have this big of an impact on you,this is a JOKE.I just have one thing to say if you base your judgement with the help of those charlatans you seriously need help.

The fact is more people attacking this guy out of the blue for no appearent reason and without anything to backup apart from the charlatans above just makes me think there is something going on about this guy.

Have a good one

Edit:By the way Jaime Maussan proved that Chacon IS a Biologist in a seminar.Search YT for it.Former MUFON Florida state director states that is disinfo agent,you can find this information on their website.
edit on 24-12-2010 by felafel85 because: Typo and additional information...

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 04:44 PM
I'm not a big fan of the Fact or Faked show, but in regards to this case they did actually reveal something in this case that to my knowledge had not been prior.

That is the exact location of the encounter event. That is a pretty big deal as it opens the door for further investigation by anyone wanting to go up there. So I give them kudos for dragging that information out of Reed and presenting it on their show.

Remember in the original Art Bell interview Reed would only tell us vaguely where the location was. Now we know it's near interstate 90 prior to Snoqualmie Pass - I think they even showed or mentioned the exit #. I happen to know the area very well as I've driven the pass many times, I've driven nearly all the back roads. I've both hiked & mountain biked the area including the 2 1/2 mile decommissioned railroad tunnel that runs beneath the ski areas that has since been closed to the public.

I don't necessarily believe that when the fact or faked show debunks something it is truly debunked. As they make it look easy to recreate these things, but we really don't have a sense of actual man hours it took to do these re-creations. While making the floating ship prop was pretty simple it would still take a day to plan & buy the materials, a day to build, and a day to paint & dry, the means to transport it to the site set-up & take pictures, destroy it in a camp fire or transport it out etc. Remember they are trying to re-create what has already been shown - something much easier than creating something like this out of scratch.

The alien model is a whole other ballpark which requires some pretty good skill sets & even more time than the ship took.

Could have Reed faked the whole thing, yes if he'd put enough time & effort in the matter. Did he - that's still unproven until somebody comes up with, his alien, spaceship, sales records to his materials used in building them etc. Had fact & faked did a more thorough investigation such as what would be done by law enforcement instead of silly recreations & simple voice analysis they would be more convincing.
edit on 25-12-2010 by verylowfrequency because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:07 PM
Total fake and very bad acting, personally think he over did it with the heavy breathing!

If that was me I would be thinking that craft is MINE, gonna rap chains round that baby and haul that thing home before the MIBs get here!

posted on Dec, 25 2010 @ 05:07 PM
reply to post by VisionQuest

I believe this to be a hoax. I hope this does not discredit the actual existence of off-world entities to anyone. The videos are funny - not convincing. I call LIES on this.

posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 03:47 AM
Im not saying I believe this case either but there are things that catches my attention here.For example alien ships design is very interesting.Flying Saucers always seems cheesy to me because if you look at the photos chronologically you will notice that ships evolve with time.Seventies we had ships like Meiers and as time passes the design changes from 'flashy' to sort of what we would expect from aliens (no visible joints-no windows-no lights)
and now most of what we see from 'U.F.O.' photos are just some sort of light like they lost their physical aspect.
But in this case design looks 'timeless' to me,maybe because its so simple.Alien looks extremely detailed and its facial movements looks organic.Well thats all I can say.Unless someone comes with tangible evidence that this case is hoax rather than simple character assassinations like the watchdog did,this will remain in the grey zone for me.

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by visionandtruth

Originally posted by visionandtruth
reply to post by Aspie

Thank you for bringing up the Rutter issue. Ive been waiting for that. I commend you for repeating the name when its listed directly in the book LINK. That was something I never quite understood for debunkers.

You say the name Rutter as if that means something concerning the evidence of the case. Why is that when his name is in the book? Have you read the book? I have. Guess what. His name is in the book. I used to wonder why people fascinated over his name which is in his book so much. Pretty weird until you figure out why they do it. I think yall do that as if its discrediting him even though his name is right in his book. So the point behind mentioning Rutter is so far beyond my comprehension. His name sits directly in the book so I still dont know the reason behind the purpose of saying the name Rutter. far as I can see from the available evidence--his own website--the name of the author on the book is Dr. Jonathan Reed.

Just sayin.

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 11:38 PM
reply to post by spacegod

What is the point of arguing or disagreeing over TOTAL NONSENSE? Seriously, why? At the end of the day nothing comes of it but a permanent record on the internet where, if someone who had the basic command of logic, reason and common sense, could point too in order to make us all look like fools.

This whole Johnathon Reed thing is 100% UTTER BUNK. Seriously discussing it makes us all look like fools of the highest order. But, then again, ufology is filled to the brink with ignorance....stubborn ignorance at that (the worst kind) so we are really good at being our own worst enemy.

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 11:46 PM
What concerns me is the footage is so blurry ive seen old cameras but the indoor examination footage still looks so bad I know it was a while ago but the fact is it seems the footage was intentionally made bad to make it much more difficult to see blemishes in the design which gives away the fact that its fake. I thought the blinking was the only credible thing but if its dead why is it blinking? Have i missed something? I think the whole thing smells of Hoax not because of fact or faked but because the way the whole scenario was played out. Is that true he also doesnt have a real doctorate?

new topics

top topics

<< 35  36  37    39  40 >>

log in